tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post2910238790869005010..comments2024-03-27T20:37:08.065+01:00Comments on Defence and Freedom: Air power influence on land campaigns and land battles.Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger18125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-53823309573944843922013-11-04T10:25:19.376+01:002013-11-04T10:25:19.376+01:00http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebanese_Civil_War#Is...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebanese_Civil_War#Israeli_invasion_of_LebanonAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-61172449150905767372013-11-03T20:30:38.301+01:002013-11-03T20:30:38.301+01:00I don't recall that occasionally bombing neigh...I don't recall that occasionally bombing neighbours was called "intervention" anywhere but by "Anonymous" here.S Ohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03359796414832859686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-38720898805770438872013-11-03T20:24:20.384+01:002013-11-03T20:24:20.384+01:00The different animals of intervention.
Israel doe...The different animals of intervention. <br />Israel does intervene in neighbouring affairs.<br />Israel has a military that is meant to fight not on home turf, but from home turf.<br />Same goes for Singapore, from their home turf they could fight all neighbouring nations as required.<br />This capability for power projection enables to intervene. It's not the same as interventionitis, an illness of constantly meddling somewhere via armed forces.<br />It would benefit this blog if a line would be drawn between capability for power projection and intervention for positions of global prestige and power. One is a tool, the other a use. <br />Belgium might want this tool, but under what circumstances would they use it?<br />Having a tool is not the same as misusing it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-33568673944296008262013-11-01T19:09:14.953+01:002013-11-01T19:09:14.953+01:00I don't think Israel's best bet is to keep...I don't think Israel's best bet is to keep the Arabs down - not in the long term. Instead, I think they should use the current Arab weakness to let the hate run out of steam over one or two decades and then reconcile.<br />As UK and France should have done with Germany in the late 20's, instead of keeping it weak (a strategy which turned ugly when it became unsustainable).<br /><br />Singapore doesn't need intervention capabilities either; it needs a fine ASEAN integration and a military capable of pushing forward immediately during a conflict with Malaysia. And they agree with me on both.<br /><br />Nobody would claim being able to strike at London and Paris would be an essential national defence strategy requirement for Belgium, right?S Ohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03359796414832859686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-85155893643621151012013-11-01T18:52:10.710+01:002013-11-01T18:52:10.710+01:00The post was meant to highlight bias of this blog ...The post was meant to highlight bias of this blog (Sven asked for such input some time ago) and this was done.<br /><br />Israel and Singapore are two examples of countries that need intervention capabilities for self-defence. Singapore should make that most obvious.<br /><br />America is much bigger than Singapore and it is debatable whether their latest brand of interventions were necessary or worth the money. OK, they are on a steep learning curve, because it's the first time a Cold War ended and someone wants to do the mopping up before China bounces into empty old trenches.<br /><br />Like the good article about encirclement, interventions are different kinds of animals. Some interventions can NOT be considerd wars of choice and Singapore and Brunei prepare for such acts in self-defence.<br /><br />Israel ran up against unexpected trouble with fixed enemy air defences, an utter intelligence failure. Fighting wars measured in days, they did not have the capability to prepare any other reply but ground assault. With better intelligence it would have been a modern EW test.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-72207510247115301482013-11-01T08:04:34.203+01:002013-11-01T08:04:34.203+01:00We will never know, as the polls were unreliable.
...We will never know, as the polls were unreliable.<br /><br />My point is that there's no evidence suggesting that the bombing on its own would have changed the government or (thus) policy. <br /><br />The government was yanked from its offices because it was a bunch of liars, the incident merely provoked them to show this trait off once again.<br /><br />There were a couple domestic terror bombings during the last decade and none really changed who's in power or government policies other than provoking more state aggressiveness against terrorists.S Ohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03359796414832859686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-55077425231746594662013-10-31T23:29:28.390+01:002013-10-31T23:29:28.390+01:00So your arguement is that had the incumbants "...So your arguement is that had the incumbants "told the truth", they would have won?TrThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07316335177828136131noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-19774643484869002312013-10-31T15:08:20.205+01:002013-10-31T15:08:20.205+01:00I'd like to add that:
1) The mere rumour of th...I'd like to add that:<br />1) The mere rumour of the presence of a MANPADS missile in the area is enough to curtail ISAF-A air operations in Afghanistan. This has to do with the political importance attached to aircraft. If we lose one it's a huge coup for the Taliban and other armed militant elements in Afghanistan because the Anglo-American military world has invested so heavily in the idea of airpower being the Invulnerable Hand of God. Imagine how shit it would be for us if the Taliban or other OMF managed to capture the aircrew as well as down the aircraft. <br /><br />2) There's a recent historical example of the curtailing of operations because of a shortage of munitions; following the attacks against Gaddafi's Libya, we had some major orders placed for replacement weapons because we'd expended our (when I say our, I mean participating NATO nations) warstocks with a low intensity war in Afghanistan and something like two weeks of intensive bombing effort in Libya.NWnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-43064762072766082582013-10-31T15:03:19.191+01:002013-10-31T15:03:19.191+01:00I notice that you fixate on the topic of infantry ...I notice that you fixate on the topic of infantry weapons while ignoring the main thrust of the comment here, which is that an aviation-heavy organization is more suited to interventionism. I think it's evident from the posts on Defense and Freedom that SO doesn't support interventionism - which kind of answers your own question, Anonymous. If there's no perceived need for it then there's no value to having it.<br /><br />I would also suggest a quick study of Israeli wars. Note instances where modern air defences have precluded the effective use of the IAF and how the Israelis were able to preserve themselves in the face of that, through the use of mechanized combat elements.NWnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-10102277203020019332013-10-31T12:45:29.645+01:002013-10-31T12:45:29.645+01:00Infnatry has several levels and several levels of ...Infnatry has several levels and several levels of heaviness at the same time.<br />A German old school infantry regiment '43 had 120 mm mortars, 50 mm AT guns and 75 mm infantry guns as regimental fire support. Meanwhile the battalions had only crew-portable equipment and the companies only man-portbale equipment. The individual soldier finally may have had a rifle, some machinegun ammo belts, a few hand grenades and a helmet only. <br />Was this "light" or "heavy"? It sure was capable of using light infantry tactics, but also had heavy punchers organic at higher, still "infantry branch" level.<br /><br />Multipurpose concepts merely strive to save redundant weight and personnel while meeting the requirements which others meet with specialised tools. It's a trade-off between specialisation and savings which needs to be determined again and again and again because there's no one rule which fits all cases.S Ohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03359796414832859686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-3318718396477573722013-10-31T10:50:00.647+01:002013-10-31T10:50:00.647+01:00Some other people have reached similar conclusion ...Some other people have reached similar conclusion with Sven about airpower being scarce and too expensive. <br /><br />"“It reduces the burden on airpower and it could save your larger munitions for strategic targets,” Laski said."<br />From Boeing to US Army. <br />I usually do not intervene with comments in articles about tactics because your analyses leave almost nothing to add. Nothing useful I mean.<br /><br />http://www.defensenews.com/article/20131022/SHOWSCOUT04/310220034/Boeing-Developing-Ground-Launched-Small-Diameter-Bomb?odyssey=mod_sectionstories<br /><br />This is just an add confirming the validity of your analysis.<br /><br />Plus :<br /><br />http://www.defensenews.com/article/20131020/SHOWSCOUT04/310200009/Poland-Brings-Defense-Focus-Back-Home<br /><br />Of course Air force is very important. But in a real conflict , not in police actions to hunt down annoying natives , it is too small and too expensive to use in high intensity actions - detailed in article.<br />The fact that armies specialized in hunting down natives in colonial enterprises like the Polish one make a move towards heavy land hardware or replacing Tac Air with various types of long range missiles is a sign on changing times.<br /><br />(I have noticed a funny fact.<br />Poles are pretty proud of their colonial actions. It seems that the brave Polish people likes military invasions and occupation duties when they are the perpetrators. Only when the are at the receiving end of an invading army do the Poles become peace loving and invasion averse. Who might have thought about that. <br />Looks like they are sensing something :<br />The aim is to pursue a defense policy that will “not exceed Polish capacities, Polish interests and Polish needs,” Komorowski said.<br />“[We want to] end an overzealous, reckless ... expeditionary policy of sending our troops to the other side of the world," dear president discovered ”.<br />The level of hypocrisy is shocking. To me at least.)<br /><br />TeoAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-31705075487559124072013-10-31T10:30:52.279+01:002013-10-31T10:30:52.279+01:00It's your posting about multipurpose guns orga...It's your posting about multipurpose guns organic to infantry.<br />http://defense-and-freedom.blogspot.de/2008/07/mortars-and-howitzers.html<br />http://defense-and-freedom.blogspot.de/2013/10/infantry-at-weapons.htmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-68377087368643847892013-10-31T04:38:30.152+01:002013-10-31T04:38:30.152+01:00"In 2004, a small scale bombing raid against ..."In 2004, a small scale bombing raid against Madrid Train station killed 191 people and wounded a further 2050.<br />Three days later, the government fell, and its replacement bowed to the wishes of the attackers and pulled out of the Iraq War."<br /><br />Dear lord, some seriously revisionist history going on here! The government fell, because they blamed the attack on domestic ETA without any proof, since this rubbish was politically opportune, as opposed to considering a Muslim extremist-source, which of course was politically inconvenient, as perceived blowback to their Iraq-policy, for which they had drawn severe criticism before.