Revision as of 01:33, 18 August 2008 editEconomistBR (talk | contribs)2,505 edits →"a dirty little war"← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:39, 18 August 2008 edit undoEconomistBR (talk | contribs)2,505 edits →New Cold WarNext edit → | ||
Line 309: | Line 309: | ||
Additional input, improvement, involvement, etc. at ] would be helpful, and this seems like an obvious place to find interested parties... ]] 22:29, 17 August 2008 (UTC) | Additional input, improvement, involvement, etc. at ] would be helpful, and this seems like an obvious place to find interested parties... ]] 22:29, 17 August 2008 (UTC) | ||
:New Cold War?!! That article shouldn't even exist, that's a neologism trumped up by TV pundits. There is no such thing a New Cold War. Russia doesn't have an sphere of influence or the money to embark on a multi year arms race. | |||
:A Russia-China military alliance comparable to NATO? That article is crazy. | |||
:I am AfDing that article. | |||
:<span style="background-color: green; color: white">]</span> <small>]</small> 01:38, 18 August 2008 (UTC) | |||
== Internal linking of dates in article and general dating == | == Internal linking of dates in article and general dating == |
Revision as of 01:39, 18 August 2008
Skip to table of contents |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Russo-Georgian War. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Russo-Georgian War at the Reference desk. |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Russo-Georgian War article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36 |
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Russo-Georgian War. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Russo-Georgian War at the Reference desk. |
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
A news item involving Russo-Georgian War was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the In the news section on 12 August 2008. |
What to do and what not to do on this article
Do
- Be neutral (scrupulously so)
- Be verifiable.
- Be collaborative
Don't
- Don't complain about the title. We've been over this and this page is staying at this location for now. See a recent discussion.
- Don't be original.
- Don't edit war
- Don't soapbox.
- Don't randomly stick tags everywhere. {{sofixit}}, if you please.
Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
Total bias in "Humanitarian impact" section
This is for "South Ossetia" section on Misplaced Pages:
On August 8, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev stated: "Georgia’s actions have led to human losses, including among Russian peacekeepers... Georgian peacekeepers were opening fire at Russian peacekeepers with whom they were supposed to work together in... maintaining peace in the region. Civilians, women, children and old people are dying today in South Ossetia, and the majority of them are citizens of the Russian Federation".
On August 8, the International Red Cross urged the combatants to make a humanitarian corridor to evacuate the wounded and civilians from Tskhinvali.According to Russian sources, Tskhinvali's main city hospital was non-functional, and ambulances could not reach the wounded, while Georgia continued to bomb the hospital. Twenty-two wounded remained in the building, which reportedly had only two storeys left.International Red Cross spokeswoman Anna Nelson said it had received reports that hospitals in Tskhinvali were "overflowing" with casualties.According to Russia Today, more than 150 people were trapped under the rubble of the city hospital. Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin alleged that Georgia was responsible for a "complete genocide."
The UN refugee agency, UNHCR, said that thousands of refugees left South Ossetia, mostly for North Ossetia in Russia within the first days of the conflict. About 140 buses, carrying thousands of refugees, had already arrived in North Ossetia on Friday evening, August 8, according to Reuters.
Human Rights Watch visited a camp for the displaced in the village of Alagir and interviewed more than a dozen people, including those from Tskhinvali and neighboring villages. Those from the city reported spending more than three days in the basements of their houses, unable to come out because of the incessant shelling. Residents of Satikhar village said that after the village came under heavy artillery fire on the night of August 7, all women, children and elderly (more than 100 people) started fleeing their homes. Most of them spent the next two days hiding in the woods and then trying to make their way toward the Russian border. Later, the Russian military in the village of Ger helped in the displaced civilians' transport to North Ossetia.
Eduard Kokoity stated from South Ossetia that the death toll has risen to 1,400 in South Ossetia. Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin on August 9 upon his return from Beijing to Vladikavkaz claimed that "tens of people killed, hundreds wounded" and 34,000 refugees had crossed the Russian border.The United Nations refugee agency said that between 10,000 and 20,000 people have been displaced within Georgia.According to Russian sources, Tskhinvali was lying in ruins, and more than ten border villages were burnt to the ground as of August 9.According to western media who arrived in the city later, however, "everal residential areas seemed to have little damage" and "eporters witnessed more than a dozen fires in what appeared to be deserted ethnic Georgian neighborhoods and saw evidence of looting in those areas. According to Chicago Tribune, theater and typesetting school were heavily damaged or destroyed.
The fighting interrupted electricity and telephone service in Tskhinvali, and some inhabitants sheltered in basements with no access to water or medicines. Human Rights Watch interviewed an Ossetian man who noted that Ossetians had lost property "in Tskhinvali and other places".
Russian media reported on August 9 that several journalists were hiding in the basements, as they appealed to world society for a peace corridor to let them out of Tskhinvali.
At a makeshift hospital camp in Alagir on August 9, Prime Minister Putin was told that Georgian troops had set fire to a house with several young women inside. "They were rounded up like cattle, shut into the house, and set on fire. In another place, we saw a tank run over an old woman who was running away with two children. We saw how they slashed up an 18-month child," a refugee said. Russian reports cited the representative of South Ossetia administration who asserted that Georgian troops opened an irrigation canal to flood the basements of Tskhinvali in order to prevent people from hiding in the basements of the buildings during bombings. and that Georgian tanks ran people down and that soldiers took away women.
