Russia Exagerating Death Toll

[SiD]

One's right is limited at the stage when it affects the other's people right. Not otherwise

I think if someone tries to kill our soldiers and ruin the city it is violation of thier rights, no?

[Yalta1945]

One's right is limited at the stage when it affects the other's people right. Not otherwise

I think if someone tries to kill our soldiers and ruin the city it is violation of thier rights, no?

Why did your soldiers, instead of being impartial peacekeepers, become a part of the force that engaged in killing other people (not soldiers only)? You know, the Kremlin’s statements on the facts differ from what we have heard from other sources. Why do you not consider a possibility that the most gruesome damage to Tskhinvali and lives of people might have been brought about by the Russian counter-attack, by Russian airstrikes? If Russia exaggerates death toll, it means the bigger loss serves their interests as an argument in the current conflict. In this case, the Russian operation in South Ossetia might have been deliberately planned without any scruples about civilian lives. It would not be the first time in post-Soviet Russia. Just remember Beslan and the hostage crisis in Moscow’s theatre.

[SiD]

One's right is limited at the stage when it affects the other's people right. Not otherwise

I think if someone tries to kill our soldiers and ruin the city it is violation of thier rights, no?

Why did your soldiers, instead of being impartial peacekeepers, become a part of the force that engaged in killing other people (not soldiers only)? You know, the Kremlin’s statements on the facts differ from what we have heard from other sources. Why do you not consider a possibility that the most gruesome damage to Tskhinvali and lives of people might have been brought about by the Russian counter-attack, by Russian airstrikes? If Russia exaggerates death toll, it means the bigger loss serves their interests as an argument in the current conflict. In this case, the Russian operation in South Ossetia might have been deliberately planned without any scruples about civilian lives. It would not be the first time in post-Soviet Russia. Just remember Beslan and the hostage crisis in Moscow’s theatre.

Our peacekeepers were ingaged into military action becouse they were under attack by Georgian troops. And they were in no position to attack someone becouse they were in defense. And what sources are you talking about? Same sources that were complitely silent while Georgia troops ruined Sckhinvali? Of course they missed georgian attack, but they have shown russian counter attack. And of course they cant sort out who ruined what.

[marisha]

Our peacekeepers were ingaged into military action becouse they were under attack by Georgian troops. And they were in no position to attack someone becouse they were in defense. And what sources are you talking about? Same sources that were complitely silent while Georgia troops ruined Sckhinvali? Of course they missed georgian attack, but they have shown russian counter attack. And of course they cant sort out who ruined what.[/quote]
If I have not seen the world map, I would have thougt that you are a representative of tiny state, desparately defending yourself from aggressive big neughbour. Don`t watch russian channels too much, for your own sake, oterwise you will soon become absolutely brainwashed. Take care of yourself please. When I read your posts, I have the feeling that I read a transcript of ORT or RTR channel. Don`t ignore the possibility to get information from different sources and try to analize it. It is already rediculous that all the russians know the phrase "Our peacekeepers were ingaged into military action becouse they were under attack by Georgian troops" by heart. Paaceful russian "peacekeepers", who were fullfiling their peace mandate adequately, defending Ossetian and Georgian peacefull population, were attacked by furious, aggressive Georgians. Truly ORT wording.

[SiD]

If I have not seen the world map, I would have thougt that you are a representative of tiny state, desparately defending yourself from aggressive big neughbour. Don`t watch russian channels too much, for your own sake, oterwise you will soon become absolutely brainwashed. Take care of yourself please. When I read your posts, I have the feeling that I read a transcript of ORT or RTR channel. Don`t ignore the possibility to get information from different sources and try to analize it. It is already rediculous that all the russians know the phrase "Our peacekeepers were ingaged into military action becouse they were under attack by Georgian troops" by heart. Paaceful russian "peacekeepers", who were fullfiling their peace mandate adequately, defending Ossetian and Georgian peacefull population, were attacked by furious, aggressive Georgians. Truly ORT wording.

First of all i checked many sources. And i still do it.

Second if it is ORT wording that means they speak truth.

