# Russia has invaded Ukraine. How will the West respond? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Tags:** ukraine-invasion\ **Created:** [February 28, 2014, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513 "2014-02-28T15:06:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 113
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2014, 2:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2241 "2014-04-04T02:58:11Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > That is all you need to admit. At least you agree with the truth that comes from the EU Report. Georgia Started it. Georgia launched an invasion, yes. The question of who started the series of events that escalated to an invasion isn’t so simple. > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > THE EU exposed the truth that corroborates the Russian immediate timeline of events: > “_On the night of 7 to 8 August 2008, a sustained Georgian artillery attack struck the town of Tskhinvali. Other movements of the Georgian armed forces targeting Tskhinvali and the surrounding areas were under way, and soon the fighting involved Russian, South Ossetian and Abkhaz military units and armed elements._” No one has disputed that. > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > Nobody wants to mention a big part of the cause of the trouble: How was that a cause of the trouble, again? > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > And of course Human Action only mentions the IED attacks on the Georgian side. Human action avoided mentioning the bombings of public places on the Abkhas side. This is in the EU Commission Report: > > And of course Human Action does not cite the EU report regarding the militaristic provocations by the Georgian side with US military troops in participation. This is in the EU Commission Report: > > Here’s more in the EU Commission Report that finds that Georgia started it: > > Why did Georgia deny the Commander of the massive Georgian artillery attack? Because it was a violation of international law stating it that way with no justification. So after Sakaashville figured out that the Russians were not going to respond in any timid fashion, they had to make up a story that that Russia started invading first. That’s odd, you refer to attacks _on_ Georgia as being “alleged”, “small arms” attacks, that are just a “couple of farmers feuding over land”. Attacks _by_ Georgia don’t get all these qualifiers. Yet another of your odious double standards. Like I said, read the report. There was plenty of escalation, and plenty of attacks, on both sides. You had Georgia covered, it’s worth noting that they weren’t cartoonish villains (or ethnically cowards, as you wrote), they were trying to end a situation that had become intolerable, they just chose a poor means to do so. Surely you, with your love of seeing things from the other guy’s side, can understand that. > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > Whether its true or not that Russia had some additional troops in South Ossetia at the time, Georgia could have taken that up at the UN or issue some kind of complaint. There is no case that Russian troops began firing at Georgian citizens or Georgian military assets prior to the massive Georgian artillery barrage on civilian targets. Georgia violated international law in a 'DEADLY" way FIRST no matter what Russia did in the days immediately preceding the Georgian attack. They did complain about Russia’s supposed peacekeepers being party to the dispute, violating the agreement, violating their airspace, and so on. Nothing changed, so they invaded. It was a bad decision. > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > In the EU report they state it: > > Worth repeating: "There is the question of whether the use of force by Georgia in South Ossetia, beginning with the shelling of Tskhinvali during the night of 7/8 August 2008, was justifiable under international law. It was not. " > Heavily U.S. backed Georgia is therefore guilty of unlawful killing of Russian citizens and troops. It is one-sided to complain afterward that Russians went to far in a military response to that murderous activity. > > Blaming the victims is ridiculous. That would only be one-sided if the report doesn’t also identify and critique Georgian misdeeds…as you’ve made clear, that’s not the case. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2014, 3:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2242 "2014-04-04T03:04:58Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > I asked, why not send troops to the gunfire if you think there are shots being fired? > > Human Action replied, “That’s called an “invasion”, crossing the border into South Ossetia to stop artillery attacks” > So where was it ever reported that ‘artillery attacks’ against Georgian targets were coming from the middle of the capitol city of Tskhinvali? That is where the Georgian artillery barrage was aimed. No, but they were coming from South Ossetia. Sending troops into South Ossetia is an invasion. If you’re going to invade, the sensible thing is to try and take control of the other nation/enclave altogether, so as to stop all such attacks. An act of war is an act of war, why chase a couple artillery guns around a field somewhere while the enemy counter-attacks and destroys you? If Canada started lobbing shells into Seattle from Vancouver, but their government and primary military forces were in Toronto, if the U.S. invaded with the goal of seizing control of Canada, we’d go for Toronto. > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > Human Action makes no sense in this incessant excuse-making for the Georgian regime. Pointing out that they didn’t attack for no reason is excuse-making? In that case, what have you been doing for Russia for dozens of pages now? ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2014, 4:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2243 "2014-04-04T04:27:01Z")