Human Rights Watch entered Tskhinvali on August 13 and reported that it saw numerous apartment buildings and houses damaged by shelling. It said some of them had been hit by "inherently indiscriminate" weapons that should not be used in areas populated by civilians, such as rockets most likely fired from Grad launchers. It said there was evidence of firing being directed into locations where civilians frequently choose as a place of shelter, such as basements. Human Rights Watch talked to a teacher at the local kindergarten, who said: "They were shooting from Grad rocket launchers, paying no attention to civilians living in these houses. We went deaf from the shelling. They simply wanted to wipe us off the face of the earth." The woman showed Human Rights Watch researchers the kindergarten building hit by the Grad rockets, as well as fragments of the rocket itself.
What we got here?
- 1. SO is in Georgia. Why is "South Ossetia" section separate from "Georgia" section? It should be, say, "South Ossetia", "Gori", "Abkhazia" and "Elsewhere" sections, for example.
- DISAGREE - Please tell me, we're not going to have this edit war of whether SO belongs to Georgia all over again. I'd have thought, it's already discussed more than necessary. ETST (talk) 14:25, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- Excuse me good sir, but at this moment nothing changed an SO belongs to Georgia according to UN, Misplaced Pages (check out the maps of Georgia) and Georgia and every country in the world, possibly with the single exception of Russia. --Captain Obvious and his crime-fighting dog (talk) 15:59, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- One could argue juxtoposition of de jure information and de facto situation in both SO and Abkhazia.theUg (talk) 19:51, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- Excuse me good sir, but at this moment nothing changed an SO belongs to Georgia according to UN, Misplaced Pages (check out the maps of Georgia) and Georgia and every country in the world, possibly with the single exception of Russia. --Captain Obvious and his crime-fighting dog (talk) 15:59, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- DISAGREE - Please tell me, we're not going to have this edit war of whether SO belongs to Georgia all over again. I'd have thought, it's already discussed more than necessary. ETST (talk) 14:25, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- 2. Most of this are unconfirmed reports of Georgian atrocities bia the Russian/"Russian citizien" propaganda - by now, this stuff should be in propaganda, and here only confirmed reports (UN, HRW, IRC, etc.). Russian propaganda (there's only Russian propaganda there) BS which has to be removed or moved to "Propaganda" section was highlighted by me in
strike.- DISAGREE - I've seen nothing to date, which unarguably disproves any of your "strike-marked BS", and still all of them are official claims from official sources. And to put it into "Propaganda" section, or anything of the sort, you should wait, till it will be stated as such by all sides of the conflict(unlikely event in the near future, don't you think?), otherwise, it will be no more than (even if heavily supported) POV. ETST (talk) 14:25, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- Wrong aproach. Please find anything which confirms these statements as facts. I havent's see ANY confirmation of any of these wild claims from UN, HRW, IRC, OSCE, or even a third-country journalists on a Russian military media trip. --Captain Obvious and his crime-fighting dog (talk) 16:02, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- DISAGREE - I've seen nothing to date, which unarguably disproves any of your "strike-marked BS", and still all of them are official claims from official sources. And to put it into "Propaganda" section, or anything of the sort, you should wait, till it will be stated as such by all sides of the conflict(unlikely event in the near future, don't you think?), otherwise, it will be no more than (even if heavily supported) POV. ETST (talk) 14:25, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- 3. There's no mention but "according to western media" of the widespread looting and destruction of the ethnic Georgian villages, and the 15,000 Georgian refugees get less space then the wild ravings of V.V. Putin. This is not "according to western media", it's a fact (HRW, UN) which was only confirmed by media from the third-party countries too.
- Well, maybe. But where this claims of "widespread" came from? I see no such word in HRW report, moreover it doesn't precisely account for actual spread. I think, we should list specific affected areas with refs to HRW(You did that once). And, knowing you, Captain, I urge you not to address the looters as men from regular Ossetian Militia, or any other Russia-affiliated regular troops, without at least adding "allegedly". ETST (talk) 14:25, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- Not isolated incidents - HRW researchers witnessed first-hand in several villages. They confirmed it's Ossetians, including a statement by an Ossetian officer saying they are destroying villages on purpose, to keep the Georgians from returning. --Captain Obvious and his crime-fighting dog (talk) 16:02, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- Well, maybe. But where this claims of "widespread" came from? I see no such word in HRW report, moreover it doesn't precisely account for actual spread. I think, we should list specific affected areas with refs to HRW(You did that once). And, knowing you, Captain, I urge you not to address the looters as men from regular Ossetian Militia, or any other Russia-affiliated regular troops, without at least adding "allegedly". ETST (talk) 14:25, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- 4. As mentioned in the previous point, HRW quotations only regarding South Ossetians - and none of these disaproving Russian BS claims in the style of "total genocide".
- DISAGREE - Goes to where your first point did. ETST (talk) 14:25, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Also, there's no mention(!) of the plight Georgians in Abkhazia. UNHCR via Reuters Reliefweb:
More than 700 frightened residents of the remote Khodori Valley in Georgia's breakaway Abkhazia region have been escorted to safety in a two-day operation mounted by UN refugee agency staff. (UNHCR secures safe passage for Georgians fearing further fighting)
Why are they "frightened" and need to be evacuated from the territory controlled by "peacekeepers", where the Georgian army did not attack so there's no "revenge"?
