News Georgian - South Ossetian - Russian Conflict

[layer_ru]

What evidence do you want ?May be audio record of a conversation between saakashvili and condolisa rise or may be some secret docs?I can't prove it ,but it can be seen clearly,that usa commanded georgia to attack.

 

[layer_ru]

Oh,but how about kosovo?Usa supported its separtment,why not support s.ossetia and abkhazia separatment?s.ossetia,abkhazia and kosovo are the same except the fact that s.ossetia,abkhazia does not meet with us geopolitical interest.And remember irak,whole country invaded because of american's oil lust.

 

[layer_ru]

And who told you that checnya and dagestan want to be separate from russia?nowdays there is a huge development in checnya ,more shops ,hospitals,etc. Are being built,and there is a peace in this region.All nationalities not only ethnic minorities are glad to be the part of russia.

 

[jostpuur]

There may be good reasons for Russia's proceeding beyond the original conflict zone. Putin said that the Georgia's original attack towards its own people in South Ossetia had elements of genocide. It can be difficult to get war criminals arrested if they are protected by their corrupted governments, and particularly difficult if the corrupted government is supported by some great nations. So if indeed war crimes were committed, Russia can only either let the war crimes go unpunished, or then take temporary control of the Georgia.

However, it could be that the claims of genocide are Russian propaganda, as well. We cannot know it here.

I have noticed that the western media has been reluctant to comment on the origins of the conflict. The conflict is indeed called only a "conflict", and the attention is drawn to the fact that Russia has attacked outside the "conflict zone", but it is suspicious how the original nature of the "conflict" is avoided. As long as western media is not giving description on it, the Russian claims of Georgia committing a genocide seem to be very well possibly true.

In one of the youtube clips I was watching on this, Putin said they would collect a "body of evidence" supporting their genocide claims. We will probably hear about this later.

Oh yes, and we cannot know for sure what Georgia has been doing after the original attack. That is most heavily hidden under propaganda from both sides: It could be that Georgia has been continuing fighting and at the same time crying: "look west! We have stopped fighting, but Russia continues!" Or it could be that Georgia has stopped fighting, and Russia continues claiming that Georgia keeps fighting. Who knows?

 

[Evo]

layer_ru your posts are meaningless without evidence. You may express a personal opinion on your feelings about the conflict, but you cannot make claims such as you have without proof, it is a violation of our guidelines.

 

[Art]

The Georgian president seems to live in a fantasy land with no grip on reality. In a television interview today he made many extraordinary claims which were blatantly false. To list a few;

He claimed he personally had been attacked that morning at a meet the press venue by Russian fighter planes which flew low over his head. A Sky News correspondent who was at the venue said no such thing happened.

He claims Russia attacked taking advantage of the world's press being diverted by the Olympic games. He seems to have completely forgotten that Russia responded to his attack on the citizens of S Ossetia which indeed was timed to take advantage of the Olympic games.

He claimed at that moment a fierce battle was waging in Gori which he claimed had been destroyed by Russian tanks and aircraft. Funnily enough Sky News had interrupted a live video broadcast by one of their reporters in Gori to go to his interview and that reporter was standing in the middle of Gori commenting on how quiet it was and how things were getting back to normal. The reporter also said and showed the only damaged building was an apartment block which had suffered blast damage following the bombing the previous day of an adjacent military base.

He claimed all Georgian troops had left S Ossetia but when asked in a Q&A session about Russian claims that his troops were still fighting in S Ossetia he said they were responding to Russian fire. Hard to see how they are doing that if they are not there.

Seeing as how Mikheil Saakashvili's lies are so easily disproved one must presume they are intended for domestic consumption or he really is simply insane.

Meanwhile the US who the Russians believe have their fingerprints all over this are now desperately trying to recover what they can from the situation. The attempt to seize the separatist areas having failed the focus now seems to be on trying to not lose ground as a result of this insane piece of adventurism. Understandably the Russians and the S Ossetians are not prepared to pretend as if nothing ever happened. America's pleas for peace seem more than a little hollow given they are in the process of airlifting Georgia's 2000 troops from Iraq to return them to Georgia to assist in the conflict.