<br /><br />Furthermore, the major opposition party had made it a policy-line to withdraw troops long before that event, it wasnt the trigger, just another convenient cause not to waste time doing it. They didnt even have to "sell" it, as the Spanish population was massively against the whole Iraq-adventure anyway.<br />That all this happened within three days was due to the fact, that general elections were scheduled then, not because some bombing led to social order falling apart. The fact, that democratic structures were in working order is actually a small testament to everyone generally staying level-headed (esp considering Spains still recent past). <br /><br />The government sealed their fate on re-election with one of the biggest displays of incompetence and deception induced by ideological bias ever, they got what they deserved.<br /><br />Really, if you have to make up such "facts", perhaps a bit of reflection on what your own ideological bent is good for, would be in order?! paranoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-31406589413688940272013-10-30T20:14:12.659+01:002013-10-30T20:14:12.659+01:00Where exactly did you get that "heavy armed i...Where exactly did you get that "heavy armed infantry" thing from?S Ohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03359796414832859686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-28180580462267414632013-10-30T19:58:18.175+01:002013-10-30T19:58:18.175+01:00Some things become quite clear. Sven is no advocat...Some things become quite clear. Sven is no advocate of aviation supremacy, ground attack aircrafts and naval aviation.<br />He is a strong advocate of medium tanks, armed scouting vehicles and heavy armed infantry.<br />Looking at the structure of the German armed forces, this is much closer to their practice than US practice. <br /><br />Many suggestions stem on great part from the believe that interventions are fruitless efforts and its about deterring another great power from making war. <br />What if the military has to be built for interventions? <br />Wouldn't the aviation heavy approach of the United States or Israel trump?<br />These airforces are instrumental for taking the fight to the enemy, especially Israel has little ground to yield and money to spend.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-15797331202408894912013-10-30T09:21:41.185+01:002013-10-30T09:21:41.185+01:00Some more about the "I think you are very lim...Some more about the "I think you are very limited in your view of how Air Power could influence a war." part:<br /><br />http://defense-and-freedom.blogspot.de/2012/04/decision-making-aid-for-strategic-air.htmlS Ohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03359796414832859686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-55456684653309083842013-10-30T09:19:50.714+01:002013-10-30T09:19:50.714+01:00The Spanish cabinet fell because it was a bunch of...The Spanish cabinet fell because it was a bunch of liars. Besides, it was replaced. The state as a whole was practically unharmed. It had an allergic reaction to being poked once, though.<br />-----<br />It's an ages-old principle that sometimes marching dividedly and fighting unitedly is superior to staying together all the time.<br />Extreme dispersed marches are actually being discussed and analysed as a potentially much safer and much quicker way of moving troops and supplies. This is evident from RAND work, literature on logistics since the 90's and so on.<br /><br />Your idea of tank combat is also off; if 9 tanks truly faced 15 packets of 3 tanks (because they didn't unite in time unintentionally), the nine tanks would have horrible odds. Three groups of 3 tanks are much, much more likely to surprise a group of 9 tanks than the other way around (more than three times as much) in first contact.<br />3 tanks can easily annihilate 3-6 tanks in an ambush, so the 9-tank group can expect to fail spectacularly.<br />On the other side, 3 vehicles is a common size for armoured recce; with one staying behind, so even if 9 tanks surprised a group of 3, this would give away the 9-tank team's location.<br /><br /><br />But of course, I was actually only writing about marching in packets, not about fighting in packets. That's a different story.S Ohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03359796414832859686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-25258726488171940422013-10-30T08:46:13.176+01:002013-10-30T08:46:13.176+01:00I think you are very limited in your view of how A...I think you are very limited in your view of how Air Power could influence a war.<br />Regarding "terror bombing"<br />In 2004, a small scale bombing raid against Madrid Train station killed 191 people and wounded a further 2050.<br />Three days later, the government fell, and its replacement bowed to the wishes of the attackers and pulled out of the Iraq War.<br />Now, I accept, those bombs were carried in backpacks not jet bombers, but is there really much difference?<br /><br />"(13) Clever reactions to air power diminish much of its power<br />It was relatively simple to call all coalition air power to the Battle of Khafji in 1991. It's a coordination nightmare if entire logistical battalions or even only entire tank battalions move dispersedly in packets of only three vehicles each."<br />At what cost to the ground forces?<br />How many of those tank packets will be engaged by tank squadrons and destroyed? How many will just get lost on the way to the rally point and never join the battle?<br />If I have 45 tanks and split them in to 15 packets to make a 100mile journey. How long will that take and how many tanks will arrive?<br /><br />If we maintain the fallacy that you need 3:1 to win, suddenly my ground forces have gone from needing 135 tanks, to 9 tanks.TrThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07316335177828136131noreply@blogger.com