> [@RedFury](#): > > Nope. Specially when their leadership was Western-driven. To say the least. Well good for you. I’ll continue to think it’s ridiculous. Have an awesome evening. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2014, 9:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2244 "2014-04-04T09:34:34Z")
> [@](#): > > Quote: > The expulsion of the Georgian forces from South Ossetia, and the defence of > South Ossetia as a whole was not a legitimate objective for Russia, > > Quote: > Russian military action taken as a whole was therefore neither necessary nor proportionate to protect Russian peacekeepers in South Ossetia. > > Quote: > Russian military activities against the Georgian military forces were not justified as collective self-defence under international law. Three quotes cited by Batutista from the EU Commissioned Report that are taken out of context. Here it is in full context as these type of things must be. > [@](#): > > 20.) At least as far as the initial phase of the conflict is concerned, an additional legal > question is whether the Georgian use of force against Russian peacekeeping forces on > Georgian territory, i.e. in South Ossetia, might have been justified.\*\* Again the answer is in > the negative.'\*\* > > There was no ongoing armed attack by Russia before the start of the Georgian operation. > > Georgian claims of a large-scale presence of Russian armed forces in South Ossetia prior to the Georgian offensive on 7/8 August could not be substantiated by the Mission. > It could also not be verified that Russia was on the verge of such a major attack, in spite of certain elements and equipment having been made readily available. > There is also no evidence to support any claims that Russian peacekeeping units in South Ossetia were in flagrant breach of their obligations under relevant international agreementssuch as the Sochi Agreement and thus may have forfeited their international legal status. > > Consequently, the use of force by Georgia against Russian peacekeeping forces in > Tskhinvali in the night of 7/8 August 2008 _ **was contrary to international law** _. And here the lack of context was eliminated and is eliminated by most posters finding Russia “EQUALLY” guilty overall… Russia is only equally guilty with Georgia in part two. Not in reaction to the ‘guilty party’ that started the whole thing. > [@](#): > > 21.) When considering the legality of Russian military force against Georgia, the answer needs to **be differentiated**. The Russian reaction to the Georgian attack can be divided into two phases: first, the immediate reaction in order to defend Russian peacekeepers, and second, the invasion of Georgia by Russian armed forces reaching far beyond the administrative boundary of South Ossetia. > In the first instance, there seems to be little doubt that if the Russian peacekeepers were attacked, Russia had the right to defend them using military means proportionate to the attack. Hence the Russian use of force for defensive purposes during the first phase of the conflict would be legal. > > On the second item, it must be ascertained whether the subsequent Russian military campaign > deeper into Georgia was necessary and proportionate in terms of defensive action against > the initial Georgian attack. Although it should be admitted that it is not easy to decide > where the line must be drawn, it seems, however, that much of the Russian military action > went far beyond the reasonable limits of defence. > > This holds true for all kinds of massive and extended military action ranging from the bombing of the upper Kodori Valley to the > deployment of armoured units to reach extensive parts of Georgia, to the setting up of > military positions in and nearby major Georgian towns as well as to control major > highways, and to the deployment of navy units on the Black Sea. All this cannot be > regarded as even remotely commensurate with the threat to Russian peacekeepers in South > Ossetia. Furthermore, continued destruction which came after the ceasefire agreement was > not justifiable by any means. It follows from this that insofar as such extended Russian > military action reaching out into Georgia was conducted in violation of international law, > Georgian military forces were acting in legitimate self-defence under Article 51 of the UN > Charter. In a matter of a very few days, the pattern of legitimate and illegitimate military > action had thus turned around between the two main actors Georgia and Russia. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2014, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2245 "2014-04-04T13:52:04Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > And here the lack of context was eliminated and is eliminated by most posters finding Russia “EQUALLY” guilty overall… Russia is only equally guilty with Georgia in part two. Not in reaction to the ‘guilty party’ that started the whole thing. Nobody said otherwise, or said Russian misdeeds were exactly equal to Georgian misdeeds. The conflict dates back to 1918, so saying Georgia started “the whole thing” on August 7th 2008 is rather myopic. In any case, what was originally disputed by you was one line in an opinon piece: > [@](#): > > The 2008 invasion of Georgia sharply increased the popularity of Dmitri Medvedev, who was filling in as president for Putin. Nothing you’ve written since then has shown that to be untrue. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2014, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2246 "2014-04-04T21:53:51Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > In any case, what was originally disputed by you was one line in an opinon piece: > > Nothing you’ve written since then has shown that to be untrue. It is dishonest and wrong to declare that the Russian people favored an ‘invasion’ of Georgia. I’m sure Russians heartily on the whole fully endorsed the defensive and punitive military strike into and against the Sakaashvilli government’s ‘massive’ artillery and tank assault on civilian targets in Tskhinvali on the night of August 7, 2008. That opinion piece has nothing to support its accusation that the Russian public at large would support Medvedev launching an invasion of Georgia without it being a defensive action as well as intended to destroy the military capability that was offensively used to kill Russian Federation soldiers in a cowardly unjustified, illegal attack that Georgia clearly started the five day war. You can defend the dishonest misrepresentation of the Russian population as a whole in that opinion. I’m not drinking the Kool-Aid that biased writer is peddling. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2014, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2247 "2014-04-04T22:15:47Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > It is dishonest and wrong to declare that the Russian people favored an ‘invasion’ of Georgia. Russia invaded Georgia. That is a factual statement. As a result, Medvedev’s popularity rose. That is also a factual statement. That is what you disagreed with. Two factual statements. You don’t get to wriggle out by redefining the statement. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2014, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2248 "2014-04-04T22:24:59Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Pointing out that they didn’t attack for no reason is excuse-making? In that case, what have you been doing for Russia for dozens of pages now? But the EU commissioned report did tell us that Georgia attacked Tskhinvali for no justifiable or legitimate or defensive reason and it was not in compliance with international law. Georgia can come up with all the ‘reasons’ in the world to justify their cowardly massive artillery assault on civilian targets, but they are worthless justifications and the words of a lying murderous government. When you ‘Point Out’ Georgia’s reasons for massively shelling innocent civilians does that mean you buy them? What is your intent for ‘pointing out’ the reasons a killer gives for doing it? ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2014, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2249 "2014-04-04T22:52:35Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Russia invaded Georgia. That is a factual statement. > > As a result, Medvedev’s popularity rose. That is also a factual statement. > > That is what you disagreed with. Two factual statements. You don’t get to wriggle out by redefining the statement. False. They are not two separate independent statements. ‘As a result’ ties the two together. This is a false statement: “The 2008 invasion of Georgia sharply increased the popularity of Dmitri Medvedev, who was filling in as president for Putin.” Why did you separate that into two statements? I duspute the ‘as a result’ part. Your confusion about ‘invasion’ was explained in the EU commissioned report that I have cited. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2014, 10:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2250 "2014-04-04T22:58:08Z")
Does anyone disagree with the EU Commissioned Report here: “21.) When considering the legality of Russian military force against Georgia, **the answer needs to be differentiated.** The Russian reaction to the Georgian attack can be divided into two phases: first, the immediate reaction in order to defend Russian peacekeepers, and second, the invasion of Georgia by Russian armed forces reaching far beyond the administrative boundary of South Ossetia.” ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2014, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2251 "2014-04-04T23:00:25Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > False. They are not two separate independent statements. ‘As a result’ ties the two together. > > This is a false statement: “The 2008 invasion of Georgia sharply increased the popularity of Dmitri Medvedev, who was filling in as president for Putin.” > > Why did you separate that into two statements? > > I duspute the ‘as a result’ part. > > Your confusion about ‘invasion’ was explained in the EU commissioned report that I have cited. Nope. I’m correct. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2014, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2252 "2014-04-04T23:01:50Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > It is dishonest and wrong to declare that the Russian people favored an ‘invasion’ of Georgia. I’m sure Russians heartily on the whole fully endorsed the defensive and punitive military strike into and against the Sakaashvilli government’s ‘massive’ artillery and tank assault on civilian targets in Tskhinvali on the night of August 7, 2008. That opinion piece has nothing to support its accusation that the Russian public at large would support Medvedev launching an invasion of Georgia without it being a defensive action as well as intended to destroy the military capability that was offensively used to kill Russian Federation soldiers in a cowardly unjustified, illegal attack that Georgia clearly started the five day war. > > You can defend the dishonest misrepresentation of the Russian population as a whole in that opinion. I’m not drinking the Kool-Aid that biased writer is peddling. 😕 Are you thinking of [the right article?](http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/31/opinion/russia-euphoria-crimea/index.html?iid=article_sidebar) This one made no accusation that the Russian public would support some alternate-reality invasion of Georgia that occurred under different circumstances. That the Russian people approved of the actual invasion of Georgia, at least in the form of increasing their approval of Medvedev, well, that’s just a fact. The article’s point is that previous military actions Putin was involved in worked out very well for him, and it’s predicting that this one won’t, because of a difference between this one and the previous ones: the international response. There is no moral judgment on the Russo-Georgian War there, you are imagining things. Things that, conveniently, allow you ignore the entire article. > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > But the EU commissioned report did tell us that Georgia attacked Tskhinvali for no justifiable or legitimate or defensive reason and it was not in compliance with international law. Sort of, it found that Georgia would have been justified, but for its treaty obligations: > [@](#): > > The armed conflict between Georgia and South Ossetia took place exclusively within the borders of the sovereign state of Georgia as they had been internationally recognized at the time when Georgia became member of the United Nations. The use of force by Georgia was directed against an entity short of statehood that formally belonged to the territory of Georgia and was therefore neither sovereign nor independent (see Chapter 3 “Related Legal Issues”). > > Under Art. 2 (4) of the UN Charter, the use of force is prohibited only if it is directed against “the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State”, or if it is “in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations”. Consequently, a government is generally not prevented from using armed force in internal conflicts, e.g. against insurgents starting a civil war or against territorial entities fighting violently for secession.41 > > In the Georgian–South Ossetian armed conflict, the use of force is “inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations”, and therefore the prohibition of the use of force is applicable to the conflict, for the following reasons. > > First, the Sochi Agreement concluded in 1992 between the Republic of Georgia (represented by Eduard Shevardnadze) and the Russian Federation (represented by Boris Yeltsin)42 reaffirms in its preamble “the commitment to the UN Charter and the Helsinki Final Act”. > > … > > Second, the legal obligation of Georgia to refrain from the use of force in its relations with South Ossetia is enshrined in the 1994 Agreement “On the further development of the process of the peaceful regulation of the Georgian-Ossetian conflict and on the Joint Control Commission”. > > … > > Third, the “Memorandum on Measures to Provide Security and Strengthen Mutual Trust between Sides in the Georgian-South Ossetian Conflict” of 16 May 1996 explicitly states: “We have agreed on the following: (1) The Parties to the conflict shall denounce application of force or threat of force ….” > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > Georgia can come up with all the ‘reasons’ in the world to justify their cowardly massive artillery assault on civilian targets, but they are worthless justifications and the words of a lying murderous government. How can a justification be “worthless”? It can be insufficient to meet some legal standard, but “worthless”? Don’t forget a dash of ethnic hatred… > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > But they could not lie about the one and only significant fact because Georgia started killing Russian troops in civilian target areas as the Georgian cowards they are. …that really sells your opinions. > [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > When you ‘Point Out’ Georgia’s reasons for massively shelling innocent civilians does that mean you buy them? What is your intent for ‘pointing out’ the reasons a killer gives for doing it? I “buy” that their reasons were what they said they were, yes. My intent is to dispute your characterization of the Georgian side as madmen. ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2014, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2253 "2014-04-04T23:04:29Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Nope. I’m correct. How are you correct? You separated a single statement into two. I contest the statement as a whole exactly as written. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2014, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2254 "2014-04-04T23:06:27Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > This is a false statement: “The 2008 invasion of Georgia sharply increased the popularity of Dmitri Medvedev, who was filling in as president for Putin.” Ummm…why is it false? From [The New York Times](http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/21/world/europe/medvedevs-handiwork-is-erased-in-putins-russia.html?