Third if it were georgians under attack they would never come close to Tskchinvali.

So go ahead and analyze it.

[Eka]

If I have not seen the world map, I would have thougt that you are a representative of tiny state, desparately defending yourself from aggressive big neughbour. Don`t watch russian channels too much, for your own sake, oterwise you will soon become absolutely brainwashed. Take care of yourself please. When I read your posts, I have the feeling that I read a transcript of ORT or RTR channel. Don`t ignore the possibility to get information from different sources and try to analize it. It is already rediculous that all the russians know the phrase "Our peacekeepers were ingaged into military action becouse they were under attack by Georgian troops" by heart. Paaceful russian "peacekeepers", who were fullfiling their peace mandate adequately, defending Ossetian and Georgian peacefull population, were attacked by furious, aggressive Georgians. Truly ORT wording.

First of all i checked many sources. And i still do it.

Second if it is ORT wording that means they speak truth.

Third if it were georgians under attack they would never come close to Tskchinvali.

So go ahead and analyze it.

I dont understand this. Can you explaine it better? You logic is very strange so please explaine this .

[mika]

If I have not seen the world map, I would have thougt that you are a representative of tiny state, desparately defending yourself from aggressive big neughbour. Don`t watch russian channels too much, for your own sake, oterwise you will soon become absolutely brainwashed. Take care of yourself please. When I read your posts, I have the feeling that I read a transcript of ORT or RTR channel. Don`t ignore the possibility to get information from different sources and try to analize it. It is already rediculous that all the russians know the phrase "Our peacekeepers were ingaged into military action becouse they were under attack by Georgian troops" by heart. Paaceful russian "peacekeepers", who were fullfiling their peace mandate adequately, defending Ossetian and Georgian peacefull population, were attacked by furious, aggressive Georgians. Truly ORT wording.

First of all i checked many sources. And i still do it.

Second if it is ORT wording that means they speak truth.

Third if it were georgians under attack they would never come close to Tskchinvali.

So go ahead and analyze it.

I dont understand this. Can you explaine it better? You logic is very strange so please explaine this .

I think it means that if Russia attacked Georgia than it would be them going to Gori and not Georgians going to Tskhinvali

[marisha]

I think it means that if Russia attacked Georgia than it would be them going to Gori and not Georgians going to Tskhinvali

And maybe this means that Georgian army was really strong and motivated to defend its own land and suceeded, untill the involvement of russian aviation? A lot of military experts, even Russians, think that Georgian army was more strong on ground and only air attacks made it possible for red army to make georgians to fall back?

[marisha]

.[/quote]

I think it means that if Russia attacked Georgia than it would be them going to Gori and not Georgians going to Tskhinvali[/quote]
And haven`t russians gone to Gori and even headed to Tbilisi and were stopped only after the involvement of EU and USA? Aren`t they still occupying territories far beoynd the conflict zones? Are they trying to defend themselves from Georgian attacks in Tsalenjhikh? Please, look at the map of Georgia and you will undestand who was in defensive and who in offensive.

[SiD]

And maybe this means that Georgian army was really strong and motivated to defend its own land and suceeded, untill the involvement of russian aviation? A lot of military experts, even Russians, think that Georgian army was more strong on ground and only air attacks made it possible for red army to make georgians to fall back?

Parhaps you unavare about military tactics but if invasion is planned aviation is involved in FIRST day of combat no less than any other day. georgian troops havent succeded, they were on the run it is recognized not only by us but by the west too. So you better consider reality not wild imagination. Strong armies do not run to the capital in first days and dont loose wars in less than a week.

And haven`t russians gone to Gori and even headed to Tbilisi and were stopped only after the involvement of EU and USA? Aren`t they still occupying territories far beoynd the conflict zones? Are they trying to defend themselves from Georgian attacks in Tsalenjhikh? Please, look at the map of Georgia and you will undestand who was in defensive and who in offensive.
.

It is called counter attack. Best defense is to destroy enemies ability to attack you and it was done. That is why our troops taken some territory beyond conflict zone.
Mika is right about what i was meaning. georgian forces attacked first, our response came much later.