Meanwhile Russian television (English language RT) is showing footage from S Ossetia particularly it's capital which has been absolutely flattened and it's streets littered with corpses from the Georgian attack. It is strange the Western news outlets aren't carrying this footage as I'm sure the Russians would be all too happy to share it with them

 

[Oberst Villa]

There may be good reasons for Russia's proceeding beyond the original conflict zone. Putin said that the Georgia's original attack towards its own people in South Ossetia had elements of genocide. It can be difficult to get war criminals arrested if they are protected by their corrupted governments, and particularly difficult if the corrupted government is supported by some great nations. So if indeed war crimes were committed, Russia can only either let the war crimes go unpunished, or then take temporary control of the Georgia.

I think it is a mistake to heat up emotions by using words like genocide. Operation Barbarossa back in 1941 was genocide, I have seen enough documentary in German TV and read enough books to say this for sure. What has happened here (as far as I understood the events) is that Georgia started this conflict by attacking South Ossetia and killed up to 2000 Russian people (if you believe Russian sources) during a military operation. Whether war crimes were comitted remains to be seen, but even then this was no genocide.

Nethertheless, I think the Russian reaction was justified: To go into South Ossetia with armed forces and to use their airpower to take out military assets in Georgia that might have inflicted further damage on South Ossetia.

Anyway, even if Saakashvili were responsible for war crimes, going into Georgia to take him under arrest would be an incredibly foolish thing to do for Russia. Even in the (very unlikely) case that they might succeed, the resulting collateral damage might poison the relationsship between the 2 countries for the next century. Not to speak of the relations with the west, if we would see trecks of Georgian refugees on youtube. (Or are you talking about some really cool Spetsnaz operation ? Get in by parachute, put Mr. Saakashvili in a bag and escape with him over the border ? Maybe we will see this in a Russian movie in some years...)

 

[jostpuur]

What has happened here (as far as I understood the events) is that Georgia started this conflict by attacking South Ossetia and killed up to 2000 Russian people (if you believe Russian sources) during a military operation.

It has not become clear to me who these 2000 people were. According to the news report to which I posted one youtube link in post #28, that number even included children. It included Russians, but I understood that it included also Georgians. At this point I might again remind of the unfortunate fact that Western media is not talking about this. It is only talking about how Russia is attacking outside the "conflict zone".

I am not yet seeing anywhere convincing evidence that Putin's claims would be plain wrong.

Anyway, even if Saakashvili were responsible for war crimes, going into Georgia to take him under arrest would be an incredibly foolish thing to do for Russia. Even in the (very unlikely) case that they might succeed, the resulting collateral damage might poison the relationsship between the 2 countries for the next century. Not to speak of the relations with the west

On the other hand, letting a possible war criminal continue in charge of his regime, and listen to the West accusing Russia of everything, would also poison the relationships. I don't see how any option for the Russia would be a good option now. Getting a new, less mad, leader to Georgia could be a positive thing though.

 

[Oberst Villa]

layer ru:

Welcome to the forum, am I right that the "ru" is for "russia" ? (I am from Germany by the way). If yes, it is certainly interesting to read what someone whose country is directly involved thinks of the whole mess (but keep in mind what Evo said in post #55...).

Would you like to make a prediction (or just a guess) what Russias next steps might be ? Let us assume for a moment that Georgia will completely withdraw from South Ossetia, and will stop firing on Russian troops. (Maybe they have already done this, to me the news reports are still a bit confusing at the moment)

In this case, do you think that Russia will agree to an armistice (end of hostilities) ? Or do you believe in reports that Russia might continue the fighting to remove Saakashvili from power ? Or to destroy as much of Georgia's military power as possible ?

