Michael Totten reports from Tbilisi.
On Monday, I visited one of the schools transformed into refugee housing in the center of Tbilisi and spoke to four women--Lia, Nana, Diana, and Maya--who had fled with their children from a cluster of small villages just outside the city of Gori. "We left the cattle," Lia said. "We left the house. We left everything and came on foot because to stay there was impossible." Diana's account: "They are burning the houses. From most of the houses they are taking everything. They are stealing everything, even such things as toothbrushes and toilets. They are taking the toilets. Imagine. They are taking broken refrigerators." And Nana: "We are so heartbroken. I don't know what to say or even think. Our whole lives we were working to save something, and one day we lost everything. Now I have to start everything from the very beginning."
Maybe they exist, but I haven't seen any eyewitness accounts of the supposed atrocities by the Georgians that Russia claims started this.
And be sure to hit his tip jar. It's how he affords to do this reporting.
Maybe they exist, but I haven't seen any eyewitness accounts of the supposed atrocities by the Georgians that Russia claims started this.
Those accounts are apparently all over Russian TV (at least in the Far East); or so say my folks in Russia. It's a matter of perspective and sympathies, I suppose...
It a matter of state run media verses eyewitness accounts by someone you can trust.
Remember, Putin is the KGB guy that bombed his own Russian people as a pretext in Chechnya, then did a gangland type murder of the journalist that was investigating and reporting it.
BTW, this is a relatively mild account. Others are much worse. They're are also some accounts where Russian officers have interceded to protect some Georgian civilians (from other Russian goons) but these are far too rare.
This comment does not directly address the subject of the supposed atrocities, but it might be of interest:
I've been enjoying articles posted at A Fistful Of Euros. One of the contributors is an American (or at least he sounds like one) who is currently lives Georgia, and has been reporting on the events with a cynical eye toward the historical antecedents of the conflict.
The two most recent entries on Georgia may be found here:
http://fistfulofeuros.net/afoe/history/gamsakhurdia/
http://fistfulofeuros.net/afoe/history/georgia-bulgaria-and-the-second-balkan-war/
The entries are short, and make for interesting reading. They take an anti-Saakashvili stance, but they are written by a guy who loves Georgia (and democracy and freedom).
Some blogs in the area...
http://tbilisiwebinfo.wordpress.com/
http://sianhasgonetogeorgia.blogspot.com/
An account of the 'provocation' I found informative...
http://hmccluskie.blogspot.com/2008/08/war-experience-republic-of-georgia.html
I didn't save most of the links I've visited. One was an aid worker in the area that gave a good perspective but I can't find it again. A large number of links don't work anymore. Russia controls many of the servers Georgians use.
A letter from Georgia about events surrounding the 'provocation'...
http://hmccluskie.blogspot.com/2008/08/war-experience-republic-of-georgia.html
Sorry about the repost. It looked like my first post didn't make it. Apparently it did. Oops.
It a matter of state run media verses eyewitness accounts by someone you can trust
And whom you trust is based, to a large degree, on your sympathies. I can find numerous links to "eyewitness accounts" of atrocities by Georgian troops.
Are they to be believed? I don't know....I certainly don't believe everything I read on the internet, but it just goes to show that it's a tangled web over there and doubtless all parties share an equal measure of blame.
whom you trust is based, to a large degree, on your sympathies
Which shouldn't be, because this is what leads to an unshakable belief in liars like Putin and gang.
Trust needs to be based on history, not sympathy. Has this guy lied to me or anyone else before? Is he willing to admit when he gets it wrong?
When your belief is base on sympathy you can be made to believe anything.
Good talkers can spin anything. Shut the sound off and just watch the tanks rolling over the landscape. Trust that.
A little applied rational thinking wouldn't hurt either.
A little applied rational thinking probably sounds a little harsh. I had in mind the initial claims of 1400 dead, 20 wound; then 1600 dead, xx wounded; now 2000 dead, xx wounded. To support the genocide claims.
Initial independent reports were about 40 to 44 dead, later upgraded to about 133 dead. Some civilian, some solders, various factions. This referring only to the fighting in south Ossetia around the 7th and 8th. Since then, nobody can tell how many have died by the Russians who are killing journalist and not letting them travel into the zones they control without Russian press credentials.
The applied rational thinking comes in when you realize, there are almost always more wounded than dead in these situations. That should immediately alert you, at least to the possibility, that someone is lying.
Russia said they would withdraw, several times. They seem to be lying pretty consistently about that.
If all the news is mainly coming from one source because they are actively suppressing any other sources... you can safely assume it's because they want to lie about things.
What it's like to be a journalist in Russia...
http://www.cpj.org/Briefings/2005/russia_murders/russia_murders.html
Trust needs to be based on history, not sympathy. Has this guy lied to me or anyone else before? Is he willing to admit when he gets it wrong?
You're right, sympathy is a poor choice of wording. Bias is more accurate.
had in mind the initial claims
Initial claims in war zones are often wildly inaccurate, regardless of the source. The fact that they change doesn't prove that anyone was lying.
Since then, nobody can tell how many have died by the Russians who are killing journalist
This is not relevant to your argument. Besides, apparently the Georgians did the same: http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=151953
That's a video from the very Georgian-biased Fox News!
Does that make one worse than the other?
not letting them travel into the zones they control without Russian press credentials
How is that different than the US controlling press access to areas in Iraq?
You haven't made an irrefutable argument that the Russians are the Boogeymen, here. Just out of curiosity, did you support the NATO intervention in Kosovo?
A letter from Georgia about events surrounding the 'provocation'...
And here's an interesting tidbit from CNN:
"it was confirmed Friday that the U.S. urged Georgia "not to do this" before it sent troops into its breakaway region of South Ossetia.
The U.S. ambassador to Russia, John Beyrle, told the Russian business daily Kommersant it had urged Georgia not to launch an attack and that Russia responded in a "legitimate" way, though he went on to say Russia went too far in its military incursion.
His comments represent a public acknowledgment from a senior U.S. official that Russia had some justification for its initial response to Georgia's attack on South Ossetia.
CNN confirmed the ambassador's response with the U.S. Embassy in Russia"
sorry, those were me. Not enough coffee, yet.