[marisha]

[/quote]

Parhaps you unavare about military tactics but if invasion is planned aviation is involved in FIRST day of combat no less than any other day. georgian troops havent succeded, they were on the run it is recognized not only by us but by the west too. So you better consider reality not wild imagination. Strong armies do not run to the capital in first days and dont loose wars in less than a week.
I am not too good in military tactics for sure. I dont say that Georgian troops succeeded. We have the result that they have pulled back. Of course they would not succeed in the sircumstances when russian aviation was bombing all the country. I don`t know on exactly whih day of battle aviation usually gets involved, but I know for sure that in one day it is impossible to mobilaze such a huge ammount of armoured technics. It is impossible to allocate hundreds of tanks near roki tunnel in few hours. It takes days. And russia has done it in advance, as it was russia who started the war. They have chosen the exact day and time. That`s all.

.[/quote]

It is called counter attack. Best defense is to destroy enemies ability to attack you and it was done. That is why our troops taken some territory beyond conflict zone.
Mika is right about what i was meaning. georgian forces attacked first, our response came much later.[/quote]
And attack of Tskhinvali by Georgian forces could not be called counter attack? Even some russian sources confirm that russian troops were heading to Georgian boarder via Chechnia and Dagestan already on 3rd and 4th of August. Read more diversified sources please, only ORT will not facilitate your ability to analize situation in unbiazed manner.

[SiD]

And attack of Tskhinvali by Georgian forces could not be called counter attack? Even some russian sources confirm that russian troops were heading to Georgian boarder via Chechnia and Dagestan already on 3rd and 4th of August. Read more diversified sources please, only ORT will not facilitate your ability to analize situation in unbiazed manner.

If it was Russian invasion it would be no counterattack. Look for western sources if you wish. As i said if your army could resist they wont loose war in few days.

[marisha]

And attack of Tskhinvali by Georgian forces could not be called counter attack? Even some russian sources confirm that russian troops were heading to Georgian boarder via Chechnia and Dagestan already on 3rd and 4th of August. Read more diversified sources please, only ORT will not facilitate your ability to analize situation in unbiazed manner.

If it was Russian invasion it would be no counterattack. Look for western sources if you wish. As i said if your army could resist they wont loose war in few days.

You mean that russians would destroy all the Georgians and there will be now counter attack because of it? Interesting assumption. I don`t mean that russians were in Tskhinvali before Georgians. I mean that they entered Roki tunnel before georgians started their defensive and have had no other option then entering Tskhinvali. Do you feel the difference? By the way our army prefered to pull back soon, as we count our victims and don`t have cannon meat.

[SiD]

You mean that russians would destroy all the Georgians and there will be now counter attack because of it? Interesting assumption. I don`t mean that russians were in Tskhinvali before Georgians. I mean that they entered Roki tunnel before georgians started their defensive and have had no other option then entering Tskhinvali. Do you feel the difference? By the way our army prefered to pull back soon, as we count our victims and don`t have cannon meat.

Destroy all georgians? What for? I meant that georgian troops could not enter Tskchinvali if we attacked them first. Second our troops entered S Osetia after attack on Tskchinvali. If Russian troops were approaching why would georgian troops want to attack Tskchinvali? Shouldnt they try and not escolate or preparing for defense? That would be logickal. But they attacked, that means they were sure that that they would win and had much more troops than it is allowed to have in this region, so it means that attack was prepared wenn Saakashvili was talking about peace negotiations. Parhaps he was in such rush to join NATO and thought that Russia wont spoil its relations with west.
If your troops had a chance to defend thier countrie would they pull back?

[Yalta1945]

A flash on the events and counting casualties:
Deaths in South Ossetia fighting, Saturday, August 02, 2008
„At least six people have been killed... Georgia has denied initiating an exchange. ...
Eduard Kokoity, South Ossetia's de facto president, told Interfax news agency that "our response to Tbilisi's aggressive actions will be very tough and hard-hitting".
"We reserve the right to strike Georgian cities. We have something that can reach them."
Shota Utiashvili, the Georgian interior ministry spokesman, denied that Georgian positions had fired first.
"The Ossetians opened fire, including with grenade launchers, and the Georgian side only returned fire."
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://english.aljazeera.net/news/europe/2008/08/200881215132611918.html">http://english.aljazeera.net/news/europ ... 11918.html</a><!-- m -->

The world‘s reaction? None. Everybody‘s waiting for the big party in Beijing...

