Talk:Defence Forces of Georgia

	Georgia (country) portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Georgia (country), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Georgia and Georgians on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Georgia (country)Wikipedia:WikiProject Georgia (country)Template:WikiProject Georgia (country)Georgia (country) articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: National / Russian & Soviet / Post-Cold War

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	National militaries task force
	Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force
	Post-Cold War task force

Untitled

the flag is wrong. it is the Battle flag. Geagea 22:38, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gea. You're correct. This is the Battle Flag officially reffered to as the Main Military Flag. --Kober 04:50, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Georgian military increasing 3000%

Or 30x.

Any mention of this?

-G —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.67.112.110 (talk) 18:40, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Active troops

I thought the land forces will be increased up to 100.000 men ??

Graphic of the Army Structure

I'm currently working on a project to create graphics of the structure of the most important Armies. i.e. French Army; German Army; Italian Army I also want to make a graphic of the structure of the Georgian Land Forces, but the information at this point is not sufficient, as there is no information how the units are structured (i.e. which Regiments/Batallions belong to which Command/Brigade, what type of units they are…) Does anyone have this information- and also the Regiments/Battalions names and/or numbers and where they are based? Thanks noclador

I added todmmmmmay the graphic of the Structure of the Land Forces, which contains all the information that I could find, BUT the units of all 5 brigades are missing and if someone has information regarding these units, please share them, so that the graphic can be updated and finished. thanks, --noclador 23:05, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

6% of GDP

Where is this from? International Crisis Group report on Abkhazia] gives 15.9% (see page 21) for the year 2006). Alæxis_¿question? 11:27, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thats correct, the georgian Ministry of Defence spent about 1.2 billion dollars for military euipment in a single year. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.196.104.132 (talk) 09:48, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Georgia's GDP is 10.3 billion (by liberal standards) and expenditure is 1.2 billion. That's not 6%. That's 11.65%. 68.167.2.213 (talk) 19:40, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Istanbul agreements

Were any deadlines for the withdrawal of Russian forces from Georgia set in these agreements? Alæxis_¿question? 06:56, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, but the agreements obliged Russians to define the deadline within three years (i.e. within the period of 1999-2002). The Kremlin did not agree to the schedule until 2005-2006. --Kober^Talk 06:57, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you provide a source which describes the 1999 agreement? If not, saying without explainings that Russia violated some international agreement, is POV. --Eurocopter tigre 07:43, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

These are the very first hits yielded by a quick search through Google and Google Books:

In a recent seminar at the Kennan Institute, a panel of experts discussed the prospects for implementation of the 1999 OSCE Istanbul summit decisions committing Russia to withdrawing its military forces from Moldova and Georgia by December 31, 2002. The consensus of the panel was that Russia would not succeed in fulfilling its obligations by the deadline, but progress has been made and, given Russia’s continued commitment to the goals of the 1999 decision, the prospects for further progress are good. Nevertheless, Russia’s failure to meet the deadline is of serious concern, and not only to Moldova and Georgia.[1].

NATO continues to insist on full implementation of the political commitments (which are not legally binding) that Russia undertook at the 1999 Istanbul OSCE Summit to resolve the questions related to compliance with treaty host-state consent requirements in Georgia and Moldova. The following are among the remaining unfulfilled "Istanbul commitments":

[...] in Georgia: the conclusion of a Russo-Georgian basing agreement that defines the terms and duration of the Russian military presence in Georgia. Engaging Russia As Partner And Participant: The Next Stage of Nato-russia Relations By Robert Edwards Hunter, Sergeĭ Mikhaĭlovich Rogov, pp. 13-14. ISBN 0833037056. --Kober^Talk 08:26, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've linked the actual agreement text between Russia and Georgia in '99 as note 3 of the current text. Cheers Buckshot06 21:12, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

M87 Orkan

There are no M87 Orkan MLRs in Geiorgian Army. Bosnea wanted to sell their Orkans to Georgia, but Georgia didn't bought them. Kos93 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kos93 (talk • contribs) 12:48, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bosnia has no Orkans, only Croatia and Serbia do, Croatia has 4 and Serbia 3 or 4, Bosnian Serbs had 2 but these were originally Serb Army Orkans and were returned back to Serbia in 1995.