- Hmm... I dunno. Maybe it were advancing Russian Hordes screaming out their thirst for Georgian blood? Or maybe it were retreating Georgian soldiers' shouts(just like the ones, voiced in Gori for no apparent reason, except panic-inducing) of 'run for your life' fallen on ordinary Georgians' ears, which were struck already by Saakashvili's broadcasted screams of 'Russia invades us'? Sigh. I think, we'll never know... ETST (talk) 14:27, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
By the same article: Right now there are 118,000 refugees, including 15,000 Georgians from SO (practically all of the Georgian population there) and 73,000 Georgians from "Georgia proper" (maybe including Abkhazia in the report), mostly Gori.
Of ~118,000 refugees, only 1/4 are Ossetians. The rest are Georgians. --Captain Obvious and his crime-fighting dog (talk) 10:53, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- I glad you've mentioned Gori. Again, i have to say, that i've seen nothing to date, that could justify people leaving Gori, except G-gov induced panic. And if we won't count Gori, then we'll get your statistic of 1/4 but this time it'll be in favor of Georgians. Of course, the Georgians are not where they're used to be, and nobody including me, will disregard that, but your implication of 1/4(O/G) ratio should be blamed on ""peacekeepers"" is, at least, unfounded. ETST (talk) 14:27, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- There are, let's say, 30,000 Ossetian refugees and 15,000 Georgian refugees from South Ossetia, so hardly four times more Osetians. " G-gov induced panic" - you say, Tbilisi ordered the panicky rout of its own forces from Gori, making them abandon their guns, vehicles, barracks and army depots on purpose? This is very interesting, but I think people rather fled the guys who are now looting & burning, after the Georgian army abandoned them to the enemy mercy. --Captain Obvious and his crime-fighting dog (talk) 15:49, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Cleanup, too
Also, what remains should be cleaned up, becuase it' badly written and mostly look like just copy-pasted (and doesn't matter if's in citation marks, it should be edited, it's supposedly encyclopedia and not a blog entry or a press article - if anyone wants to read more, they can click the link rwead in the source).
For example, the apparant copypasta of:
Human Rights Watch talked to a teacher at the local kindergarten, who said: "They were shooting from Grad rocket launchers, paying no attention to civilians living in these houses. We went deaf from the shelling. They simply wanted to wipe us off the face of the earth." The woman showed Human Rights Watch researchers the kindergarten building hit by the Grad rockets, as well as fragments of the rocket itself.
Should instad be:
HRW researchers found a kindergarten building hit by the Grad rockets, as well as fragments of the rocket itself.
If I'm back and nobody cleaned up this, I'll do it myself. --Captain Obvious and his crime-fighting dog (talk) 11:12, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- DISAGREE - I believe, most of people do not look into ref's section, unless they're doing some research requiring strict verifictation, while, i feel, this witness' impression of what have happened is notable, and changes the whole tone of the section. ETST (talk) 14:29, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- Ha, they should. Are you going to post whole HRW reports here? Btw, the previous section manipulated sources: for example, the "Ossetian man" in Misplaced Pages complaining about the lost property in reality was an Ossetian militiaman saying why he's looting. Yes - I checked, and you should too - everyone should, instead of believeing Misplaced Pages editors. --Captain Obvious and his crime-fighting dog (talk) 15:15, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
About moving to the "Propaganda" section
There's no such section, but should be (about the stuff which was presented as facts and provided as a justification for the invasion, but later turned out to be untrue). For example, we take the lie of:
According to Russian sources, Tskhinvali's main city hospital was non-functional, and ambulances could not reach the wounded, while Georgia continued to bomb the hospital. Twenty-two wounded remained in the building, which reportedly had only two storeys left.
and the lie of:
According to Russia Today, more than 150 people were trapped under the rubble of the city hospital.
and make it:
- According to Russian sources, Tskhinvali's main city hospital was non-functional, and ambulances could not reach the wounded, while Georgia "continued to bomb" the hospital, which allegedly had only two storeys left and where 22 wounded were alleged to remain. According to Russia Today, "more than 150 people were trapped under the rubble of the city hospital". However, it turned out that the city hospital, which was hit in the roof by a single Grad rocket, did not collapse. The Grad rocket damaged part of the second and third floors of the building. The hospital, whose outer walls were also hit by either small arms fire or shrapnel, continued to operate in the building's basement until August 13, when all the wounded (of which 273 were admitted in during the fighting) were evacuated to Russia.
Instead, Misplaced Pages is promoting disproved lies as "humanitarian impact". --Captain Obvious and his crime-fighting dog (talk) 11:28, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- As i have already said, i don't think we're ever going to reach consensus on the matter of existence of such section. Moreover, as far, as i can see, you failed to provide any refs to your "turned out" proposal. Add them, and we'll discuss that further. ETST (talk) 14:29, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- Already done (btw, the damage by the rocket in the hospital is not even visible from the outside). --Captain Obvious and his crime-fighting dog (talk) 15:11, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Captain and his bloody hungry beast - How much people you need bleeding and dying to call in "humanitarian impact"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.102.43.111 (talk) 13:40, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- Only exactly how many had bleed and die and not even one more. Hey, shouldn't you be actually happy that 2,000 people didn't die? --Captain Obvious and his crime-fighting dog (talk) 13:54, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- Tagging "original research" to the section. The "propaganda" is the conclusion of Misplaced Pages editor. --Anton Gutsunaev (talk) 17:06, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- So remove these lies altogether. :shrug: It's actually kind of beating a dead horse anyway. --Captain Obvious and his crime-fighting dog (talk) 17:24, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
If there is to be a section of this kind, I think ”Propaganda” is too wide a term. I propose ”Information warfare” instead, or possibly ”Disinformation”, or ”Alleged disinformation”, if you like.--gnirre (talk) 21:38, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Unused for now
OK.
