Who started the war in S.Ossetia: Georgia or Russia?

[gogita]

Gogita, it does not matter, what arguments we will provide here, the brains of Russians and pro-russian modern comunnists are fucked by Putinizm....

I fully agree with you, it has no sense to present any arguments to russians, they exist in a parallel world and have no desire to listen to other people. They believe only in the truth of power. They are striving not to become civilized, democratic country, but to become powerful autocracy. They want to sow fear, not respect. But anyway the arguments should be presented, but presented not for russians, but for those people who really want to drive appropriate conclusions and to have enough information.

[the globe]

Before the war started Ossetians had their orders to do all they can to provoke the war. Separatists and so-called Russian “peacemakers” systematically fired to Georgian villages around Thkhinvali. They had killed many Georgian civilians. Russian backed separatists denied any negotiation for peace. Georgian government was forced to protect these villages. After recent occupation of Georgia, Russian “peacemakers” commit to the flames these villages to carry out ethnic cleansing. They are involved in looting, rape and killing of Georgian citizens. Russian soldiers are telling Georgians they are to leave their homes or die. They say they have their orders. It is all happening in Georgia proper around Tskhinvali.

Russia does not let the Red Cross in South Ossetia. Why?

Really, Russia starts this war to put obstacles in Georgia's way to NATO. Everyone knows this, even Its staunch supporters from Iran, Venezuela, North Korea, Syria, Sudan, Byelorussia and Hezbollah.

[lashachochua]

Gogita, it does not matter, what arguments we will provide here, the brains of Russians and pro-russian modern comunnists are fucked by Putinizm....

I fully agree with you, it has no sense to present any arguments to russians, they exist in a parallel world and have no desire to listen to other people. They believe only in the truth of power. They are striving not to become civilized, democratic country, but to become powerful autocracy. They want to sow fear, not respect. But anyway the arguments should be presented, but presented not for russians, but for those people who really want to drive appropriate conclusions and to have enough information.

Yes, you are right

[maxdedikov]

It is curious that a person should be so zealous in blaming Russia for indulging in the seven deadly sins here whilst ignoring the fact that the murderous missions run by the States and their European allies in Irag, Afghanistan and elsewhere have had much more disastrous results in terms of innocent lives taken. Why is it so that one county because its people chose to have a retard for their president driven by oil industry tycoons comes up with a ridiculous terrorism threat and goes into war with weaker countries at no restrain killing people and it is considered civil and justified? I belive everyone should understand that there is no such thing as the American World anymore.

[maxdedikov]

You should all forget about NATO, UN, a country called Giorgia (if could have been Henria or Paulia). The world has changed irretrivably. Now it is not only the States and Europe to decide how to alter the world.

[maxdedikov]

And I side neither with Russia nor America. I'm a mere observer of what is going on in the world. The balance has changed.

[lashachochua]

For those who thinks that Georgians came to abkhazia in 1930.......

Year 1886 1897 1926 1939

Georgians 34 806 44 882 71 954 91 967
Abkhazians 28320 39600 51 458 56197

The following information is based on the sources: Svod sttisticheskix dannix o naselenia zakavkaskovo kraia. Tiflis. 1893; Cbornik ctatisticheskix cbedenie o kavkaze, t.1 Tiflis, otdel II, 1869, page 39

also for those who knows netural logarithms and simple mathematics, you ca check that all these data looks believable.....By the way the one way to check whether the data are correct people use average groth rate for a population, if you calculate it for bot Georgians and Abkhazians, you will see that there is correspondance with world average growth rate of population...........Now you decide.......But for those who do not know mathematics, please do not comment.........

[lashachochua]

For those who thinks that Georgians came to abkhazia in 1930.......

Year 1886 1897 1926 1939

Georgians 34 806, 44 882, 71 954, 91 967
Abkhazians 28320, 39600, 51 458, 56197

The following information is based on the sources: Svod sttisticheskix dannix o naselenia zakavkaskovo kraia. Tiflis. 1893; Cbornik ctatisticheskix cbedenie o kavkaze, t.1 Tiflis, otdel II, 1869, page 39

also for those who knows netural logarithms and simple mathematics, you ca check that all these data looks believable.....By the way the one way to check whether the data are correct people use average groth rate for a population, if you calculate it for bot Georgians and Abkhazians, you will see that there is correspondance with world average growth rate of population...........Now you decide.......But for those who do not know mathematics, please do not comment.........

[maxdedikov]

I don't quite understand the relevance of the figures sited here. Does anyone here think that Giorgia has not rights on Abkazia or Sout Ossetia as parts of its territory?

[lashachochua]

I don't quite understand the relevance of the figures sited here. Does anyone here think that Giorgia has not rights on Abkazia or Sout Ossetia as parts of its territory?

Yes many people think like this......Some of them even thinks that Georgians came to abkhazia in 1930s with the help of Stalin........

[maxdedikov]

I believe it unfortunate for Giorgia that it has been selected as the bone of contention by the States and Russia. Russia is trying to reassert its role and will do it whether other like it or not. They very clearly stated that.

[maxdedikov]

I also think that it was quite foolish of the Giorgian leaders to think that by becoming pro-american they will benfit more than lose. Let's see what americans and Europe can do about Russia to cease its encroachments. I fear, very little apart from shouting and drooling

[lashachochua]

I also think that it was quite foolish of the Giorgian leaders to think that by becoming pro-american they will benfit more than lose. Let's see what americans and Europe can do about Russia to cease its encroachments. I fear, very little apart from shouting and drooling

You logical fears are understandable....But if modern world will not react in this problem, than Russia will follow the same logic. In ukrainian conflict zone they already started to distribute russian passport - the same thing that they did in Abkhazia and S. Ossetia.....Now Russia should be condemned, otherwise the problem will enlarge in dimensions, and anyway today or tommorow the western world would have been forced to solve the problem....I think it is better to solve this problem now, tomorrow it will be late....