Only 8 Orkans were built in 1987-1990 period, originally JNA requirements were around 24 and Iraq around 48.

Tbilisi headquarters

Are they really to be withdrawn in 2008? I had an impression they've already been evacuated. Alæxis_¿question? 21:21, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Numbers in Equipment section

The numbers in the Equipment section have been added by vandals, ultranationalists or unknown IPs and are by no means accurate. For example, the number of tanks is clearly highly exagerated (370, while the UK operates 360 MBTs). Also, the numbers of IFVs, APCs and MLRSs cannot reflect the real numbers existent in the Georgian Land Forces inventory. If no proper sources are found in short notice, these numbers should be deleted. --Eurocopter (talk) 17:33, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure about Georgia, but UK reduced its MBT fleet as UK defense strategy changed, we I mean UK has 780 Challenger 1 and Challenger 2 tanks way back in 1993, but with the 1997 defense white paper 400 tank where sold to Jordan as upgrading Challenger 1 tanks to 2 was deemed to expensive. UK kept 374 Challenger 2 tanks but this figure could change in future.

From what I understand (prewar) Georgia had 230 T-72 tanks, all upgraded with the help of Israel, how many tanks Georgians have now, it's anyone's guess. Mic of orion (talk) 00:38, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

230 is the total number and not all tanks have been upgraded to T-72 SIM1, only (some of) the former Ukrainian T-72AV and former Czech T-72M. The T-72B/B1's are the original models that are also used by the Russians.dendirrek (talk) 16:57, 17

August 2008 (UTC)

Plse change the number of Georgian T-72 MBT's. That there exist only 85 taken from the source which the author didn't really read like it seems, is pure nonsince. The source states the number of georgian tanks which took part in the Battle of Tskhinvali amd operations around the capitol of South Ossetia. Officialy Georgia has up to 240 T-72 tanks with different variants.

There is an info about 65 tanks lost/captured by Russia. So there are 165 (230 - 65) left. Even if the 65 loss counts only T-72, there must be more than 85 T-72 anyway: ~120. The Russian army eye witnesses (I do not know how much they should be trusted) tell there was quite few of Georgian heavy equipment lost in the battle itself and 30-44 tanks have captured in Gori. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.81.14.89 (talk) 08:45, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The russians themself confirm the destruction of 12 georgian T-72 and the capturing of more than 45 tanks in Gori and even a few in Senaki. But, where is the Anti-Air-Systems Section ???? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.196.2.208 (talk) 17:21, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Need Better Info

I think this latest war shows why we need to have accurate information on this article.

Last year, I made changes to this article in regards to the Air Force. My reference was Air Forces Monthly magazine. The article was written about the Georgian Air Force and showed many pictures, and had an interview with numerous commanders and the AF Chief of Staff. Many of the rumors of the Georgians having Mig-21s and Mig-25 were dispelled. However, it kept getting reverted back to the same old, unreliable, ten-year out of date information probably from a Jane’s 1995 reference. It was in this article up to a few days ago.

Also Georgia does not posses the large amount of SAMs (surface-to-air missiles) stated. Many of these missiles are out of service or were never in service. Only a few Russian aircraft were shot down, and all of them in the first day or two of the War.

I have given up trying to clean these things up. I had the same problem with the article of the Mig-29 and Mig-23. There are people on there who want to make out these aircraft to be the best interceptors of all times, even though they have been dismal failures in combat. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Panzertank (talk • contribs) 12:28, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Uniform question

In some recent videos, I've seen Georgian army officers with a patch on the front of their uniform saying "MC" (in Latin letters). What does this mean? Richwales (talk) 04:26, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The patch on the russian soldiers "MC" means Peacekeeping Forces.(Yamitahuvaka (talk) 22:43, 15 August 2008 (UTC)).[reply]

Current Status of military

We need to find a way to address that the Gerogian military has ceased to be an effective fighting force. There are numerous sources that state the Army is basically defunct at this point. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Panzertank (talk • contribs) 15:58, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt that is the case, I think 5 professional brigades are back in Georgian capitol defending the city in case of w/e, but as situation stands now, Georgian army is very much demoralized due to poor performance in Sout Osetia.