- On August 8, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev stated: "Georgia’s actions have led to human losses, including among Russian peacekeepers... Georgian peacekeepers were opening fire at Russian peacekeepers with whom they were supposed to work together in... maintaining peace in the region. Civilians, women, children and old people are dying today in South Ossetia, and the majority of them are citizens of the Russian Federation".
- Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin alleged that Georgia was responsible for a "complete genocide."
- Eduard Kokoity stated from South Ossetia that the death toll has risen to 1,400 in South Ossetia.
- Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin on August 9 upon his return from Beijing to Vladikavkaz claimed that "tens of people killed, hundreds wounded" and 34,000 refugees had crossed the Russian border.
- According to Russian sources, Tskhinvali was lying in ruins, and more than ten border villages were burnt to the ground as of August 9.
- At a makeshift hospital camp in Alagir on August 9, Prime Minister Putin was told that Georgian troops had set fire to a house with several young women inside. "They were rounded up like cattle, shut into the house, and set on fire. In another place, we saw a tank run over an old woman who was running away with two children. We saw how they slashed up an 18-month child," a refugee said.
- Russian reports cited the representative of South Ossetia administration who asserted that Georgian troops opened an irrigation canal to flood the basements of Tskhinvali in order to prevent people from hiding in the basements of the buildings during bombings. and that Georgian tanks ran people down and that soldiers took away women.
I didn't even chceck the Georgia section, but I guess it may has similar problems.(?) "Buses" link was dead. (And yes, I check the links and the content - everyone editing should.) --Captain Obvious and his crime-fighting dog (talk) 13:52, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
And yeah, Georgia proper reports also should be cleared of media sensationalism and the possibly rumour-type stories of panicky refugees (which may be or may not be confirmed later) and only post the preliminarily confirmed reports (of which some might also be corrected later). For example, the Cluster bombing of Gori. --Captain Obvious and his crime-fighting dog (talk) 15:42, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, remove all the supposedly Russian POV, and fill it up with your pro-Georgia crap... That's what you do, isn't it. As long as it's AGAINST Russia, it's not POV? I esspecially like how you removed all the Russian sources, yet left all the Georgian/Western POV. Hypocrites.--SergeiXXX (talk) 16:36, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- And the examples of the "pro-Georgia crap" in this section now? You can't possibly mean the HRW and UN, can you? No, "it's not POV". See also what I wrote about the media reports, just above (should be not used if only second-hand, like "refugees say militiamen murder and rape" and the journalists didn't witness it). --Captain Obvious and his crime-fighting dog (talk) 17:15, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- Well, I noticed you ONLY pointed out everything that argues the Russian side. That's POV.--SergeiXXX (talk) 17:30, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- Because there was just no Georgian propaganda in this text. If you see any, point it in bold. Go on. --Captain Obvious and his crime-fighting dog (talk) 17:41, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- Humanitarian impact. South Ossetia.
- Because there was just no Georgian propaganda in this text. If you see any, point it in bold. Go on. --Captain Obvious and his crime-fighting dog (talk) 17:41, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- Well, I noticed you ONLY pointed out everything that argues the Russian side. That's POV.--SergeiXXX (talk) 17:30, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- And the examples of the "pro-Georgia crap" in this section now? You can't possibly mean the HRW and UN, can you? No, "it's not POV". See also what I wrote about the media reports, just above (should be not used if only second-hand, like "refugees say militiamen murder and rape" and the journalists didn't witness it). --Captain Obvious and his crime-fighting dog (talk) 17:15, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
"Since Georgian and Russian forces use identical Soviet-era weapons systems including Grad rockets, HRW couldn't definitely attribute specific battle damage to a particular belligerent" What a bunch of crap. Why would Russian bomb South Ossetians? They are our friends. They are on our side. Its OBVIOUS that this was the work of the Georgians.--SergeiXXX (talk) 17:46, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- I think you should learn what the Human Rights Watch is. ("Human Rights Watch has been criticized for perceived anti-Western, anti-China, and anti-Israel bias while others have criticized it for having a pro-Western and pro-Israel bias." - which means they're completely neutral, and just for the truth and the equal human rights everywhere.) The source said: "There were also several aerial bombardments of Gori from August 9 through 12 which could only have been carried out by Russian airplanes." (And "why should Russian bomb" Grozny and the rest of Chechnya, repeatedly, for weeks and even months, in several battles in two wars? Were the Chechens and ethnic Russians and others, all "Russian citiziens" - not "your friends"? Less friends than the Georgian minority? Or would you say it didn't happen?) --Captain Obvious and his crime-fighting dog (talk) 18:20, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- As for Human Rights Watch and their alleged neutrality, the same article you quote defines it as US-based organization; and notice 'pro-US' or 'anti-US' are nowhere in its profile. Given how much emphasis US put onto information warfare to protect its ally, I won't rule out poissibility of HRW being politically biased, also, looking up their website makes impression that they're at least, hmm, cautious in discussing US matters. So their opinion, IMO, has the same weight as Russian's opinion; it should get confirmation from other media sources.