 

[Alex:)]

I haven't been following this thread since last post, so am not sure if this link has already been discussed: Human Rights Watch http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2008/08/10/georgi19581.htm

disclaimer: I am neither supporting nor refuting this information. Consider it as just another point of view.

 

[Oberst Villa]

Some guesses / rumors / news snippets. Please don't take them as reliable facts, but you might correlate them with what you hear in the news:

Russian troops will advance until they have secured buffer zones around South Ossetia and Abkhazia. A German reporter in South Ossetia was told by Russian staff officers that Russia had no intention to occupy Georgian territory except for this buffer zones. I just hope they don't think that all of Georgia is their buffer zone... Seriously, another source claimed that Russia explicitly stated they would not move into Tblisi.

I read in some posts the accusation that western media do only report what happened to the Georgian population but ignore the South Ossetian refugees. I have also observed this in some media, but on a German TV channel they brought a relatively long report about South Ossetians that had fled to North Ossetia, including a statement of a woman about Georgian attrocities (I do not consider this reliable as long as I have no confirmation by an independent source, I am only telling you this to make my point that not all western media give one-sided reports).

Finally, I made the false assumption that the South Ossetians are a homogeneous population that all want to break away from Georgia. This is surely true for the majority, but today I heard reports of some South Ossetians that are loyal to Georgia and had fled there when Russian troops moved into South Ossetia.

 

[edward]

We are into Georgia militarily up to our necks and have been since 2002. It is always about oil and blood is always shed.

The Pentagon is to privatise its military presence in Georgia by contracting a team of retired US military officers to equip and advise the former Soviet republic's crumbling military, embellishing an eastward expansion that has enraged Moscow.


After a Georgian appeal for support to the US defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, during a visit last month, a team of 20-30 private defence consultants are already in Tbilisi. Their employer, a Washington security firm, Cubic, has a three-year $15m contract with the Pentagon to support all aspects of the Georgian ministry of defence.


A senior western diplomat said: "One of the goals is to make the army units capable of seizing and defending a given objective. The consultants will work with US defence liaisons in the US Tbilisi embassy and the European command in Stuttgart." He said the programme could continue for much longer than three years.


About 60 US military trainers arrived in Georgia in the summer of 2002 to help the dilapidated military deal with the perceived threat of terrorists linked to al-Qaida hiding in the Pankisi gorge, on the border with Russian Chechnya.

http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=11213

And it is all being done by private companies, probably Cheney's choice on this.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/jan/06/georgia.nickpatonwalsh

The price of crude is allready going up.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601082&sid=az6JIuhga_a8&refer=canada

 

[Jordan Joab]

Speculation:

WWI and WWII started out of a small regional event/conflict. WWIII just a few months away?

 

[jostpuur]

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/11/us.georgia/index.html

Bush also warned Russia against trying to depose Georgia's government, saying evidence suggests Russia may be preparing to do so.

At the United Nations in New York on Monday, Russia refused to sign off on a resolution calling for a cease-fire with Georgia despite mounting pressure from world powers.

The U.S. is trying to transport 2,000 Georgian troops serving in Iraq back home to fend off Russian advances, but beyond that "there are no discussions about the U.S. getting involved militarily,"

It looks like Russia will be taking control of the entire country now, despite what the west is crying. I don't believe WIII is coming, assuming Russia wins and ends the war quickly. If the battle starts continuing too long, I suppose anything can happen then.

 

[Pyrrhus]

Like Serbia and Kosovo/Albania you mean? By the same deduction technically Serbia didn't attack Kosovo as it was their own territory which they were trying to regain control of from Albanian supported separatists but that didn't stop NATO intervening to give Kosovo independence. The two situations are remarkably similar only for NATO read Russia.

You know that's exactly what i thought when i first read about this war. Anyway, later as I was looking reading the countries reactions I wasn't surprised when I read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_reaction_to_the_2008_South_Ossetia_War" .

 

[jostpuur]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7555858.stm Russia 'ends Georgia operation'

Now it appears that the Russia is not heading towards the capital anymore.

