NATO return to Cold War force structure

[Ssnake]

It's pretty much all gone, Stuart. If you can't keep a production line open, knowledge decays. People move to new jobs or retire, they won't come back. Even if you keep a minimal production line running, scaling up is difficult enough. If Britain were to concentrate on what it's good at, look at what it's good at right now.

The Ukraine war is a good acid test for the entire European defense industry and procurement agencies and their processes. Things are moving. Are they moving fast enough? If so, it'll be a close call.

[Stuart Galbraith]

Well we do have some latent AFV production capacity. But notably, thats all been resurrected to create new orders in the last 5 or 6 years, because the British army contrived not to buy ANY Afvs for 20 years and killed the industry. Partly due to the war on terror, largely because it couldnt make its frigging mind up what it wanted. They complained for years about the poor service they got from that industry, then when it all disappeared, almost overnight, they had a sudden realisation they could no longer get the bespoke weapons they always told themselves they needed.

I console myself with the fact that what we have is now primarily European. Which frankly is probably for everyones good, because now the army cant  buy boutique weapons, but actually something sensible the rest of Europe agrees on. Which to my mind, might actually be sustainable. You might be content to give the finger to Alvis, but you really arent going to do it to a big player like Rheinmetall without suffering long term consequences.

I agree though, we are best to concentrate on our strengths. We seem reasonably good at drones, short range RPG's, short range air defence. We still build some actually fairly decent warships and submarines and ASW helicopters. How predictable then the threat we are most facing is on land.

 

[Martineleca]

8 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

I console myself with the fact that what we have is now primarily European. Which frankly is probably for everyones good, because now the army cant  buy boutique weapons, but actually something sensible the rest of Europe agrees on.

This is why the SP70 was ultimately a good project that should have been brought to fruition, it's main purpose was for Italy, the UK and Germany to establish an extensive localized manufacturing network so as not to rely on the US. At some point a goal of outperforming the existing M109 platform was added and when it couldn't be achieved within budget the whole program was cancelled, subsequently Italy has produced zero SPGs, Britain built a couple hundred before shutting down the factory and Germany eventually set up production with a depressingly low annual rate, so a lot has been lost and almost nothing gained from that decision as usual... 

[Stuart Galbraith]

12 hours ago, Martineleca said:

This is why the SP70 was ultimately a good project that should have been brought to fruition, it's main purpose was for Italy, the UK and Germany to establish an extensive localized manufacturing network so as not to rely on the US. At some point a goal of outperforming the existing M109 platform was added and when it couldn't be achieved within budget the whole program was cancelled, subsequently Italy has produced zero SPGs, Britain built a couple hundred before shutting down the factory and Germany eventually set up production with a depressingly low annual rate, so a lot has been lost and almost nothing gained from that decision as usual... 

And Combat Engineer Tractor. That was first rate, really decent equipment that all Europe funded, then ultimately only Britain bought. So we arent the only ditherers here, all Europe does it.

So the lesson is, Europe needs to have over capacity, and it needs to agree on common weapons. We knew this 40 years ago, but with the over optimism that went around the 'end of history', we clean forgot about it. Time we did something about it. Defence policy should not be regarded as national, but European wide.

And yes, that includes Britain, Brexit notwithstanding. 

[Martineleca]

On 4/30/2024 at 9:25 AM, Sardaukar said:

To comment original topic...

Finland never left the "Cold War structure" while many including Sweden dismantled their defence structure. 

Macron reaffirms possibility of sending troops to Ukraine - "I have a clear strategic objective: Russia cannot win in Ukraine,"

https://www.france24.com/en/france/20240502-macron-doesn-t-rule-out-troops-for-ukraine-if-russia-breaks-front-lines

 

- If Russia wins in Ukraine, there will be no security in Europe. Even if a ceasefire is enforced and holds with an established DMZ there still won't be guaranteed security until NATO reconstructs its militaries to something resembling their former capacity. Germany should have held onto its Leopards and produced new ones that Finland would buy at the market rate, it's only natural. 😉

[Stuart Galbraith]

Macron is right. The problem is, he isnt going to do it unless he has some big mates do it with him. And I dont see anyone else in Europe going to do it.

Well possibly Poland. Whom else? Because we wont, because the Americans will tell us off if we do.

[seahawk]

1 hour ago, Martineleca said:

Macron reaffirms possibility of sending troops to Ukraine - "I have a clear strategic objective: Russia cannot win in Ukraine,"

https://www.france24.com/en/france/20240502-macron-doesn-t-rule-out-troops-for-ukraine-if-russia-breaks-front-lines

 

- If Russia wins in Ukraine, there will be no security in Europe. Even if a ceasefire is enforced and holds with an established DMZ there still won't be guaranteed security until NATO reconstructs its militaries to something resembling their former capacity. Germany should have held onto its Leopards and produced new ones that Finland would buy at the market rate, it's only natural. 😉

Again, with all allies busy in the Sandbox, this would not have been an option.

And the Russian bogeyman is also boring. The only threat to Europe is American imperialism. The new Russian Civil War is no threat, and re-instating Russian dominance over Eastern Europe is just returning to the natural order of things.

[Stuart Galbraith]

if the natural order of things is potentially waking up to an SS-20 sunrise, you can stick it where the sun doesnt shine.

[seahawk]

Well, what do you expect when Russian imperialism was largely accepted by the Western powers for a long time?

[Martineleca]

1 hour ago, seahawk said:

Well, what do you expect when Russian imperialism was largely accepted by the Western powers for a long time?

