Saudi considers T-95 MBTs?
- Thread starter Izzy1
- Start date
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #183
Prince Khaled was also in Poland, checking out the PT-91.
RSLF want one platform - M1-A2.
Interesting - I wonder what his opinion was inregards to the PT-91M and what kept them from wanting the T-90. There may be a good chance that the T-90 tanks that Algeria will be purchasing may in fact have the Relikt tile package, I wonder if this was the model Russia was trying to sell to
Saudi Arabia.
With the money available for Saudi Arabia I would wonder if the visit to Poland was more than just some nice visit without actually thinking about aquiring a PT version...
Diversifiying ones defense material sources is fine but operating 2-3 different kinds of MBTs alone is insane if you have the money to aquire nearly every top notch MBT out there with any bells and whistles you want in sufficient numbers.
Diversifiying ones defense material sources is fine but operating 2-3 different kinds of MBTs alone is insane if you have the money to aquire nearly every top notch MBT out there with any bells and whistles you want in sufficient numbers.
Agreed - I would be quite shocked if they picked up a batch of PT-91s, including the future PT-91EX. But if I am reading @IZZY correct then it looks like they will stay the course of M1A2.
I dont see much sence in buying T-90 except political - show to USA "we can live without your tanks!" and gain some russian support in international affairs.
Obviously, buying tanks from such weak and controllable by USA country as Poland will not bring any political benefits.
Weak and controlled - that was not a nice statement to make inregards to Poland Chrom, you are just upset that Russia cannot bully them around any longer and that maybe they would give Russia a real bloody nose in a armed confrontation. Saudi Arabia has shown the world stage that when they are in need of purchasing weapon systems for their first class military that they are not concerned on who`s feelings decide to get hurt when making those purchases.
Lets see: Is Poland weak in international politic? - Yes. Weak compared not only to USA or Russia, but also compared literally to every other european state.
Is Poland controlled by USA? Yes, USA have great influence on Poland. Of all european states, Poland is probably most close and questionless USA ally.
So, while my statement is indeed a bit less politicaly correct (better to say a bit too much stright) than comfortable - it is truth.
The question here is not about SA purchases hurt anyone. But obviously buying T-90 (let alone PT-91M) instead of Abrams have nothing to do with "first class military". Or do you have different opinion and REALLY think what SA consider PT-91M better than Abrams? May be they know something unknown to us about Abrams after they tryed it?
Last edited:
Chrom - if you think of Poland in the way that you do then so be it, what ever floats your boat. If Saudi Arabia decides to purchase different tanks then that is their progative.
On this topic I have to agree with Chrom to some degree.
Poland is heavily influenced by the US and is maybe one of the most US influenced countries in europe.
Its influence in europe is limited (the twins haven't made many friends here in europe...) and outside of europe it is nearly not existent.
This lack of influence and independence together with the quality of the PT makes poland a not very good source for MBTs, especially for countries with a big budget.
Poland is heavily influenced by the US and is maybe one of the most US influenced countries in europe.
Its influence in europe is limited (the twins haven't made many friends here in europe...) and outside of europe it is nearly not existent.
This lack of influence and independence together with the quality of the PT makes poland a not very good source for MBTs, especially for countries with a big budget.
What has Poland done to upset her European neighbors, and I agree that they produce a tank with quality standards set for lower budget militaries.
Poland is a major pain in the .. for Europe. Politically Poland always support USA and not EU. War in Iraq is an example. Economically also support USA at expence of european interests - see F-16 purchase, oil/gas pipline disput with Russia (while France, Germany, Italy and some other countries are deeply interested in that poject), recent problems with EU - Russia agreement, ABM issue where Poland dont even ask about EU interests, ever rised tension with Germany due to Nazy times, etc.
Funny part: BTW, see how Waylander wrote Poland with small "p"? He is from Germany...
martitrmartitr
New Member
Not really sure if thats funny.......Funny part: BTW, see how Waylander wrote Poland with small "p"? He is from Germany...
