I don’t know what “well away” means when speaking about such a small theatre of operations. This is not Iraq or Afg.

What I am getting at is this…

if the intent of the Russian operation is to protect South Ossetia and Abhkazia from possible Georgian incursions then why the continuing Russian military presence is a city far away from the disputed areas?

I think the reason why a lot of commentators in the west may be questioning Russian motives in this conflict are due to actions like this one. Gori I can understand realtively speaking as it is close to the disputed areas, but Poti is 50 km away from Abhkazia and over 150 km from South Ossetia.

Here is a map: http://www.lonelyplanet.com/maps/europe/georgia/

Wow…this thread needs serious moderation.

The political sniping towards Russia and especially Georgia here is simply wrong and very disappointing. Take your discussions to the General board please if you feel the need to editorialize. This thread should be for news about the conflict, nothing more!

I would hope that this thread can be moderated to the point where I can continue to rely upon it as a repository of news and information and not of vitriol about one side or the other.

Countries antagonize one another all the time. Ukraine is an independent country. They have a duly elected government that won office in a legitimate electoral process (unlike Russia unfortunately) and they apparently see their future freedom and security tied to integration into NATO and Europe. Russia does not have to like it but invading Ukraine would be the biggest mistake they could ever make.

Not only would it be an exceedingly difficult job to take over a massive country, it would lead Russia back to relations with the rest of the world that would parallel the depths of the Cold War. Russia would be well served here to try and convince Ukraine that Russia is not set on taking over again because the more sabre rattling they do the further they drive former Soviet Republics into the arms of the West.

The lesson for Ukraine from this Georgia mess is “…We need into NATO…NOW!…”. If Georgia was a NATO member does anyone here really think that Russia would have reacted the way they did?

Due to the potential of further conflict, I do not think Sweden would be politically willing to supply weapons of any sort – full stop!

Regards
Pioneer

Point well taken. However I could see this happening in a few years if Goergia is offered and accepts NATO membership. The Czechs and Hungarians use the Gripen, why not another NATO country?

The more I think about this issue the more curious I become about how the USA will react to this conflict over the short term.

George Bush is very popular in Georgia. The road to the Airport in Tblisi is actually named for him. Georgia has been a loyal supporter of the Iraq War and has had significant boots on the ground in Iraq for a few years. US military staff have been training (and to a small degree) re-equipping the Georgian military. On the other side of the coin there has been significant friction with Russia recently over such issues as Kosovo, missile defense and NATO expansion. Will Bush use the aftermath of the conflict as a way to try and drive Georgia further into the USA/NATO fold or will he let Georgia fall back into the Russian orbit without intervening?

With Bush in the lame duck period of his presidency it will be interesting to see what kind of support, if any, he throws Georgia’s way. He is speaking on CNN about Georgia at 16:00 GMT.

Technically speaking they were produced there . . . 🙂

correct…;)

Current production is not done in Georgia

Well the simple fact is Russia is huge, and you surely know this, and the sheer amount of various units in the Russian army means they are rather spread out. The T-72B uses a Kontakt 5 ERA which is quite advanced, and the BM model is rumored to have one that is twice as effective.

Point well taken, but to me it just seems that if this was not a “spur of the moment” kind of operation, the Russian Army might have brought in some of it’s top flight units with a more up to date TO&E.

Granted the T-72B has some nice additions on it in recent years, but the T-80 and T-90 are significantly more effective vehicles, being able to fire on the move and have a reasonable probability of hitting something. Their armor (both passive and active) has also been significantly upgraded. The T-72 was famous in the 1991 Gulf War for having to stop to fire at American and British Tanks as it could not accurately hit much on the move outside of 500 metres range.

If I saw columns of T-90’s and BMP-3’s driving down the road in Ossetia I would be much more convinced that this was an operation a long time in the works by Moscow.

moderation…please

This thread, with due respect to all sides, needs to be seriously moderated. Take your politics and polemics about right and wrong to other parts of this board or to other sites. This is an aviation forum. Let’s all please try and keep cool heads and try and share with one another facts and not conjecture or biased history, from either the Georgian or Russian perspective.