That's not what they've learnt from their march through Georgia. I guess the lesson will have to come another day, and in a different place.
Georgia was not a Soviet satellite..it was part of the USSR.
=)
That's not what they've learnt from their march through Georgia. I guess the lesson will have to come another day, and in a different place.
Georgia's problem, militarily, is primarily one of relative size compared to Russia, and there's not much they could have done about that. Its soldiers are decent enough (Russian troops not being exactly stellar themselves), but they've largely been equiped to fight counter-insurgency, since that's the security problem they had up until the Russian tanks came rolling in.
Closest?
Only?
Most powerful?
Look at a map.
Also note, Matteo, that Georgia is not the closest ally of the US. The relationship is not equal. Our closest allies are the UK, and Canada.
Maybe they picked the right one. I don't know much about the military prowess of the former Soviet territories but Georgia seemed very weak and totally unorganized militarily. If they went into a different country with a better fighting force and were inflicted with many casualties Russia might be thinking differently.
Yes and no. On paper the destruction of the Roki Tunnel and some reasonable costal defences would have made russian operations somewhat harder.
The Russian troops involved were some of their better ones veterans of chenya and the like.
Georgia was not a Soviet satellite..it was part of the USSR.
=)
When you are in a hole, the first thing you ought to do is stop digging.You are stupid.
I wrote "The United States is Georgia’s closest ally."
Not the other way around.
You do not understand a heck.
No time to lose with you
When you are in a hole, the first thing you ought to do is stop digging.
Take a break, have an espresso. Then read the sentence I wrote about the relationship not being equal.
DR
Grazie Mille. Molto gentile.Sorry for having called you "stupid"
I regret it