 

[AhmedEzz]

I think Russia is showing the US that it will no longer tolerate its policies. US has been supplying Georgians with weapons , tanks, etc... Russia doesn't want a puppet government controlled by the US near its borders. I believe this is a way of saying "We are serious about this and you must change your policies.".

This might also be linked with the US plans to protect itself from Russian missiles. If the US went forward with this, Russia will lose power balance to US and I don't think that is a good thing.

I think that the US is simply after taking every power in the world down but then it IS "THE" superpower and it is the wealthiest nation in the world, what else do they want? This remains mystery to me.



*These are all personal opinions*

 

[Briant232]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxSvsa7I9fg&feature=related

Brings to mind that saying, "You can run, but you'll only die tired." Add to that, "You can run, but your panicked flight (to nowhere really) will be on display on youtube for years to come."

He is a puppet, which is why he had US and Israeli trainer's to prepare his military to attack South Ossetia. I guess they didn't teach his troops what to do in case of a real opponent...that's always the tricky part...when they shoot back.

Hopefully the Georgian people throw this guy under the bus.

 

[Oberst Villa]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7555858.stm Russia 'ends Georgia operation'

Now it appears that the Russia is not heading towards the capital anymore.

So the bloodshed is over ! Thanks for this wonderful news, jostpuur.

 

[seycyrus]

I find it strange that people put any credence in Russian *controlled* media.

To those who said the US involvement in this was about oil. You are correct, but not in the way you think.

Georgia has one of few (maybe the only) non-Russian oil pipeline to Western Europe. Chew on that for a moment. Now chew some more.

This is why Russia is interested in maintaining an independent, but pro-russian, South Ossetia.

We are of what Putin has been pulling over the last couple of years, aren't we?

 

[AhmedEzz]

This is about many things other than oil my friend. Yes oil is a major factor, Russia supplies Europe with about half of its gas needs and a great % of its oil. The only pipeline that is not in Russia is the one in Georgia. Now this is strategically important for Russia to maintain this status of controlling European power needs.

However, this is also about power balance between Russia and the US. Russia regained not all but some of its strength since the fall of the Soviet union. Now, the US doesn't want Russia to re-emerge, they don't want another China. Therefore, US finds some poor ex-soviet countries and supplies them with weapons and money to counter Russian influence, same with Georgia.

Now, Russia doesn't like that one bit, therefore it moves into Georgia (this is an examplary move; it gives an example to the US that Russia will not accept what is going on; same move could hapepn with any other small country near Russia.) In my opinion, this is not about "protecting Russian citizens and peacekeepers", it is a strategical move rather than an act of agression.

Moreover, with the presidential elections coming, it gives MCcain something to talk about and be voted for.

 

[Art]

I find it strange that people put any credence in Russian *controlled* media.

To those who said the US involvement in this was about oil. You are correct, but not in the way you think.

Georgia has one of few (maybe the only) non-Russian oil pipeline to Western Europe. Chew on that for a moment. Now chew some more.

This is why Russia is interested in maintaining an independent, but pro-russian, South Ossetia.

We are of what Putin has been pulling over the last couple of years, aren't we?

The existence of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline may have come as a new and novel surprise to you but please don't assume it is a surprise to everybody else here.

I think you will find Russia are far more concerned with Georgia's cosying up to NATO wirh the prospect of NATO troops and more anti-missile batteries on their doorstep than with the pipeline which could be easily cut at a whim.

Now which part of the Russian 'controlled' media reports do you question? Do you not believe Georgia launched an attack on South Ossetia?

 

[grant9076]

Like Serbia and Kosovo/Albania you mean? By the same deduction technically Serbia didn't attack Kosovo as it was their own territory which they were trying to regain control of from Albanian supported separatists but that didn't stop NATO intervening to give Kosovo independence. The two situations are remarkably similar only for NATO read Russia.

Having fought in the Kosovo war, I can tell you that the actions of the Serbs were not just about regaining control from separatists. What happened there was essentially ethnic cleansing (read genocide) against the Ethnic Albanians.