I think this has more to do with poor leadership of Georgian Army and State than anything else. Mic of orion (talk) 00:42, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

At this point, Georgian police are putting up more resistance than the Army. Yesterday they set up a roadblock with police cars, which was destroyed by the Russians. The Army at this point is defunct. While there might be some brigades defending the captial, I doubt there are five and I doubt they are that professional. Maybe what is left of the 2,000 troops that came back from Iraq can put up a fight against the Russians. However the large amount of reserve (non-existant) troops are not combat trained, equiped, or ready to fight the Russians. If the Russians wanted to they could take the captial in a few days.

Panzertank (talk) 13:39, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well we do have information that veteran Iraq brigade was able to withdraw from Gori mostly intact (although they abandoned some heavy equiptment after a Russian air strike) ^[1] However the rest of the Georgian army is worse shape. Recent news seems to indicate that the majority of Georgian Armor assets were either destroyed or abandoned in the disorganized retreat from Ossetia and logistical headquarters at Gori, The airforce itself also seems to have been destroyed on the ground and a key airbase at Senaki fell. Most of the Remaining brigades are likely functioning as light infantry at the moment. ) ^[2] ^[3] ^[4] ^[5] Freepsbane (talk) 16:37, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That has to do something with, that Saakashwili, this bitch, made himself commander in Chief of the whole georgian armed forces. A man, complitly without War experience ....

Current Status:

Navy - 75% knocked out. Vessels are left in Batumi and some others in Poti. Air Force - There is nothing left of an air force. Ground Forces: Personnal - Theoratically no heavy but enough casulties to have a desaster. around 185-210 of 28.000 infantry soldiers died ( 2 special forces soldiers ) Armor - around 32 vehicles were destroyed or abandomed during fightings and air strikes in Tskhinvali and the road from Gori to Tbilisi. Another 50-60 vehicles were occupied by russian troops after entering Gori Artillery Base and the large Senaki Military Base. Artillery piece were destroyed or made inoperative Weapons: Several dozens of Bushmaster M4a1's, several types of Anti-Tank Guns and Bazookas, AK-74, mortars and modern combat systems and euipment were stolen by russian troops. Millions of ammunition was stolen by russian troops.

If you ask me, the georgians should learn from this conflict. For what the heck do you need tanks if you have thousands of hidden anti tank systems. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.196.48.251 (talk) 17:34, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ "The Times & the Sunday Times".
^ "Geopolitical Diary: From Tbilisi to Tehran, History Resumes".
^ http://www.reuters.com/article/asiaCrisis/idUSLD294757 ANALYSIS-Georgia rebel confidence rises after fighting
^ "Geopolitical Diary: Countermoves to a Russian Resurgence".
^ http://www.stratfor.com/podcast/facing_new_reality

Georgian "irregulars"?

According to FOX News reporters, they were shot at by "Georgian forces" that were "irregular". This is the only instance I've been able to find that "Georgian irregulars" exist as of 2008. I wonder if they could possibly have been near a Russian checkpoint and confused arriving Ossetian irregulars with "Georgian forces". They say they were "in Gori" at the time, and while it's been confirmed Russians and Ossetians were there at the time, I'm not aware of sources saying "Georgian forces" were "in Gori" then. I wonder if we should mention that an unspecified number of irregular forces exist, or is this source dubious given its isolation?Bdell555 (talk) 03:08, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They were Osetian irregulars. There's some confusion. Read "Georgian irregulars" as "irregulars in Georgia." There are no irregulars in the Georgian military.--93.177.151.101 (talk) 03:32, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, but the reporter clearly describes them as "Georgian forces". But I think you are right that it is highly likely FOX misidentified them. Compare the FOX reporter's account "one minute you're talking to Russian soldiers, then next minute Georgian forces show up" and start shooting with this AP description of events at a Gori checkpoint:

... Georgian officers with binoculars watched as dozens of journalists gathered near the Russians tanks, taping and photographing them up close and attempting to talk to the soldiers. ...

