Russia/Georgia War. Irrespective of who attacked who, who shot first

Question

I just asked this question, and had to have it deleted because no-one respected, what i asked them not to do in the question. I hope this does not happen again, and that the answers that are given, actually answer the question that i have asked.

Question: Irrespective of who attacked who, who shot first. I'll say that again, IRRESPECTIVE of who attacked who, who shot first. Russia, attacked and bombed throughout Georgia, outside South Osettia (conflict zone) It also, invaded parts of another sovereign nation against the will of that country's people. Russia also wanted to remove the democratically elected government of Georgia, and impose a regime that has not been elected, and is not accountable to the will of the Georgian people. These actions are against every agreement/treaty Russia has signed and violates many international laws. This is why the entire international community, condemned Russia's actions as out of order, and why Russia was undeniably in the wrong, for the above actions that it committed.

Just to remind you, irrespective of who attacked who, who shot first. Surely, you all acknowledge that Russia was/is in the wrong for the reasons explained above? If you think Russia was right for these above actions, then explain why?

Answer 1

The russian peacekeepers were deployed there according to UN and international laws.

They had the obligations to protect civilans there.

Peacekeepers and civilians were attacked - they MUST respond.

And as they were attacked from the georgian territory with artillery - they cannot sit and allow this too. And I suppose according to the international laws about peacekeeping they can attack all what is attacking them in self-defense though it is outside the zone of conflict like artillery.

And I can say that the Russia was TOO gentle with Georgia, because georgian artillery, that attacked S.Ossetia stopped only some hours ago...

Answer 2

When Russia gave Russian passports to armed (by Russia) paramilitary forces in S.O. that expected exactly what?

Those Russian peacekeepers never prevented S.O. forces from shelling Georgian villages. Last round of shelling started on Aug. 1. Which eventually went into full scale war. I suspect this is how it will continue if Russia is the only peacekeeping force.

Russia doesn't need peace and stability in Georgia. Constant tension in the region to prevent it from joining NATO and becoming more western and a reason to intervene militarily is Russia's goal.

IMHO it was absolutely wrong to assign Russia peacekeeping role in that region because:

a) they're clearly on the side of separatists supplying them arms and money.

b) S.O. separatists openly declare they want to join Russia. So, what kind of objectivity and "uninvolvement" would one expect from Russia?

c) Given Russia's constant tensions with neighboring former soviet republics it's clear Russia never accepted their independence and has its own goals very different from the goals of now independent countries.

d) Russia has an "excellent" record of peacekeeping in that region and everywhere else. Freshest example being Chechnya, which in Russian eyes was very wrong to ask for independence from Russia and for that deserved 12+ years of bombardments from Grads, Uragans(upgraded version of Grad), thermobaric bombs and whatever else Russia deemed necessary to keep "peace" and "restore constitutional order" in there. So, if you want to talk about Genocide, that's what was happening over there for over a decade. And that's the country that will keep peace somewhere else?

e) Like any successful empire Russia has long mastered divide and  conquer principle. 100% of regional conflicts in Caucasus are made in Russia. How can a country supplying arms and money to separatist forces be trusted with peacekeeping in the very same place?

2 Chechen battalions were deployed in S.O. Back in 91-93 Russia did train Chechen terrorists to fight against Georgian in the region of Abkhazia. Acts of Genocide against Georgian population there are well documented. Only later all that backfired and the same Russian trained Chechens started fighting Russia to get Chechnya independent from Russia.

When Russia got bogged down in Chechnya for over a decade they still managed to continue the same policy. Eventually one of the worst terrorist acts committed by  Chechens was in Beslan, North Osetia. Because Chechens saw them as Russian supporters.

Now Russia brought Chechens again to fight in Georgia on the Russian/Osetian side.

Answer 3

I think Russia was wrong to=

A    prepair a force prior to the incident Why?

B   use that force to invade a country

C   not use diplomacy from the outset

D   to go on the offencif rather than the defencive.  

Answer 4

Regardless of who shot first, I still see certain false assumptions in your question. It appears that your source of information only comes from American media. I suggest you read European sources too. I am not taking any side, but will base my judgment from from all sources.