Mass killings, sexual slave camps, disemboweling pregnant women and other atrocities have nothing to do with controlling territory.

 

[seycyrus]

This is about many things other than oil my friend. Yes oil is a major factor, Russia supplies Europe with about half of its gas needs and a great % of its oil. The only pipeline that is not in Russia is the one in Georgia. Now this is strategically important for Russia to maintain this status of controlling European power needs.

I not did state that the situationa was solely about oil. It *is* as you point out about Russia trying to recapture some of it's former glory. Control of oil is just one path.

 

[seycyrus]

The existence of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline may have come as a new and novel surprise to you but please don't assume it is a surprise to everybody else here.

Excuse me? I find your condescension insulting. Nowhere did I imply that was the harbringer of a great revelation.

:
I think you will find Russia are far more concerned with Georgia's cosying up to NATO wirh the prospect of NATO troops and more anti-missile batteries on their doorstep

Any other obvious things that you would like to add?

:
than with the pipeline which could be easily cut at a whim.

Who would be doing the cutting?

:
Now which part of the Russian 'controlled' media reports do you question? Do you not believe Georgia launched an attack on South Ossetia?

I thought my implication was fairly obvious. The generalities of the conflict have been reported by other news agencies besides Russia. I do not dispute them.

But throwing down propaganda that the russian media puts out? C'mon.

Certainly we wouldn't trust the Chinese govt. to give us an uncensored view of any China-Tibet conflict. Why would *anyone* just gobble out what the russian controlled media puts out?

 

[jostpuur]

I find it strange that people put any credence in Russian *controlled* media.

Not anymore than in West controlled media either. The right way to go is to gather information as from many sources as possible, and try to put pieces together.

Georgia has one of few (maybe the only) non-Russian oil pipeline to Western Europe.

This is an extremely good reason for Georgia to not attack Russians! Giving the Russia a reason for counter attack is among the stupidest possible things Georgian leaders could do. So why did the Georgia attack then? The speculations about secret advices/commands from the West are not unreasonable.

It is not logical to conclude that because oil is involved, therefore the Russia would be the one proceeding in an unethical way.

To those who said the US involvement in this was about oil. You are correct, but not in the way you think.

You actually did not try to justify this opinion.

 

[meopemuk]

If there is a textbook on peacekeeping there should be a chapter about what happened in Georgia. That's a classic example. The rough narrative is this:

1. Peacekeepers are stationed in the area according to international agreements.
2. Invading forces move into the area killing peacekeepers and civilians on the way.
3. Peacekeepers call for support from the mainland.
4. An overwhelming force comes in and drives the invaders out of the protected area.
5. If the invader resists, the protecting force targets some infrastructure on the invader's territory: airfields, ports, radars, etc. The goal is to interrupt supply routes to the conflict area, make this adventure painful for the invader's leadership, and force it to stop.
6. Western media and politicians spew nonsense about "pipelines", "young democracy", "hegemony", "damaged relations with US", "We are all Georgians!", etc.

...five days later...

7. Invader's army is demoralized and runs for cover to its capital.
8. With some mediation help (Sarkozy) an agreement is signed and peace is restored.

... few months later...

9. The leader of invaders is indicted on the war crimes charges and serves time in the Haague's prison.

If you live in a troubled area, ask Russian peacekeepers to protect you. I don't think they'll necessarily agree, but they definitely know how to do that.

 

[seycyrus]

You actually did not try to justify this opinion.

Yes, you are correct. I was going to make a statement regarding the US, trying to stop Russia controlling the oil supply to W. Europe. Sort of an indirect connection.

Thank you.

 

[jostpuur]

... few months later...

9. The leader of invaders is indicted on the war crimes charges and serves time in the Haague's prison.

If you are right with this, it will be interesting to see how American propaganda machinery deals with this. I suppose American people have already been "informed" about how the Georgia was an innocent victim of Russia's aggression outside the "conflict zone".