But the situation turned ugly. South Ossetian militiamen, who are allied with the more disciplined Russian troops, appeared and began shouting at people to leave the area. They were highly aggressive, pointing weapons and shoving civilians. One older fighter with a beard fired a pistol in the air.

Note the similarity in accounts, right down to the "pistol" and "undisciplined". Apparently these FOX reporters would have us believe that "Georgian forces" would show up at a Russian checkpoint and start firing. This possibly before the binoculars of Georgian officers. And not just "Georgian forces" but "Georgian irregulars", by all available evidence the first sighting of such a creature in the 21st century.Bdell555 (talk) 04:30, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They are possibly speaking of the ethnic Georgian volunteers from Azerbaijan when they speak of irregulars. (Yamitahuvaka (talk) 06:47, 16 August 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Forest Brothers (Upper Abkhazia) for example. --Captain Obvious and his crime-fighting dog (talk) 07:47, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh wait, the article is about anti-Soviet Baltic partisan movement. The Forest Brothers (Georgia) then. (If they disbanded meanwhile, they would have easily get together at the time of the new open war.) --Captain Obvious and his crime-fighting dog (talk) 07:48, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, please don't cite FOX News anywhere on Wikipedia. --Captain Obvious and his crime-fighting dog (talk) 07:56, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, the FOX news video looked like a poorly produced Blair Witch Project with the camera conveniently pointing at the reporters face as he finished scrambling into the minivan showing him breathing hard from his escape, but not making any report. Perhaps he was too tired to talk but not to correctly aim the camera to show his breathlessness.--Jmedinacorona (talk) 22:40, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are no Georgian "irregulars". The only mentions of irregulars talk of Ossetian armed groups; like here: http://www.lemonde.fr/archives/article/2008/08/19/choses-vues-dans-la-georgie-en-guerre-par-bernard- henri-levy_1085547_0.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.81.14.89 (talk) 08:54, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Su-25

Actually the number 10 is definitly wrong. In a documantary a high military official of the Georgian Army statet that the Georgian Air Force consists of 35 Su-25 close support aircrafts including different variants, mostly the upgradet version Su-25KM. TAM didn't stop working until it was bombed by the russian Air Force in 2008

I highly doubt that the GAF still has 35 Su-25s. I doubt they have ten that still are flying.Panzertank (talk) 13:40, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What means "still". The Russian Air Force didn't ( couldn't ) destroy any of them. Russia has at least 20 air crafts less in it's inventory, but not georgia. I highly doubt that you have informations, but it seems that you are some kind of angry about that .... —Preceding unsigned comment added by ComanL (talk • contribs) 05:33, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am upset that you took out my comments from this page. What gave you the right to do that? I am also upset that people post things they have no idea about. Do you still believe that Georgia hasn't lost any Su-25s? Where are they? Georgia is being overrun and they decide not to use their attack aircraft? Give me a break!

Here is a story for you:

Blown away: Georgian troops say air superiority won war

Published: Monday, 18 August, 2008, 08:24 AM Doha Time

By Adam Plowright

AS HE lies in a Tbilisi hospital, his leg missing from the knee down, Lieutenant Roman Abashidze reflects on the reason for Georgia’s crushing defeat to Russian forces.

“I think that if there had not been Russian air forces, then yes, we had a chance,” he says as he shifts his body by grabbing a steel bar running above his bed.

Like others recovering in the Georgian capital after their army’s failed offensive in South Ossetia last week, he sees Russian air power as the key factor.

Many recounted terrifying ordeals under aerial bombardment around the capital of South Ossetia, Tskhinvali, where fighting was concentrated and many fellow soldiers were said to have been lost.

