its true weapons are unproductive capital goods, and money could be better spent, but your point about 3th world counties buying high priced weapon systems is only half thru, even brazil makes fighter jets and angola has a triving small arms industry, 3th world countrys have taken on western developement models in more ways than one. The logic of long production runs is inescapable, even for counties at peace. America is a grotesque example of a counties economy deformed by the arms trade but it is something that has taken place in nearly all western economies to a greater or lesser degree, even German.
European Armour
- Thread starter .pt
- Start date
- Status
So who is going to tally all this up? (Bags not me!) And what criteria will be used to designate diferent bits of equipment, eg is a Leo2A4 a class 1 MTB or a Class 2 etc etc...?
Something I would be interested in is how much of this equipment is operated by conscripts and how much by regulars. I know the British are all regular, but unsure about the rest.
IMO equipment and units manned by conscripts are not likely to be deployed outside of Europe short of all out world war.
Something I would be interested in is how much of this equipment is operated by conscripts and how much by regulars. I know the British are all regular, but unsure about the rest.
IMO equipment and units manned by conscripts are not likely to be deployed outside of Europe short of all out world war.
Most of our air force and naval units together with one army tank division, one division for special operations (airborne/light Infantry, special forces, etc.) and one division for air operations are operational all the time. The rest of our army contains conscriptors but most brigades are able to field one mixed btl for duty in other countries.
On the other side we are able to field nearly 800.000 to 1 million soldiers if the red army wakes up again.
On the other side we are able to field nearly 800.000 to 1 million soldiers if the red army wakes up again.
IIRC UK, France, Spain, Italy, Netherlands, Belgium, Portugal, Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovenia, Slovakia, Bulgaria & Romania are either professional or soon will be. Germany, Austria, Greece, Turkey, Poland, & all of Scandinavia are keeping conscription, though reducing numbers & increasing exceptions to the point where some are, in effect, getting volunteers. Note that some of these countries retain the conscription law & system (like the USA), in case of emergency.Whiskyjack said:
Scandinavian countries don't have any difficulty manning peacekeeping units with conscripts. They ask for volunteers, & get plenty. Germany has had a problem deploying troops abroad, because (as with many other countries) there are legal limits on the use of conscripts: they can't be ordered outside the NATO area*. But again, they have enough conscripts who volunteer for such service. What was needed (& has now been done) was to reorganise units to form some manned entirely by regulars & willing conscripts, so they are deployable anywhere, on the model of the intervention force the French maintained before they gave up conscription.
*This limited the French commitment to ODS. The French intervention force was mostly light, intended for, e.g., African service. Still, a light armoured division proved very useful in ODS for covering the left flank.
We have enough volunteers for oversea missions but not enough units.
It is getting too much I think. Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan and Kongo. And in most of them we have the biggest force.
And now they are talking of Lebanon... :hitwall
What are we talking about. How effective the EU/NATO is without the support of the US in case of a full scale attack on europe or how effective we are in oversea missions (peacekeeping and full scale battles)?
It is getting too much I think. Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan and Kongo. And in most of them we have the biggest force.
And now they are talking of Lebanon...
:hitwall What are we talking about. How effective the EU/NATO is without the support of the US in case of a full scale attack on europe or how effective we are in oversea missions (peacekeeping and full scale battles)?
Well think of it this way, if Germany has no social welfare system, and a military budget of 3 to 3.5 per cent of GDP, then you will actually not have to pay a lot less, since there is no more need to fund social services, so instead of having a 50 per cent income tax top rate, Germans will just have to pay a 30 per cent flat tax, which will boost consumer spending and business investment, thus leading to an economic boom in Germany. And your examples are for third world countries, Germany and Ireland are first world countries, not third, for your information, Singapore, a country which spends 6 per cent of its GDP on the military, and whose military budget comprises about 30+ per cent of its budget, actually has an income tax rate that is a lot lower than Germany, which spends only 1.5 per cent of its GDP on the military. By the way, do you know how much as a percentage of its budget or GDP Germany spends to service its debt?TrangleC said:
Grand Danois
Entertainer
Conscription isn't that big a thing in the Danish Army.swerve said:
- Permanent professional personnel - 9,150.
- Reaction Force Contracts - 4,070 (4 months as conscripts + 8 months Army Reaction Force training + ? months of mission specific training/workup is minimum. Then 3 deployments of 6 months, each with its own workup. Civilian life in between with brushup on training.