First of all, Russia never said that it wanted to remove the democratically elected president of Georgia. Such statements saying that Russia wanted the Georgian president to step down is circulated only by the western media. European media didn't mention such a thing. I've seen the Russian president (Medvedev) being interviewed on European TV. His exact words were: "That's up to the Georgian people to decide. Georgia is a sovereign nation and it's people have the right to choose their own leader. It's not in Russia's interest to choose a leader for them". Those are clear words from the Russian president himself. So do not believe anything that is contrary to that statement.

Second, the western media (also Shaakasvili's statements) said that the Russians attacked and occupied Gori, an urban area outside of Tbilisi. European reporters on the scene said that they have never seen any Russian presence in that area. The Russian military also denied occupying the area. This is another wrong information circulated by the western media.

Third, the Russian president confirmed that he already gave the order to the Russian troops to cease firing and stop advancing. He ordered that Russian troops should only fire as a response to Georgian fire. The western media (also Shakasvilli's statement) says that the Russians are still firing and advancing. However, there is no mention of such action by the European media.

It is clear that one bases his/her opinion from his/her source of information. So, the whole truth may not be known just by relying from a single news information (which may be filled with biases).

Answer 5

This conflict dates way back.

Perhaps the earliest stage in the aggravation of the conflict is the fact that the russians began the preparations for the recognition of the two regions: Abkhazia and South Ossetia in spite of the fact that the entire world community sustained Georgia`s integrity.

Furthermore, the russians began plans of geological explorations in Abkhazia for future oil fields and even though this has been denied by russian officials, plans for a pipeline connecting Russia and Abkhazia have been confirmed.

Who started first? The russians.

Above all that I have stated above, there has also been the incident involving the shooting down of a georgian UAV by a MIG-29, later on being confirmed of russian origin. The fact is that they shouldn't have shot down the georgian UAV. Russia had no right to have a fighter in that region and in no way shoot a georgian UAV down, but neither had Georgia the right to deploy military UAV's in Abkhazia air-space due to the signed treaties and cease-fire agreement.

All-in-all,  everything escaladed to a full-scale war after Georgia saw that it's integrity was compromised by the Russia's involvement in supporting the rebel states, both military and diplomatically (offering them russian passports). Russia wanted the regions to be annexed to it (both of the regions stated that they wish to be annexed to Russia) and Georgia wanted to put an end to this as discussions would probably have taken decades and by the time the UN reached a decision, they would have long been annexed to Russia.

Answer 6

Well, Russia is not going to Tbilisi, they have stopped advance in 40km south from Osetia.  French president N Sarkozi has been to Moscow recently and now goes to Tbilisi. This doesn't look like russians would replace Saakashvili. However, this should be done by an international trial.

Why?

Both US and Russian media are lying. Thats obvious, as mass-media is a weapon too.

Its difficult to expect any pro-Russian stuff from CNN, right?

On the first day of fighting there was a nice movie by CNN. Featuring dark night and bright flares of starting missiles in the background of voice telling us about Russian invasion. Wait, it was only evening in Georgia and russians have joined war in the midday. It takes time to send the movie to some studio and prepare some breaking-news, at least an hour I'd say. And camera men should travel that to the front, Tskhinvali city is far from Georgian capital city of Tbilisi. So that couldn't be that night, this is previous night: August 07. And there were no russian forces in Georgia at that moment... So missiles are Georgian!

Lets take a closer look on them. They're flying in the very fast rate. Axelerate, then rocket engine stops and disappears in the night. Do you know what this weapon is? It is 'Grad' soviet era indirect missile artillery designed to kill lots of infantry in the field. It is useless against tanks and strongpoints. And it is very inacurate... Warhead turns into numerous splinters on detonation effectively killing everyone around. And 'Grad' provides rain of such rockets. Rain of death.

Do you imagine this? Without declaration of war, warnings et.c. in the middle of night, when people are sleeping at their homes someone bombards city with 'Grad'. This is not a police action against rebels, this attempt to kill as many of them (children, women, everyone) as possible and make others run in terror. That exactly happened. Saakashvili is a war criminal.

Answer 7

Russia was in the wrong to a degree, however, Georgia was as well because they were killing Russian passport holders living in Ossethia.

Either way, this Russia/Georgia c**p is over as far as the US is concerned.

They will always have problems with each other.