 

[seycyrus]

Not anymore than in West controlled media either. The right way to go is to gather information as from many sources as possible, and try to put pieces together.

As part of the "western controlled media" you certainly have many elements that are not known for their pro-US stance.

To state the obvious, there isn't any "anti-russian" element in the russian controlled media.

This is an extremely good reason for Georgia to not attack Russians!

Perhaps there were "russian peacekeepers" in S. Ossetia that were killed, but Georgia certainly did not target them because they were Russian (in my opinion based on no evidence to the contrary), nor did they attack inside Russia proper.

Giving the Russia a reason for counter attack is among the stupidest possible things Georgian leaders could do. So why did the Georgia attack then?

I agree that it was a tragic miscalculation. Perhaps georgia thought US/Nato support would be greater. Or perhaps they actually thought they were in their rights to retake territory that has never been recognized by the US, the EU, NATO or any other country as an independent country. To my knowledge (wikipedia-granted), not even Russian recognizes S. Ossetia as being an independent country!

I have seen opinions ventured that this whole even was perhaps planned by Russia for some time. This opinion was based on the large scope of the air-land-water forces that were deployed to proper position in such a short time.

 

[seycyrus]

6. Western media and politicians spew nonsense about "pipelines", "young democracy", "hegemony", "damaged relations with US", "We are all Georgians!", etc.

Actually, none of those, save the last, is nonsensical in the least.

 

[seycyrus]

If you are right with this, it will be interesting to see how American propaganda machinery deals with this. I suppose American people have already been "informed" about how the Georgia was an innocent victim of Russia's aggression outside the "conflict zone".

the reality of the situation is that the majority of the american people have already benn "informed" that Russia is the innocent.

The latest CNN poll shows pro-russia support at 92%.

I find it a bit unbelievable myself and suspect hacking. I also note how the Russians hacked into and took over the Georgian' governments servers and such. This is of course baseless speculation on my part. I do find the cyberwarfare very indicative of things to come tho.

 

[jostpuur]

I was going to make a statement regarding the US, trying to stop Russia controlling the oil supply to W. Europe.

In more detail this plan was supposed to be, to use Georgia to create a fighting zone, to get a reason for Western troops to be brought into Georgia, to ensure that Russia will not control the oil supply to the W. Europe?

 

[meopemuk]

I agree that it was a tragic miscalculation.

Last time several thousands of civilians were killed and (parts of) cities destroyed (remember 9/11?) nobody called it "tragic miscalculation". Some stronger words (and actions) were used. I am amazed how restrained is Russian leadership in this case.

 

[seycyrus]

In more detail this plan was supposed to be, to use Georgia to create a fighting zone, to get a reason for Western troops to be brought into Georgia, to ensure that Russia will not control the oil supply to the W. Europe?

I am sorry jostpuur, but i am not sure I understand your question. I shall try my best however.

No, I don't think the U.S.'s plan was as involved as that (creating a fighting zone with western troops etc). It could simply be to make sure that Russia does not expand it's control and influence in the region, by supporting Georgia.

 

[seycyrus]

Last time several thousands of civilians were killed and (parts of) cities destroyed (remember 9/11?) nobody called it "tragic miscalculation". Some stronger words (and actions) were used. I am amazed how restrained is Russian leadership in this case.

I did not mean to make light of loss of life by using the words "tragic miscalculation". All I meant was that his strategy, whatever it might have been, apparently backfired.

Am I correct in assuming that you are going under the assumption that the majority of the deaths were as a result of the Georgian attack, and not the Russian counter?

I have not seen conclusive evidence either way, and am hesitant to claimit either way. Certainly I would not say the Russians responded with the "minimal force necessary"

 

[AhmedEzz]

a side note would be, no one that has the adequate strength responds with the "minimal force necessary". Especially if they have a reason to use force ( Russia, US, Israel, etc..).

