International Army News Thread

Big_Zucchini

Well-Known Member
That's certainly true but it can also be pointed out that operating Leos also has its advantages from a commonality/training perspective. In the event of a sudden Russian thrust into Poland, chances are it will be Bundeswher Leos in numbers in Poland before U.S. M-1s arrive in numbers.

The decision to get M-1s was probably driven by a combination of political and operational factors.
Earlier? Perhaps. I would assume not. Considering US troops actually train very frequently with Poland, have actual QRFs, and have large presence in nearby countries. But let's assume they're early. This still leaves us with the fact the US will be doing the majority of the fighting, the majority of the time. So even if late to the party, a Polish army would see more cooperation on the ground with the US than Germany. Already Germany is giving Poland (and Ukraine) the middle finger.
 

Chaldry

New Member
The decision to get M-1s was probably driven by a combination of political and operational factors.
Personally, I think it was primarily a politically driven one as you mentioned yourself. Poland has been VERY prolific in improving Polish-US relations, and understandibly so, if we consider Russia and its recent actions in Eastern Europe and the Causacus.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Earlier? Perhaps. I would assume not. Considering US troops actually train very frequently with Poland, have actual QRFs, and have large presence in nearby countries. But let's assume they're early. This still leaves us with the fact the US will be doing the majority of the fighting, the majority of the time. So even if late to the party, a Polish army would see more cooperation on the ground with the US than Germany. Already Germany is giving Poland (and Ukraine) the middle finger.
The US has to get the majority of its M1 fleet to Europe from the continental US. IIRC that's OP REFORGER and it'll take probably at least two weeks before the M1 force in any substantial numbers will be on the ground in eastern Poland to face down the Russian battle groups. Then there are the logistics of such tanks. It's a long way back to the US across the Atlantic. If the Poles had gone with the Leopard their logistics would be significantly shortened. WRT Germany, if the Russians cross the Polish border then the NATO agreement is enacted and Germany has to respond militarily. Ukraine is different because it isn't part of the EU or NATO, so the German pollies have plenty of wiggle room and that's their choice.
 

Big_Zucchini

Well-Known Member
The US has to get the majority of its M1 fleet to Europe from the continental US. IIRC that's OP REFORGER and it'll take probably at least two weeks before the M1 force in any substantial numbers will be on the ground in eastern Poland to face down the Russian battle groups. Then there are the logistics of such tanks. It's a long way back to the US across the Atlantic. If the Poles had gone with the Leopard their logistics would be significantly shortened. WRT Germany, if the Russians cross the Polish border then the NATO agreement is enacted and Germany has to respond militarily. Ukraine is different because it isn't part of the EU or NATO, so the German pollies have plenty of wiggle room and that's their choice.
Laws are words. If any entity wishes to disobey laws, it will simply do so.
Article 5 does not specify how much support is given. Just that it is given. Previous activations resulted in most members only sending symbolic support.

Even if the US takes a whole month to deploy Abrams-equipped units, it will still be it fighting there most of the time. I am certain Poland can do more than stay alive for a few weeks with its vast armed forces.

If we listen to Polish commentators, there's an order of magnitude more trust in the US than in Germany.
 

Unric

Member
The US IS NATO. Any Leopard user's presence would be dwarfed by American one, particularly when it comes to the defense of eastern Europe.

So if we think who is going to operate alongside Poland in the same theater, the Abrams is definitely the one to match.
Just checked wiki to see how many Leo's in Germany and even though I knew it was low, I was shocked at how low. Digging around other nations like Poland, France, UK etc. and the numbers of MBTs do add up a bit but assuming it's an accurate reflection of the state of Euro armed forces then it's pretty woeful. Makes you wonder if US is badly distracted by events in Pacific just how far Mr. Putin could go. He seems to be pondering that himself for which the Euros seems partially to blame.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Just checked wiki to see how many Leo's in Germany and even though I knew it was low, I was shocked at how low. Digging around other nations like Poland, France, UK etc. and the numbers of MBTs do add up a bit but assuming it's an accurate reflection of the state of Euro armed forces then it's pretty woeful. Makes you wonder if US is badly distracted by events in Pacific just how far Mr. Putin could go. He seems to be pondering that himself for which the Euros seems partially to blame.
The distractions weren’t only the Pacific. Even more significant was 20 year war on terror, a black hole on blood and treasure and last but not least the four year Trump $hit show. Previous to him wasn’t much better.
 
Last edited:

STURM

Well-Known Member
The U S.has to stay focused in the Middle East, with China, North Korea and Europe. That's the price, or rather the burden with being the world's some superpower. The U.S. has commitments to NATO and non NATO trusty allies.