Then the heavy fighting erupted. On the 8th of August Kokoity who had left Tskhinvali before the fighting started distributing the statements on „genocide“. Figures of 1400, 1600, 1800, 3000 dead were mentioned.

August 9 Putin said „dozens“ were killed, however he later accused Georgia of genocide. The ambassador of Russia to UN Churkin repeated accusation of genocide, claiming 2000 were killed. (N.B. It’s the same Churkin who denied the Stalinist genocide in Ukraine when during Holodomor several millions were made to starve to death. )
South Ossetia says finds 500 of 1,600 civilian dead
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSL953954020080909">http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNew ... 4020080909</a><!-- m -->

August 14th, Is Russia Exaggerating Deaths In South Ossetia?
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://theimpudentobserver.com/world-news/is-russia-exaggerating-deaths-in-south-ossetia/">http://theimpudentobserver.com/world-ne ... h-ossetia/</a><!-- m -->

There are indications Russia is deliberately exaggerating the number of people killed in South Ossetia in order to present an image of great need for Russian intervention. Anna Neistat of Human Rights Watch says her group has been investigating the deaths in South Ossetia and has concluded there is no evidence the Russian figure of 2,000 dead is accurate. “Our findings so far do not in any way confirm the Russian statistics. On the contrary, they suggest the numbers are exaggerated.” Her investigation has found evidence of Ossetian fighters burning and looting Georgian villages north of the South Ossetian capital.
Doctors at Tskhinvali hospital said they had treated 273 wounded people and there were a total of 44 dead people. It is quite clear a Russian propaganda campaign is being waged to convince the Russian people there was need for intervention in order to save lives.

20/8/2008
Authorities of South Ossetia report about 1492 casualties of Georgia's attack
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://eng.kavkaz-uzel.ru/newstext/engnews/id/1227624.html">http://eng.kavkaz-uzel.ru/newstext/engn ... 27624.html</a><!-- m -->

The official group of Office of the Prosecutor General of Russian Federation reported 134 dead, one fifth being civilians. This figure grew to 154 in October.
BTW, somebody was asking on the internet: „Can you "prove" Churkin's claims that Georgian forces killed 2000 is South Ossetia? Can you even cite legitimate independent sources to show there is any merit to Churkin's claims of ethnic cleansing and genocide by Georgia?” What naïve questions!

To be qualified as genocide the crime has to have intent to destroy in whole or in part the ethnic (in this case) group. Again, Georgia was accused of genocide by the country whose politicians do not count as genocide deliberate annihilation of Kosovars by Milosevic’s regime, nor its own war in Chechnya (where many dozens of thousands were killed).

Some facts on ethnic cleansing. In 1992-93 some 3000 Abkhazians and 17000 were killed. At the time when the USSR broke up, Georgians constituted 52% of population in Abkhazia, and Abkhazians – 17%. Around 250,000 of Georgians fled the province because of war, and Georgians became a tiny minority in Abkhazia. Ethnic Georgians made up roughly a third of population of South Ossetia. How many of them are still there now?

A story that differs from the one presented by the Kremlin:
Georgians tell of ethnic cleansing
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/georgians-tell-of-ethnic-cleansing-902908.html">http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 02908.html</a><!-- m -->