“We couldn’t handle it. The troops were very well prepared, but the air forces of Russia destroyed everything,” 29-year-old Dato, a captain who declined to give his surname, told AFP as he lay covered in shrapnel injuries, his arm in a steel brace.

Russian planes including SU-25s bomber jets and MiGs had been in the area, he said, and like other soldiers he claimed cluster bombs had been used.

Maintaining an icy stare as he recalled his experiences, he was visibly moved when he talked of the mangled bodies left after a Russian plane attacked an area where the injured were being collected.

An official post-mortem on Georgia’s military action in South Ossetia has not yet begun and it is unclear what the political consequences will be after the humiliating defeat and near destruction of Georgia’s army.

Despite help from the world’s biggest military power, the US, and a sharp increase in defence spending in recent years under President Mikheil Saakashvili, the Georgian forces were no match for Russia’s hugely superior firepower.

The US has spent millions on military training, equipment and weaponry for Georgia, which provided 2,000 troops for the US-led force in Iraq.

Levan Tsereteli, 20, a corporal, is another air raid victim found on the wards of Tbilisi’s hospitals, where stories abound about planes swooping down to 30m from ground level before unleashing a fearsome assault.

“The first time the plane missed, then suddenly we saw it again and it was shooting and dropping bombs. I was wounded from the shrapnel,” he said, a heavy, blood-stained bandage visible around his thigh.

Giorgi Gvelesiahl, a 19-year-old corporal, recounts a similar tale as he sits on his bed, eyes downcast. “I was wounded by a plane. It was a bomb I think, the shrapnel went in my shoulder and in my back,” he says, turning slightly to show a bandage surrounded by scabs.

After being evacuated to a hospital in the nearby city of Gori, he now hopes to make a full recovery and return to the army, but admits to having lost some of his faith.

“It would be better if my friends were here who have died,” he sighs. “Before going we were very proud, but now we are not so proud.”

Vakhtang Maisaia, a military analyst and defence adviser to the Georgian government from 1999-2001, told AFP the country’s leadership was unprepared for the Russian onslaught and had no answer to Moscow’s air force.

“Russian air superiority was crucial. The Georgians were unable to cope with their air defence system,” he said. “Georgia had only tactical air defence (anti-aircraft guns, ground-to-air missiles) which was insufficient. For a short period the ground troops were being protected, but in the long-term it was not enough.”

He said Russia had deployed SU-24 and SU-25 bombers, Soviet planes designed to support ground forces, to target infrastructure and troops, as well as TU-22 long-range strategic bombers. “If we had had fighter jets, maybe the Russians would not have had such superiority,” he said.

In response, Georgia could call on only 10-15 SU-25 bombers, some of which were destroyed and the rest were immobilised after Russia attacked Georgia’s military airports, he said.

“Without a doubt, there was absolutely nothing we could do against them (the Russians) once the planes were sent in,” says Temur Chachanidze, a former analyst at Georgia’s defence ministry and a journalist at the bi-weekly Arsenal military magazine.

“Aviation played the main role. The soldiers told me that everything went wrong as soon as the planes moved in.

“The operation was well organised but the conception of our army, the type of weapons bought by our army and the type of priorities we had was not that well thought out.

“We concentrated on infantry and tanks, which are of no use if they don’t have proper cover from the air.” – AFP

Panzertank (talk) 12:34, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The last phrase as some other phrases are just pure desinformation and war propaganda like allways mixed with good fantasy, you know what Propaganda means, the whole world knows it. The rest is also not fully acceptable. Georgia did not had any interceptors to clean the sky from russian close support air crafts, that's right. Of cource Russia had this advantige right at the beginning. Georgia didn't lost any air craft during the fights

because the georgian air force definitly Could Not risk and also don't wanted to risk loosing any of it's air crafts. Even if they had Interceptors, noone thinks that Russia would have been unable to handle this. That """"georgian statement"""" above is rubish and pure fantasy. That is just silly. It is the same propaganda ly like the """"DEFEAT"""" of the georgian army. Which defeat ??. Retreat does not mean DEFEAT. It was a political chess turn made by a political genius. The georgian army let's the RF forces deeper into the country which is followed by very very very very big consequences for Russia!