[lashachochua]

I also think that it was quite foolish of the Giorgian leaders to think that by becoming pro-american they will benfit more than lose. Let's see what americans and Europe can do about Russia to cease its encroachments. I fear, very little apart from shouting and drooling

You logical fears are understandable....But if modern world will not react in this problem, than Russia will follow the same logic. In ukrainian conflict zone they already started to distribute russian passport - the same thing that they did in Abkhazia and S. Ossetia.....Now Russia should be condemned, otherwise the problem will enlarge in dimensions, and anyway today or tommorow the western world would have been forced to solve the problem....I think it is better to solve this problem now, tomorrow it will be late....

[vasili]

of course russia started the war. And started it not for the sake of Ossetian people,but to hinder Georgia`s NATO accession.

[davidbua]

Who started the War? It is a rediculous question. Of course, war was provoked by the side which now is occupiyng the independent state and by recognizing independence of its two regions attempts to occupy the third part of the territory Georgia. Welcome to the 19th century.

[SVP]

Salomo, I'll reply to your questions later (busy at work now).

To all:
please read these materials (they are from the US, UK, France, not from Russia), just for your info:

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/25/georgia.russia">http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... gia.russia</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/08/19/opinion/edgreenway.php">http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/08/19/ ... eenway.php</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1047509/OPINION-World-peace-Give-Putin-anyday.html#">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... yday.html#</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/20/nato.usforeignpolicy">http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... eignpolicy</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.lefigaro.fr/debats/2008/08/15/01005-20080815ARTFIG00001-avec-la-georgie-que-veut-l-amerique-en-europe-.php">http://www.lefigaro.fr/debats/2008/08/1 ... urope-.php</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://exiledonline.com/war-nerd-south-ossetia-the-war-of-my-dreams/">http://exiledonline.com/war-nerd-south- ... my-dreams/</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net/Geopolitics___Eurasia/Caucasus_War/caucasus_war.html">http://www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net/G ... s_war.html</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net/Geopolitics___Eurasia/Saakashvili/saakashvili.html">http://www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net/G ... hvili.html</a><!-- m -->

What do you think?

[SiD]

Analyze please

Timeline of Russian Aggression in Georgia


Document by the Government of Georgia

25 August 2008

Tbilisi

The Government of Georgia invites the international community and journalists to verify the information laid out in the timeline below.

You expected something else? Parhaps they would just say: yes we did it?
But it is usefull to understand georgians position, thank you.

Maybe you prefer only documents prepared by Russia? There are not any conclussions here, only the facts are presented, which have documented evidences. So try to drive conclusions by yourself, if your brain is not completely washed out by Russian Propaganda machine.

I prefer to see everything, if you explore this forum you will find links to dozens of different "facts" from all sides. You think that only pure true comes from Georgia and only lies from Russia?

But anyway the arguments should be presented, but presented not for russians, but for those people who really want to drive appropriate conclusions and to have enough information

So you already know what conclusion anyone must have?
It looks like for you there is only 2 points of view yours and incorrect one.

[lashachochua]

Salomo, I'll reply to your questions later (busy at work now).

To all:
please read these materials (they are from the US, UK, France, not from Russia), just for your info:

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/25/georgia.russia">http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... gia.russia</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/08/19/opinion/edgreenway.php">http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/08/19/ ... eenway.php</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1047509/OPINION-World-peace-Give-Putin-anyday.html#">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... yday.html#</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/20/nato.usforeignpolicy">http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... eignpolicy</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.lefigaro.fr/debats/2008/08/15/01005-20080815ARTFIG00001-avec-la-georgie-que-veut-l-amerique-en-europe-.php">http://www.lefigaro.fr/debats/2008/08/1 ... urope-.php</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://exiledonline.com/war-nerd-south-ossetia-the-war-of-my-dreams/">http://exiledonline.com/war-nerd-south- ... my-dreams/</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net/Geopolitics___Eurasia/Caucasus_War/caucasus_war.html">http://www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net/G ... s_war.html</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net/Geopolitics___Eurasia/Saakashvili/saakashvili.html">http://www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net/G ... hvili.html</a><!-- m -->

What do you think?

I have read first two artcles yet, but now I NOW FROM WHERE YOU TOOK YOUR COMMENT ABOUT WINE AND POEMS

[lashachochua]

Salomo, I'll reply to your questions later (busy at work now).

To all:
please read these materials (they are from the US, UK, France, not from Russia), just for your info:

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/25/georgia.russia">http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... gia.russia</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/08/19/opinion/edgreenway.php">http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/08/19/ ... eenway.php</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1047509/OPINION-World-peace-Give-Putin-anyday.html#">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... yday.html#</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/20/nato.usforeignpolicy">http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... eignpolicy</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.lefigaro.fr/debats/2008/08/15/01005-20080815ARTFIG00001-avec-la-georgie-que-veut-l-amerique-en-europe-.php">http://www.lefigaro.fr/debats/2008/08/1 ... urope-.php</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://exiledonline.com/war-nerd-south-ossetia-the-war-of-my-dreams/">http://exiledonline.com/war-nerd-south- ... my-dreams/</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net/Geopolitics___Eurasia/Caucasus_War/caucasus_war.html">http://www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net/G ... s_war.html</a><!-- m -->
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net/Geopolitics___Eurasia/Saakashvili/saakashvili.html">http://www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net/G ... hvili.html</a><!-- m -->

What do you think?