(know its not on purpose ofcourse)
@ eckherl
The Germans and Russians ganging up on Poland again.... only kidding
I believe we have lost one of the twins, so I expect Poland will make an effort not to be so antagonistic to its European neighbours in the future.
They see the US as being a better garrantor of there independence than the EU, given that they have seen repeated invasions and brutal occupations by there neighbours this can be seen as a not unreasonable stance.
The Germans and Russians ganging up on Poland again....
only kiddingI believe we have lost one of the twins, so I expect Poland will make an effort not to be so antagonistic to its European neighbours in the future.
They see the US as being a better garrantor of there independence than the EU, given that they have seen repeated invasions and brutal occupations by there neighbours this can be seen as a not unreasonable stance.
martitrmartitr
New Member
What I see as one of the problems with Poland and some of the other eatsern european and former soviet states is that they want to be a part of the EU, and EU will be their most important trading partner, but still they play "lapdog" (a bit harsh, no offence) to USA during the Iraq invasion, ABM bases etc. going against Germany and France in the former.
Yes, they are the most loud cryes about "EU should unite!", "Everyone should respect eachoever interests!", "The whole EU should solve each one problems!", "Noone should be alone!" .
But in reality these states mean what whole EU should solve THEY problems, EU should respect THEY interests, etc. without them helping EU to solve Germany or France problems and respecting EU interests. Of course, peoples are not stupid and do not like such parasite behaviour.
Grand Danois
Entertainer
The trend is the eastern Europe is steadily looking more towards the rest of W Europe. They still see the U.S. as the garantor of security, but the entire Iraq story has left them disenchanted and more quid pro quo as to their distant ally. That was the legacy Rumsfeld left in "New Europe".
As for Poland in particular, the recent elections was a clear move towards cooperation in Europe rather than the Twins' policy of dealing with the EU as another national state (and being eccentric and text-deleted). It was the youth in particular who wished to be seen as an integrated part of Europe, not wanting those two to represent them.
As for Poland in particular, the recent elections was a clear move towards cooperation in Europe rather than the Twins' policy of dealing with the EU as another national state (and being eccentric and text-deleted). It was the youth in particular who wished to be seen as an integrated part of Europe, not wanting those two to represent them.
I did not realize that there was that much tension with Poland and the rest of Europe, hopefully with new leadership at the helm they will get political relations improved with the rest of Europe. My personal opinion of Donald Rumsfield is that he did alot of damage with our European friends and I did not like his vision on where he felt our military needed to be as far as strength and equipment goes. Hopefully Gates will be able to fix some of the collateral damage that Donald caused.
Ok, the crowd was faster than me and explained the problems with Poland (Yeah, the small p was without intention ).
I also hope that the new government is going to solve some of the problems.
Back to topic.
I have often read about a lot of the Saudi Arabian ground equipment is in storage.
As they have no conscript system, how do they expect to man it in case of a crisis or is it mainly supposed to be replacement for battlefield damage/attrition?
Blow out panels made it even more likely that a tank is ready after some repair but the crew is lost.
I expect that in a conflict Saudi Arabia is short on trained crews and not equipment.
Besides with different MBTs in service one cannot easily put crews which learned on M1A2 onto other tanks. Especially not onto eastern designs and vice versa.
).I also hope that the new government is going to solve some of the problems.
Back to topic.
I have often read about a lot of the Saudi Arabian ground equipment is in storage.
As they have no conscript system, how do they expect to man it in case of a crisis or is it mainly supposed to be replacement for battlefield damage/attrition?
Blow out panels made it even more likely that a tank is ready after some repair but the crew is lost.
I expect that in a conflict Saudi Arabia is short on trained crews and not equipment.
Besides with different MBTs in service one cannot easily put crews which learned on M1A2 onto other tanks. Especially not onto eastern designs and vice versa.