Do you remember the term shock and awe, well the Russian just did their own shock and awe in Georgia.?

Question

"One Georgian officer who returned from the front said the army succumbed not to one-on-one combat but to overwhelming Russian air power. The officer, who appeared shaken by what he saw, showed photographs of Georgian military jeeps destroyed from the air, the bodies of their occupants lying bloated on the road."

These were Georgian trained by the best of American forces, obviously not a match since, The U.S. trainers come from different branches of the military: Marines, Army, Navy and special forces. Most have combat experience in Iraq or Afghanistan But no experience with a really armed and trained enemy like the red army of Russia.

Seems US is not the only one with the shock and Awe capability. your opinion America.?

Answer 1

Hardly - they didn't launch a fraction of the cruise missiles or create nearly the images of an overwhelming display of excessive power.  Their strike seemed more surgical (unlike when Russia attempted the Afganistan invasion, which needs to be considered if you want to compare overall invasion effectiveness with the US or NATO).

Answer 2

I'm sorry, but 'trained by' anyone else's army or whatever service is not the same as the best of the best, have trained after actually experiencing war and actual combat.

American soldiers got their training from experienced warriors without the 'aid' of a language barrier. Training from Our Civil War, the Indian Wars, the Spanish American war, the Philippine Insurrection, WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam Nam, Gulf War...Training that was filtered down through the sieve of combat.

And to top it off, Georgia had no where near the arsenal that the Russians have been storing up over the past 20 or so years. (since they got ran out of Afghanistan.)

But hey, if you were impressed by this, you would love to watch the Greenbay Packers take on Stockton High Schools 1st string.

Edit...Space Station? The talk was about Shock and Awe and you have done the typical soviet tactic, change the subject.

Personally I was surprised that the soviet tanks (that's who made them, right) weren't being pulled by drought horses.

Answer 3

It was more like Men against Boys just what Georgia was thinking of by attacking Russian's in South Ossetia i will never know. Moscow would never allow this to happen, yet crazily they still did it.

I personally think they got off lightly if Russia did unleash on them there would be no more Georgia I'm not condoning it but its a fact !! :)

Answer 4

The funny thing is that "Shock and awe" in Iraq was a joke.  We didn't use any of our best weapons.  No Moab bomb, no thermobaric bombs...

The Americans spent too much time worrying about civilian casualties in Iraq.  The Russians could give a d**n.  There is a double-standard on the world stage when it comes to this.  If it were America, those bloated bodies of dead in jeeps would be all over the television with the media calling us cowards for killing soldiers that were running away (they did this during the first Iraqi war).

Keep it up.  Putin has been lulled into a false sense of security the same way Al Qaida was.  American airpower could eliminate the entire Russian force in Georgia if we wished it.  

Now the question is, will there be an American leader who is brave enough to confront the Russians?  We have the strength.  We just don't know if our leaders have the stomach for it.

Answer 5

Please.  Iraq had the world's fourth biggest army.  Georgia had a significant number of it's troops in Iraq at the time of the invasion.  Also read this.

A military observation ...

Many journalists reporting on the present situation in Georgia use standard phrases expressing Russian "power" and "might" etc. But if the photographs show the present state of the Russian army, then it is not in a good state at all. For first-class Russian frontline units, there is strange mixture of obsolete and semi-obsolete armoured vehicles, with tanks in particular ranging from truly ancient T-54s to mid-life T-70s smothered in reactive armour. The use of this appliqui armour alone shows somewhat primitive tank thinking as compare to up-to-date Western models. Reactive armour is a cheap and cheerful form interim anti-tank protection pending the arrival of new tank models, and never used on Western tanks. Ceramic Cobham armour is used on Challenger 2 and Abrahams tanks, and the Russians appear not to have developed this. Also, it is surprising for a first-class tank unit to have some of its vehicles show appliqui armour whilst others show no such things. Also there appears to have been no attempt by lackadaisical tank crews to camouflage their vehicles and break up profiles.

The Russian transport, mainly, 1960s-design Ural trucks, is equally as ancient, and their thinly-armoured BTR armoured personnel carriers are of a model which hardly compares as with such advanced vehicles as the British Warrior, the US Bradley, or the US state-of-the-art Stryker vehicles, all of which which sprout multi-tasking aerials all over the place. On the Russian BTRs, here is no sign of anti-RPG bar armour, and absolutely no sign of mine-protected vehicles which have proved so necessary in Iraq. The Russians columns appear not to be alert as concerns mines or possible ambushes. The single aerials installed on all vehicles show that the internal VHF communications suites are almost of 1960s standard.

The state of the Russian infantry as observed is even more worrying. Their uniforms are not standard, their vehicle discipline looks casual, and the foot deployment of infantry is sloppy, with rifle and kit not properly adjusted, with Kalshnikovs pointing all over the place. Frankly, it is enough to make a British Sergeant-Major go apeshit. Also, the infantry have no body armour (or even steel helmets), and lacking man pack aerials, appear to have no good communications kit at all.

The age range of some of the Russian infantry must also be worrying to Russian trainers and instructors. I have seen men of well over thirty in infantry sections, and any number of over-plump tummies on display. There is also a racial mix which must present problems to any basic training programme as concerns language difficulties. Infantry appear in particular are drawn from every conceivable area in Russia, which must make for training and co-ordination difficulties.

Frankly, on detailed technical observation, this display the Russian army shows it appearing to have sunk to a third-world standard which only succeeded in this case by confronting a numerically inferior force. If the Russians had any alert propaganda sense at all, on this spotlight occasion, they would have fielded a modern elite force instead of the dog's breakfast as observed. On this evidence, goodness only knows what their second line units are like.

Colin Bennett

Author, London

Answer 6

More like Gee and Whiz. The Georgians were in no position to take on the Russian bullies.

Answer 7

Well Duh.  I mean did anyone really think Georgia could fend off a Russian invasion?  

Answer 8

they sure did, woke up europe in the process.