I guess he thinks he still has a chance of returning to power.
The Commission didn’t include either Russian or Georgian members. It did, however, interview both Russians and Georgians, and received documents from both countries. So how is it unbalanced?
And while the war started when the Georgians shelled Russian troops, it’s not like the Georgians just said one day, “Hey, wouldn’t it be fun to attack the Russians?” The shelling was in response to South Osssetian guerrilla attacks on Georgian positions and the South Ossetian Russian backed puppet government.
No. It’s an insightful interpretation of what you’ve said.Both sides were condemned for their provocative actions. You hold up part of that judgment as holy evidence and discard the rest as lies. Transparent bullshit, I’m afraid.
That’s a topic that’s not received the attention it deserves. Putin’s argument was in part that Yanukovych asked for Russian help - fair enough. But was Yanukovych OK with Russia taking a chunk of his country? It seems unlikely that a country’s leader would give away one of its regions.
Thus the commission is still biased to the EU side because the EU sided with the US and all NATO membership that wanted to add Ukraine and Georgia to NATO at that time. Their fool embarrassed the EU and the NATO membership do naturally they had to dole out an opinion of blame on Russia. But they could not lie about the one and only significant fact because Georgia started killing Russian troops in civilian target areas as the Georgian cowards they are.
We’re there any casualties in those ‘guerrilla’ attacks on Georgian positions? What were Georgian monitors doing about the alleged attacks? Does a potential NATO member bomb a civilian city over a couple of farmers feuding over land outside the city. Why not send troops to the gunfire if you think there are shots being fired? Why launch GRAD rockets into the capital and civilian targets if you think your positions are under small arms fire? It was disputed territory under a ceasefire treaty after all . Georgia knew the rules or should have.
You are wrong. The undisputed fact established in an pro-EU pro-Georgia investigation is that Georgia started the rocket attack on civilian targets in the city prior to a Russian response. That is not a judgement. It is a determination and admission of what has been proven to be fact.
That is because they know precisely when the Georgian rocket barrage started and how long after it started before Russian tsnks rolled through the Roki tunnel. They know for a fact that Georgia lied about when those tanks came through
Everything after that is not fact it is opinion. Biased opinion that is easy to spot.
It doesn’t deserve any attention. Yanukovych is completely corrupt and lost all legitimacy and relevance when he fled the country. Any argument Putin may have used concerning him are bullshit. He was irrelevant then, he was irrelevant when he last week suggested (otherwise reasonable) that all Ukrainian regions should have a referendum about their preferred nation, and he’s irrelevant now.
- Georgia isn’t in NATO.
- Georgia’s not even in the Membership Action Plan, which is a precondition to joining NATO. The US tried to push NATO to add Georgia to the MAP, but the rest of the NATO nations, including France and Germany (who are the two largest economies in the EU) blocked it.
- NATO isn’t the EU.
- The EU isn’t hostile to Russia.
Georgia was building up its military and being trained by US advisers to meet NATO standards prior to gaining membership. It was that heavy weaponry that was used to preemptively rocket attack the Capitol of South Ossetia. Russian soldiers legally stationed there were under Georgian attack.
What response should Russia have done in your view?
Takeout the Georgian rocket launchers and advancing tanks only and return to Russian soil? Nothing at all? Stand back and watch Russian troops and civilians be slaughtered?
Whatever would your nation do if a neighbor launched such a brazen attack and killed members serving in your military?
I believe every EU and NATO country would have gone as far as Russia did to destroy all that NATO military hardware that they could and then stay in Abkazia and South Ossetia to protect them from further attack.
It was Georgia that broke the treaty by striking first using massive military force to try to settle the territorial dispute by military means.
Funny how every argument favoring Russia is declared irrelevant by the West.
I wonder what his campaign slogan would be. “I promise not to give any more of the country away”?
Yanukovich didnt give Crimea away. Ukraine’s dropped constitutional law on elected leaders and during the gap of cobstitutional
lawlessness Crimea’s leadership decided to depart that mess. Russia backed them with the threat of Military force of the lawless regime in Kiev tried to block it.