Besides, there're many blogs with photo/video of Georgian atrocities, as well as Russian media is filled with them. So both Russian and HRW/US claims should be put in the same section, with 'alleged' word preceding them. Once any of those gets confirmed by diffrent media source, some can be ruled as 'trustworthy' and some as 'information warfare'. As for Georgians, their media is filled with sick statements too. Their claims of Roki tunnel destruction, Russian tanks assaulting Tbilisi, etc. etc. were all later declared untrue. 78.29.67.134 (talk) 18:55, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- "There were also several aerial bombardments of Gori from August 9 through 12 which could only have been carried out by Russian airplanes."
- Ok. Sure, Russia bombed Gori. I'm not disputing that. I was talking about Tshinvali.--SergeiXXX (talk) 18:26, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Since Georgian and Russian forces use identical Soviet-era weapons systems including main battle tanks, Grad multiple-launch rockets, BMP infantry fighting vehicles and tube artillery, Human Rights Watch cannot definitely attribute specific battle damage to a particular belligerent, but witness accounts and the timing of the damage would point to Georgian fire accounting for much of the damage described below.
Anything else? And didn't Russia bomb the Russian citiziens in Grozny - a much larger city on a much larger scale, and much longer too (to say least)? What's so supposedly different between the Russian army in Russia (Grozny) and the Russian army in Georgia (Tskhinvali) to make it even a littlest bit incredible? Russia literally(!) leveled much of a city of Grozny, but couldn't even damage a town of Tskhinvali? --Captain Obvious and his crime-fighting dog (talk) 18:42, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- And that's also what Mikhail Sakaashvili said, check it out here, he also compared it with the bombing of grozny. 62.163.232.175 (talk) 19:58, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- It's hardly Grozny in any case. --Captain Obvious and his crime-fighting dog (talk) 21:00, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
"a dirty little war"
If you want to know the story of this war, see this Guardian article.Bdell555 (talk) 01:28, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- Really biased article. There is nothing to be gained by portraing Russians as evil barbarians, nothing. It's in fact really dangerous.
- It's way more constructive to try to understand why the Russians are behaving like this.
- ⇨ EconomistBR ⇦ Talk 04:16, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- Should it be considered for incorporation into the article? Otherwise what the point of this post? Lihaas (talk) 10:08, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- The article is called "Russia's objectives.." but starts with a story of some marauders. No mentioning on Georgian invasion into Tskhinvali, its called "..doomed military incursion..". How tragic. Then follow ramblings about Putin's yearning for Soviet years and about some graffiti on Moscow wall (I tell you, most graffities on our walls are run-of-the-mill obscenities, no need to travel that far to read them). The article is the hysterical anti-Russian propaganda masterpiece, an is as far from political analysis as I am from North Pole. It paints the whole situation upside-down. "..secessionist provinces of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, which broke away from Tbilisi during the 1992-93 civil war.." - no mentioning of the cancelled autonomy and attempted militatry crackdown by nationalistic Georgian government. Then they speak of Crimea as some "target" of Russia, what an imagination. "On Friday, the US Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, condemned Russia's invasion of Georgia.." ..then went on to condemn U.S. invasion in Iraq and Guantanamo prison, began laughing wildly and was taked to the nearby hospital. Oh my God. Of course such cartoonish presentations, whether painted by Russian or Western propaganda, have no place in an encyclopedia article. --CopperKettle (talk) 10:12, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- Just look at this marvelous phrase: "..Like the Soviet Union's invasion of Czechoslovakia 40 years ago this week, this invasion took place in August...". Yeah, and just like the Hitler's annexation of Austria, the War in Iraq started in March. Cool analogies. Let's scan the history for cozy dating. --CopperKettle (talk) 10:18, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- The fact of the matter is the the Guardian is a reliable source by Misplaced Pages sources and therefore material from it may and should be included in the article. The Guardian is a left-leaning paper. The fact that you don't like is not a sufficient reason to exclude material provided by a reliable source.Bdell555 (talk) 15:33, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- Even a reliable source will fail from time to time; this article is raving madness. I guess they leaned so far to the left that they completely tipped over and knocked their heads. The article reads like a Russian State TV transript, only with 180 degrees turn. --CopperKettle (talk) 15:46, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- @Bdell555
- You have to agree that those views do not necessarily represent The Guardian's views. That article is an op-ed nothing more. The Time for example, has published already about 3 op-ed or "analysis" about the conflict.
- @CopperKettle
- Totally agree with you..."cartoonish presentations"... very well said, it is really cartoonish and 1 dimensional.
- ⇨ EconomistBR ⇦ Talk 17:29, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- Even a reliable source will fail from time to time; this article is raving madness. I guess they leaned so far to the left that they completely tipped over and knocked their heads. The article reads like a Russian State TV transript, only with 180 degrees turn. --CopperKettle (talk) 15:46, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- The fact of the matter is the the Guardian is a reliable source by Misplaced Pages sources and therefore material from it may and should be included in the article. The Guardian is a left-leaning paper. The fact that you don't like is not a sufficient reason to exclude material provided by a reliable source.Bdell555 (talk) 15:33, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- Should it be considered for incorporation into the article? Otherwise what the point of this post? Lihaas (talk) 10:08, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- No, I do not have to agree.