I would like to talk about two issues:

“Abkhazia and South Ossetia—the first a traditional Black Sea resort area, the second an impoverished, sparsely populated region that borders Russia to the north—each has its own language, culture, history. When the Soviet Union collapsed, both regions sought to separate themselves from Georgia in bloody conflicts - South Ossetia in 1990-1, Abkhazia in 1992-4.”

According to many Greek, Persian, French, Egyptian Historians before XV century the territory of Abkhazia was considered as the part of Georgia, the part of Kolkhs, who are considered to be the forefathers of Laz people (the same megrelian Georgians). The people living in the territory of Abkhazia was called Absuas….After XV century as Georgian kingdom was weakened, the different tribes started to come from North Caucasus…. Among them Abkhaz, Ossetians…By the way these facts are approved by the following Russian Historians: Tatishevi (1686-1750), Pototski and several Egyptian and Turkish Historians….So it is not right to say that the people living in these territories had different history from Georgia, because these territories had always been under the Georgian Kingdoms governance…..

You may think that this historical passage is not relevant for current situation but I think it is crucially important when talking about independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia…..

In all articles authors say that the war was started by Georgians, but all of them lack one main fact, that before the Georgia started bombarding, S. Ossetians opened fire and for three days they were opening fire to Georgian villigase……Read the following article:

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.realclearworld.com/articles/2008/08/russogeorgian_war_and_balance.html">http://www.realclearworld.com/articles/ ... lance.html</a><!-- m -->

Even in this article the author indicates that Georgian started the war, But

“Let’s begin simply by reviewing the last few days.
On the night of Thursday, Aug. 7, forces of the Republic of Georgia drove across the border of South Ossetia, a secessionist region of Georgia that has functioned as an independent entity since the fall of the Soviet Union. The forces drove on to the capital, Tskhinvali, which is close to the border. Georgian forces got bogged down while trying to take the city. In spite of heavy fighting, they never fully secured the city, nor the rest of South Ossetia.
On the morning of Aug. 8, Russian forces entered South Ossetia, using armored and motorized infantry forces along with air power. South Ossetia was informally aligned with Russia, and Russia acted to prevent the region’s absorption by Georgia. Given the speed with which the Russians responded — within hours of the Georgian attack — the Russians were expecting the Georgian attack and were themselves at their jumping-off points. The counterattack was carefully planned and competently executed, and over the next 48 hours, the Russians succeeded in defeating the main Georgian force and forcing a retreat. By Sunday, Aug. 10, the Russians had consolidated their position in South Ossetia
In this simple chronicle, there is something quite mysterious: Why did the Georgians choose to invade South Ossetia on Thursday night? There had been a great deal of shelling by the South Ossetians of Georgian villages for the previous three nights, but while possibly more intense than usual, artillery exchanges were routine. The Georgians might not have fought well, but they committed fairly substantial forces that must have taken at the very least several days to deploy and supply. Georgia’s move was deliberate.
The United States is Georgia’s closest ally. It maintained about 130 military advisers in Georgia, along with civilian advisers, contractors involved in all aspects of the Georgian government and people doing business in Georgia. It is inconceivable that the Americans were unaware of Georgia’s mobilization and intentions. It is also inconceivable that the Americans were unaware that the Russians had deployed substantial forces on the South Ossetian frontier. U.S. technical intelligence, from satellite imagery and signals intelligence to unmanned aerial vehicles, could not miss the fact that thousands of Russian troops were moving to forward positions. The Russians clearly knew the Georgians were ready to move. How could the United States not be aware of the Russians? Indeed, given the posture of Russian troops, how could intelligence analysts have missed the possibility that the Russians had laid a trap, hoping for a Georgian invasion to justify its own counterattack?”

I think it is clear that Russia was preparing for the war, that’s why they provoked Ossetians to open fire, they made image like Russia can not control the situation, Georgian government based on this started bombarding, and ops, Russia the great lover of small nations…..It is also possible that Georgia was preparing for the war, who knows.........But it is clear that Russian provocation did not started in 2008, from 2004 Russia started aimed policy, like offering Russian passports, opening railway, providing russian generals to breakaway regions,...and so on
It is really questionable why Russia needed this provocation, what is the goals of Russia….No country will recognize the independence of Abkhazia and S. Ossetia….Than why?.....What Russia wants to say?.........And is it capable to oppose the whole world?.....
I do not know…. The future will show….
But Thanks SVP the articles were really interesting, but they are mostly speculations about ideas, they are not based on facts….But thanks anyway. :-)

[EU1]

Georgia supported by the USA and some EU countries supplying weapons there started this war to join NATO as soon as possible, it could not do it without that. According to maps found in geargian headquaters, all was well planned, they occupy S Ossetia within one day cleaning civilians at this territory, then war on Abhazia. They only did not take into account that Russia could interfere, fatal mistake frome their side. And don't cry Russia began this war, you should not have listened to Rice's advices and to think that the USA will help you, this country never cares about the others but uses them for its own aims

[SVP]

I have read all your texts with great interest. They are well written and I have tried to understand the Russian point of view through them. I would like to ask you some questions, which I however still have not understood (some of them may have been initiated by other Russians, but I feel you are the best person to explain them):

1) Why demonise only Saakashvili in this crisis? If someone, who has ordered to bomb civilian towns or to kill civilians with other methods, is called a mad person and a kind of Hitler, then fine… but he is not alone here! Also Russians bombed the civilians in Gori, don’t forget that. And your beloved Putin let bomb Groznyi I do not remembered how many times… but it really was in ruins, you must admit it. So… why not call also Putin a fool who is dangerous for humanity?

