Breaking news: Shelling is imprecise!

It’s hard to know what to make of Tom’s great praise for a recent article in the New York Times, “Accounts undercut claims by Georgia on Russia war.” I wonder if C.J. Chivers is Tom’s secret source whose material was being censored by the western media that Tom had mentioned a bit ago.

Tom’s take is short and heart felt…

About time.

Read it and learn some truth amidst all the BS fed us.

… though I can’t imagine why, as the piece does a pretty good job reinforcing the consensus that has existed since August.

The point at which you assume that who “wins” an argument depends on whether or not anyone takes claims of “precision shelling” seriously is the point you should realize you are stuck in Cold War thinking.

I’m not kidding about the precision shelling bit, by the way. Here’s the third paragraph from the article:

The accounts are neither fully conclusive nor broad enough to settle the many lingering disputes over blame in a war that hardened relations between the Kremlin and the West. But they raise questions about the accuracy and honesty of Georgia’s insistence that its shelling of Tskhinvali, the capital of the breakaway region of South Ossetia, was a precise operation. Georgia has variously defended the shelling as necessary to stop heavy Ossetian shelling of Georgian villages, bring order to the region or counter a Russian invasion.

In related news, recently unearthed documents from the Peloponnesian, Punic, Hundred Years, French-Indian, and Revolutionary Wars raise questiona about the accuracy and honesty of America’s claim that it’s soldiers in Operation: Just Cause were the most disciplined and brave fighting force in human history.

Sites like The Duck of Minerva were outlining the imprecision of the Georgian Operation all the way back on 8/8/08. Open-source intel about the escalation of the fighting in Georgia is also quite old. Catholicgauze was providing maps back on August 11. No need to get worked up by a takedown of an irrelevant red herring three months after the fact.