- This is a Guardian op-ed. See what it says above the title? "Comment"
- This is a Guardian editorial. See what it says above the title? "Comment"
- Now go look at what it says above the title of this piece. "NEWS". The Guardian is accordingly putting the full weight of its credibility as a news source behind the factual claims in this piece. The Guardian was THERE. Were you? For this material to be excluded, you have to provide evidence that the Guardian, as a general news source, is not reliable, given the fact the general consensus across Misplaced Pages is that it IS reliable. If you are going to edit war over the inclusion of any claim of fact cited to this article, I suggest providing some more argument here first.Bdell555 (talk) 19:41, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- This article should have dealt with only facts in an objective manner, instead it used selected facts in order to support a bunch of one-sided extremely biased opinions, making it IMO an op-ed.
- In the end that article wrote exactly what you wanted to read, that's why you like it so much to the point of advertising it. That's very sad.
- ⇨ EconomistBR ⇦ Talk 20:18, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- It's sadder that you seem to think that what happened did not happen. If it did not happen why is another British reporter saying something similar?
- That's a cheap shot from you. You failed to address my points and invented the point that I disputed the veracity of the article's accounts. Really awful, if you don't something to say shut up but don't invent slanderous points.
- ⇨ EconomistBR ⇦ Talk 01:33, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
- What exactly do you want to add from this article? BTW, see that I've translated at the talkpage of the Timeline. --CopperKettle (talk) 19:45, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
KOSOVO Information
The information about Kosovo and it's relation to this conflict is excessive. For example, it is the largest subheading in the background section, but gives very little information about South Ossetia; although, it gives extremely repetitive information (mostly pulling from quotations) about why Russia cites the situation as a precedent for sending their own troops into the breakaway provinces of Georgia and Georgia proper. Some of these quotations are not cited well and/or are wholly unnecessary to this article: "An UN Security Council diplomat said "Strategically, the Russians have been sending signals that they really wanted to flex their muscles, and they’re upset about Kosovo."" Who is this Security Council diplomat? What country are they from? Does this information have anything to do with Georgia? And if everything is legitimate then (grammar) some should change "An" to an "A". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Menrunningpast (talk • contribs) 17:47, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- Very much agreed, the text does not belong to this article. What we need is a section detailing the US reaction the US is very much a party to this as a military ally of Georgia fighting with their troops side by side in Iraq for example. Hobartimus (talk) 18:18, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
"Background to war" - Sunday Times Article
I offer for the possible improvement of this article the following from the Sunday Times (in the UK) which offers some interesting background regarding the "behind the scenes" issues leading up to the conflict in South Ossetia - http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article4545980.ece
doktorb words 19:05, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- I've also translated a piece telling of the events in the runup to the Georgian invasion. Talk:Timeline_of_the_2008_South_Ossetia_war#Georgian_police_car_bombed_on_31th_July_.28Novaya_Gazeta.29 Here. --CopperKettle (talk) 19:32, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- Very well balanced account of what happened, the part talking about the diplomatic efforts to stop the conflict from starting are unique, nowhere I've seen so much detail. IMO we should add it to the article. The article is quite unbiased.
- Thanks doktorb for posting the link.
- ⇨ EconomistBR ⇦ Talk 20:59, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- I quote from the doctor's article:
Novaya Gazeta tells of this incident thus:The US State Department’s internal timeline of the crisis pinpoints the explosion on August 1 of two roadside bombs, believed to have been planted by South Ossetian separatists sympathetic to Russia, as a decisive moment. Five Georgian policemen were injured, one severely.
Best regards, --CopperKettle (talk) 21:11, 17 August 2008 (UTC)..This war was brewing up for a long time, but one incident served as a formal pretext. On the 31th of July, a Georgian police car was blasted using a self-made remotely controlled device on a detour road near the Eredvi village to the east of Tskhinvali. Russian peacekeepers had time to carry out an investigation and found that two 122 mm Russian-type howitzer shells were used. The policemen's Toyota was totally wrecked, and five Geogrians were injured. Just at the same spot, but on the 4th of July that year, similar explosive was used to destroy a car that carried the head of the provisional pro-Georgian administration of South Ossetia Dmitry Sanakoyev. After the blast the car was fired upon, but Sanakoyev came out unscathed though his bodyguards were wounded. Sanakoyev had been a minister of defence in the separatist government of South Ossetia, but later broke up from Kokoyti and passed to the Georgian side with a group of his Ossetian militant followers. Kokoyti and his supporters consider Sanakoev a traitor.On the 1st of August the Georgians striked back and fired at Ossetian positions, for the first time using long-range big-caliber rifles. The separatists didn't expect such an attack and suffered noticeable losses, replying with a mortar fire directed at Georgian villages, and this fact was noted by the Russian peacekeepers. In the following days the Ossetians started an active provocation campaign, apparently aiming to bring on the full-blown conflict and draw in the Russians, and in this they funally succeded. ..