First, I'm not saying that Putin is an angel at all (though I voted for him previously and for Medvedev during recent elections). And I'll tell you more: no angels are possible in politics. Yes, Grozny was in ruins, but it's a different story, which is very long and deserves a separate topic. There are things which I like and hate. But let's talk about Gori: there were military objects, they had to be destroyed. I fully approve the Russian bombing the mainland Georgia for one and only reason - to suppress the enemy and stop the war as soon as possible. This is NATO tactics used in Yugoslavia (where they even bombed Beograde), and I fully approve of it. Of course, it's better not to be in a war, but once you are in - do this way. The goal was reached. Let's imagine, that the Russians don't move to Georgia and stay in the South Ossetia, and don't bomb Georgian military in Georgia. I tell you - the war would still be there, but there would be tens of thousands dead by now, on both sides, and Tshinvali would really look like Stalingrad by now. I don't think the Russians bombed civilian targets intentionally. Again example - the US are believed to have the most precise weaponry, they have satellites, etc. The bombing process for American pilots is like a game - you see a target on a screen, you gun is guided by a satellite, just press a button. And bada-boom, wow! So, even their hi-precision weapons hit civilian targets and take thousands of civilian lives. I remember a passenger train in Serbia hit by a rocket from air. I don't understand, how can you take a passenger train for a military target. Anyway, I don't believe they did and still doing it intentionally. Otherwise, what is the difference between the brutal Russians and civilized westerners? We have not heard from really independent media that the regular Russian troops in Georgia were chasing civilian cars and killing everybody inside (like Georgians did), or they were intentionally destroing civilian living quarters (like Georgians did), or the snipers were hunting Georgian refugees (like Georgians did). Saying "like Georgians did" I'm not citing you "misinformation" by Russian media about "Tshinvali looks like Stalingrad", or "Tshinvali" does not exist, "Or there are millions of dead Ossetians". I mean only confirmed evidence of the Ossetians (with names), who lost their relatives in Georgian sniper traps on the road to North Ossetia and witnessed other Georgian atrocities directly. You'll see the documentary very soon, I hope. So, what we can talk about in Georgia - intentional bombings of the military, and, unintentional - of some civilian targets. If there were war crimes from the Russian side, I'm against the criminals, they must be sentenced to death. The death sentence is also my choice for looting, because it humiliates my country. About demonizing. Putin - you can call him the devil, but he's not a fool anyway. But Saakashvili is. Trust me, I say this not because Saakashvili is on the other side, while Putin is our guy. It's simply the truth. Only the fool could start this war. Or a provocateur. He's mentally not quite balanced. If you know the Caucasian men, just make a comparison. Most Caucasian men are calm and (at least look) wise, most are. Because what he did - REALLY crossed all hopes for a peaceful solution of this problem. Ever. A asked our Georgian opponents directly - what was his task, what did he hope for? Nobody replied. Ok, let's imagine again, that Russia did't respond at all and forgive him for our peacekeepers. He "wins". He would kill half of the Ossetians (because they would fight), he brings back Georgian refugees, referendum says YES to Georgia (of course, because Ossetians, just like Abkhazians are minorities on their own land). But what next? He'd still have a conflict zone there - everyday terrorist attacks on Georgians and their authorities. But if he loses (like now), again - no benefits for Georgia. Because after this assault no talks are possible ever. The conflict with no end. And, I emphasize - the problem is not in Russia or Russian passports, or Russian support. The problem is in the Ossetians themselves (even without ant Russian support) - this is true. And Saakashvili knew this for sure, that's why such order was given. By the way, he forgets what he was lying yesterday: in an recent interview he said that Georgias' actions were a response to a Russian aggression (please note the Russian troops were in Russia on 8 august, when this all started and only came almost in a day). The interviewer asked - but previuosly you said the decision was taken to use troops to put law and order back to South Ossetia. You know what he replied? "I never said so, some officer did". Some officer, from the crowd :-) They say, Saakashvili was provoked, etc. B*llsh*t. Hitler was also provoked, will we justify him? Politicians know what to do when you're provoked. The only thing they MUST NEVER DO - TO SUCCUMB TO PROVOCATION. Otherwise, you're not a a politician, but a fool, and not only fool, but a criminal. Because by this action, he made more damage to Georgia itself, just like Yeltsin to Russia in the first Chechen war.

2) Why don’t you blame at all the South Ossetians who shooted on the close Georgian villages or the Abkhazians who drove away hundreds of thousands of Georgians from Abkhazia? (Morally, a referendum would need to be done about Abkhazian independency, with also these away-driven people voting, don’t you think?)

I blame. And everybody blames. But you can never prove who was the first to start fire. Just never. Every side says it was the opposite side.

3) Why was Russian invasion necessary in Abkhazia at all? And in close cities like Poti? I have not heard of any Georgians' heavy attack on Sukhumi like their heavy attack on Tskhinvali?

Was there a Russian invasion in Abkhazia? Never heard. Ah, yes. Russian peacekeeping force was strengthened after Georgia's inadequate behaviour in the region (and because Abkhazians asked Russians for help). But that's not an invasion. I think, they came to prevent the planned Georgian assault on Abkhazia. I don't doubt this one was also planned (otherwise, what Georgian troops were doing in Kodori?). What are we talking about, if Georgia promised to use ANY means (that was said by the DEFENSE MINISTER) to get the breakaway Republics back. And the US knew about the plans, and tried to stop Saakashvili , as they say now. So, this is not a big secret. To prevent a disease is less painful and cheaper than treating it.