_r=0): > [@](#): > > Still, there were unmistakable signs that Mr. Medvedev was being cut down to size, starting on the fourth anniversary of the August 2008 war with Georgia. That event had lifted his popularity greatly, and each anniversary he reminisced on television about the tough, solitary decision he made to send the army into Georgia while Mr. Putin was away in Beijing. Do you have a source that says the invasion of Georgia _didn’t_, in fact, increase the popularity of Medvedev? ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2014, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2255 "2014-04-04T23:14:22Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Ummm…why is it false? From [The New York Times](http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/21/world/europe/medvedevs-handiwork-is-erased-in-putins-russia.html?_r=0): You can’t see the difference in these two statements? “\*\*That event \*\*had lifted his popularity greatly, and each anniversary he reminisced on television about the tough, solitary decision he made to \*\*send the army \*\*into Georgia while Mr. Putin was away in Beijing.” “The 2008 invasion of Georgia sharply increased the popularity of Dmitri Medvedev, who was filling in as president for Putin.” ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2014, 11:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2256 "2014-04-04T23:18:11Z")
Sending an army into a country isn’t an invasion? Well, what do you know!! ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2014, 11:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2257 "2014-04-04T23:26:45Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > You can’t see the difference in these two statements? > “\*\*That event \*\*had lifted his popularity greatly, and each anniversary he reminisced on television about the tough, solitary decision he made to \*\*send the army \*\*into Georgia while Mr. Putin was away in Beijing.” > “The 2008 invasion of Georgia sharply increased the popularity of Dmitri Medvedev, who was filling in as president for Putin.” No, there is no difference. Sending the army into a hostile foreign nation is [an invasion.](http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/invasion?s=t) > [@](#): > > Invasion > > 1. an act or instance of invading or entering as an enemy, especially by an army. Perhaps the issue is some kind of a negative connotation you associate with the word “invasion”? ---
**Author:** ![NotfooledbyW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/f475e1/32.png) [@NotfooledbyW](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotfooledbyW)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2014, 11:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2258 "2014-04-04T23:30:45Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > I “buy” that their reasons were what they said they were, yes. My intent is to dispute your characterization of the Georgian side as madmen. OK. Its clear that you dispute my view that a head of state that orders a massive artillery and tank assault against a populated city, killing and wounding many human beings in an illegal and unjustified attack, is a madman. I’ll keep that in mind for future reference. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2014, 11:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2259 "2014-04-04T23:31:30Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > No, there is no difference. Sending the army into a hostile foreign nation is [an invasion.](http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/invasion?s=t) > > Perhaps the issue is some kind of a negative connotation you associate with the word “invasion”? He probably thinks that a country can’t “invade” another country as an act of self-defense. Or, he’s redefining common English words again in order to defend his indefensible statements. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2014, 11:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513/2260 "2014-04-04T23:52:30Z")
> [@NotfooledbyW](#): > > OK. Its clear that you dispute my view that a head of state that orders a massive artillery and tank assault against a populated city, killing and wounding many human beings in an illegal and unjustified attack, is a madman. > > I’ll keep that in mind for future reference. A madman is someone [who’s insane](http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/madman?s=t), not someone who disagrees with you as to what sort of events justify a military attack. You called Bush a madman as well, IIRC. Words mean things. > [@John\_Mace](#): > > He probably thinks that a country can’t “invade” another country as an act of self-defense. Or, he’s redefining common English words again in order to defend his indefensible statements. I never know what’s the result of a language barrier, what’s ignorance, and what’s frantic back-pedaling to avoid ever admitting error. In case it’s ignorance, here, **NotfooledbyW** , are a few invasions done in self-defense: [Six-Day War](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-Day_War) [Operation Overlord](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Overlord) [Pancho Villa Expedition](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pancho_Villa_Expedition) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513.md?page=112) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-has-invaded-ukraine-how-will-the-west-respond/682513.md?page=114)