Page 54 of 306 FirstFirst ... 444464748495051525354555657585960616264104154 ... LastLast
Results 796 to 810 of 4581

Thread: Georgian Army, Navy and Air Force

  1. #796

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PCrudy View Post
    France fought off a simultaneous invasion of six nations immediatly after the end of the French Revolution. They where by no means a great power at that moment in time, as their entire military and economy where in shambles as a result of the revolution. Yet France built a brand new army from scratch, and against tremendous odds beat back the invaders (Austria, Two Sicilies, Great Britian, Russia, Portugal, Ottoman Emprire)

    In Napoleans first battles in Italy, he was consistently outnumbered. Yet not only did he beat his enemies, he anihilated their armies. Napolean is perhaps the greatest tactical and operational leader the world has ever known.
    Georgia is no France, period. That you continue to pretend the situation is remotely equivalent is absurd.

    "Vastly superior technology"? We're compairing people who where using spears and bows and arrows. Yes, the Greeks had moderatly superior technology. Only the Spartans had considerably better training, and they where still vastly outnumbered by the Persians. The Persians where also battle hardened and experience, and war is a soldier's best training. But seriously, when you say vastly superior technology, it sounds like you're comparing the British to the Zulu, and speaking of which...
    Yes, vastly superior technology. Everyone understands that about the Persian Wars. Unit for unit, a greek phalanx was superior to any Persian unit - and your claim that only the Spartans had 'considerably better training' is utterly laughable. Every hoplite, to a man, could be said to have considerably better training, since the phalanx formation demanded it.

    A tactical skirmish? It was 139 soldiers, about half of them wounded, fighting off an attacking force of 4,000 Zulu - about a 28:1 force ratio in favor of the Zulu. The British won because they employed excellent teactics.
    Yes, a skirmish. Not a war. Learn the difference between tactics and strategy.

    This , however, was immediatly following the defeat of Chelmsford's center invading column. The initial British defeat in the Zulu war was so decisive that British forces had to withdraw from Zululand and restage the invasion. Why where the British initially defeated, despite having vastly superior technology? It was because of extremely poor decisions made at the tactical and operational level by the British.
    So what? Again, you're waxing poetic about battles, not wars.

    Saying that war is mearly a game of numbers is crazy talk. No force, no matter how overwhelming, can achieve victory without sound strategy. Georgia, geographically speaking, has a huge defensive advantage.
    LOL. Really? So being surrounded on two seperate flanks is a 'huge defensive advantage'? Can you point to any natural defensive positions that the Russians would have trouble overcoming? Substantiate your claims, please.

    They still have numerical superiority over the Russians in the immediate Georgian region. If they successfully drove the Russians out in an initital offensive, then they could fortify their perimeter along the coast and mountains. This would force the Russians to mount either an amphibious or airborne operation against Georgia in order to drive the Georgians out. Either campaigns would involve a high amount of risk and most likely result in a high number of casualties. The casualty count might be too high for the Russian public to tolerate, and could perhaps mount calls to find a political solution to end the war. The Georgians could achieve the initial push required by utilizing suprize and mass. They don't have the necessary equipment to do it now, but if they continue to procure equipment from the Ukraine and other sources, and continue building up an all-volunteer, professional military, they could have the capability for such an operation in 5-10 years. I doubt, however, that Georgia either has the political will or economical capacity to ever prepare their military for such an operaion.
    Are you on some sort of narcotic? So let's get this straight, the Georgians are going to blitzkrieg through South Ossetia and Abkhazia - simultaneously - mind you - so that the Russians will have no choice but to mount an amphibious or airborne assault? ROFLMAO. And apparently the Russians are not going to notice the preparations for an offensive like this, and of course, Georgia's massive air superiority will ensure that the VVS doesn't pound said offensive to dust - never mind whilst the strategics pepper Georgia with cruise missiles and destroy its infrastructure.

    An examle of another region this scenario could play out is Korea. If the North threw everything they had at us tomorrow, and achieved suprise, I sincerely doubt we would be able to push them back before they advanced well beynd Seoul and in the process reduced much of the country to rubble. Sure we train for such a contingency, but we really don't believe the North will ever suddenly come over the border without warning, and we are therefore are unprepared for a sudden agressive move by North Korea.
    That's similarly laughable, given the parlous state of North Korea's military, and the ease with which preparations for an offensive can be discerned.

    And BTW, our conventional military capabilities are far superior to Russia's.
    I don't know who the hell you're talking about, but it's not Georgia.

    Not so much in our technological aspect, where we have a slight advantage, but more so in our training aspect, in which we have a huge advantage. And yes, Georgia could absolutely repel an American invasion if they deployed the right strategy and if America went in without properly planning for the invasion. Such was the case in the Bay of Pigs, such was the case in Vietnam, and such was the case for the Soviets in Afghanistan.
    You've got no idea what you're talking about. A paltry force of cuban exiles, and two wars where guerilla warfare drove an invader out even though they had obvious superiority at the tactical level are not at all equivalent to 'repel an American invasion' in the conventional sense. But hey, if you think Georgia is going to destroy the flower of its nationhood like the decade-long horrors of Vietnam and Afghanistan, that's your issue.

