Georgia vs. Russia

89 high resolution pictures taken by the advancing Russians. Warning, some of them are graphic:

http://www.navoine.ru/forum/viewtopic.php?t=112

It is not important who started at the moment. The fact is the russians are taking advantage of the whole situation to pass a clear message to many.

For me, the problem is that the current actions are a consequence of the way the west still looks upon Russia. At no moment, since 1991, has Russia ever been considered an ally or even a real partner. During the times of drunken king Ieltsin, Russia was forced to accept all sorts of agreements that were often directed against it or that showed the toatl lack of interest there was for them. See 1999 in Kosovo. Everytime they were looked upon with condescendence and at no moment was an effort to create a real relationship done. And for me these are some of the most missed oportunities of the 20th Century. The west could have usedthe Ieltsin period to create a real bond, not to humiliate russia every time it got a chance.

Putin is a different kind of animal and since he came in 2000, the west has again started to see Russia as the evil enemy and all NATO rethorics is clearly against Russia; Let's face it; Are the Russians to stay and see.

Then there is the unilateral declaration of Independence from Kosovo, sposored and supported by the USA and the West. The Russians warned back in March that it would have dire consequences; Here's the first and they started playing by the same book they were teached. And unfortunately, it is not over. For me, the next crisis will be much closer to Romania, namely the Crimea, full of ethnic russians and the home of the Black Sea Fleet.

On a more philosophical note, is there any difference between Saakashvili and Putin as persons and the way they rule their respective countries?

Mat

It would be good to know who are/were Georgian and who Russian (incl. burned-out AFVs and trucks) in those photos. I assume most of the damage was done to the Georgian forces...

Gen . Dénes

This post has been edited by Dénes on August 15, 2008 12:08 pm

yesterday evning russian Chanel1 anounced the following data:
Russia
95 military personel KIA
6 tanks and 11APC destroyed
Georgia
253 mil.pers.KIA
30 tanks and 56 APC destroied.
I should stress that,this is only " SpetzPropaganda" and should be taken as such.
The Georgian sources are ,also untrustworthy,sinc their imagination is much richer.

And several russian aircraft.

This is very different from the doctrine of combined arms of the Soviet Union, with deep thrusts of tanks and APC`s, supported by attack helicopters and strike aircrafts. The russians advanced like 60 km in 6 days. I can walk faster...

Also the equipment they have looks 20+ years old BMP-1, T-72, I also saw at TV some T-55`s. I didn`t knew they still use it.

The experts that are watching the conflict might draw in fact the conclussion that Russia isn`t a grat power anymore.

Yesterday Sakashvili said that Russia has occupied two more towns - Kashuri and Borzhomi. If you look at the map Borzhomi is in a mountain and forested area. And yet there was no resistance to the Russian advance there.

IMO Georgia's focus on creating a small conventional and professional army has affected its ability to properly resist an invader. That army has regrouped towards Tbilisi, but it has lost control of the air and of the main communication routes and is cut off there. People's war doctrine is the only way of resisting a great power on the long term.

Hadrian,
It is also possible that the Russian Army did not think it was necessary to engage more significant forces in Georgia than it did. It is far from certain that this is the best they can do.

Imperialist,
You have a good point, but they have some "attenuating circumstances". Georgia prepared to become a NATO member and this required precisely a small conventional force of professionals. Even if they had rethought their defense strategy following the April summit, there wasn't time to implement anything. I still don't get it why they fell into Putin's trap so easily.

i haven't seen much post 1980 technology as well. probably the russians were convinced they'll do the job with expendable equipment.

Point of vew,
See the article "bogat,sarac....."Unfortunately only in "moldavian"
http://www.jurnal.md/article/8223/

And for thouse interested on Georgian side,see
http://www.geotimes.ge/
or The Georgian Messenger.

Re pictures sent by Imp from "WWW navoine"
In one of a pics,figures a column of armour passing under a big banner with following inscription:
"The year of Transdnestria in South Ossetia" !!

In my opinion, in view of the recent events and the heated rhetoric Romania should speed up the purchase of fighter jets, should re-introduce compulsory military training (maybe for shorter periods of time than previously provisioned) and like Florin said, focus on buying some man-portable AT and AA systems.

And maybe Romania could also do a deal with the Canadian government for some ADATS/MMEV units.

Personally I am not very convinced we actually need 48 new fighters. I would invest half the money in state-of-art AA systems.

We all can see that the tanc is dead.
After less then 100years.

In the first place we need every of those 48 fighters. New, not second hand. And some Amraams and in future Meteor missiles to go with. In case of an attack we can expect tens, maybe hudreds of Flankers swarming around. Then some guided air to ground weapons for tank "plinking".
I also heard that it is planned an aquisition of new long range AA missiles, to replace the Volhovs. it would be great if they have also some limited antibalistic capability, the new all have. We already have the surveillance radars. A supplement with a long range Over-the-horizon radar would be great, but I`m already dreaming... Anyway, AA isn`t as efective as fighters.

On the ground, we have Spikes and Maliutka-2T (it`s modernised with the Milan warhead). Both efective, and go well with the MLI-84M. By the way, our BMP`s are better than russians BMP`s. . The TR-85 are slightly better than T-72, if used with BM-412Sg rounds. We shouldn`t spend now for new tanks.
CA-94 and CA-95 (Strela 2) are obsolete, we need new MANPAD`s. A lot of them. Thousands.

Sell the frigates, buy atack submarines with the money. Use them for destroying comercial fleet, not enemy`s navy.

And bring Ukraina in NATO ASAP, so we have our border protected.

This post has been edited by Hadrian on August 18, 2008 05:16 pm