Russia Vs Georgia..a widening crisis!

Discussion in 'World Armed Forces' started by Finn McCool, Aug 8, 2008.

  1. edieboy777
    Offline

    edieboy777 New Member
    Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2005
    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    0
    Wasn't it quoted from one of the actual American mentors that the Georgian troops were unorganized and fell apart when push came to shove? Its not a matter of equipment, its a matter of training. Even if their potential with the new equipment is large, the actual operating efficiency of their military is very low.
     
  2. utelore
    Offline

    utelore Junior Member
    VIP Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2005
    Messages:
    492
    Likes Received:
    3
    ok, all russian supporters are right and the U.S is wrong. U.S should never of made friends with a new democracy. Russia should and will show its economic and military power combined with a "new type of democracy" I mean who needs checks and balances when Putin is....well, I wish he was my president.

    I am sorry for even thinking different than supporters of the russian federation. The powerful T-72/80 and BMP-2 proved it is a awesome fighting machine along with its brave troops who fight for the mother land. How could Georgia even think about standing up to mother Russia and all her might.

    I wish great Putin would of just ended this whole thing by going all the way to Tbilisi. Georgia is a russian satellite state and should just get used to it. I wish to think Gol, san and finn for showing me the light. I was wrong and you guys are right. Georgia started the war, committed genocide and mother Russia stepped in to protect the peoples of the world from capitilist aggression.

    This has truly opened my eyes. I am going to join the AFL-CIO tomorrow. please forgive me and accept me as a equal my comrades. could someone send me the soviet national anthem....I wish to sing. lets all sing. Sanpan please recommend a good vodka....potato of course
     
  3. crobato
    Offline

    crobato Colonel
    VIP Professional

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2005
    Messages:
    4,852
    Likes Received:
    4
    I got this from post 312 of the CDF, no original link given, posted by Xinhui. So how competent and professional were the Georgians?

    September 3, 2008
    Georgians Eager to Rebuild Army
    By C. J. CHIVERS and THOM SHANKER

    Part of the article given.


    ----


    "But interviews with Western military officers who have experience working with Georgian military forces, including officers in Georgia, Europe and the United States, suggested that Georgia’s military shortfalls were serious and too difficult to change merely by upgrading equipment.

    In the recent war, which was over in days, Georgia’s Army fled ahead of the Russian Army’s advance, turning its back and leaving Georgian civilians in an enemy’s path. Its planes did not fly after the first few hours of contact. Its navy was sunk in the harbor, and its patrol boats were hauled away by Russian trucks on trailers.

    The information to date suggests that from the beginning of the war to its end, Georgia, which wants to join NATO, fought the war in a manner that undermined its efforts at presenting itself as a potentially serious military partner or power.

    Mr. Saakashvili and his advisers also say that even though he has no tactical military experience, he was at one time personally directing important elements of the battle — giving orders over a cellphone and deciding when to move a brigade from western to central Georgia to face the advancing Russian columns.

    In the field, there is evidence from an extensive set of witnesses that within 30 minutes of Mr. Saakashvili’s order, Georgia’s military began pounding civilian sections of the city of Tskhinvali, as well as a Russian peacekeeping base there, with heavy barrages of rocket and artillery fire.

    The barrages all but ensured a Russian military response, several diplomats, military officers and witnesses said.

    After the Russian columns arrived through the Roki Tunnel, and the battle swung quickly into Russia’s favor, Georgia said its attack had been necessary to stop a Russian attack that already had been under way.

    To date, however, there has been no independent evidence, beyond Georgia’s insistence that its version is true, that Russian forces were attacking before the Georgian barrages.

    During the battle, one Western military officer said, it had been obvious that Georgia’s logistical preparations were poor and that its units interfered with each other in the field.

    This was in part because there was limited communication between ground forces and commanders, but also because there was almost no coordination between police units and military units, which often had overlapping tasks and crowded one another on the roads.

    One senior Western military official said that one of the country’s senior generals had fled the battle in an ambulance, leaving soldiers and his duties behind. Georgia’s Defense Ministry strongly denies this.

    No one disputes that the army succumbed to chaos and fear, which reached such proportions that the army fled all the way to the capital, abandoning the city of Gori without preparing a serious defense, and before the Russians had reached it in strength. It littered its retreat with discarded ammunition.

    C. J. Chivers reported from Tbilisi, and Thom Shanker from Washington. Clifford J. Levy contributed reporting from Moscow."
     