- Conscripts - 2,150 (6,450 with 4 months each) - This is where the recruiting for Reaction Force contracts is done.
Also, the two brigades and the divisional units are drawn from the permanent or rapid reaction force btls of the regiments, which each also have a training btl each. 1. Bde and Div units are made up of professionals on permanent contracts and 2, Bde is mostly up of made of reaction force personnel. MBT's and IFV's ie all the best stuff is assigned to these units. Whilst conscripts will have kit on the M113 level.
It is not that easy to recruit personnel right now, with a current shortfall of 1,100 over all three services.
As for European defense capabilities try Headline Goal 2010, ECAP, ESDP and keep in mind that most expeditionary capability in Europe is tied up in the NATO NRF structure. It is far easier way of measurement than a tally of European armour.
Edit: DefenceTalk - Afghan NATO Mission Will Test European Resolve: Analysts
Last edited:
Dude are you seriously avocating european countries to become dependent on arms sales to spur economic growth? Before the 1960's the US had a normal economy, this was the golden age for american industry, now the only thing you make that is top of the range are weapon systems, almost every other industry has been eaten into by forigen compeditors.
Less than 40 years ago america was the undisputed world leader in everything. Now at least 30% of your industry is devoted to the military production which you sell to the highest bidder as long as they dont threaten you. And you want other countries to follow that path? What do you think would happen if germany and Japan went in to the arms market in the same way as the US? your profits would be destroyed! Everything else the Japanese went into they dominated, and the Germans arent far behind.
Singapore has to spend that kind of cash it lives in a very dangerous neighbourhood, they dont want to spend that money they have to.
Anyway europe is not america, goverments and people work differently here,
social cohesion and a more equal socity are much more important than booming profits and a lack of a social net. What seems to work for you does not work for other countries, just imagine where america would be if for the last 40 years half of what you spent on militaty R and D was spent on pure industral R and D. Maybe you would still be the top industrial dog.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #52
Focus
Well, when i started this post my idea was to focus only in armor/mechanized forces capabilities of the countries in the EU. That was the scope intended, not an all out European defence capabilities assesment wich would have to include Aerial and naval assets, industrial capabilities, forces integration, and so on. That would be an enormous task, and not possible in this forum i think.
Also i´m not even leaning too much on operationality of these assets, since those vary a lot. My Idea is to get a general grasp on figures and types of Tanks, APC/IFV, SPG, etc etc that make the armor currently available in these countries, so that we can discuss their relative value as compared with armys wich also have great numbers of armored forces, such as the US, China, Russia, etc. Nothing to do with Nato, its just an European evaluation.
As for the tallying, i´ll do it, altough probably in a very crude manner, in order to keep things simple.
.pt
Well, when i started this post my idea was to focus only in armor/mechanized forces capabilities of the countries in the EU. That was the scope intended, not an all out European defence capabilities assesment wich would have to include Aerial and naval assets, industrial capabilities, forces integration, and so on. That would be an enormous task, and not possible in this forum i think.
Also i´m not even leaning too much on operationality of these assets, since those vary a lot. My Idea is to get a general grasp on figures and types of Tanks, APC/IFV, SPG, etc etc that make the armor currently available in these countries, so that we can discuss their relative value as compared with armys wich also have great numbers of armored forces, such as the US, China, Russia, etc. Nothing to do with Nato, its just an European evaluation.
As for the tallying, i´ll do it, altough probably in a very crude manner, in order to keep things simple.
.pt
I'm not sure raw figures will give you that much insight in to real depoloable military power. It would just be a long list. I'm sure if the russian counted up all there tanks the total would be frightening, but undepolable in any meaningfull capability. The fact that most (all) european counries rely on the
US airlift capabilitys makes such totals kind of meaningless. Its a nice idea dont get me wrong, but maybe it would be better to look at european rapid reaction forces or the nasent Battle groups system.
Grand Danois said:
It seems that we finns are the sole EU country to left with "real" conscription system (over 80% of finnish mens go to army). There have been very cauntionly talks over proffesional army but mainly among some political minority groups. The general support among the public and in the biggest parties still supports our current system. Due our unique history and relatively small size as a nation have curved the coscription system deep into our society and tearing it dwon might have strong consequenses. Also at least us just served there seems to be this united wiev that if we had to do it, then shall the others:soldier :ar15
But anyway If we should speculate over theoretical "european army" we should just focus on the MBt force...artillery (other than fancy SP systems too) and infantry is still the key elements of any military power and shoudln't be negledged...
