The propaganda begins - Georgia started this conflict

For those up early Friday morning, if you turned on the news you saw reports of a huge Georgian offensive against separatists in South Ossetia.

Background:

South Ossetia, is a de-facto independent state, which Georgia claims is its own, however it is primarily made up of Russians, most carry Russian passports and have Russian citizenship. Following a brief period of fighting in the early 1990s, a ceasefire was made between the rebels, whereby a joint Russian-Georgian and Ossetian peacekeeping force (limited to about 500 soldiers) remained in the area to keep the peace.

Night of the 7th: Georgia broke the ceasefire and launched an all out assault upon South Ossetia, following up on a brief artillery barrage on the 1st which killed about six people. This time Russian forces come under fire, and the capital is heavily damaged by sustained artillery fire. 1,400 civilians are estimated to have died, and 10 Russian soldiers.

The following morning: Additional Russian troops are ordered into South Ossetia to re-enforce existing Russian peacekeeping forces and defend the Russian population.

Funnily enough throughout the day I thought the reporting wasn't too bad, even Sky News mentioning the fact that it was Georgia that started this conflict.

Somehow, the BBC News at 10, forgot the details of the night of the 7th. Giving the impression this was a Russian invasion of Georgia.

I'm pleased to say, BBC News 24 (or whatever it is called now) at midnight on the 9th, correctly reported that Georgia made the opening moves.

However the damage has been done. On Labourhome we see rubbish like this:

After Georgia attempted to restore order to its legal sovereign territory - South Ossetia - Russian tanks and fighters have crossed into Georgian land and airspace.

Right, attacking fellow Russian peacekeeping forces, shelling the capital city and killing over one thousand civilians is restoring order.

By attacking Russian forces, minding their own business in South Ossetia - where they're supposed to be - is an act of war. Russia would be well within its rights to drive to Tbilisi and force Georgia's surrender.

The sheer aggression of Georgian President Saakashvili cannot be overstated, what did he think the Russian government would be too busy watching the Olympics to respond? Or was he expecting NATO support? No doubt timing serves in the propaganda war, Georgia attacks hours before the Olympics - so it gets very little news time, and the following day all we here about is the Russian response. There's no question at all, Saakashvili should be booted out of office.

People can really come up with some wacky conclusions when they don't know the facts, Tree Tibet supporters come to mind, and so does our Labourhome friend who says:

A full scale attack on Georgia must be met by NATO.

Great, that'll calm the situation down.

9 comments

Comment from: Paul [Visitor]
****-
Excellent Analysis
10th August 2008 @ 16:02
Comment from: Nat [Visitor]
****-
"South Ossetia, is a de-facto independent state"
Can you support this statement by any facts? Since when any state with intentions of separating becoming
independent de-facto?
13th August 2008 @ 18:18
Comment from: Paul Smith [Member] · http://www.dasmirnov.net/
Simple. It is an independent state in all but recognition. It has its own government, its own armed forces and so on and has been run as an independent state since the breakup of the USSR. Wikipedia also agrees with me http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Ossetia
13th August 2008 @ 19:20
Comment from: Lawrence 56 [Visitor]
*****
I don't really understand why the U.S. is backing up this crook Mr Sakashili? Why should we pay our taxpayer money to protect yet another 'our son of a bitch'? This guy started aggression against his own people and the Russian peacekeepers and provoked the Russian retaliation. How come we support the guy? Why don't we let him face the international trial like the one for Mr. Karazchich?
14th August 2008 @ 06:55
Comment from: Nat [Visitor]
following the same logic , Chechnia was de-facto independent. Which rose totally different emotions in Russia.
14th August 2008 @ 14:04
Comment from: Paul Smith [Member] · http://www.dasmirnov.net/
Chechnya was de-facto independent for a few years. However, in Chechnya's case most ordinary people wanted to be part of the Federation, it was only a minority of Islamic fundamentalists that fought for independence and took control of the region.

In the case of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, the vast majority of the people decided in elections to become independent.
15th August 2008 @ 01:15
Comment from: Christina [Visitor]
*****
What is disturbing is the cognitive dissonance that results when the MSM reports condemning Russia start entering the brain. Early on, a NYTimes article described Georgia's aggression; but all of the heated rhetoric against Russia made me think that I'd misunderstood the article. So tonite, I went to Wikipedia (no worse than McCain) and spent some time to reorient my thinking. Sure enough it seems that Georgia started the conflict, and Russia appears to have the high ground of acting to protect the people of Ossetia. Then this evening, a small local news broadcaster ridiculed Russia for claiming that Georgia had started the conflict. Now my head is spinning because I can see the deception taking root in the public's mind, and I just can't get my mind around the questions: who benefits from the death and destruction and why do we the people have to be deceived about it all?
15th August 2008 @ 08:05
Comment from: Nat [Visitor]
"Chechnya was de-facto independent for a few years. However, in Chechnya's case most ordinary people wanted to be part of the Federation, it was only a minority of Islamic fundamentalists that fought for independence and took control of the region."
And in case of this two "republics" de-facto ,you just happened to believe that this islamic fundamentalists wanted to be a part of russia showing that by holding democratic values dearly and marching to the referendums, the way russia presents that to the world. There must be a reason why this territories never were accepted as sovereign states by any state, including Russia. It is historically georgian territory, consult wikipedia once again.
15th August 2008 @ 14:39
Comment from: Narnia [Visitor]
The reason is that there was a hope that Georgians will manage to PEACEFULLY convince S.Osetians to return under the Georgian sovereignty. Sure enough this was not a simple task. But at least there was peace between Georgians and S.Osetians. Peace for 15 years since the war between Georgia and S. Osetia in 1992. Pour peace but still peace. What Russia needed the least was a new war between Georgians and Osetians which almost inevitably would involve North Osetians from across the Russian border. Such conflict would be very difficult to contain. That's why Russia HAD TO act quickly to extinguish the Georgian aggression against S.Osetia and restore status quo in the region.
16th August 2008 @ 06:25

Leave a comment


Your email address will not be revealed on this site.

Your URL will be displayed.
PoorExcellent
(Line breaks become <br />)
(Name, email & website)
(Allow users to contact you through a message form (your email will not be revealed.)