4) Why was it necessary to drop bombs on CIVILIAN targets in pure Georgian towns like Gori? (I can not think Russian pilots are so bad that they drop bombs on civilian residence areas just by mistake!) Russians could have had a much better image worldwide and sympathy on their side without these bombings, why did they destroy this possibility?

Already explained about Gori above. Just agree here, that Russians could have had much better image without it. And I repeat, I don't believe we destroyed this possibility intentionally, this is just war, which is not nice by definition. There are human factor mistakes, machine and electronic malfunctions, etc. I really grieve about any civilian loss, trust me or not. I know any of us can become one in case of war. Also, trust me, if the Russians really had any intentions to capture Tbilisi or bomb the civilians intentionally - Georgia would not exist now, not only Tbilisi. There was no such a goal, I'm sure and I see. Yuu cannot even call Russian occupants. Because they do not actually overthrow the government, force own rules and regulations, and control the whole life of Georgia :-) When I see those video clips about a Russian looter, with one gilded spoon in his pocket, almost attacked and heavily questioned by the Georgian reporters: "What is it? Ah? What is it? Where did you take it? Ah!!! I thought they would kill him with a camera :-) As I said earlier, I hate looters, Russian or not. And I'd sentence him to death. But 10 or 20 looters does not mean the whole Russian Army is like this. What I wanna say in this episode - the "occupied" do not talk to "occupants" in this way :-)

5) Why was it necessary to destroy the railway bridge in Kaspi on whole Georgia’s main railway?? Army forces would not even use railway, they would use roads! I regard the destroying of the bridge as pure terrorism. (I am btw surprised almost nobody has mentioned this bridge here.) And why burn down forests in the national park? Pure revenge and terrorism, I would say.

Do not know much about the bridge and the forest. The bridge - we don't know what this bridge could be used for by the Georgians. Maybe there were reasons to destroy it like a strategic object. Better ask the military who did this - if they did this, of course. Especially about the park. Maybe there was Georgian army hiding in the park? As one Saakashvili fan said here, their Army did not run away, but made a secret maneuver and hid itself somewhere (and it could not be their bases, because bases were bombed) to jump out suddenly and destroy the Russian army. I allow possibility, that this could be done by the Russians - but we must see proofs of this, then ask the military why was it done. Of course, Georgia has the right to go to Hague with this issue and present the proofs. But, on the other hand, please don't say it is ridiculous - the Georgians (one man is enough) could set this forest on fire, to put another Russia's crime on the list. Shortly, both versions possible. And I'm judging just theoretically, without knowing nothing about this. Please note it. I mean, maybe there's 300% evidence against Russians, then I would rethink it.

6) Why were Gorbachev and Yeltsin shitheads, according to you? In my opinion, Gorbachev was the only pleasant leader of Russia since Czar Alexander II (whom we of course can know only through history books). Gorbachev’s politics led to the fall of an imperialistic empire, which was the best thing that could happen in the end of last century! A lot of small nations, including our small Baltic neighbours whom we have followed a lot, re-gained independence. Ok, this was not Gorby’s intention maybe, but he was finally a liberalisator after decades of dictatorship. Spasiba, Gorby! And during Yeltsin, Russia started to liberalise even more. (Though I admit many things: Russia’s economical liberalisation went too fast and out of control, it however started a war in Chechnya, Yeltsin was drunkard etc.)

Well. I have already described this difference of approach to one and the same fact. We both agree, that Gorbies policy led to disintegration of the USSR. I wanted it. Like many. But for the West Gorbie is hero number 1, ruined the USSR and f*uck the consequences. Yes? Ask in Russia - does somebody like Gorbachev? You'll hardly find anybody. Why? Because we all want USSR back? With all our "colonies" to enslave them again and suppress them? Nope. The truth is simple: such disintegrations should be well prepared, the "divorce" should be civilized, not so fast, but carefully thought over, all problems solved. Instead - each republic was given independence WITHOUT solving territorial, national, and other problems. It was a wild disintegration, reckless. All today's "bombs that explode" come from Gorbie time, including South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Pridnestrovje, Karabah - they actually started when he was at power. Yeltsin is as reckless and stupid as Saakashvili, he started the first Chechen war, very stupid and bloody affair (here I don't say that nothing had to be done). All the "crimes" of the century happened under Yeltsin, like "privatisation". Again, I'm for free market economy and all possible freedoms, but Russian privatisation was really a crime of the century not possible anywhere in the West. But it's a big separate topic. As to freedom - there was less freedom than today, I would say. Because, on the one hand, everything was allowed (which I'd call permissiveness), but on the other hand all opponents were not forbidden, but just killed (I mean numerous journalists, election candidates, businessmen). We'll remember the Yeltsin era as an era of gang rule and complete lawlessness. By the way, it's under Yeltsin, that Russia led "strange" policy in South Ossetia and Abkhazia. So we have "presents" in these issues from Yeltsin time too!

7) And why do you like Putin? During his regime, freedom of speech has gone only backwards compared to 1990’s, NGO’s have difficulties to be allowed to exist, opposition’s politicians are forbidden to take part in elections, imprisoned or given very little speech in medias (Garry Kasparov and the whole Other Russia party… plus the Yabloko party, plus many others)… What is the purpose of all this? Why is Putin so afraid of opposition? Russia will soon be a dictatorship?!