Personally I think consription is a great idea, in that it gives everyone a taste of what the army is, when armys go professional i think they lose that link with the people. Its not your son its some other son who goes off to fight.
In someways it becomes a mersonery force, deployed by the goverment at its whim. If you look at the UK, its deployed in Iraq and Afganistan, but there is no sense the country is at war, no solidarity, and very little questioning amoung the public about why its there, its just not a topic of conversation. If that was a conscripted force there would be a lot more interest in the military the war and the way its run. A Professional force has the effect of exculding the citizen, a bad thing in my book. I'm not saying that the Pro's dont do a good job, its just that they become isolated from socity at large.
Go the Finn's!!
Well in purely defencive forces like our army, the conscription is the ideal system. We still (thank god) have the policy to defend all of our rather wide area and that calls for area-defence doctrines. It means that the defence is layered very deep and fighting in a way some big countries may call a "gureallian warfare". That cannot be achived with small proffesional army (as country of our size cannot afford to have a huge proffesional army) so the coscription system comes in hand.
Sorry for continuing the oftopic but... That functions [the Conscription System] whenever the society and particularly the youths be socially aware of their country defence and a massive conscience objection phenomena not be produced.
This exactly happened in Spain with a conscription system of nine months, where in the last 90s, 85000 of the 90000 called in every replacement declared conscience objections (allowed by law), refusing to be join with the Armed Forces. Obviously creating gigantic holes in the number of troops of the units.
This exactly happened in Spain with a conscription system of nine months, where in the last 90s, 85000 of the 90000 called in every replacement declared conscience objections (allowed by law), refusing to be join with the Armed Forces. Obviously creating gigantic holes in the number of troops of the units.
Gollevainen said:It seems that we finns are the sole EU country to left with "real" conscription system (over 80% of finnish mens go to army). There have been very cauntionly talks over proffesional army but mainly among some political minority groups. The general support among the public and in the biggest parties still supports our current system. Due our unique history and relatively small size as a nation have curved the coscription system deep into our society and tearing it dwon might have strong consequenses. Also at least us just served there seems to be this united wiev that if we had to do it, then shall the others:soldier :ar15
But anyway If we should speculate over theoretical "european army" we should just focus on the MBt force...artillery (other than fancy SP systems too) and infantry is still the key elements of any military power and shoudln't be negledged...
The swedish system has recently been changed (again). 11 or 15 months obligatory + 5 months optional. The obligatory is for defending the country and the optional is more international. This year 8000(15% of thoose who got enlisted) has been called to "serve the country" (i'm one of them). I think 1500 conscripts is placed in "fighting units" and the rest as maintainance, engineeres, staff, guards, royal guards ect. ect.
The goal is that at least 4000 youths is called each year and that 90% choose to participate international, join the Home Guard or become a officer. The problem is that in the near future there wont be 4000 youths available to SAF, the youngsters don't want too go through 2 weeks of "hell in the dark, cold and dangerous swedish pine forrest". So they have to take thoose who don't want this and the result is poorly motivated conscript soldiers. So SAF is planning to start training "tech-officers", keep informing the public, start training proffesional soldiers, make SSG(Särkilda Skydds Gruppen, swedens "top secret elite unit") available for conscripts and train conscripts.
Tearing a down a big conscript system really fast is not good!!!
Sorry for going a little off topic!
Last edited:
True its hard to get 18 19 year old kids to put themselfs true that kind of thing when they would rather be chasing women and getting drunk!
Maybe the best thing is half and half, conscript reserves with a professional standing army. The swedes are quite good in that they give a good level of techincail training to the support troops, which will be useful when they get out of the army.
But the most important thing about a conscript army is to give them a sense of mission, you know like the NYPD "To Protect and Serve"
The Israeli IDF are an example of a good conscript army where everyone serves, and most want to serve. Obviously they live in a tough neighbourhood, so its a bit easier to motivate the kids. Sweden, spain, finnland dont have the same problems of course, but I still think you can motivate people to join in other ways, give them basic university education/ technical/engineering training/ civil defence/ paramedic training.
- Status