  4. crobato
    Offline

    crobato Colonel
    VIP Professional

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2005
    Messages:
    4,852
    Likes Received:
    4
    Its all about energy folks, one chapter in the coming Resource Wars.

    http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/174971

    A piece of the post.

    "Obviously, the more oil and gas passing through Georgia on its way to the West, the greater that country's geostrategic significance in the U.S.-Russian struggle over the distribution of Caspian energy. Certainly, the Bush administration recognized this and responded by providing hundreds of millions of dollars in military aid to the Georgian military and helping to train specialized forces for protection of the new pipelines. But the administration's partner in Tbilisi, President Mikheil Saakashvili, was not content to play the relatively modest role of pipeline protector. Instead, he sought to pursue a megalomaniacal fantasy of recapturing the breakaway regions of Abhkazia and South Ossetia with American help. As it happened, the Bush team -- blindsided by their own neoconservative fantasies -- saw in Saakashvili a useful pawn in their pursuit of a long smoldering anti-Russian agenda. Together, they walked into a trap cleverly set by Putin."
     
  5. Finn McCool
    Offline

    Finn McCool Captain

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2006
    Messages:
    2,025
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ute, don't be immature. I disagree with you over the tactical performance of the Georgian Army. I don't want Russia to "stand up to the hypocritical hegemony-seeking United States". I think that a person of your intelligence should be able to distinguish between an academic assesment of the course of battle and supporting one side or another.

    A little bit about what ifs. I'm wondering about whether or not the bombardment of Tshinkvali was tactically necessary at all. It provided the Russians with a pretext for entering the fight. What I'm wondering is was it necessary to remove South Ossetian resistance quickly so the Georgians could take up defensive positions on the road to the Roki tunnel. If that is the case then it was (strategically; from a tactical sense standpoint) justifiable, but if it wasn't then it was just stupid, the result of poor decisionmaking in an inexperienced army that didn't know how to use its firepower. I'm inclined to believe that the Georgians could have not fired on the civillian areas of Tshinkvali and bypassed the city altogether. This is for two reasons: Firstly the seem to have done that in actuality, with a column of Georgian troops apparently moving east (I believe) and trying to cut Tshinkvali off from the Russian border. Secondly the Georgians were not able to move through the city, so obviously that was not a productive axis of attack regardless of the fact that it had been bombarded throughly (did they not hear about the battle of Grozny? Hell Stalingrad even!). I believe that Georgian Army should have ignored Tshinkvali all together, bypassing it to the east and west and focusing on cutting the road to the Roki Tunnel. If the account of the battle posted earlier is ture, then they would have met the main Ossetian force here, and would have had a better chance of destroying it (superior numbers and their firepower focused on targets in the open, not in the streets of Tshinkvali). If the Ossetian light infantry in Tshinkvali tried to foray out of the protective urban environment of the city the Georgians could have defeated them at range and in detail, having surrounded the city rather than charged into it.

    As it happened the went for a somewhat more "direct" plan, hitting the city with rockets and artillery and then charging into the apparently well-defended smoking ruins.
     
  6. RedMercury
    Offline

    RedMercury Junior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2006
    Messages:
    979
    Likes Received:
    7
    Without separating the fact from fantasy in Ute's claims of what US intel knew, it is not really the point of debate to say that the US military would not have been able to do much better had it been in that situation and prepared. The US military is the big dog now and for awhile to come (there, feel better?).

    But, if in fact the Russians used such outdated and bad tactics and still did so well against the Georgian forces, then that result just reiterates how bad the Georgians were.

    As to Tshinkvali, Sun Zi is spinning in his grave :p
     
  7. Gollevainen
    Offline

    Gollevainen Colonel
    VIP Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2005
    Messages:
    4,553
    Likes Received:
    23
    Ute you got me all wrong here. It's not about wheter it's right or wrong that Russia did what it did and all other political mambojambo tagged to it. It's all down what happened in the battlefield which I'm talking about. And everything indicates that that Georgians did perform poorly aside you.

    With the troops and equipment Georgia possesed, the end result may have been differentif used with some logic behind it. Georgians could have succeed to retake the South-Ossetia as they initially toughted and keep russians out of the province. If the South-Ossetia and Russia are connceted with single road with a tunnel at the border which can trasport heavy equipment, even our most silliest teenage fanboy member could have figured out that "gee, we propably should try and take that tunnel out and secure it..."