I like Putin for several reasons only. The main one - this is the FIRST government that really cares about national security. For those who are ready to start a long and winding song about "Russia's fears that are stupid, that nobody threatens Russia, better make love not war etc - please relax and go buy yourself an ice-cream. Of course, every country has interests, and threats (non necesserily of military origin). All countries have, why not Russia? My opinion is that the last defenders of the national interests of our country before Putin were the leaders of the USSR before Gorbachev. But that was USSR. The first defender of the national interests of the Russian Federation is Putin. Gorbachev as not the defender of the USSR interests. Yeltsin is in no way was a defender of Russia's interests. Plus, under Putin's regime the country lives much better than under "liberal" Yeltsyn. In terms of the incomes, salaries, pensions. With crime situation is not ideal, but it's definitely much better that in the "wild 90's" - we have such term, meaning there was complete gang rule. About problems with freedom of speech - there are no problems, I think. Yes, it's not like in the 90's - but that was permissiveness, remember? But the opponents have their newspapers, internet sites, radio-stations, and there are TV talk shows which do really take place with participation of these opponents. They ARE on TV. I never heard anything about Yabloko problems, except that people do not vote for them :-). Who of the opponent leaders was forbidden to take part in elections and why? Who may be restricted by law here? I know, there are some anti-Russian forces here, in Russia. Like in Georgia there were dissidents against Russia, but here we have "russian" dissidents agains Russia too :-) There even professional opposition, like Novodvorskaya. She's is against everybody. I think, only the president of the US will suit her as the Russian governor. Really, look. If I oppose Obama, then I'm for McCain, right? If I oppose Yeltsin (whom you like), then I support Putin (whom I like), and vice versa. But she opposes both and any other, except those she wants. But the Russian people don't give a f*ck what she wants, or anybody else wants, as far as our national interests are concerned (of course, I mean the internal politics). I Don't think, that Putin is afraid of opposition. In fact, there's no real constructive opposition here. The are implementers of the national interests of other countries here. And, of course, they meet resistance. These peeple can never win elections and gain support of the Russians. And not because the Russians are so stupid that cannot understand what their real happiness is. I consider myself an independent "thinker", nobody influences me and washes my brains. My English is fluent, can read in French - and I actually read foreign media of all the "camps", pro et contra. So, I can tell you - I know what these "dissidents" do or say, and I do not like it. But, I'm not making an icon out of Putin, and don't say he cannot be wrong in some cases.

8) I understand the worrying of Russia about the enlargement of NATO, but the big difference between NATO and the former Warsaw Pact was: if you asked the people of the nations concerned, they would not have joined the Warsaw Pact, but are much more willing to enter into NATO. Because they do not want to be “alone” any more when some foreign invader threats them… For example the Baltic countries were occupied by USSR during 45 years, Russian became the official language, the only until 1988 (I think, am not sure, but remember some news from Estonia in 1987 or 1988 when Estonian was re-introduced as official language of Estonia!). Do we need to wonder why Baltics and others are EXTREMELY suspicious against Russia? And as we also have Chechnya, a war without Soviet-communistic imperialism, only Russian imperialism again…

Fully agree there was occupation of Baltic states by the Stalin's USSR. The Big Guys agreed to divide the spheres of influence. A casual thing for Big Guys of that time. By the way, even small Poland had its piece of pie - under Germany's protection it got a disputed Teshen Region from Chechoslovakia. Everybody had his strategic interests, and nobody cared about whether the population of the "voluntarily joined" territories will love you or not, nobody cared about any populations at all. And what they would think about it in 70 years, and that they'd call this one more "Russian" aggression. As, I told you Cнechnya is not for this topic, very complex and long. But it has nothing to do with Russian impearialism. "Russian Threat" as an excuse for spreading of NATO. But you cannot compare that occupation of the Baltics to anything today. There were ideological differences, that is why there was Iron Curtain, Warsaw Pact, NATO, etc. But they age gone forever. Don't you agree? Then what Russian threat you are talking about? Do you really believe that Russia could attack Estonia or Litva, if they were not NATO members? There was a period, when they were not NATO members, why Russia did not attack them to prevent them from joining? Though they had purely anti-Russian government and we had disputable issues with them, including territorial diffrences! Simple - there was no Saakashvili in Estonia or Litva. If somebody really thinks that Russia can attack a sovereign state first - I think, he's mistaken. Because the Russians clearly understand that EVEN IF THEY REALLY WANTED IT - they CANNOT start such a war, because they cannot win a war against the whole world. Guys in the West definitely know Saakashvili is to blame for this conflict, and he started it. Otherwise we'd be at war with the whole world now. I mean "hot war", not informational. So, as I said, NATO is an outdated organisation, because the country it was created against does not exist any longer. The only really effective European security system INCLUDING RUSSIA, but not confronting it, must be created instead of NATO. If a country is a member of the security system, what threats can be talked about? But, for example, Georgians in this forum are strongly against it, because (I think) they prefer opposing us, they need an enemy, to protect all Europe and the whole civilized world from the Russian threat :-) And get more funding :-) NATO itself (as a shield) is not dangerous even if it surrounds Russia completely (not scary at all). The problem is the so-called Anti-Missile Defense system, which is being pushed by the US in their satellites directly, without NATO medaition even. This is also a big topic, and a separate one. But I can explain, why it is a danger to Russia. At first sight, how a defence can be a danger? It's just a shield. This is the main argument of those, who say it's not against Russia, it's just a shield from somebody else, etc. Most people trust this and additionally accuse Russia in all sins, that Russians do not want Europe to have defence because they're just going to attack Europe. The matter is missiles and nuclear heads still exist, they are many and they increase in number. Of course, nobody wants to use them, but nobody wants to disarm and destroy them either, for the peace's sake! Finally peace for all! However, this is called balance. We are afraid, they are afraid. We know, they cant start first, because we'll reply et vise versa. But the strategic guys in both camps obliged to predict and analyze all possible developments. Just for example. Let's assume, that the US suspected that Russia plans a serious war against somebody, it's a suspicion, or mistake, or misinformation. The US know, that they cannot use their nuclear missiles, because Russia will strike back, and good bye, cruel world! Because when the missiles approach America, it's too late to do something. But this European shield, which we are talking about is an ideal thing. Matter is this radar in Chechoslovakia is not far from Russian borders, and it can detect the launch of Russian strike within seconds, and make all necessary calculations - trajectory etc also within seconds (unlike the NAVY radars at sea or satellites - it takes minutes in their case). Plus, the missiles are much easier hit by anti-missile defence on the initial stage of flight. Thus, let's continue our example. The US decided to destroy the Russian military potential (for this or that reason, it's not important now). They bring their nuclear submarines to the sea near Russia, launch their missiles, and when Russia strikes back, the European Defense immediately detects it and destroys. What I'm driving at - with this system, there's no balance any more. One side knows it has advantage. This means danger only grows - there can be a temptation to destroy Russia - maybe it'll never attack anybody, but just for seciruty reasons, "to be on the safe side", so that the world doesn't have a Russian threat anymore, and live peacefully under the US domination. I would like to remind, that Russia offered various alternative options of JOINT RUSSIAN-EUROPEAN ANTI-MISSILE DEFENSE SYSTEM, but all offers were rejected. How can they build an anti-Russia system in cooperation with Russia? :-) Who knows about other reasons - I'm ready to hear that. An adequate Russian reply would be to install a Russian shield in Cuba :-) And Mexico :-) No, not offensive weapons, not missiles. Just a radar and anti-missiles, like in Europe :-) By the way, Vatikan is against this European AMD, but who cares.

