Comments on: Assault on Georgia! Exclusive Military Analysis on South Ossetia Conflict

By: Rod Kingsley

Rod Kingsley — Thu, 07 May 2009 11:40:53 +0000

I have never read so much crap in my life. Talk about a one eyed view.
The Russians were ready – Yes – so would any sensible Country living next to Georgia backed by the USA with its own vested interests in the region.
It took Russia 3 days to respond. Agressors respond immediately.
Russia contacted the USA before going in asking them to intervene – Fact – the USA did nothing or could not get Georgia to respond. Fact.
Russia has said – the EU can send all the Peacekeepers there they like – the more the better – is that the actions of someone with designs on Georgia. No – only one Country would like to have influence there for obvious reasons and some of Europe.
Fact – the Ossetians etc. are ethnically differnent to Georgians and much closer to Russians. Fact. Many Ethnic Russians did live there and still do live there.
They all through history have been independent or under the Russian Empire umbrella by there choice. This was changed by Stalin about 70 years ago. A Georgian who forced them to be part of the Georgian State.
Since when does the USA support Stalin and his actions.

Fact – all independent Reporters who have gone there since know the Ossetians are very happy to have had Russia come to there rescue. They comprised 90% of the Population. Sue they had Russian Passports. What were they supposed to do – go nowhere – nobody recognised them – Georgia would not give them Passports since 1991. Russia did – so what?? What crap you go on with.

Bullshit – your General goes on about how the Russians operate.
From where does he get this knowledge. The only time the Russians ever commited troops overseas in action since WW2 [ leave out the Chechoslovakia uprising] was in Afghanistan. An entirely different setup and different war.
How the hell does he know how the Russians would operate today?? Many reforms there in the last 18 years and Putin has managed to clean out most of the old Cold War [Hawks] over the years gradually. Something the USA is only recently starting to do.

I have never read such crap in all my life. I have been there also.

The real culprit here is the USA – always trying to ram there crap and what they want down the neck of others.
O’Bama thank heavens will change that hopefully.

I could write pages – but what is the point. Some people only want to see what they want to see.

One more Fact – the bulk of the Refugees fled to Russia – do you flee to the Enemy? – news to me.
Typical USA twisting of the past. USA disinformation.

By: Andrei

Andrei — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 18:52:33 +0000

Author is a hired agent of the failed western powers, trying to hogwash this debacle of Georgia
This is what I understood from your -so- called “analysis”
Andrei

By: Brian Peters

Brian Peters — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 18:00:13 +0000

During the initial assault by Russian forces that was captured on various news outlets, I too noticed the ’slovenly’ appearance of the Russian soldiers. They appeared to be more of a well armed corporate-mercenary militia than a professional military. Watching the lines of Russian armor and trucks being backed up along many winding roads, I was amazed that Georgians didn’t take the chance for ambushes. Prior planning on the Georgian’s part could’ve set up the Russian’s for a deadly ambush on many of those winding mountainous roads. I’m sure the PRC’s-PLA watched and learned and are adapting for their future battles with Russia on this part. LTC. Peters did a great job at analyzing the whole Russian gambit that was played out on Georgia.

By: Randall C. Reed

Randall C. Reed — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 21:24:28 +0000

Several points are worth reiterating, in hindsight:

1. Two terms of Bush and the neo-cons mean we respond to Russian actions with an empty moral reservoir: Kosovo and Iraq have seriously eroded our ability to shape the ethical argument on the world stage, and that stage should still count for something.

2. Even if the Georgians were provoked into action, it is clear that they acted without consulting their US benefactors. Had they done so, they would have surely been advised that they were playing right into Russian hands.

3. The Georgian leadership is quickly establishing a track record of “shoot-from-the-hip” cowboy politics, much akin to Bush and his cronies. We would be foolish to engage in political “brinksmanship” on Russia’s doorstep with a Georgian partner who apparently acts first and then consults with allies.

4. If this article was, as asserted, a “hot wash” of unfolding military current affairs, perfect accuracy should not have been expected. Actually, it was fairly well on target. It might have created less of a reaction from third party observers, however, if many of the references had been couched in more neutral language, as has been pointed out by many responders.

By: Funny Pictures

Funny Pictures — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 22:25:37 +0000

Thanks for your article, Now there is more reason to comment than ever before! This is a great fir for our project!

By: Alex

Alex — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 23:34:45 +0000

What a joke of an article. Thanks for wasting my time.

By: Nelson Cook

Nelson Cook — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 18:41:15 +0000

Mr Peters seems to be so firmly locked into cold war thinking that there is no point in trying to debate things. Shame.

By: Job

Job — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 14:43:40 +0000

This article is hogwash, of course the Russians had a plan here, that by no means excuses the Georgians for responding to minor provocations with extreme brutality – using Grad multiple missile launch systems on a densely populated civilian target. That’s simply criminal.

@Barton

2) The Georgians were using modern Ukrainian air defence systems. Anybody taking on a country with them should be pretty worried. US arrogance about military superiority will cost them one day, maybe when they come up against a real enemy that can’t be bombed into oblivion before they set foot in the country.

There was also a comment about how the hardware is all 20 years old. The most modern equipment wasn’t used in this conflict. It’s not really a demonstration of what the Russians are capable of. Any half-decent analyst would see that, but then again as others have already pointed out, this writer is no analyst, he’s an inept propagandist.

By: Barton

Barton — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 16:18:14 +0000

Everyone please note THREE interesting facts.
1) Russia’s cyberwar on Georgia, just like Estonia was well planned and crippling to Georgia’s internet assets. We in the West (I live in Chicago, IL USA) should be very worried about this threat.
2) Russia’s air force dismal showing. The Georgians had old Soviet built radars and jets and the the Russians lost 2 to 10 aircraft (http://www.strategypage.com says four). The Russians knew exactly the capability of the opposing equipment and still lost aircraft. This does not bode well for them fighting a foe with modern Western made hardware.
3) Motive. Russia wanted to increase its “nationalism” at home, and to stir up trouble to increase oil prices. If the West responds well to this (kick Russia out of G8, suspend stock trading in Russian state owned companies, reduce oil drilling technology sales, limit diplomatic contacts, and MOST importantly allow more countries in to NATO) this “adventure” may prove to be expensive.

By: Rick Johnson

Rick Johnson — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 11:59:41 +0000

The bias in these comments is shocking.
The critics in these comments should note Mr. Peters track record. His analysis of other conflicts have proven dead on. For example, his articles on the situation in East Africa, and predictions of what would happen. On scene witnesses have verified what Peters said would happen has indeed occurred.
Also note that having contingency plans and strategies in place is a far cry from having specific materiale pre-positioned for an attack. To see where conflict is coming, measure the movement of ammunition and boby bags. The insight from an intel pro like Peters on the Russian preparations for this political and military conflict is invaluable.
Those looking for a detailed military report should have read the introduction, which stated the article would specifically address the question of “who started” the conflict.
Moral comparisons to Kosovo, etc. are interesting, but irrelevant. We need to know what is happening in Georgia now. If you want to critique previous US (and other) administrations for being involved in other conflicts, please do so. However, if indeed there were immoral conflicts, that in no way justifies further immorality.
What is clear is that the Russian government is playing hardball. They have an energy stranglehold on Western Europe. They are using military force to impose their will. They have also demonstrated a willingness to violate trade agreements and let people freeze in order to have their way.
Friends in the Ukraine are watching this conflict very closely. They do worry that they are next.
It is vital that we have an understanding of what is actually going on. Or, as Soviet diplomacy was once defined, “Who is doing what to whom?”