That’s certain a perspective on the events that took place, yes.
Russia was due for a share of the blame. They violated Georgian airspace, violated the peacekeeping agreement, and contributed to the escalation that led to open battle.
Way to slander an entire people there. Clearly, no bias on your part. :rolleyes:
Yes, read the report.
Appealing to the UN, and occasionally firing back. Again, read the report.
Irrevelant, as that’s not what was taking place here.
That’s called an “invasion”, crossing the border into South Ossetia to stop artillery attacks (to say nothing of the IED attacks in Georgia). While that’s ultimately what Georgia opted to do, here you are condemning them for it, so…?
I love your rhetoric here, “alleged attacks”, you “think” your positions are under “small arms fire”, a “couple of farmers feuding over land”…you could write for a state-owned propaganda network with skills like that.
They were invading to retake South Ossetia and put an end to the conflict altogether, not in response to any individual artillery attack.
They were baited, and they fell for it, giving Russia a pre-text to launch a massive, prepared, counter-attack.
Revisionist history at its most simple (read: MSN) narrative. They were fed a much stronger commitment from the West in such a situation.
Was never going to happen. Again, you don’t tangle with The Bear in their own backyard.
Just not going to happen. Computer games aside.
You don’t think it a little ridiculous to think you know the Russian mindset better than the Georgians?
That is all you need to admit. At least you agree with the truth that comes from the EU Report. Georgia Started it.
THE EU exposed the truth that corroborates the Russian immediate timeline of events:
“On the night of 7 to 8 August 2008, a sustained Georgian artillery attack struck the town of Tskhinvali. Other movements of the Georgian armed forces targeting Tskhinvali and the surrounding areas were under way, and soon the fighting involved Russian, South Ossetian and Abkhaz military units and armed elements.”
Nobody wants to mention a big part of the cause of the trouble:
And of course Human Action only mentions the IED attacks on the Georgian side. Human action avoided mentioning the bombings of public places on the Abkhas side. This is in the EU Commission Report:
And of course Human Action does not cite the EU report regarding the militaristic provocations by the Georgian side with US military troops in participation. This is in the EU Commission Report:
Here’s more in the EU Commission Report that finds that Georgia started it:
Why did Georgia deny the Commander of the massive Georgian artillery attack? Because it was a violation of international law stating it that way with no justification. So after Sakaashville figured out that the Russians were not going to respond in any timid fashion, they had to make up a story that that Russia started invading first.
Whether its true or not that Russia had some additional troops in South Ossetia at the time, Georgia could have taken that up at the UN or issue some kind of complaint. There is no case that Russian troops began firing at Georgian citizens or Georgian military assets prior to the massive Georgian artillery barrage on civilian targets. Georgia violated international law in a 'DEADLY" way FIRST no matter what Russia did in the days immediately preceding the Georgian attack.
In the EU report they state it:
Worth repeating: "There is the question of whether the use of force by Georgia in South Ossetia, beginning with the shelling of Tskhinvali during the night of 7/8 August 2008, was justifiable under international law. It was not. "
Heavily U.S. backed Georgia is therefore guilty of unlawful killing of Russian citizens and troops. It is one-sided to complain afterward that Russians went to far in a military response to that murderous activity.
Blaming the victims is ridiculous.
If you’ve evidence that the West told Georgia they’d go to war with Russia on their behalf, by all means, present it.
I asked, why not send troops to the gunfire if you think there are shots being fired?
Human Action replied, “That’s called an “invasion”, crossing the border into South Ossetia to stop artillery attacks”
So where was it ever reported that ‘artillery attacks’ against Georgian targets were coming from the middle of the capitol city of Tskhinvali? That is where the Georgian artillery barrage was aimed. Human Action makes no sense in this incessant excuse-making for the Georgian regime.
Nope. Specially when their leadership was Western-driven. To say the least.