I supported Kosovo's independence (because I think it is the will of the majority of people living there) and have nothing against independence of South Ossetia or Abkhazia either, if only referendums are held there with also chased people voting.

This is not so easy. And I think I understand why Medvedev recognized them, though he said it was a hard decision to make. Because he understands, and I undertsnd, we all understand we can lose a lot. But I'm afraid this is a special case, like all cases of such nature. Here all the parties to the conflict and from outside world have to make a choice between two HOLY things - state integrity and the right of people to choose their fate. I'm talking about people of Ossetia and Abkhazia, not about their leaders, whom you call Moscow marionettes. But let's face reality. The reality is that after what happened (not only in 2008, but in 1990's and earlier), the Ossetians-Georgians and Abkhazians-Georgians cannot live together in one state. If you get them back by force - there still be hatred, and terrorist attacks, the fight will continue within Georgia. If you arrange a referendum - the Georgians will easily win, because both Ossetians and Abkhazians are minorities on their lands. As a result - you'll still have hatred, violence, terrorist attacks. Because you cannot just order people - hey, he've won the elections (yes, by law it's OK, you have protocols, figures, proofs). Now be friends with us and love us immediately! Is it possible? No. Because all evil that happened is in memory of THESE people, who did not read in books about what happened, they witnessed it, they buried their daughters, wives, etc. I'm talking about all the victims, from all sides. They just cannot and will not forget it. Long time must pass, 30-50 years minimum, before these nations can discuss this question again (if they'll still need it :-) Example - everybody knows what Germans were doing in Russia in WW2, and afterwords, the Russian revenge in Germany. But after time, I have my best friends in Germany (ethnic Germans). This could not be possible in 1945 :-) We were also at war with Napoleon. I have a lot of friends among ethnic French.

[SVP]

I have read first two artcles yet, but now I NOW FROM WHERE YOU TOOK YOUR COMMENT ABOUT WINE AND POEMS

I promised to ignore you, but I'll make an exclusion this one time :-) Just to clarify. You are wrong. It is my opinion, from my life practice. I served in the Soviet Army, in East Germany. Our regiment was a USSR in miniature - we had all ethnicities, and I can tell you about every one of them. I even can tell Tadzhik guy from Kirgiz guy :-) I also know so-called national character of all ethnicities. First, I'm not very happy about us, the Russians (to start with ourselves :-). I know Chechens as warriors, cruel and merciless. But that's an ideal of a warrior :-) And I know Georgians as cheerful people, who are very hospitable (in peace time :-), like to sing and drink wine, they make good wine, and good poetry. I would call them "artists of the Caucasus", because many movie directors that we love come from Georgia, many actors. Perhaps, no other Caucasus republic gave us so many artists. What is true is true. But, sorry, Georgians are not good warriors.

I was also surprised to read about this in an article. But on the other hand, what is said is not a secret, but many people know that :-)

About Abkhazia early history:

In the 9th–6th centuries BC, the territory of modern Abkhazia became a part of the ancient kingdom of Colchis (Kolkha), which was absorbed in 63 BC into the Kingdom of Egrisi. Greek traders established ports along the Black Sea shoreline. One of those ports, Dioscurias, eventually developed into modern Sukhumi, Abkhazia's traditional capital.

The Roman Empire conquered Egrisi in the 1st century AD and ruled it until the 4th century, following which it regained a measure of independence, but remained within the Byzantine Empire's sphere of influence. Although the exact time when the population of Abkhazia was converted to Christianity is not determined, it is known that the Metropolitan of Pitius participated in the First Œcumenical Council in 325 in Nicea. Abkhazia was made an autonomous principality of the Byzantine Empire in the 7th century — a status it retained until the 9th century, when it was united with the province of Imereti and became known as the Abkhazian Kingdom. In 9th–10th centuries the Georgian kings tried to unify all the Georgian provinces and in 1001 King Bagrat III Bagrationi became the first king of the unified Georgian Kingdom.