Are you stable? You really think the Georgian strategy was to let their country get overrun, and their military destroyed. Georgia doesn't want to lose their aircraft? Please! There lost. I want the Georgians to kick the Russians butt! I feel bad for the Georgians. But this article is about fact, not what I wish were true like you do. And what were the big consequences for Russia, the fact they won! Panzertank (talk) 01:55, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

he has a point. Saakashvili sacrificed hundreds of his countrymen lives just to portray Russia as an aggressor. And partly succeded. But this is forum-like discussion and Wikipedia is not a forum and it ends here.--TheFEARgod (Ч) 09:43, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean, 'It ends here.'? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Panzertank (talk • contribs) 21:59, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

the Soapboxing --TheFEARgod (Ч) 12:26, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The only one soapboxing is you. I am making points about the article and its content. If you don't have nothing useful to add, please don't respond.--Panzertank (talk) 14:51, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can argue as hard as you can and present tons of false facts, but my friend there visited a nearby military airbase and reported more than 18 Su-25 aircrafts only in that place. That's why I'm so angry about your statements. Where can you find any proof for a georgian military defeat during conflict ??

The 2000 men of the seperate infantry batallions and the 2500 men from the 4th Brigade returned home, but leaving 113 dead corpses in Tskhinvali, Gori, Roki and Kodori .... Sorry for their mothers. The retreat was planned before the conflict took place. But Saakashvili didn't know that the Russians would steel and burn nearly every georgian equipment in the Senaki Base, Gori air base and Poti Navy base. The aim of this action was not the defeat of the Russian army, but the political, propaganda and economic defeat of the corrupt aggressive russian Imperium, which will follow in the next years. No big bloodsheed, but tons of billions of dollars lost by Russia. No big sarcrifice, but the destruction of Russia as country and big Gas/Oil Empire. Saakashvili ordered 2000 regulars to retake Tskhinvali for the moment, but not to face the russian army. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.196.113.146 (talk) 15:48, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the proof that the Georgian military was defeated was the fact that the Russians destroyed the Georgian Navy, occupied several towns, and roamed around the countryside destroying Georgian weapon caches and occupying several towns. Also, Russian troops at this moment are still in Georgia. I am not sure what you would classify as a defeat, but when a military is not able to resist an invasion, I think that would classify as a defeat.

As far as your friend visiting a base, I believe that is not enough proof to add that the GAF has 18 Su-25 into this article. If you have a picture of him holding up today’s newspaper with the SU-25s flying behind him, I think that would be solid proof.

I'm all for the Georgians kicking the Russian's butt, but this is an article based on fact.Panzertank (talk) 12:52, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is a opinion quite spread in Russia that most of Georgian Su-25 are neither destroyed nor disabled. Undoubtedly, that is no proof to anything. But these kind of rumours proved to be more or less valid before, so personally, I more or less believe them. Surely it does give little idea what a responsible wikipedia.org editor should fill in the article. So I think the sentence "The factual accuracy of part of this article is disputed." is the only thing one can do by now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.81.14.89 (talk) 09:05, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, this discussion is a bloody mess. First of all the Georgian airforce did not suffer any losses in air according to the Ministry of Defense of Georgia. Neither does the Russian military claim anymore that they had downed a Georgian Su-25 but the claim was present during and shortly after the war. Certain analysts listed are not credible for being highly POV and the Russian military has it's own official data. The Ossetians insisted of having downed one Georgian Su-25 during hostilities. However it turned out that the Su-25 which was shot down belonged to the Russian airforce and it's a documented fact that the Russian airforce lost a number of aircraft due to friendly fire. During hostilities it was reported from Russian side that Georgian aircraft were shot down by Russian forces but later those were all identified as Russian aircraft, friendly fire. Actual losses sustained by the Georgian airforce consist of a number of L-9 trainer aircraft and a few Mi-8 transport helicopters all of which were destroyed on the ground. This is confirmed by both sides. So the Georgian Su-25 wing was not reduced in the war but effectively taken out of action when the Russian airforce damaged the runways. Most or rather ALL Georgian Su-25 and L-9 were / ( are nowdays as well ) stationed in a single aerodrome what meant / means that taking out it's runway would completly cut the GAF off of ANY fixed-wing air support.