It may have been accepted by the Western powers, but not by the peoples of Eastern Europe. Russian ambitions to bypass the Bosporus were dashed when Bulgaria refused to effectively become their province and Bosnia was annexed by Austria-Hungary lest it be taken over by the Serbs, cutting the only two viable routes to the Aegean and Adriatic seas. The Poles, Ukrainians, Finns, Georgians, Moldovans or Baltics were never part of that empire of their own will and split away as soon as the chains were broken at the end of the Great War.

[Stuart Galbraith]

1 hour ago, seahawk said:

Well, what do you expect when Russian imperialism was largely accepted by the Western powers for a long time?

I think the word you are looking for is 'endured'.

[rmgill]

Who wanted to do what Patton wanted to do? Seriously? 

[Martineleca]

3 hours ago, rmgill said:

Who wanted to do what Patton wanted to do? Seriously? 

Well the Polish government in exile for starters, the security guarantees for whom led to France and the UK declaring war on Germany for their invasion, yet no action against the Soviet Union who joined in a few weeks later. Not long after that stripping them of a net 76 000sq. km. of ancestral lands and imposing a brutal communist regime for the next half century, yeah I'm sure the Poles would have supported what Patton wanted to do and felt terribly betrayed when it didn't happen, along with most other countries of Eastern Europe who were occupied by that rapist looting horde of red savages.

Edited May 4 by Martineleca

[Ssnake]

5 minutes ago, Martineleca said:

that rapist looting horde of red savages.

"Liberators", I think, is the preferred Russian nomenclature.

[seahawk]

It is the generally accepted correct term, as Russia and the Soviet Union liberated Europe from Fascism. Sadly it seems like they have to do it again today.

[Martineleca]

52 minutes ago, seahawk said:

It is the generally accepted correct term, as Russia and the Soviet Union liberated Europe from Fascism. Sadly it seems like they have to do it again today.

Liberated by the armies of the most bloodthirsty regime in the history of the planet, the Soviet Union and China are notorious for having more of their population killed in "peacetime" than during total war. Not surprising it was the same in all foreign lands they conquered, after the shooting ends the killing starts, whether dead or red didn't matter as the chance of survival was at best 50-50 even for the useful idiots.

Edited May 4 by Martineleca

[bojan]

1 hour ago, Martineleca said:

... Not surprising it was the same in all foreign lands they conquered, after the shooting ends the killing starts, whether dead or red didn't matter as the chance of survival was at best 50-50 even for the useful idiots.

If it was true in the way you present it most eastern Europe countries would have 1/2 of the population they had in 1990.

 

[Martineleca]

5 minutes ago, bojan said:

If it was true in the way you present it most eastern Europe countries would have 1/2 of the population they had in 1990.

Not as bad as Holodomor of course, that's a whole different level of terror. My great-grandfather was arrested by commies, spent ten years in a gulag receiving daily beatings to the point half his face was paralyzed, I suppose he was lucky since a lot of his friends were fed to the swine. After getting out he couldn't live a normal life from his injuries and eventually jumped in a well to end it, he is a casualty of the aftermath of Soviet occupation, even if he didn't die in 1945.

[bojan]

My grandfather also spent time in jail under communists for "being too critical of them". Personal stories are personal stories, and if there was real extermination intention post 1945 - population grow in eastern Europe would be way less than it was historically.

You are also behaving like every country in eastern Europe was functional democracy before communists came, and no, it was not, with partial exception of Czechoslovakia every other country was a dictatorship that has brutally suppressed undesirables, no matter if the were racial, national or political, including killing them when convenient.

Edited May 4 by bojan

[TrustMe]

When the great powers won WW2 the rational for the USSR having control over Easter Europe was simply "Their better than the Nazi's were". Cold blooded but true  

Edited May 4 by TrustMe

[Stuart Galbraith]

3 hours ago, Ssnake said:

"Liberators", I think, is the preferred Russian nomenclature.

As Berliners called the Soviet War memorial there, 'The Tomb of the Unknown Rapist'...

[Stuart Galbraith]

I think the worst you can say about Pre WW2 Eastern Europe, 'it was a lot better than what replaced it'. Which isnt much, but was frankly all they needed.

You dont have to believe that all those states were functional democracies, its enough to say that the Red Army brought nothing good with them, even if it was masked under the cloak of 'Liberation'. That I think is more than enough to say.

As far as numbers, its clear they didn wipe out Eastern Europe. As far as the intelligentsia, yes, I think it fair to say it was something of a Holocaust. You either left for the west, or you ended up gritting the roads.

[bojan]

40 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

I think the worst you can say about Pre WW2 Eastern Europe, 'it was a lot better than what replaced it'. ....

Except realistically it was not for the vast majority of the peopel. Look at illiteracy rates, look at % of people with education higher than mandatory school (which was often only 4-5 years), expected length of life, access to the medicine, look at the... basically everything "materialistic". Some of those things were bound to happen no matter what, but a lot of those, especially mass access to the higher education were unlikely. Even corruption, which is considered default of every communist system has  already existed many nasty forms.

Hence you can not look at communism (or what came before it) as strictly black or white dilema, IRL both were much more covered with shades of grey. Somewhere shades were lighter (Yugoslavia post war), sometimes darker (Romania in the '70/80s). But it was never one-sided.

45 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

As Berliners called the Soviet War memorial there, 'The Tomb of the Unknown Rapist'...

Ah, Berliners, real moral authority on war crimes...

Edited May 4 by bojan

[seahawk]

This is just a result of anti Soviet propaganda.

[bojan]

It is a result of "Our shit smells better than foreigner's cake" mentality that is so prevalent in eastern Europe.