In the 16th century, after the break-up of the united Georgian Kingdom, the area was conquered by the Ottoman Empire, during this time some Abkhazians converted to Islam. The Ottomans were pushed out by the Georgians, who established an autonomous Principality of Abkhazia (abxazetis samtavro in Georgian), ruled by the Shervashidze dynasty (aka Sharvashidze, or Chachba).

[lashachochua]

I have read first two artcles yet, but now I NOW FROM WHERE YOU TOOK YOUR COMMENT ABOUT WINE AND POEMS

I promised to ignore you, but I'll make an exclusion this one time :-) Just to clarify. You are wrong. It is my opinion, from my life practice. I served in the Soviet Army, in East Germany. Our regiment was a USSR in miniature - we had all ethnicities, and I can tell you about every one of them. I even can tell Tadzhik guy from Kirgiz guy :-) I also know so-called national character of all ethnicities. First, I'm not very happy about us, the Russians (to start with ourselves :-). I know Chechens as warriors, cruel and merciless. But that's an ideal of a warrior :-) And I know Georgians as cheerful people, who are very hospitable (in peace time :-), like to sing and drink wine, they make good wine, and good poetry. I would call them "artists of the Caucasus", because many movie directors that we love come from Georgia, many actors. Perhaps, no other Caucasus republic gave us so many artists. What is true is true. But, sorry, Georgians are not good warriors.

I was also surprised to read about this in an article. But on the other hand, what is said is not a secret, but many people know that :-)

About Abkhazia early history:

In the 9th–6th centuries BC, the territory of modern Abkhazia became a part of the ancient kingdom of Colchis (Kolkha), which was absorbed in 63 BC into the Kingdom of Egrisi. Greek traders established ports along the Black Sea shoreline. One of those ports, Dioscurias, eventually developed into modern Sukhumi, Abkhazia's traditional capital.

The Roman Empire conquered Egrisi in the 1st century AD and ruled it until the 4th century, following which it regained a measure of independence, but remained within the Byzantine Empire's sphere of influence. Although the exact time when the population of Abkhazia was converted to Christianity is not determined, it is known that the Metropolitan of Pitius participated in the First Œcumenical Council in 325 in Nicea. Abkhazia was made an autonomous principality of the Byzantine Empire in the 7th century — a status it retained until the 9th century, when it was united with the province of Imereti and became known as the Abkhazian Kingdom. In 9th–10th centuries the Georgian kings tried to unify all the Georgian provinces and in 1001 King Bagrat III Bagrationi became the first king of the unified Georgian Kingdom.

In the 16th century, after the break-up of the united Georgian Kingdom, the area was conquered by the Ottoman Empire, during this time some Abkhazians converted to Islam. The Ottomans were pushed out by the Georgians, who established an autonomous Principality of Abkhazia (abxazetis samtavro in Georgian), ruled by the Shervashidze dynasty (aka Sharvashidze, or Chachba).

It is your choice to ignore me....But while you are answering I will try to reply too....My friend, you provided very good facts from early history, very good....You should know that Kokheti and than Iberia was populated by Georgian tribes.......and they were totally georgians by nature......The forefathers of modern Ossetians and Abkhaz people are from north caucasus....They started to populate on georgian teritorries after 16 century, so they came to our territory..........And one very simple question, from the very beginning XII century B.C. Georgia managed to live and come to nowadays......What do you think based on what?......Struggle, wars and our strenght of sole.......So just stop talking what soldiers we georgians are.......As I know in Soviet Times Georgian boys were very strong in all soviet armies, and many russians were servicing them....Are you one of them? You have some very bad experience with georgian soldiers......

[SVP]

And one very simple question, from the very beginning XII century B.C. Georgia managed to live and come to nowadays......What do you think based on what?......Struggle, wars and our strenght of sole.......So just stop talking what soldiers we georgians are.......

Again you're provoking me to reply :-) Wasn't it you who was always saying that Georgians never had wars with anybody, were friendly with everybody and settled all problems by peace? It's just Russians came and made Caucasus people kill each other. Rapid changes.

As I know in Soviet Times Georgian boys were very strong in all soviet armies, and many russians were servicing them....Are you one of them? You have some very bad experience with georgian soldiers......

This is why i made a decision to ignore you - just look through your posts. Whenever you do not like anything, you are immediately trying to personally insult your opponent ("you know nothing", "you are a liar", "go read Dostoyevsky", "were you servicing Georgians?" etc, etc.). This looks childish, how old are you, I wonder?

No, you have wrong information about Soviet Army. The thing was called 'dedovshina', and it does not matter who are you ethnically, the main thing is when you were drafted. And again, your Georgian friends were boasting when they told you strories (they want so much to look like real warriors, like Chechens :-) Such heroes :-) Funny. I didn't want to insult you (instead, on the contrary, I made compliments to Georgians in what they are strong), but you asked for it: the Georgian army is the army of cowards, it just ran away, losing their guns and ammo, from the Russians (who were 'servicing' them in the Soviet Army), leaving their civilians behind. Learn to admit the defeat. So, my friend, eat it, shut up and don't bother to reply - I'm permanently ignoring you from this moment, since you're a real loss of time.

P.S. I'm a boxing and judo master, so come and try make me servicing you :-)