No kidding? Sorry, but I never claimed that number. Truth is the first casualty of war. Guess what? Both sides make things up!
Also please re-read what I posted regarding HRW. It is what the HRW people SAW. What they saw, not what someone told them!
You've created two straw men to knock down. Try responding to what I posted, not what I didn't!
I'll extend the question to you too.
So, comrade, do you agree with Georgia's brutal tactic of indiscriminate shelling of civilian areas?
And the Russian allegations are the ones being debunked the most. Which calls into question what hasn't been debunked yet.
It is what the HRW people SAW.
Try improving your reading comprehension
Since Georgian and Russian forces use identical Soviet-era weapons systems including main battle tanks, Grad multiple-launch rockets, BMP infantry fighting vehicles and tube artillery, Human Rights Watch cannot definitely attribute specific battle damage to a particular belligerent, but witness accounts and the timing of the damage would point to Georgian fire accounting for much of the damage
I'm rather curious how HRW can determine the timing of the damage.
I would imagine they relied most heavily on the first part - WITNESS accounts.
And considering that any ethnic Georgians are long gone from South Ossetia, just who would be left there to provide witness accounts?