 

[Gokul43201]

One thing that appears to be completely missing in the discussion so far are some of the early moves by Russia in some weeks and months ago - are they not relevant? Sometime in the spring, there was something in the news about Russian planes violating Georgian airspace. And about a couple weeks ago, there was again something in the news about Russia violating some UN mandate by engaging in direct relations with S. Ossetia and Abkhazia, while bypassing Georgian channels.

Anyway, here's what the candidates had to say:

1qISqGnZWw0[/youtube] [url]ply-2CKZ2qU[/youtube] [url]nXLAMaXnB50[/youtube]

 

[Gokul43201]

Am I correct in assuming that you are going under the assumption that the majority of the deaths were as a result of the Georgian attack, and not the Russian counter?

Were there more deaths in NY/Washington than there were in Afghanistan/Iraq? Have there been more deaths in Israel due to suicide bombings than there have been in Palestine and/or Lebanon, due to Israeli retaliation?

Things can be more complex than a simple comparison of kill-rates may reveal.

 

[meopemuk]

Am I correct in assuming that you are going under the assumption that the majority of the deaths were as a result of the Georgian attack, and not the Russian counter?

I am not a firsthand witness, so I could be misled by propaganda, I admit. I watched both US and Russian TV. Russians said (and showed a footage) that Georgians shelled Tshinvali with "Grad" rockets. This is a weapon not intended for target strikes. It is a modern version of "Katyusha" launchers used most recently by Hesbollah against Israel. It covers a big area (say, 1x1 mile) and everybody in the area has a good chance to be killed. I think there is an international prohibition of using this kind of weapon in populated areas. This is a fact that Tshinvali is now razed to the ground. You can easily find pictures on the Internet.

I saw interviews with refugees who spent 3-4 days in basements and cellars hiding from the shelling and sniper fire. They told about Georgian atrocities. Like in any conflict of that sort, there could be some lies and inflated numbers. But, basically, I tend to believe these people.

I think Western media would do a better job if it talks less about geopolitical "spheres of influence" and focus more on real sufferings of real people.

 

[seycyrus]

Things can be more complex than a simple comparison of kill-rates may reveal.

True, but I am asking a simple question about the "2000" deaths number that has been ntossed about. I have read reports that say the majority of those were caused by Russia, others say Georgia.

 

[seycyrus]

...
I saw interviews with refugees who spent 3-4 days in basements and cellars hiding from the shelling and sniper fire. They told about Georgian atrocities. Like in any conflict of that sort, there could be some lies and inflated numbers. But, basically, I tend to believe these people.
...

I thik it is a bit interesting that you mention both Russian and South Ossetian accounts, but not the Georgian version of events. Have you seen any testimony from Georgian citizens and/or military?

 

[meopemuk]

I thik it is a bit interesting that you mention both Russian and South Ossetian accounts, but not the Georgian version of events. Have you seen any testimony from Georgian citizens and/or military?

I don't have access to Georgian TV, but I suppose their version of events is well represented by the US media. All I saw there were statements by Saakhashvili that "Russian tanks are coming to Tbilisi" and "we will not kneel before occupiers". Have you seen any credible accounts of what happened in Tshinvali from the US/Georgian side? I have a feeling that they prefer to avoid this issue. They more like to discuss how Russia should be punished.

 

[seycyrus]

I don't have access to Georgian TV, but I suppose their version of events is well represented by the US media. All I saw there were statements by Saakhashvili that "Russian tanks are coming to Tbilisi" and "we will not kneel before occupiers". Have you seen any credible accounts of what happened in Tshinvali from the US/Georgian side? I have a feeling that they prefer to avoid this issue. They more like to discuss how Russia should be punished.

Sure thing. I saw the footage of the bombing on both CNN and Fox websites.

The western media itself is NOT discussing how russia should be punished. Rather, they are covering certain political figures who are raising such issues. It would be much more suspicious if such stories were *not* covered.

 

[Astronuc]

I believe that both the US and Russia have strategic interests in Georgia, in addition to the fact that Abkhazians and S. Ossetians would prefer to breakaway from Georgia, but then Georgians in Abkhazia and S. Ossetia would prefer to remain as part of Georgian territory.

