Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Milos that bear was the one who went to rescue Serbia in 1914, and fought side by side with Serbs many times against common enemies. That bear was the only one who took Serbia's side during NATO bombings in 1999.
I believe the bear is not the animal you should be scare of.
Looking more and more like Russia got what it wanted and now is ending it's operations in Georgia. Nothing the Georgians can do about it. The thing looks pretty much over.
Read a good article from Ralph Peters on this one. He's got some very good points. Posting it below.
that explains it all.IT'S impossible to overstate the importance of what's unfolding as we watch. Russia's invasion of Georgia - a calculated, unprovoked aggression
Almoust all what I've red in UK and US press was a reflection of the georgian point of view.The response of our own government has been pathetic - and our media's uncritical acceptance of Moscow's version of events is infuriating.
gonna tell them my friends in Kiev and Donezk - they better gotta find a new hiding place.This is the "new" Russia announcing - in blood - that it won't tolerate freedom and self-determination along its borders. Prime Minister Vladimir Putin is putting it bluntly: Today, Georgia, tomorrow Ukraine (and the Baltic states had better pay attention).
BS. Even the BP confirmed no air attacks were commited on the pipelines.Nor does Putin's ambition stop with the former Soviet territories. His air force has been trying (unsuccessfully) to hit the new gas pipeline running from the Caspian Sea to the Mediterranean.
this guy simply doesn't have a clue. Of course Russia planned a response to any possible Georgian attack on Ossetia or Abkhazia, that's why military exersices were executed in that region two months ago.Let's be clear: For all that US commentators and diplomats are still chattering about Russia's "response" to Georgia's actions, the Kremlin spent months planning and preparing this operation.
Any soldier above the grade of private can tell you that there's absolutely no way Moscow could've launched this huge ground, air and sea offensive in an instantaneous "response" to alleged Georgian actions.
As I pointed out Saturday, even to get one armored brigade over the Caucasus Mountains required extensive preparations. Since then, Russia has sent in the equivalent of almost two divisions - not only in South Ossetia, the scene of the original fighting, but also in separatist Abkhazia on the Black Sea coast.
same here.Every one of these things required careful preparations. In the words of one US officer, "Just to line up the airlift sorties would've taken weeks."
no blockade was actually commited, warships stayed in the vinicity of Abkhazian shores.The Russians also managed to arrange the instant appearance of a squadron of warships to blockade Georgia.
well these South Ossetia mercenaries somehow managed to defend their land against Georgian military in 1990ies even without any Russian help.Working through their mercenaries in South Ossetia,
not a single Russian soldier was even in the vinicity of this city.and Russian troops seize the vital city of Gori in the country's heart.
that's why its (Russian) troops are withdrawing to their prewar positions according to the Sarcosy-Medvedev agreementMake no mistake: Moscow intends to dismember Georgia.
well it looks like USAF will airlift them back to Iraq very soon.It also has backed our Iraq efforts with 2,000 troops. (We're airlifting them back home.)
tell that the citizens of Tshinvali, some 1500 of them are dead after Georgian bombardment. Hell I can give this guy a telephone number of a good friend of mine , a journalist, who saw all this mess with his own eyes.This invasion recalls Hitler's march into Czechoslovakia - to protect ethnic Germans, he claimed, just as Putin claims to be protecting Russian citizens - complete BS.
lol let's come to the funniest part of allTHE BEAR'S MILITARY MESS
as I said -this guy hasn't a clue. In fact there were less Russian troops in South Ossetia than opposing Georgian troops.Russia's military is succeeding in its invasion of Georgia, but only because Moscow has applied overwhelming force.
slovenly? That was a hell of bold action demonstrated!Well, the new Russian military looks a lot like the old Russian military: slovenly and not ready for prime time.
these "latest" jets were actually aged Su-24 and Su-25 some of them saw the action even in Afganstan.The most visible failings are those of the air force. Flying Moscow's latest ground-attack jets
well he certainly has a source in North Kaukazus Military District who provides him with a classified information.armed with the country's newest precision weapons, pilots are missing far more targets than they're hitting.
