Talk:Russo-Georgian War

Good articleRusso-Georgian War has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
In the newsOn this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 4, 2010WikiProject peer reviewReviewed
May 20, 2014WikiProject peer reviewReviewed
November 21, 2014Good article nomineeNot listed
December 4, 2014Good article nomineeListed
February 28, 2015Good article reassessmentDelisted
July 26, 2015Good article nomineeListed
September 13, 2016Good article reassessmentKept
In the news News items involving this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "In the news" column on October 1, 2009, and August 12, 2008.
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on August 7, 2014, August 7, 2016, and August 7, 2018.
Current status: Good article

Horribly cited and politically charged

edit

The first section is like edited by Saakashvili himself. Putting blame on the one side of the war, while completely trying to protect the other, citing mostly media sources and articles that have questionable impartiality to say the least.

I would edit it myself if I knew how, using both credible sources and media sources.

Most notably the section

"in 1 August 2008, the Russian-backed South Ossetian forces started shelling Georgian villages, with a sporadic response from Georgian peacekeepers in the area. Intensifying artillery attacks by the South Ossetian separtists broke a 1992 ceasefire agreement. To put an end to these attacks, Georgian army units were sent into the South Ossetian conflict zone on 7 August and took control of most of Tskhinvali, a separatist stronghold, within hours. Some Russian troops had illicitly crossed the Georgia–Russia border through the Roki Tunnel and advanced into the South Ossetian conflict zone by 7 August before the Georgian military response. Russia falsely accused Georgia of committing "genocide" and "aggression against South Ossetia"."

The language, amateur level of wording showing horrible bias, the information's one-sidedness, even the questionable events not being treated as such and presented as undisputed facts......


I would heavily edit this very important section with sources such as the EU independent fact-finding mission, UK Parliament report, even US officials, as well as more credible, established political scientist/authors.


I have Masters degree in political science and international affairs from an American (US) university and I find this horrendous. Ghar93 (talk) 03:17, 28 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

I agree that the current version is biased. This issue was discussed extensively, you can read the last RfC here. You can edit the article yourself per WP:BOLD or propose changes here at the talk page. Alaexis¿question? 20:17, 28 April 2023 (UTC)Reply
I see. Sorry I'm new here. Came to the page for something else, stumbled on this gem 141.136.89.95 (talk) 20:59, 28 April 2023 (UTC)Reply
@Ghar93 Welcome to literally any page involving Russia nowadays 89.113.102.17 (talk) 03:58, 23 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

This is a joke

edit

Ridiculous, state sponsored propaganda is rife on this site America's butcher in Georgia and Odessa started this conflict, but who cares about facts on a site that can be commandeered by agents of American foreign policy

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-georgia-russia-report-idUSTRE58T4MO20090930 2A02:C7F:5D32:DE00:586D:615E:AE69:E210 (talk) 22:08, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

I don't think linking to the "Tagliavini Report" says as much as you want it to. It specifically notes the shelling Georgian towns of Russian backed separatists as early as August 1st (and other incidents). Saying Georgia started the war is a stretch, or at least a very poor representation of what actually happened.
There's even a Wiki page about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsibility_for_the_Russo-Georgian_War. Check out the section for the UN report you linked.
> "... no way to assign overall responsibility for the conflict to one side alone."
Also, I'm not sure how much we should trust your objectivity if you're using language like "America's butcher", not even in quotes like it's some well known label. 220.245.142.188 (talk) 07:11, 18 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
I am sure that he believes that Russia invaded Ukraine for denazification. 213.200.15.17 (talk) 08:26, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply


I agree. A very one-sided article. Mr Saakashvili was a bit of a hot-head who became overly-emboldened and the Bush people couldn't keep him in check. Hence the 'war'. It's disappointing that we can no longer have some objectivity on these matters. More recent events in the Ukraine have likely made it that way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C4:503:5F01:98FE:F8F0:EF2E:1831 (talk) 01:59, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

Two sentences not supported by the source. Cannot edit to correct for some reason.

edit

The following sentences: " Chief of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces Yuri Baluyevsky said on 11 April that Russia would carry out "steps of a different nature" in addition to military action to block NATO membership of former Soviet republics. General Baluyevsky admitted in 2012 that after President Putin had decided to attack Georgia prior to the May 2008 inauguration of Dmitry Medvedev as president of Russia, a military action was planned and explicit orders were issued in advance before August 2008. Russia aimed to stop Georgia's accession to NATO and also to bring about a "regime change"."

Are not supported by the provided reference. A search for the name Yuri does not show any reference to this Russian officer. The name "Baluyevsky" does not appear in the source material at all. This is clearly a fabrication.122.150.92.52 (talk) 05:38, 20 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

Further to this, he was not even the Chief of Staff at the dates mentioned, according to a quick check of the Wiki article about him. You'd assume Wikipedia would at least get that fact correct, but I did not check if that was also based on a fabricated source.122.150.92.52 (talk) 05:42, 20 June 2023 (UTC)Reply
I'm not sure why you're saying that they are not supported by sources. Two sources are provided: Reuters article and Van Herpen's book. I've added a clarification to the article that Baluyevski no longer was the chief of staff in 2008. Alaexis¿question? 09:10, 20 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

Now that I dug deeper into it and found some inconsistencies. I'll try to demonstrate them as succinctly as possible. The article says

The is referenced to Van Herpen's book Putin's wars : the rise of Russia's new imperialism, pp. 233-235. Indeed he says According to ... Baluevsky ... "a decision to invade Georgia was made by Putin before... May 2008". He doesn't mention NATO or regime change though. Van Herpen references the Russian/South Ossetian film 8 August 2008. The Lost Day [1] in which Baluevsky supposedly made these statements (this is supposed to be a direct quote). The problem is that he never says these words. The closest thing he does say (at 14:34) is The decision was taken earlier by Putin regarding the possible actions of the Russian Armed Forces, to give the order to respond after the first shell or bomb falls (Решение было принято на возможные действия российских ВС ещё ВВП, с первым падением снаряда, бомбы, давать команду на применение ответных действий) (he's a bit rambling). So the plans Baluevsky describes are about the response to a Georgian attack. This makes a lot of sense given that this was the official Russian position from the very beginning and the film is a pre-election pro-Putin propaganda. In the film the narrator says it himself at 7:30.

Of course the video itself is a primary source and Van Herpen is an expert who is entitled to interpret it the way he sees fit. However we have other sources which noted that Baluevsky was talking about the plans how to respond to a Georgian attack: The documentary ... lauds ... Vladimir Putin as playing a decisive role in preparing a plan to repel Georgia and then ordering its execution Harvard Kennedy School, Lenta.ru (pre-2014), Geopolitika.lt.

Obviously this doesn't *prove* that only the response was planned. I'll try to update the article following WP:NPOV and WP:RS. Alaexis¿question? 12:24, 20 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

"...The first European war of the 21st century."

edit

The last line of the opening paragraph is; "It is regarded as the first European war of the 21st century." But what about the 2001 insurgency in Macedonia? Any thoughts on that? Bajaria (talk) 04:46, 1 September 2024 (UTC)Reply