The question is - who fired first? Georgian military or S. Ossetian militias, who are apparently looting in S. Ossetia and parts of Georgia?

It certainly appears that Abkazians and Ossetians have legitimate greivances with the Gerogian government in Tbilisi.

Violence and ethnic cleansing is not the solution.

 

[Oberst Villa]

The question is - who fired first? Georgian military or S. Ossetian militias, who are apparently looting in S. Ossetia and parts of Georgia?

Probably there was fighting of relatively low intensity some time before this mess started, but the major escalation seems to have come from Georgian side:

"Authorities in the Georgian separatist region of South Ossetia said Wednesday night (last week) that the outskirts of the region's capital were coming under heavy fire from Georgian-controlled territory, Russian news agencies reported."

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/eu...tml#cnnSTCText

Even if this is a statement coming from one of the involved parties, the subsequent events and reports seem to confirm it more or less.

 

[Oberst Villa]

Cyclovenom found this link (post #65):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_reaction_to_the_2008_South_Ossetia_War

If you search for the German reaction you will find this:

"Deputy Foreign Minister Gernot Erler accused Georgia of violating international law by breaking a 1992 ceasefire agreement with Russia. Eckart von Klaeden, foreign policy spokesman for the Christian Democratic Union, said Russia was to blame."

Pick the one you like

Seriously, what I think is: The German deputy FM would not blame a gouvernment that is an outspoken friend of the west, if he would not really think that it is true. So in my book, yes the Georgian gouvernment started the RECENT events (I'm not saying there has been no bullying and harassment from Russia and / or South Ossetia before...)

P.S: I KNOW how easy it is to put crap on a wiki page, I will try to get some confirmation ASAP...

EDIT: Here you are:

http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,3551206,00.html

Deputy FM: Georgia violated international law
His deputy, Gernot Erler, who is also a Social Democrat, went a step further. Talking to German public broadcaster NDR Info, Erler said Georgians had breached a 1992 ceasefire agreement struck with Russia over South Ossetia, monitored essentially by Russian peacekeepers.
"In this sense, it is also a question of a violation of international law as soon as you start to go down the road of military action," said Erler, who is a Social Democrat like Steinmeier.
He acknowledged prior provocation of the Georgian leadership from Russian-backed South Ossetia's separatists, but said he understood Russia's reaction. While South Ossetia remains sovereign Georgian territory, Russia has taken over the role of providing economic support to the region, Erler said. From a Russian perspective, peacekeeping troops have therefore
been attacked.
"It's an insane, bloody war which will surely do nothing to resolve the problem of this separatist Ossetian province," he said.

 

[seycyrus]

Even if this is a statement coming from one of the involved parties, the subsequent events and reports seem to confirm it more or less.

I don't see how the subsequent events confirm that version. Gerogian forces could have been responding to S. Ossettian fire.

Events still would have unfolded as they did.

 

[meopemuk]

Actually, none of those, save the last, is nonsensical in the least.

I agree that "pipelines", "young democracy", "hegemony", etc are all important issues. My point is that they have only side relationship to this particular conflict. The major questions are whether or not Georgian leadership committed a war crime by ordering to bomb a city and whether or not Russian army overreracted to the events. My answers are "yes" and "no".

 

[seycyrus]

Cyclovenom found this link (post #65):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_reaction_to_the_2008_South_Ossetia_War

If you search for the German reaction you will find this:

"Deputy Foreign Minister Gernot Erler accused Georgia of violating international law by breaking a 1992 ceasefire agreement with Russia.

This quote is a bit confusing as, and doesn't clarify (even if taken at face value) what occurred between Georgia and S. Ossetia.

Could it not have transpired thusly?

S. Ossettian rebels fire at georgians.

Georgians fire back, inadvertently killing some Russian peacekeepers.

Russia points at dead Russians and claims that cease fire was broken by Georgia.