Georgia did aquire a number of Su-25 from Bulgaria later ( I think 4 aircraft ) for spare parts. The number of Su-25 was never dramaticaly reduced in recent years. Some were decomissioned due to maintanance issues. With the decision made by the Ministry of Defense of Georgia in mid 2014, six of the 11-12 Su-25 aircraft will be sold either to the end of 2014 or in 2015, effectively reducing the Su-25 wing to half it's strenght. This is in accordance to new military reforms ( 2014-2018 ). TheMightyGeneral (talk) 14:33, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Equipment list of GEORGIA

which idiot took it off?? ill see i if can try and fix it.if you guys dont mind.User talk:Homan05

Where is the MBT section ????????? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.196.74.249 (talk) 19:40, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Revision Due to Vandalism

revised to a older version due to vandalism —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kalus (talk • contribs) 01:11, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Georgian National Guard

How can the national Guard consist of 25.000 men, when the regular forces strenght is not more than 28.000 and total army strength, 32.000 ???? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.196.43.176 (talk) 07:28, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AA Systems

Hm, I have a question. After the august war in 2008 the georgian army received new equipement. I saw some tapes of Tunguska AA-Systems. Does anyone have informations about that ???? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.196.51.146 (talk) 19:37, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Those Tunguskas belonged to the Russian army. dendirrek (talk) 12:13, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Those" Tunguskas were propably imported from Ukraine. Russia is not the only country using Tunguskas. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.196.86.10 (talk) 16:25, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To 92.196.51.146 and 92.196.86.10, unless you have some reliable sources which indicate that Georgia has somehow obtained Tunguskas, or that exactly ukraine had supplied Tunguskas to Georgia, then I'm afraid but we won't be able to add information that Gorgia has Tunguskas to the article. I haven't even seen any military databases or respectful military sites that say that georgia has Tunguskas.GVilKa (talk) 20:48, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Equipment losses from war

There is a table [2] which lists Georgian equipment losses from the war. Maybe we should copy that information to to this article as well? Offliner (talk) 20:01, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Hiberniantears (talk) 20:41, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copied the table. Offliner (talk) 14:00, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

citing the numbers?

Can somebody source this:

Active personnel 36,000 Reserve personnel 100,000

Those numbers change for no reason.. any source for that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Barciur (talk • contribs) 00:43, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reserve Personal is 100.000 but the regular forces consist of 33.000 men —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.196.1.63 (talk) 15:44, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As there is no given data on the actual number of servicemen in the post 2008 Georgian army, I changed the figure of both active and reserve personnel to N/A TheMightyGeneral (talk) 17:34, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Georgia Ground Force

First, why does Georgia Ground Force redirect to Military of Georgia? Ground Forces are a separate branch of the Georgian military (just like the Air Force and Navy).

Second, official name of this branch is Georgian Land Forces [3].

Also, the official name of the Georgian military is Georgian Armed Forces [4].

I think this article should be renamed into Georgian Armed Forces and a separate article about the Georgian Land Forces should be created. --GVilKa (talk) 11:28, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How much left?

Exactly how much of the Georgian military is left after the was last year? Shouldn't this article include information on that and any efforts to rebuild? ANK 71.244.156.156 (talk) 17:22, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article had a chapter about the impact of the war on the Georgian military, but the chapter was removed by someone. 2008 South Ossetia war article contains a lot of info about how many tanks Georgian military lost, etc. Offliner (talk) 10:50, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, since the Georgians allready use their own factories to modify and produce the T-72B1 and upgrade it later to the Sim1, I would say, an amount of the T-72 gap is allready filled. The Georgian Army had at least 38 T-72's less in it's inventory. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.23.81.76 (talk) 17:09, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Eduard Kokoity thinks Georgia is already better armed than before the war: [5]. Offliner (talk) 08:58, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Abolishment of the Georgian Air Force and Reestablishment

