Heavy fighting in South Ossetia.

[SiberianTiger]

Remarkably, Stalin's statue in Gori hasn't been damaged.
N.

Surely, they didn't dig under the statue to make there a weapons storage, so that's why the bombing was directed elsewhere.

 

[Notebook]

I did read Stalin came from Georgis, didn't know he came from Gori though. Surprised anything of his regime is left, he also has a museum, and a Pullman car! I thought Uncle Joe was a non-person after his sudden death?

N.

 

[simonpro]

2 Everyone: I'm curious how PR warfare goes - who is aggressor in this war? What does your media says? Also - how media covereage started?

Danish media is, for once, being suprisingly unbiased. To be honest they're more busy criticising the UN for doddling over what to do than they are abuot deciding whether Georgia or Russia is at fault. Swedish media is almost the same, but seems to be of the opinion that Russia was a little heavy handed.
As usual, however, the British media is being anti-Russian. Even the BBC, which is supposedly unbiased. Surprisingly, however, Sky news (which is typically leading the anti-Russian charge) had a well balanced piece on their website yesterday explaining what the Russians are doing and why they're doing it. Unfortunately I can't find it again now.

Friendly fire is not caused by drugs, or anything else. It is simply the by-product of war. It has happened in every war, but compared to civillian and military deaths, friendly fire was significant. One of the drawbacks of these one sided wars the US has fought has been the fact that a higher proportion of friendly casualties are being caused by friendly fire.

Friendly fire can be caused by carelessness and over eagerness though.

Pilots nowadays are coming back with most of their weapons. They are simply afraid to drop.

As well they should, if there's friendlies on the ground they need to watch where the hell they put their weapons. I think this (from an airbourne perspective) boils down to aircraft being used in the wrong way. The majority of aircraft in combat at the moment aren't really suited to the job that they're doing, and the pilots are frequently not well trained for the job either. This leads to confusion.

However, the insinuation that US forces are morons who are trigger happy, is personally very insulting. No soldier, sailor, or airman has ever taken lightly the idea that they are able to kill their fellow countryman or ally. It is a grim reality that we all live with and do our utmost to avoid.

Unfortunately a very small minority of soldiers (US and otherwise) are trigger happy. I've met some of them. The trick is to recognise that they're not suitable and boot them out before they can cause any damage. That is easier said than done, however.
This is the area which causes ground based friendly fire problems for the US. They seem to have a slightly higher proportion of such people. Not sure if that's a cultural thing (although I doubt it) or whether it's just because selection procedures don't catch the people as efficiently as the Swedish system does.
Still, we've been in Iraq and Afghanistan for quite a few years now, and it seems that the tactics for fighting a geurrila war are slowly being figured out. Hopefully those lessons will be used in any future conflicts too.




(edit) And Moore is a waste of space. IMO a few of his points are valid, but his method of presenting them (along with the other points which are not valid) completely ruins his credibility for me.
Plus he's a little bit of a lardbucket, and for some reason that pisses me off. Maybe I'm fattist.

 

[Moonwalker]

Friendly fire is not caused by drugs, or anything else. It is simply the by-product of war.

I don't think so. Friendly fire is mostly caused by US pilots and soldiers. It was and still is discussed that the intake of go-pills and no-go pills like Dexedrine and Restoril might be linked to US friendly fire. US pilots are even allowed to self-regulate their doses within flight. During the second Gulf War 60% of US pilots took Speed while for some units it even was 96%. One dose was 5mg while today one dose is 10mg. Can't be really healthy to the mind in perpetuity. Also, the US is non-cooperative concerning foreign investigations of friendly fire. There has to be other certain reasons for that too beside the use of go-pills. But actually it doesn't really matter. The US government does what it wants to do anyway...

 

[SiberianTiger]

I did read Stalin came from Georgis, didn't know he came from Gori though. Surprised anything of his regime is left, he also has a museum, and a Pullman car! I thought Uncle Joe was a non-person after his sudden death?

N.

Actually, Stalin was born in an Ossetian family who lived in Gori. The local townsfolk have been sort of proud of him for all that time, because some of their lads managed to rise so high once upon a time. That's why they kept the statue, the museum, etc. Saying a 'non-person' is too powerful to describe the banishment of Stalinism after his death. No one erased his name from the books (that would mean ripping front pages from nearly every book published in Stalin's time). Piling down the monuments was considered enough.

 

[GregBurch]

I don't think so. Friendly fire is mostly caused by US pilots and soldiers. It was and still is discussed that the intake of go-pills and no-go pills like Dexedrine and Restoril might be linked to US friendly fire. US pilots are even allowed to self-regulate their doses within flight. During the second Gulf War 60% of US pilots took Speed while for some units it even was 96%. One dose was 5mg while today one dose is 10mg. Can't be really healthy to the mind in perpetuity. Also, the US is non-cooperative concerning foreign investigations of friendly fire. There has to be other certain reasons for that too beside the use of go-pills. But actually it doesn't really matter. The US government does what it wants to do anyway...

How terrible it must be to be subject to the undisciplined might of the drug-addled imperialist American armed forces! It’s a good thing there’s a ready alternative for you, and one with such a great track record:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2002/may/01/news.features11

 

[Notebook]

Actually, Stalin was born in an Ossetian family who lived in Gori. The local townsfolk have been sort of proud of him for all that time, because some of their lads managed to rise so high once upon a time. That's why they kept the statue, the museum, etc. Saying a 'non-person' is too powerful to describe the banishment of Stalinism after his death. No one erased his name from the books (that would mean ripping front pages from nearly every book published in Stalin's time). Piling down the monuments was considered enough.