    The whole war wasen't so much of a Russian show-off, but sad evidence of what sort of catasthrope can adventurous and incompetente leadership do with ill-trained and poorly motivated army.
     
  8. flyzies
    Offline

    flyzies Junior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    416
    Likes Received:
    257
    I thought most, if not all, of Georgia's radars wouldve been destroyed by now...

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article4678456.ece

    Nato's early-warning surveillance system has been plugged into Georgia's air-defence network in the first evidence that the US-led alliance is shoring up the country's shattered military.

    Alliance officials said that the arrangement enabled Nato radar specialists to be linked up to the Georgian radar systems. “It means Nato can now see what the Georgians are seeing through their radars, effectively allowing the alliance to monitor what is going on over Georgian airspace without having military assets in place,” one official said.

    After the war in Georgia last month and the continuing occupation of parts of the country by Russian troops, the move underlined the intention by Nato to provide assistance to the Georgian military.

    A Nato official said that the combined air surveillance arrangement had been negotiated before the crisis in Georgia. The technical switch-on, linking radars in Georgia to Nato, happened this week however.
     
  9. utelore
    Offline

    utelore Junior Member
    VIP Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2005
    Messages:
    492
    Likes Received:
    3
    First this "war" was not as big as the way the media made it seem. there was one big fight in ossetia and at a certain point washington told Georgia to cease fire back up and lets re-look at this. The Georgians to much of my dismay then followed those orders and made a quick disengagement from russian military units. I do know the first -2 Georgians fought well and yes with professionalism. they could of taken to the hills, started using IED's and continued using hunter killer groups against those lackadaisical russian road blocks. but they did not. that proves a command structure and functional military units.

    The retreat out of Gori looked bad by media standards but the georgians got most of their heavy stuff out and. 1 georgian brigade was rendered combat ineffective and that was the brigade that fought in ossetia. the 3 other Georgian brigades were and are still combat effective. Huge amounts of georgian reserve battalions and brigades are now combat ready.

    One of the more notable disengagements was the brigade near abkazia. that unit travels all the way back to Tbilisi and set up a hasty defense west of the capital which is now a prepared defense.

    Georgia could of done allot more things to hurt Russia but under pressure from washington not wanting to see Georgia turn into Chechnya they disengaged. My intel I was getting was based on Georgia fighting all the way under total war conditions which was stopped by Georgian leadership.
    1. No insurgency started..by order
    2. active disengagement Georgian troops looked down because of the order to disengage not because of superior russian fighting.
    3. Most units got their equipment out of the theater of ops
    4. Most important the Georgians learned allot and will fix many issues.

    We now have a state in Georgia who is being re-equipped much faster than anybody can believe ALSO there is a want and nationalism in Georgia enlarging its standing army to 75,000 and another 100,000 reserve and 20,000 national guard remember Georgia is basing its military off of israeli standards once this is achieved it will be a very good force with constant on the job training as its special forces probe into abakazia and ossetia with little fights here and there. IF the Russians were to ever go "all the way" they would be facing a nightmare that would make little Chechnya look like a walk in the park because from what I am hearing is that no order for disengagement will be issued and they would start a insurgency.

    In closing this is doing wonders for the upcoming american ellection. The mean ole bear is back so americans will believe they need a strong president. not one that plays golf while a small nation is invaded. This was a well excuted politcal move by the republicans to reamain in power and If Mccain is in the white house...good god...russia watch out because A#1 is to turn Georgia into a snarling pit bull of the U.S just like Israel.
     
  10. lcortez
    Offline

    lcortez New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2007
    Messages:
    76
    Likes Received:
    1
    Would tend to be sceptical that the US and Israel are overtly going to re arm Georgia,as the Russians would very definatly take this as a pretext to completely take over Georgia,either militarily or through some sort of staged coup.
    Clearly the world is now engaged in some sort of 21st century version of the "Great Game" that was played out in the 19th,and Russia would not tolerate such intrusion into its "near abroad",after all this is very likely the reason that the whole thing kicked off in the first place.
    My money is on some sort of coup,or vote manipulation,in the near future,with surprise!surprise!,a Russian puppet being placed in power.Poss the same in Ukraine.
    With regard to qaulity of Georgian forces,are they a conscript force or proffesional?
     
Loading...

Share This Page