US says no to Georgian arms request
The United States will not provide Georgia with the weapons it has requested and which it says would deter Russia from starting another war, a Pentagon official has said. In advance of US Vice President Joe Biden’s visit to Tbilisi in mid-July, Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili publicly called on Washington to provide it with “defensive” weapons, in particular anti-tank and anti-aircraft systems.
I thought this was interesting and wanted to post it some where and this forum looked like the best spot. Any guesses what weapons Georgia was asking for?? My guess is Javelin anti-tank missiles and maybe Patriot or SL-AMRAAM for air defense.
If Georgia can not get American weapons what other options exist? Will Israel supply Spike anti-tank and SpyDer air defense missile systems or will the USA block such a sale? Any other weapons from any other source?
By: Vympel - 16th August 2009 at 04:48
There’s no question from any credible circles that it was Georgia that bears the responsibility for the August War. That’s just an uncontroversial fact, at this point. They started it, the Russians finished it. Sucks to be them.
By: Primate - 15th August 2009 at 23:39
I do feel thie little nation embraced Western Democracy whole heartedly, it put one of the largest forces into Iraq to help and in the end the west dumped on them…
I don’t remember many details about this conflict, but, given some of the decisions made by Georgia, do you think that e.g. NATO had a sound reason to do anything?
Wasn’t there a report from somewhere within the U.S. intelligence community that put a great deal of the responsibility for the war on Georgia?
Sorry for going OT.
By: TonyT - 15th August 2009 at 20:59
I do feel thie little nation embraced Western Democracy whole heartedly, it put one of the largest forces into Iraq to help and in the end the west dumped on them…
By: Thaddeus - 15th August 2009 at 20:20
If the Russians decide to attack, a Georgian victory would be unlikely. But that doesn’t mean resistance is futile. After all, the Russians aren’t the Borg. The Georgians could build up their defenses to a point where any military action against them would result in a pyrrhic victory at best. That’s really all the deterrent they need. History has shown that in the face of a numerically superior foe a highly organized, well-equipped and well dug-in Army can not only be difficult to beat, but can be victorious as well.
By: dionis - 12th August 2009 at 16:00
Russia could do whatever they like to Georgia no matter what weapons Georgia gets, short of an decent arsenal of nuclear missiles with range to reach Moscow.
Russia can preemptively spray everything in Georgia with cruise missiles from bombers, Tochkas and Iskanders before they even send the tanks and infantry in.
Saakashvili will be gone one day, and things will be better.
By: Flyboy77 - 12th August 2009 at 09:46
At least deter Russia from launching another attack against Georgia.
A better and cheaper way would be not to shell and kill Russian troops.
By: Arabella-Cox - 12th August 2009 at 09:39
At least deter Russia from launching another attack against Georgia.
Russia will start another attack whenever they see fit. Whether they lose 15 or 40 tanks makes no difference.
The point is not having enough weapons to retaliate potential attack, the point is not giving reasons to do so.
By: Arabella-Cox - 12th August 2009 at 09:34
Unfortunately, Georgia is made defenseless.
Too bad.
A country with a population of 4.2mil facing Russia is defenseless, anyway. Spike, Javelin or Ingwe.. who cares?
If they wanna survive on the long term, they will need to learn to get along with Russians somehow. Otherwise they are doomed to waste 10% of their GDP on defense every year and still be helpless. Freakin waste of money, IMHO.
By: talltower - 12th August 2009 at 09:32
Georgia already has SPYDER SAM systems. Israeli aid may be their best option given the SPYDERs and UAVs already imported, but come on, “deter Russia from starting another war’? Clearly that means they asked the USA for nuclear warheads, because that’s really what it’d take.
At least deter Russia from launching another attack against Georgia.
By: SOC - 12th August 2009 at 08:35
Georgia already has SPYDER SAM systems. Israeli aid may be their best option given the SPYDERs and UAVs already imported, but come on, “deter Russia from starting another war’? Clearly that means they asked the USA for nuclear warheads, because that’s really what it’d take.
By: talltower - 12th August 2009 at 08:09
Unfortunately, Georgia is made defenseless.
Too bad.
By: Snow Monkey - 12th August 2009 at 08:03
Albanian Mafia? North Korea? Honduran Coup?
By: J33Nelson - 12th August 2009 at 07:40
South Africa
South Africa could provide Ingwe & Mokopa anti tank missiles and Umkhonto air defense missiles.
By: mabie - 12th August 2009 at 06:50
Maybe they could try some Chinese take-out..:D
By: Vympel - 12th August 2009 at 05:56
Given that Russia is now purchasing Israeli UAVs, I suspect Israel will find it contrary to their interests to arm Georgia with any so-called ‘defensive’ weaponry. If the Tie-Chomping-Thomas-Jefferson-Of-Tbilisi starts another ill-advised military adventure, it’ll be a major embarassment for Russian troops to be killed by same, and even more so when they’re inevitably captured in the resulting rout and promptly taken apart.
The only option Georgia has in relation to weaponry is purchase of Soviet-era arms from pre-existing stocks in Ukraine, as they have been doing. They’re pretty much the only country that will sell. And that may stop too, given the political situation there.
Russia just captured all their Ukranian-purchased Soviet arms anyway, so they’re really screwed.
Sign In
August 12, 2009 at 3:14 am