We have a similar character in history, Oliver Cromwell. He came to a bit of a sticky end too. For some strange reason, there's a statue of him outside Parliament.

N.

 

[Urwumpe]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2002/may/01/news.features11

Not really a new information here. It is also not like German soldiers behaved better when they "visited" Russia.

People steal cars. Does that make it right for you to also steal cars?

 

[GregBurch]

Not really a new information here. It is also not like German soldiers behaved better when they "visited" Russia.

People steal cars. Does that make it right for you to also steal cars?

The swamp of moral relativism rises ever higher.

Are you really not capable of seeing that, relative to its simple power, the US military is qualitatively different than these examples? Is it really "all the same" to you?

And please don't cite Abu Ghraib: That set off a paroxysm of guilt and moral self-examination in the US -- as it should have.

 

[simonpro]

Greg, perhaps you need to take a step back for a second. You're not addressing the points at hand, instead bringing up entirely different matters from 60 years ago, and seem to be getting personally offended by this. It's not like you

I think Moonwalker's descriptions are severely over the top here, of course the USAF isn't a drug addled bunch of lunatics.

 

[GregBurch]

Greg, perhaps you need to take a step back for a second. You're not addressing the points at hand, instead bringing up entirely different matters from 60 years ago, and seem to be getting personally offended by this. It's not like you

I think Moonwalker's descriptions are severely over the top here, of course the USAF isn't a drug addled bunch of lunatics.

You're absolutely right that I do. I'm going to sign off the forum for a while. The outrageous caricature of America that is held by some is so depressing that I have reached the edge of my tolerance.

 

[Moonwalker]

How terrible it must be to be subject to the undisciplined might of the drug-addled imperialist American armed forces! It’s a good thing there’s a ready alternative for you, and one with such a great track record:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2002/may/01/news.features11

Of course we now could start looking at several armies and events of history. But actually I'm talking about the most modern army of the 21th century. An army which has the assignment of spreading the ideals of the USA to countries with a totally different culture, totally different religion, totally different people, totally different history which happens on a totally different continent. An army which is not what it seems to be...

I think Moonwalker's descriptions are severely over the top here, of course the USAF isn't a drug addled bunch of lunatics.

Intake of drugs during "Desert Storm" and "Operation Iraqi Freedom" is not a secret And I think 60% (and partly 96%) is a huge value...

 

[Urwumpe]

Intake of drugs during "Desert Storm" and "Operation Iraqi Freedom" is not a secret

Actually, even worse, it is not even a secret, not taking go pills is a career problem in the USAF.

But also, many armies relied on go pills in history. 20 million of such pills had been used by the British troops alone during WW2.

My personal theory of why the amount of friendly-fire incidents are higher for the US, is that the soldiers have not understood the situations correctly, mostly due to an inadequate training and briefing.

 

[adamb193]

Yes it's not like there are more US forces there, no that's not it,it's that they are americans and must be inept, that's it!

 

[Eagle]

My personal theory of why the amount of friendly-fire incidents are higher for the US, is that the soldiers have not understood the situations correctly, mostly due to an inadequate training and briefing.

That is a rather... unfriendly... theory. I would assert that US soldiers are given the best possible training and that the high friendly-fire losses are a result of increased lethality of deployment of weapons, engagement of enemy forces extremely close to friendlies, and drastic reductions of losses from enemy action.

If you have the x losses from enemy action and y from friendly-fire. If x drops and y remains constant the proportion of y increases relative to x.

But I lack the skill to convince many people to change their view 180 degrees, so this is likely futile. :dry:

 

[Notebook]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7552659.stm

Georgia 'calls Ossetia ceasefire'

 

[Urwumpe]

That is a rather... unfriendly... theory. I would assert that US soldiers are given the best possible training and that the high friendly-fire losses are a result of increased lethality of deployment of weapons, engagement of enemy forces extremely close to friendlies, and drastic reductions of losses from enemy action.

Of course it is a unfriendly theory, but remember that your own theory has a weakness: Most blue-on-blue events happened with old classic weapons. I think the most powerful ever was a 500 lb bomb, the typical weapon a 5.52mm bullet. It is not like the soldiers underestimate their powers. They just unleash these powers at the wrong targets.

The engagement of enemy forces close to others is a normal situation. But you often have the problem, that soldiers fail to remember where they are and where other soldiers on their side are. A bad situational knowledge. A good briefing should prevent this.

And drastic reductions in losses from enemy action is also not true. The rate of losses is even higher now as in 1991, and the 1991 campaign had less blue-on-blue events, even in very dynamic situations.

I think the indoctrination of being the best army and the last remaining superpower in the last decade is actually a better cause. Plain hubris. US soldiers are not invulnerable and it did not take people long to find out.

 

[Andy44]

Lot's of armchair combat leaders around here.

 

[SiberianTiger]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7552659.stm

This offer has been acknowledged by Russian and was met by a counter-offer that the only case when the cease-fire might come to power are the two conditions satisfied: (1) the Georgian forces withdraw behind the border to the positions they took before 1992 assault and (2) Georgia signs a treaty with the South Ossetia guaranteeing safety and non-violation of the borders.

It is reported that despite the claims Georgian snipers continue to keep under fire outskirts of Tskhinvali and the road between Tskhinvali and Java. A massing of about 100 tanks and 2500 artillery units was detected in Georgian-controlled territiory.

 

[Notebook]

Yes, if (2) is agreed (never mind (1)!), it would be hard to see how Saakashvili could remain. Looks like they are in for some hard barganing.

N.