- So it's one bomb made of two artillery shells, as Russian peacekeepers investigation tells. --CopperKettle (talk) 21:18, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- The article tells of the event of 31st-1st as Russian provocation, and this could just be, we dont know. But further on it tells that Rice just barely stopped Saakashvili from launching an offensive agains Abkhazia earlier this year. So the war should've happened without any provocation; and I guess Abkhazians would've defended even without Russian help. --CopperKettle (talk) 21:58, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- On the whole, the most balances article as of yet, with a little surprizing implication that Russia would've rolled the tanks in without an offensive from Georgia; this I doubt. But at least it agrees that offensive caused much troubles to civilians and such. --CopperKettle (talk) 22:08, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- I quote:
..etc. --CopperKettle (talk)Whatever the final death toll, few dispute that the city suffered destruction and that civilians were hardest hit. Nor is there any doubting Albina Shanazarov’s tragic fate. A 13-year-old girl, she sought to flee the city with her mother and three sisters...
Pictures deleted
May I ask why exactly pictures that I uploaded under Creative Commons Attribution by Arkady Babchenko were deleted? I uploaded a bunch of them, and asked the author (Arkady Babchenko) personally if it was alright to use them. Direct quote: "Огромная просьба, когда будете выкладывать их где-либо в сети, упоминайте не только авторство Аркадия Бабченко, но и то, что они принадлежат Альманаху «Искусство Войны» (http://www.navoine.ru)." Translation: "if you post these pictures somewhere else, please note the author, Arkady Babchenko, and navoine.ru".
http://www.navoine.ru/forum/viewtopic.php?p=610#610
--Mrcatzilla (talk) 19:06, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- He said they belong to the almanach "Art of war"? Then they are probably not free, and that may be the reason for the deletion. Optimally the images should be totally free for use. Also if you find such images, try to put them directly in WikiCommons. Best regards, --CopperKettle (talk) 19:40, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- There were multiple problems during the last few days about people uploading war images under false license declarations, so admins are rather quick on the delete button now. Perhaps an admin may have been a bit too quick in some instance or other. Can I get this clarified (as I don't read Russian) - this was a webforum where the guy who posted the images said he was himself the photographer, he'd actually been down there with the army and taken photographs and owned the copyright, yes? And that "Almanach", what kind of a publication is that? - Also, did he explicitly allow re-use in other venues besides Misplaced Pages, including commercial ones? Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:51, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
Casulties
The georgian armed forces suffered losses about 133 servicemen. That was confirmed on Sunday 17th august 2008 by georgian soldiers during an interview at a military base —Preceding unsigned comment added by ComanL (talk • contribs) 20:39, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- You need to give us a source before we can put that in. Was it on Georgian TV? I'd probably be prepared to believe you seeing as we may not be footnoting the infobox anyways.Bdell555 (talk) 01:19, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Quoting Governments
I have edited rather drastically. My view continues to be that neither the Russian nor the Georgian (nor the American) Government is a reliable source, and we can leave out claims which are solely reprinting their various spokebeings. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:30, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- When we do want to say something about American actions, this report that the Americans warned Saakashbili to be cautious, but did not tell him they would not support him, and that "they believed they had an understanding with Russia that any response to Georgian military action would be limited to South Ossetia," should be included. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:31, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- Times online also speaks extensively on US actions to try to contain Saakashvili's vigor. (from a link by doctorb higher up) --CopperKettle (talk) 22:40, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- On August 16, The general staff of Moscow confirmed that Russia had occupied Poti, as well as military bases in Gori and Senaki. It stated that they were there to "defuse an enormous arsenal of weapons and military hardware which have been discovered in the vicinity of Gori and Senaki without any guard whatsoever."
This is unacceptable. The Russian Government cannot confirm anything; nor can the Georgian Government: they are the interested parties, and we are not here to reprint their public statements.. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:43, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- Can you please cite a wikipedia policy for this? I find it rather ridiculous that you don't think the Russian government is reliable enough to confirm that they've occupied a town and destroyed military equipment, which falls in line with what the BBC and Guardian are saying. Your view may be that it's not, but my view is that statements are what they are, reliable or not, they shouldn't be censored, and I've never heard of a wikipedia policy backing that view up. LokiiT (talk) 22:55, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, the governments are apt to misinform, especially in a war, but shouln't there be some "common sense" rule: if the presumed fact told by a government is apparent, just add it? --CopperKettle (talk) 22:59, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- If the presumed fact asserted by a government is obvious, and it is (as here) of world-wide interest, someone else will say it, as something they have observed. Half of this is an assertion we already have: that the Russians are in Gori and Senaki; the second asserts the purpose of the Russians remaining, which is crystal-ballery. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 23:07, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, the governments are apt to misinform, especially in a war, but shouln't there be some "common sense" rule: if the presumed fact told by a government is apparent, just add it? --CopperKettle (talk) 22:59, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- Can you please cite a wikipedia policy for this? I find it rather ridiculous that you don't think the Russian government is reliable enough to confirm that they've occupied a town and destroyed military equipment, which falls in line with what the BBC and Guardian are saying. Your view may be that it's not, but my view is that statements are what they are, reliable or not, they shouldn't be censored, and I've never heard of a wikipedia policy backing that view up. LokiiT (talk) 22:55, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- We don't make up rules, we have to adhere to wikipedia policies and guidelines. Misplaced Pages requires verifiability, not truth. See WP:V. As long as we mention that it's the government making the statements, there's nothing wrong. LokiiT (talk) 23:02, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- We don't quote interested parties when (as here) we can find disinterested ones; that's part of verifiability. Doing so risks deceiving the reader by inducing him to overlook the source of the information. We don't put in long quotations of doubtful factualty; that violates WP:UNDUE. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 23:10, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- Please cite a source that says official government statements can't be quoted, assuming the source is reliable. By your logic, we can't add that Medvedev said the pullout will start on Monday because he's an "official source". WP:UNDUE only applies if the addition is bigger than it should be, that doesn't mean you can remove the quote in its entirety. There's nothing wrong with saying that Moscow officials confirmed what the BBC and Guardian reported, nothing at all. LokiiT (talk) 23:13, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- Show any reason for a neutral reader to believe that a government spokesman is reliable, Russian, Georgian, Ossetian, or American. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 23:15, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- We don't make up rules, we have to adhere to wikipedia policies and guidelines. Misplaced Pages requires verifiability, not truth. See WP:V. As long as we mention that it's the government making the statements, there's nothing wrong. LokiiT (talk) 23:02, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
In brief, don't cite people who "are apt to misinform". There is no good reason for doing so, unless better citations are not available; and even then there's a sound case for silence. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 23:14, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- There is good reason for doing so. It's called WP:NPOV, one of the most important aspects of editing on wikipedia. It's not up to you to decide who's "apt to misinform", that's wp:OR. The only important aspect to quoting governments is making sure such statements are reliably sourced, in this case they are. All I can really gather from your argument is that you don't like something therefore it shouldn't be in the article, but wikipedia doesn't work like that.LokiiT (talk) 23:16, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- Repeating the statements of either side in the interest of NPOV is preposterous. I will give it some time to see what course of dispute resolution is most suitable. Hopefully, consensus will have removed this channelling of propaganda - and, I repeat, I object equally to Georgian propaganda - before I return to this. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 23:24, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- "Repeating the statements of either side in the interest of NPOV is preposterous" ...?????? LokiiT (talk) 23:27, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- Perhapt it would be clearer to say that repeating the Russian case for themselves, including their crystal-ballery, is preposterous. We could, in theory, neutralize it partly by citing the numerous sources who don't believe them; but that would merely add a cloud of words to what we should have in the timeline: the events which have observably happened on the ground according to the most disinterested sources.
- "Repeating the statements of either side in the interest of NPOV is preposterous" ...?????? LokiiT (talk) 23:27, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- Repeating the statements of either side in the interest of NPOV is preposterous. I will give it some time to see what course of dispute resolution is most suitable. Hopefully, consensus will have removed this channelling of propaganda - and, I repeat, I object equally to Georgian propaganda - before I return to this. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 23:24, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- That is what we did have, before Lokiit changed it. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 23:33, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
New Cold War
Additional input, improvement, involvement, etc. at New Cold War would be helpful, and this seems like an obvious place to find interested parties... user:j (aka justen) 22:29, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
- New Cold War?!! That article shouldn't even exist, that's a neologism trumped up by TV pundits. There is no such thing a New Cold War. Russia doesn't have an sphere of influence or the money to embark on a multi year arms race.
- A Russia-China military alliance comparable to NATO? That article is crazy.
- I am AfDing that article.
- ⇨ EconomistBR ⇦ Talk 01:38, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Internal linking of dates in article and general dating
The article has many date references, some in the format of ex. August 17 or August 17, 2008, but there is no consistency in the format. Also, dates are being internally linked i.e August 17,2008 and is it really necessary to do so? There are so many blue links that I feel the reader gets so mind boggled that he/she won't notice links that might enhance their understanding of the crisis.
So can we:
- Agree on a consistent date format? or
- Remove internally linked dates to reduce "blue link" blindness?
I don't mind going through the article and reformating to whatever we can come to an agreement on. «Javier»|Talk 00:16, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
McClatchy reports on Tskhinvali damage
A McClatchy report from Tskhinvali confirms 40 killed there, a number very close to that of Human Rights Watch. I suggest adjusting the 44 number to "40-odd" or "low 40s" and say "According to HRW and McClatchy..." or something like that.Bdell555 (talk) 01:27, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
- "Medvedev's official statement (August 8)".
- Cite error: The named reference
complete genocide
was invoked but never defined (see the help page). - "South Ossettia leader says 1,400 killed in conflict". The Independent. Reuters. Retrieved 2008-08-09.
- Путин: из Южной Осетии в Россию перешли 34 тысячи беженцев, RIA Novosti, August 9 2008.
- Cite error: The named reference
rt
was invoked but never defined (see the help page). - Cite error: The named reference
rb
was invoked but never defined (see the help page). - "Peacekeepers say Georgian forces shelling apartments in S.Ossetia". Retrieved 2008-08-11.
- "Georgia opened an irrigation canal to flood the basements of Tskhinvali". Retrieved 2008-08-11.
- "Civilians perish as Georgian troops torch church".
- Misplaced Pages controversial topics
- All unassessed articles
- WikiProject templates with unknown parameters
- B-Class Abkhazia articles
- Top-importance Abkhazia articles
- WikiProject Abkhazia articles
- B-Class Georgia (country) articles
- Top-importance Georgia (country) articles
- WikiProject Georgia (country) articles
- B-Class Russia articles
- Top-importance Russia articles
- Top-importance B-Class Russia articles
- WikiProject Russia articles with no associated task force
- WikiProject Russia articles
- B-Class International relations articles
- Top-importance International relations articles
- WikiProject International relations articles
- B-Class military history articles
- B-Class Russian, Soviet and CIS military history articles
- Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force articles
- Misplaced Pages In the news articles