Belarus set to recognize Abkhazia, S. Ossetia

Russia wins Chinese, SCO support over Georgia but felt short of gaining support for the recognition of S/Ossetia and Abkazia.
Are you kidding me? Who did you guys write this article for KIDS IN THE KINDERGARDEN???

Is there a single sentence in the text that supports the title of this article?

Russia got a blow in the face from that meeting. None of the five countries supported Russia's action. Not only they refused to recognize the provinces but also, China in particular, stressed that these problems should be resolved with dialogue and not use of force.
I guess, desperate times call for desperate means and that includes disinformation.

Funny reporting of this event... especially the heading in bold...

here is the same event, as reported by Associated Press:

"Russian President Dmitry Medvedev traveled to Dushanbe, the capital of Tajikistan, to ask China and other members of an Asian security group to sign a declaration of support Thursday for Russia's role in the conflict in Georgia.

Yet Russia's hopes of international support for its actions in Georgia were dealt a huge blow when the Asian security alliance denounced the use of force and called for respect for every country's territorial integrity.

A joint declaration from the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, or SCO, deepens Russia's international isolation over its military action, which was blasted in the West for being disproportionate."

The best thing would still be to insert a link to the declaration, so as everyone can make up its mind on how "China and the other members of the SCO voiced their support for Russia's actions in Georgia"... :)).

Seems like conflicting reports surfacing in other news sources.

Nothing really exiting... except one little thing we usually tend to forget: there were three, not two "colorful revolutions".

"Tulip Revolution" is the third,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_Revolution

As the result of revolutions, two of the countries (Georgia and Ukraine) became not any less corrupt, but NATO-but-kissers. The third one (Kyrgizistan) still has untroubled relationship with Russia: they had no opportunity to became American lapdogs (yet).

Hence the key is not that a certain country is democratic or not, it's the relationship with NATO. Interesting, isn't it?

This is of course not an excuse for Russian government acting barbarian way recently. Besides, if your opponent is a barbarian and crazy, you should not be an other crazy barbarian.

"Under the circumstances Russia had no other moral choice but to support appeals of South Ossetian and Abkhazian peoples on the recognition of their right for self-determination in line with fundamental international documents," Lukashenko said in the message.

Batka has driven his country in a financial crises - and Russia is the only country, which supported him with Dollar credits, to keep the economy of Belarus alive. on the other side Lukashenko knows: to be on Putin's side in this conflict is the end of his own political career. Citizens in Belarus start to ask themselves, if they must accept the strange friends of Batka: Syria, Iran, Venezuela ... and "Dolly Dollar" Putin

I wonder, how Russia is going to find a way out of this farce.

I am pretty sure that Belarus will be the last country to back Russia's decision, somehow I get the feeling that while many countries were happy that Russia exposed the West's hypocrisy, they are worried that Russia also exposed its own hypocrisy. It all just shows how moral politicans really are and how their arrogance reflects in the suffering of the average Ossetian, Georgian, Albanian, Serb etc. etc.

@Ataman: "As the result of revolutions, two of the countries (Georgia and Ukraine) became not any less corrupt, but NATO-but-kissers."

No, actually, they are less corrupt now. See the charts at http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/sc_chart.asp

In 2003, Georgia's "Control of corruption" percentile was about 15, now it's almost 50. The figures for Ukraine are about 15 and 25.

Is there a single sentence in the text that supports the title of this article?

Russia got a blow in the face from that meeting. None of the five countries supported Russia's action. Not only they refused to recognize the provinces but also, China in particular, stressed that these problems should be resolved with dialogue and not use of force.
I guess, desperate times call for desperate means and that includes disinformation.

Russia wins Chinese, SCO support over Georgia but felt short of gaining support for the recognition of S/Ossetia and Abkazia.
Are you kidding me? Who did you guys write this article for KIDS IN THE KINDERGARDEN???

Funny reporting of this event... especially the heading in bold...

here is the same event, as reported by Associated Press:

"Russian President Dmitry Medvedev traveled to Dushanbe, the capital of Tajikistan, to ask China and other members of an Asian security group to sign a declaration of support Thursday for Russia's role in the conflict in Georgia.

Yet Russia's hopes of international support for its actions in Georgia were dealt a huge blow when the Asian security alliance denounced the use of force and called for respect for every country's territorial integrity.

A joint declaration from the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, or SCO, deepens Russia's international isolation over its military action, which was blasted in the West for being disproportionate."

The best thing would still be to insert a link to the declaration, so as everyone can make up its mind on how "China and the other members of the SCO voiced their support for Russia's actions in Georgia"... :)).

Nothing really exiting... except one little thing we usually tend to forget: there were three, not two "colorful revolutions".

"Tulip Revolution" is the third,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_Revolution

As the result of revolutions, two of the countries (Georgia and Ukraine) became not any less corrupt, but NATO-but-kissers. The third one (Kyrgizistan) still has untroubled relationship with Russia: they had no opportunity to became American lapdogs (yet).

Hence the key is not that a certain country is democratic or not, it's the relationship with NATO. Interesting, isn't it?

This is of course not an excuse for Russian government acting barbarian way recently. Besides, if your opponent is a barbarian and crazy, you should not be an other crazy barbarian.

I am pretty sure that Belarus will be the last country to back Russia's decision, somehow I get the feeling that while many countries were happy that Russia exposed the West's hypocrisy, they are worried that Russia also exposed its own hypocrisy. It all just shows how moral politicans really are and how their arrogance reflects in the suffering of the average Ossetian, Georgian, Albanian, Serb etc. etc.

Seems like conflicting reports surfacing in other news sources.

@Ataman: "As the result of revolutions, two of the countries (Georgia and Ukraine) became not any less corrupt, but NATO-but-kissers."

No, actually, they are less corrupt now. See the charts at http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/sc_chart.asp

In 2003, Georgia's "Control of corruption" percentile was about 15, now it's almost 50. The figures for Ukraine are about 15 and 25.

"Under the circumstances Russia had no other moral choice but to support appeals of South Ossetian and Abkhazian peoples on the recognition of their right for self-determination in line with fundamental international documents," Lukashenko said in the message.

Batka has driven his country in a financial crises - and Russia is the only country, which supported him with Dollar credits, to keep the economy of Belarus alive. on the other side Lukashenko knows: to be on Putin's side in this conflict is the end of his own political career. Citizens in Belarus start to ask themselves, if they must accept the strange friends of Batka: Syria, Iran, Venezuela ... and "Dolly Dollar" Putin

I wonder, how Russia is going to find a way out of this farce.