the Georgian air defence was practically wiped out on a second day by these scared ill-training pilots.but most are just the result of ill-trained pilots flying scared.
lol this guy is a true warfare operations expert !They're missing pipelines, rail lines and oil-storage facilities - just dumping their bombs as quickly as they can and heading home.
four losses confirmed.Russia's also losing aircraft. The Kremlin admits two were shot down; the Georgians claimed they'd downed a dozen by Sunday.
combat sorties were mostly flown by Chechen war veterans with over than a 200 flying hours per year.As one US officer observed to me, the Russian pilots are neither professionally nor emotionally toughened for their missions. Their equipment's pretty good (not as good as ours), but their training lags - and their pilots log far fewer flight hours than ours do.
in fact it was one of the most effective operations the Russian army ever combined in its newest history - bold, fast , good planned and executed against some good trained army which even had a numerical advantage.And they're pulling it off - but the military's embarrassing blunders must be infuriating Prime Minister Putin.
this BS is written by some conservative Cold War "analysist" who hasn't a clue in the issue. Biased allegations, totally amateurish military analysis.
RUSSIA GOES ROGUE
By RALPH PETERS
August 12, 2008 --
IT'S impossible to overstate the importance of what's unfolding as we watch. Russia's invasion of Georgia - a calculated, unprovoked aggression - is a crisis that may have more important strategic implications than Iraq and Afghanistan combined.
We're seeing the emergence of a rogue military power with a nuclear arsenal.
The response of our own government has been pathetic - and our media's uncritical acceptance of Moscow's version of events is infuriating.
This is the "new" Russia announcing - in blood - that it won't tolerate freedom and self-determination along its borders. Prime Minister Vladimir Putin is putting it bluntly: Today, Georgia, tomorrow Ukraine (and the Baltic states had better pay attention).
Georgia's affiliation with the European Union, its status as a would-be NATO member, its working democracy - none of it deterred Putin.
Nor does Putin's ambition stop with the former Soviet territories. His air force has been trying (unsuccessfully) to hit the new gas pipeline running from the Caspian Sea to the Mediterranean. The Kremlin is telling Europe: We not only have the power to turn off Siberian gas, we can turn off every tap in the region, any time we choose.
Let's be clear: For all that US commentators and diplomats are still chattering about Russia's "response" to Georgia's actions, the Kremlin spent months planning and preparing this operation. Any soldier above the grade of private can tell you that there's absolutely no way Moscow could've launched this huge ground, air and sea offensive in an instantaneous "response" to alleged Georgian actions.
As I pointed out Saturday, even to get one armored brigade over the Caucasus Mountains required extensive preparations. Since then, Russia has sent in the equivalent of almost two divisions - not only in South Ossetia, the scene of the original fighting, but also in separatist Abkhazia on the Black Sea coast.
The Russians also managed to arrange the instant appearance of a squadron of warships to blockade Georgia. And they launched hundreds of air strikes against preplanned targets.
Every one of these things required careful preparations. In the words of one US officer, "Just to line up the airlift sorties would've taken weeks."
Working through their mercenaries in South Ossetia, Russia staged brutal provocations against Georgia from late July onward. Last Thursday, Georgia's president finally had to act to defend his own people.
But when the mouse stirred, the cat pounced.
The Russians know that we know this was a setup. But Moscow's Big Lie propagandists still blame Georgia - even as Russian aircraft bomb Georgian homes and Russian troops seize the vital city of Gori in the country's heart. And Russian troops also grabbed the Georgian city of Zugdidi to the west - invading from Abkhazia on a second axis.
Make no mistake: Moscow intends to dismember Georgia.
This is the most cynical military operation by a "European" power since Moscow invaded Afghanistan in 1979. (Sad to say, President Bush seems as bewildered now as President Jimmy Carter did then.)
This attack's worse, though. Georgia is an independent, functioning democracy tied to the European Union and striving to join NATO. It also has backed our Iraq efforts with 2,000 troops. (We're airlifting them back home.)
This invasion recalls Hitler's march into Czechoslovakia - to protect ethnic Germans, he claimed, just as Putin claims to be protecting Russian citizens - complete BS.
It also resembles Hitler's invasion of Poland - with the difference that, in September '39, European democracies drew the line. (To France's credit, its leaders abandoned their August vacations to call Putin out - only Sen. Barack Obama remains on the beach.)
Yet our media give Putin the benefit of the doubt. Not one major news outlet even bothers to take issue with Putin's wild claim that the Georgians were engaged in genocide.
well he may be a good writer and I believe I've heard his name some time ago but particulary this analysis here is of some painfully low quality. He overlooks here some elementary facts.Disagree with you on this one guys. Peters has been around for a while and pegged events in the Middle East pretty much on the nose. He is very good. If you have the time and the inclination, you should read his books. They are excellent, if sometime a little on the intense side.
that's definately true ,but Peters made wrong conclusions from the correct facts . Of course the operation was planned some time ago, and there were several military exercises conducted , but does it mean it was a preplanned agression? Remember the famous Cold War exercise "Reforger"? Pretty the same thing I believe.While we can disagree on the targeting of the Russian aircraft and the start of the war (he said/she said on who did what first), his point that the attacks into Georgia were planned has to be taken at face value. He is right about the logistics of moving the equivelent of 2 divisions into an attack. It doesn't happen overnight. It takes weeks, if not months to do something like that. A lot of foresight and planning. As the old adage says, "Amatuers study tactics, proffessionals study logistics". There is no way this thing was pulled off in less than a month of planning.
strictly speaking there wasn't any second column directed in the West - there were about 5000 troopers brought by transport ships and some 3000 airborne troops brought by planes.Another point which brings in the point of planning. There were two columns into Georgia. One directed at Ossentia, the other in the West. Pretty smart and pretty good move. Force the Georgians to deal with two threats at the same time. Something they just don't have the forces to do.
absolutely true. But that doesn't mean a preplanned agression at all .If you look at the actions taken by Georgia some last months or even years (Adzharia and Kodori pass) - no wonder Russians've planned an operation like this.We are getting only tidbits of information about this thing but what I have seen come out (and I'm getting about the same stuff everyone else on this board is getting) shows some pretty smart moves by the Russians in their actions. Attacking in two different locations, cutting the main highway, seizing the main tunnel into Ossentia, all are smart and methodical moves.
It shows a decent amount of planning, if anything.
Well as I said, based upon what limited information I have, I believe the US would have acted similarly. What is most suprising is how our Forum members have been so quick to villify the US in this situation. That is disheartening. And VERY telling.
Matt308 said:Latest I heard was that they were implying a scorched earth policy for T'bilisi, warning citizens to evacuate as they pushed towards the city, and indicating bombing/shelling was on its way.
or even deliberately used the Georgians as Guinea Pigs??
Regards
Kruska
I have also read all other posts and I'm not pointing fingers at anyone but I think that Georgians started this whole thing and that Russians can do whatever they want for they are far superior.
this BS is written by some conservative Cold War "analysist" who hasn't a clue in the issue. Biased allegations, totally amateurish military analysis.
[/url]
Agreed 100%, but I did not expect anything different.
that was a Georgian claim , one of many. Of course some civilian buildings were undeliberately hit , but it's seems an inevitable thing in a modern conflict...If that is the case, that is not the right thing to do.
So what?I'm not denying that, very true - a lot of BS is written in Russia as well. Just like a lot of BS was written about the performance of coalition troops in the Second Gulf War . But it doesn't mean THIS particulary article isn't a BS. This guy shows an apalling lack of knowlege of some basic facts of the conflict.I am not going to argue with you that it is a biased piece, but please be honest with yourself. I am sure there is just as much BS (as you call it) written coming out of your Russia that is written about the US and Nato. Very biased and frankly BS. Just be honest...
I am not going to argue with you that it is a biased piece, but please be honest with yourself. I am sure there is just as much BS (as you call it) written coming out of your Russia that is written about the US and Nato. Very biased and frankly BS. Just be honest...
So what?I'm not denying that, very true - a lot of BS is written in Russia as well. Just like a lot of BS was written about the performance of coalition troops in the Second Gulf War . But it doesn't mean THIS particulary article isn't a BS. This guy shows an apalling lack of knowlege of some basic facts of the conflict.