The Georgian Ministry of Defence recently announced that the Georgian Air Force is beeing abolished as an own branch and will be reorganised as an element of the ground forces. Thus I will delete the Air Force section. TheMightyGeneral (talk) 14:28, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

UPDATE 2014: The Georgian Air Force will be re-established as it's own branch of the Georgian Armed Forces in accordance to the new ongoing military reforms in cooperation with NATO. TheMightyGeneral (talk) 14:37, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Update on Georgian forces

Note, the updated figures provided by me date back to 2009. The number of troops could have been massiveley increased later that year and in present. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheMightyGeneral (talk • contribs) 19:21, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

VANDALISM

194.27.30.2 edited and deleted the unit tag images I added without any permission or reason. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheMightyGeneral (talk • contribs) 05:29, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Military Academy?

Is there a Georgian Military Academy? If so, where is it? Can't find anything about it on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.89.175.147 (talk) 23:09, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just because there isn't an article, doesn't mean there is no academy .... Google or visit the official MOD site. TheMightyGeneral (talk) 17:24, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Current size - as of 2013/14

The official document from 2013 provided gives a figure of 37,825 active duty personnel. In other words, every contract based employed individuel serving in the armed forces. That excludes the number of civilians also employed by the ministry of defence, who are not active duty personnel. Only civilian employees. I've segmented the overall employer strenght of the Ministry of Defense 43,475 ( active personnel + civilians ) according to how it's displayed in the document. This is what is asked in the template. I'm open for compromises though if we find a solution. Thank you. TheMightyGeneral (talk) 12:13, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Georgian Armed Forces. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:34, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Georgian Armed Forces. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20160111220826/http://www.mod.gov.ge/2007/downloads/The_Strategic_Defence_Review(www.mod.gov.ge).pdf to http://www.mod.gov.ge/2007/downloads/The_Strategic_Defence_Review(www.mod.gov.ge).pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:44, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Georgian Armed Forces. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110903235612/http://www.crisisgroup.org/~/media/Files/europe/205%20South%20Ossetia%20-%20The%20Burden%20of%20Recognition.pdf to http://www.crisisgroup.org/~/media/Files/europe/205%20South%20Ossetia%20-%20The%20Burden%20of%20Recognition.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:17, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Georgian Armed Forces. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20161125044727/http://www.mod.gov.ge/p/chief-of-general-staff to http://www.mod.gov.ge/p/chief-of-general-staff
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130508082214/http://mod.gov.ge/documents/2013%20wlis%20biujeti.pdf to http://mod.gov.ge/documents/2013%20wlis%20biujeti.pdf
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.jamestown.org/single/?no_cache=1
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130508082214/http://mod.gov.ge/documents/2013%20wlis%20biujeti.pdf to http://mod.gov.ge/documents/2013%20wlis%20biujeti.pdf
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131105133928/http://www.mod.gov.ge/index.php?page=-10&Id=25&lang=1 to http://www.mod.gov.ge/index.php?page=-10&Id=25&lang=1

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:28, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Name changing - Discussion

I propose changing the name to "Defense Forces of (the Republic of) Georgia" - which would be the accurate translation anyway, and out of technical reasons because there is already a "GDF", namely Guyana Defence Force. So there at least be a different abbreviation, such as DFG / DFRG which is not taken yet by any military force. TheMightyGeneral (talk) 16:04, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

References

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Nurol Ejder.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:56, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[1] "The Times & the Sunday Times".

[2] "Geopolitical Diary: From Tbilisi to Tehran, History Resumes".

[3] ttp://www.reuters.com/article/asiaCrisis/idUSLD294757 ANALYSIS-Georgia rebel confidence rises after fighting

[4] "Geopolitical Diary: Countermoves to a Russian Resurgence".

[5] ttp://www.stratfor.com/podcast/facing_new_reality

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]