Worried about turkey's naval programms

[kostas-zochios]

Hello everybody, this is my first post! I live in Greece where everyone-more or less-is concerned about turkey's military force. Since 1996, when a very dangerous crisis between the two coasts of the Aegean occured(the Imia-Kardak incident), Greece has spent billions of dollars to purchase various military systems in order to overcome the growing turkish threat. For nearly a decade Greece had a slightly stronger naval force than the Turks, a similar in strength air force and a (much) weaker army, but now Himli Ozkok said that he would transform turkey into a naval force and announced a series of navy programms that are very worrying. At the moment Greece has 4 MEKO 200HN and 10 STANDARD-KORTENAER class frigates, 5 SUPER VITA class guided missiles patrol ships and ~20 more others armed with exocets,penguins and harpoons, 8 type 209 subs, 4 ZUBR class hovercrafts and 25 MIRAGE 2000EGM/BGM fighters that can carry 2 exocets each. Turkey has 8 ex OLIVER HAZARD PERRY frigates(Gabya class?), 8 MEKO 200TN, 4 KILIC class corbettes, many more guided missile patrol boats and 10? type 209 subs. I would really like to know if THIS naval turkish force could be able to destroy the greek force :daz

 

[Strategos]

It seems to me that having a sizable navy only makes sense,look at a map for heavens sake!They obviously need a decent fleet in the mediterranean,And something in the black sea

 

[Rich]

""How do you know about the love between Greeks and Turks?""

I already answered that. I spent 18 mos there on the GI plan.

 

[webmaster]

Thread moved from Land Forces forum to Naval.

Folks, Navy is the topic here.

Let's stop discussing regional disputes and other strategic/political problems that may exist between Turkey and Greece. I do not want to see none of that highly emotional nonsense in here. Thank you!

Enjoy

 

[Rich]

OK, naval,"btw I wouldn't have gotten into a flame war". First you have to look at the 1974 conflict to understand the one that will happen in 2007. Which means you have to look at the impact of Turkeys air force. They had a relatively strong air force compared to the Greeks of that era. Greece's relationship with NATO had tailed off in preceding years due to the communist leanings in its Govt. and its military, particularly air force, had suffered. They learned from this however and I would say their air force is in better shape nowadays. The air war between the two countries could be better called "the F-16 war" since both countries invested heavily in the air craft. I will add the Turks still fly the F-4 Phantom, especially in the maritime strike role. I don't know if the Greeks still do,or, if they put their phantoms thru the last life extension program.

Most importantly however is that Cyprus is far closer to Turkey then Greece, even more importantly it is fairly close to the huge air base at Incirlik. The Turks have troops in control of the Northern sector of the island. Which means they will neither have to establish a bridgehead following a amphib landing,nor, will they have to drop parachute troops. They did both rather successfully in '74. The only large warships the Turks sunk in this conflict was one of their own. Three Turkish navy DDs were attacked by their own warplanes and one was sunk.

In my opinion the Turks would have no problem taking all of Cyprus. No doubt this is why they left so many troops there after '74. They didn't want to have to do it all over again. In the Aegean?? Well....again its going to come down to who controls the air. Buying systems like the S-300 is an important first step but I guarantee you the Greek Aegean bases they will be deployed at will be attacked heavily by the Turks. They will be target #1.

This thread should actually be moved to aviation since thats where the war will be decided. I can only tell you this, and Ive been to NATO bases on both sides of the conflict. The Turks and Greeks have their military systems pointed east and west, not to the north. It was like that when I was there during the height of the cold war and I doubt its changed since.

 

[mark22w]

Question - what do you think the response of NATO (other) countries would be to an attack on either by the other? Isn't an attack on one member an attack on all?

And what sort of response (Naval) might it take?

 

[Sea Toby]

I'm of the opinion that NATO would enforce a cease-fire as quickly as possible.

 

[kostas-zochios]

I believe that this would be the most logical outcome to a NATO member vs NATO member conflict. But a cease fire could be imposed at a moment were one enemy has the diplomatic advantage,for example in a Greek-Turkish situation, Turkey may have captured an island in the Aegean and use this as a leaver to gain what she wants in the diplomatic field.

 

[ksaatci]

"Let's stop discussing regional disputes and other strategic/political problems that may exist between Turkey and Greece. I do not want to see none of that highly emotional nonsense in here. Thank you!"

Enjoy
WebMaster

No comments !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!