Counting Casualties In South Ossetia
Friday, October 3, 2008

President Mikheil Saakashvili of Georgia rightly cast doubt on the initial figures cited by the Russian government for civilian deaths in the South Ossetia conflict in his Sept. 23 op-ed, "Answering Russian Aggression." But Mr. Saakashvili's statement that Human Rights Watch estimated that there were 44 civilian deaths was inaccurate.
Human Rights Watch does not have the capacity or expertise to count civilian casualties. We were skeptical, though, about Russian estimates, beginning one day after the conflict started on Aug. 7-8, which ranged from 1,500 to 2,000. It was not clear how such figures were compiled, and the range was inconsistent with the number of civilians reported wounded, which was in the hundreds.
In August, we interviewed a doctor at the hospital in the South Ossetian capital, Tskhinvali, who said that the hospital received 44 bodies between Aug. 6 and 11. We presented this figure not as a comprehensive account of civilian deaths but as a doctor's report of the number of bodies brought to what was the only medical facility in the Tskhinvali area.
We have repeatedly underscored publicly that it is not a comprehensive figure.
The Russian prosecutor's office is investigating 154 deaths, although to date it is unclear whether that office is distinguishing between civilians and members of volunteer militias, and, if so, how.
RACHEL DENBER
Acting Director
Europe and Central Asia Division
Human Rights Watch

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/02/AR2008100203954.html">http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 03954.html</a><!-- m -->
____________________________________
But what is going on now in the province?
Kokoity Blames International Observers for Failing to Prevent Provocations in Conflict Zone
Saturday, October 18, 2008
Oct 18 (Interfax) - South Ossetia leader Eduard Kokoity has expressed his bewilderment over the apparent lack of response from international observers in the region to Georgian provocations.
...
South Ossetia Interior Minister Mikhail Mindzayev told Interfax earlier on Saturday that the republic's law enforcement posts were attacked by machine-gun fire from the Georgian village of Nikozi.
"South Ossetia's law enforcement posts on the border with the Georgian village of Nikozy were attacked by machine-gun and small- arms fire this morning. This happened at the time when South Ossetian positions were being equipped in border zones," Mindzayev said.
There are no casualties or victims, he said.
http://www.istockanalyst.com/article/vie...18565.html
Compare it to this one:
‘Drunk Russian soldiers’ open fire <AFP> Published:Oct 18, 2008
http://www.thetimes.co.za/News/Article.aspx?id=865933
A spokesman for Georgia’s interior ministry confirmed shooting in the area but said it was coming from drunk Russian soldiers at a border post and that they were firing into the air.
"Drunk Russian soldiers were firing into the air near Nikozi," said the spokesman, Shota Utiashvili.

Meanwhile the situation in the near Ingushetia looks like another unrecognized war zone:
Russian Troops Attacked, Report Claims 50 Killed
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v5/newsindex.php?id=365639">http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v5/newsi ... ?id=365639</a><!-- m -->
http://www.ingushetia.org
http://ingushetiya.wordpress.com/ - English

[Terry]

The website <!-- w --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.ingushetia.org">http://www.ingushetia.org</a><!-- w --> seems to be very much emphasizing its tendency to be independent. What makes Ingushetia hate so much Russia?

[Yalta1945]

The website <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.ingushetia.org">http://www.ingushetia.org</a><!-- m --> seems to be very much emphasizing its tendency to be independent. What makes Ingushetia hate so much Russia?

I think some answers can be found just on the site.
If we look back a bit, under Stalin many nations in Caucasus were treated bad.
Nowadays it seems that the Kremlin have taken "preventive" measures to keep Ingushetia away from supporting Chechnya's independence. I heard Ossetians acquired some minor territories at the expense of Ingushetia. The Kremlin favours Ossetians and Kadyrov in Chechnya to make other nationalities fearful and humble.

[Faw_Peter]

The website <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.ingushetia.org">http://www.ingushetia.org</a><!-- m --> seems to be very much emphasizing its tendency to be independent. What makes Ingushetia hate so much Russia?

I think some answers can be found just on the site.
If we look back a bit, under Stalin many nations in Caucasus were treated bad.
Nowadays it seems that the Kremlin have taken "preventive" measures to keep Ingushetia away from supporting Chechnya's independence. I heard Ossetians acquired some minor territories at the expense of Ingushetia. The Kremlin favours Ossetians and Kadyrov in Chechnya to make other nationalities fearful and humble.

This is an advantageous step-by-step policy carried on by Russia. Interesting if it ever will end. Such territorial/national issues may last for a couple of hundreds of years.