In contrast, Russia and China can focus their attention and resources on specific areas.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
The U S.has to stay focused in the Middle East, with China, North Korea and Europe. That's the price, or rather the burden with being the world's some superpower. The U.S. has commitments to NATO and non NATO trusty allies.

In contrast, Russia and China can focus their attention and resources on specific areas.
The Middle East and Europe need to be doing more for themselves to ease the US burden. Like it or not, these regions must appreciate the US focus will be drifting towards China, assuming the crowd in DC can get their $hit together.
 

STURM

Well-Known Member
I won't go into Europe but various Arab countries have long made it a policy to be dependent on the U.S. as a contingency against threats from fellow Arab countries and from internal threats. There is also the question of how keen the U.S. really is for countries to be less,dependent on it.

The point I was trying to.make is that the U.S, even before this ''pivot'' to the Asia Pacific, has long overstretched itself. It has written out numerous cheques and if several cheques are cashed out, it would be somewhat problematic.

Take the Asia Pacific, the U.S. has treaties with Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, Thailand and Australia. It's also committed to come to Taiwan's defence.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Fair question about what the US wants. Given America’s weakening economy, it may come down to economics, which region is more important. Asia-Pacific along with India seems more important than the Middle East if you can’t manage both. Europe should be securing energy from the ME instead of Russia so they really do need to get real about burden sharing. Probably in Israel and India’s interest as well.
 

KrustyKoala

New Member
The US is a Pacific nation as much as it is an Atlantic nation. If it sees that its security and future is in the Indo-Pacific then its focus should be in the Indo-Pacific. The US does have commitments to its allies around the world and it upholds these commitments, even when it is vocal some allies may not be holding up their end.
The US can still make deals and arrangements with European and ME countries without having to focus on Europe or the ME.
 

STURM

Well-Known Member
If it sees that its security and future is in the Indo-Pacific then its focus should be in the Indo-Pacific
Yes it can divert more focus to other areas but it still can't be seen as doing it at the expense of other areas because this would send a wrong message, both to allies as opponents.

IThe US does have commitments to its allies around the world and it upholds these commitments, even when it is vocal some allies may not be holding up their end.
That is the price or rather the burden of being the world's sole superpower.

IThe US can still make deals and arrangements with European and ME countries without having to focus on Europe or the ME.
The problem will come if major trouble breaks our in more than one area.. The U.S. would be somewhat overstretched.
Hence my cheque analogy about writing multiple cheques and hoping that they're not cashed at the same time.

It won't happen but imagine if China made a grab for Taiwan and the Spratlys whilst the U S. was focused on events in Europe. On top of that North Korea starts major drills not far from the DMZ, as well as missile tests.

Easy to make commitments when there is no actual trouble but when things actually get hot. A major concern for some European partners has been that the U.S. might start losing focus on Europe in the coming years, just like how various Asia Pacific allies in the past were worried that a U.S. bogged down in the Middle East and Afghanistan would lose focus in Asia.
 
Last edited:

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
Boeing has been awarded a contract for AH-6 light-attack helicopters to Thailand. The contract has a value of $103,8 million for the delivery of the AH-6i helicopters to the army of Thailand, with an estimated completion date of 30 May 2025.


In September 2019 there was already an approval by the US State Department for a possible Foreign Military Sale to Thailand of eight (8) AH-6i light attack reconnaissance helicopters and related equipment for an estimated cost of $400 million.




 

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
France and Spain have launched the Tiger Mk III upgrade, Germany will maybe follow later.

The French variant will also include the MBDA MAST-F (future tactical air-to-surface missile) and Mistral 3 air-to-air missile, along with a new battlefield management system by Atos and a self-protection system built by Thales. Indra is providing the battlefield management system and countermeasures for Spain.
The Spanish Tiger will also include new 70mm guided rockets along with a new air-to-ground missile, as well as Link16 and SATCOM functionalities.

Once delivered, the upgraded Tiger MkIII aircraft are expected to remain operational into the 2040s.



 

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
The State Department has approved a possible Foreign Military Sale to the Government of Nigeria of 12 AH-1Z Attack Helicopter Related FMS Acquisitions and related equipment, spareparts and training for an estimated cost of $997 million.

It is unclear if these 12 AH-1Z attack helicopters will go to the army or air force, but if Nigeria will really order this, then it will be Nigeria's biggest defence acquisition in decades.

 

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
The Caesar underwent a demonstration in Colombia in 2011. As a result, GIAT was invited by the Army to submit bids for the sale of up to 12 howitzers, with the order of the first batch of six scheduled for 2014.

However, political and fiscal troubles caused the postponement of purchasing plans. Acquisition efforts were revived in 2019 and the Caesar is now officially selected and approved. The procurement consists of 12 Caesar howitzers, but spread across three batches of four each.

With this acquisition, Colombia will be the first South-American export customer of the GIAT Caesar.

 
Top