What have we learnt from the Russian weaponary in the brief Russia / Georgia war

What we've learned is that Russia is not stupid.

They fought a low tech war on purpose.

They didn't show off the lastest greatest goodies/tactics. Just the minimum required to win against a numerically inferior opponent.

What does this mean?

If a war between the U.S. breaks out, I predict:

U.S. satilites will be targeted heavily. Goodbye GPS, Sat COM.
Anti-Aircraft systems have progressed to a point where piloted aircraft will not be used over the battlefield. Outrageous comment? Watch, the Air superiority doctrine using piloted aircraft will be a thing of the past.
Airmobile troops (like rangers) will be decimated.
Return to conventional ground tactics as air transport will become suicidal

Tank warfare I'm not sure about. I can hardly imagine war without them anymore but anti-tank technology could eliminate their widespread tactical employment.
Increased use of Artillery, reduced use of missiles due to lack of satellite, GPS.

Thermal Sights limits will be exploited to the max.

The U.S. will be forced to go back to low tech warfare in many ways but, we are natural fighters as are the Russians and will adapt.

I predict the first widespread use of lasers as weapons (not just targeting) in the next major war. Which by the way will begin within 1 1/2 years caused by Israeli strike on Iran, Russia backing Iran, U.S. backing Israel. Listen to the news to find out which side your country will be lining up on.

Wish all ATSers the best regardless of sides. It's the way the lines are drawn, most of us can do little to stop it.

Originally posted by RussiaUSA
especially a very formidable computers race which in military technological use the USSR was better at.Which explains the USSR's superior systems or weapons. As well engineering marvels. This georgia war proves that Russia has the technology but needs to modernize its entire military.

I'm sorry where is the evidence of this Russian computer might? They can't even build a commercial CPU. The Soviets/Russians have never been superior in any way to the US in terms of computers. In fact the Russians have to buy their supercomputers from the good ole USA, of course not the best the US has to offer.

In order for thier SAM's and Fighters/Subs to be as good as they are they must have good computeres.

russia sucks
god bless the u.s.a.

The US can't pay for it's overly expensive equipment, at least not forever. The cost-benefit ratio favors Russian equipment.

reply to post by bubbles75


well said my man, Russia didnt break any international laws nor hire mecenaries to cover their work.
-Naeem

Russia didnt use their top of the line equipment either, also the georgians had more men and material at the crucial part of their offensive yet still failed to defeat the low amount of russians in the area at that time.

reply to post by Shamanator


Russa is on the verge of a massive military buildup. Entire new cities are being built to equip the "new military". This buildup will include all forces of their military. (Army, navy and air force.) While this is going on the west is stuck in a global monetary fiasco. Our high tech machinery is being worn into junk status from years of war. No quality replacments are in sight. (I don't count the F35 as quality and the F22 is limited in number and too expensive to lose in combat) We are down sizing our military into "small highly equiped forces" that are doomed to fail in a global conflict. Our possible enemies such as Russa & China to name just two are building their forces at an alarming rate. Even third world countries are buying quality air planes and submarines. The quality of modern conventional subs is amazing. More than good enough to shut down vital shipping lanes for long periods. I was in the navy. Finding any sub, even an old clunker is not easy. It's not like the movies. We are teetering on the verge of falling into the class of bannana republic. For 60 years we have been slowly sliding left into the marxist/socialist realm. With this comes poverty, poor defense, moral collapse and so on. The high standards and ideals that this country was founded on are no longer being taught in our schools. We have stopped being a nation of one and become a nation of nations. A house divided.

I think you are counting your chickens before they have hatched. The US has not won the war in Afghanastan and never will. Firstly, as was discovered in Vietnam, unless the enemy do the right thing and dress in a nice uniform and fight traditionally, you are not going to win. With all the rules that the west uses during war, it severely diminishes our effectiveness. While the enemy will decapitate a soldier and drag them along behind a car, or set up ambushed and roadside bombs etc, we will treat them fairly and in a humane fashion.

All this is to make us look good and seem above our enemies.

reply to post by spacebot

Actually surrounding a US unit historically is a fatal idea.
NATO is a paper tiger and the EU isn't going to help us on our own soil.
An 85 year old veteran from WWII hit a target at 1000 meters, this year ,with the rifle he used in the battle of the bulge.
We are 23 million strong. I won't follow the Geneva convention so I will redefine atrocity if so unleashed and without weapons of mass destruction our fifth column elements will annihilate any invasion force and every military leader knows it.
Yes I do know how to kill an M1 with common materials.
That is why we are being broken down from within (they think).
I will not accept invading a nation to take it over nor would you and we don't want more issues than the ones that have left other countries have brought with them.
so there is not a purpose or any sane reason to fight that war.
Politicians do amazingly stupid things but as we speak they are really at the end of the rope with their self propagating crypto-corprocracy.
They have to start taking mass groups out and we have to stand by when they turn their hand for it to work.
For me and at least 1 million others death is preferable.

Can we keep the US stuff out of this?

Anyways, does anyone know if any Su-27 or derivatives of the 27 family were fielded during the war? I've heard rumors that a Su-34 was used for electronic warfare, I'm not sure if its true.

My question is why USA didnt just send in a bunch of puppet rebels and SAD teams to create and fund anti-saddam splinters in the military and civillian militia's to launch a quick attack on the palace and overthrow the b*****d. It would have worked better than any invasion, it would also reflect on the fact that that is how the USSR fell, almost without any violence, and the fact that saddam's loyalists weren't religious nuts at all (i doubt the majority of his cabinet were even religious) as the official state policy was socialism and secularism, they wouldn't have to deal with foreign fighters.

Invading a country you don't like doesn't work, retaliation maybe but remember the US attacked Iraq first.

Originally posted by Fromabove
First.. let me put this puppy to bed this way. Russia had it's war with Islamics like Iraq. It was called Afghanistan, remember. After a many year struggle they lost, were humiliated, and left with their tails between their legs. We (the USA) invaded both Afghanistan and Iraq and won both wars.

Good joke! Really, do you read your stuff before hitting the reply button? US won a war in Afghanistan? Made me laugh on that! Where is the us in afghanistan now? Germany has to secure a area that is half of the size of germany! It was your war and others are the idiots who carry out the leftover...
Dont forget, the US gave money and weapons to afghanistan before.

Originally posted by Fromabove
As for weaponry, they have no new weaponry except some new missles.....As for new weaponry, yes, we have it all....

Russians were, in all times, really silent about their weapons...Some day, all the dumb americans (!= all americans are dumbs!!) will fall on their nose for their behavior in one or another way.... I promise you

EDIT: Listen to this, starts aat 2:10...
www.abovetopsecret.com...