    You should study the invasion of France by the First and Second coalitions , as well as the Seven Years War, as excellent examples where nations (France in the former case, Prussia in the later case) fought off invasions by multiple enemies boasting overall larger armies and invading from multiple fronts simultaneously. Fredrick The Great isn't called "The Great" for nothing.
    Refer above. Your continued insistence that France and Georgia are equivalent nations in equivalent positions is just obscene in how historically absurd it is.

  2. #797

    Default

    Noone just throws half of it's inventory at you for only 1/4 of its price.

  3. #798

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Woland View Post
    He-he.
    Georgia has only one metallurgical plant - Rustavi metallurgical plant.
    And that is it prodused.

    He-he.
    Man, don't dreem and write.


    Wrong, again The Rustavi metallurgical plant is NOT NEW but has a NEW website ...... It btw is the second largest and does also produce parts for the T-72

    http://www.georgiansteel.com/history/

  4. #799

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GeneralL View Post
    Wrong. Georgia is upgrading AND currently also producing T-72s.
    Uh ... huh. And what factory is producing these T-72s, please?

  5. #800

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Leo1 View Post
    Uh ... huh. And what factory is producing these T-72s, please?
    Why do you people quote before reading on ?

  6. #801
    Member Mr.Woland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Russia. Kaluga city
    Age
    28
    Posts
    655

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GeneralL View Post
    It btw is the second largest and does also produce parts for the T-72
    He-he.
    Who is the first largest, boy ?

  7. #802
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Age
    30
    Posts
    651

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GeneralL View Post
    Whatever. Reading and informing are the A and O today. Just try and you'll find. If I didn't put those links in here, people porbably still wouldn't believe. You cannot just judge about countries because of their small geographical shape. Georgia was the second richest Nation of the Union and the second largest weapons deliverer. Things do not just dissapear because a system has collapsed. Those giant plants and steel companies of the sovjet times are all beeing reactivated now.
    Reading through your posts so far, I realize that you have a problem. I have no doubt that you love your country and I don't think you are not being honest, I just think you are bereft of information. Do a little research and your posts will look different.

  8. #803
    I think I know everything, but I don't lightfire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    5,234

    Default

    This thread has degenerated from reposted pictures to reposted retarded flames, piss/***** envy contests. Well done both sides....

  9. #804

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Woland View Post
    He-he.
    Who is the first largest, boy ?
    It is the "Factory-31". One of the largest in the sovjet union. It has been reactivated in 2003. It did produce, aircraft parts, weapons and tank parts from 1940-1980. It is a giant monster which destroys the atmosphere

  10. #805

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Suhoij View Post
    And Su25 F-15E M1A2 Space Shuttle ehm something forget

    http://www.tam.ge/

    http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...russia/tam.htm

    http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...am-history.htm

    People just do not read ! Actually, TAM produced parts for russian sateliitles and shuttles. Just visit the links.

  11. #806

    Default

    Last I checked, TAM doesn't make tanks, which was the claim you were being asked about.

  12. #807

    Default

    TAM made enough for Russia to be at least recognized by Russia
    Last edited by GeneralL; 09-23-2009 at 04:10 AM.

  13. #808

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Leo1 View Post
    Last I checked, TAM doesn't make tanks, which was the claim you were being asked about.
    Uhh, sorry. I didn't mean that TAM produces tanks

  14. #809

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Karaahmetoglu ლორთქიფანიძე View Post
    Georgia military budget which stands at:

    $2.4billion. 17.2% of the GDP of the country (one of the highest in the world).

    Which is the same as Azerbaijan a Caucasian neighbor whom operates, a considerable amount of Mig 29's, Mig 25's, and Su 23's.
    I think you mean Su-25s. And those are hand-me downs from the Soviet legacy, not aircraft they've bought new.

    I do know they produce an engine that goes into there Su 27's, and J-10 to replace the Russian powerplant. the Shenyang WS-10. Whether or not China wants to support Georgia I do not know, proxies are always an option.
    Highly doubtful.

    Man to man Napoleans enemies where better equipped. Something I read in a book, long time ago.
    A musket is a musket. There was no military technological overmatch in those days.

    The one in the middle is Persian, hardly wicker sticks and cloth armor.
    That picture from who-knows-where is hardly representative of your typical Persian infantry. That their shields were mainly wicker is a historical fact.

    Add the the fact that their are advantages and disadvantages to the Greek bronze armor as well (weight mainly).
    Luckily said disadvantage didn't help the Persians any, which was the point.

  15. #810
    Senior Member coltfan111's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    London.
    Age
    26
    Posts
    2,839

    Default

    Gentleman, lets leave this as a pictures and videos forum before it gets locked.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •