tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.comments2024-03-16T11:54:44.590+01:00Defence and FreedomUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger12567125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-6838599415061682212024-03-16T11:54:44.590+01:002024-03-16T11:54:44.590+01:00Training methods and time planning improved as wel...Training methods and time planning improved as well. The school education is a lot better than the non-Gymnasium school education of the 1930's. Time-consuming and exhausting march training can now be cut to a minimum due to motorisation. <br /><br />In the end it's about feasibility and ambition. To have 100,000 NCOs and lieutenants with 3 years original service time is much more demanding (personnel costs, barracks, infrastructure, operational expenses, motivating young people) than two years.<br />S Onoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-31668651716593255062024-03-16T02:07:13.389+01:002024-03-16T02:07:13.389+01:00Newsflash: It isn't 1943 anymore and hasn'...Newsflash: It isn't 1943 anymore and hasn't been for the last 80 years. The requirements of the modern battlefield (and warfare in general) are different and taking the training procedure of a 7 million strong army in desperate need of any and all manpower to plug the gaps and applying it to today is as stupid as it sounds. Not to mention that even back then, the quality of replacements this mid to late war training produced was negatively noted.<br /><br />As for your second point: Sorry, that is total bullshit. It was and is common practice to create new units from depleted ones, rather than fill them up. You might retain the unit's overall designation, but not the actual unit. Filling up is only done if you can't pull a unit out of the front for rebuilding; and that only happens when you're so overstretched that you can't rotate your units.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-36863931790230856632024-03-15T14:19:48.760+01:002024-03-15T14:19:48.760+01:00I think many countries in Europe are gonna get bac...I think many countries in Europe are gonna get back back to a form of national service, wich in many cases will be voluntary with incentives because I don't think that a mandatory one, with the actual state of euro societies could be ''sold'' by politicians (well maybe in Sweden and countries very near Russia like it's happening in Finland), but the Ukrainian war has proven that reserves, matériel and formed men, are paramount to a national defense or even a coalition participacion in a big front defense. So this is very interesting and anything from the actual small armies standard will be an improvement without having to go to delirious jingoistic military spending. Another big thing for me it's less the armies are professional less there is a tentation to go in some military adventures outside of Europe. balrog2005https://www.blogger.com/profile/10440015172185409511noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-38309646336977653072024-03-15T06:24:47.404+01:002024-03-15T06:24:47.404+01:00Why is it so hard to get relevant data first, then...Why is it so hard to get relevant data first, then post?<br /><br />The proposed schedule used the German training procedure of 1943 and is wll proven. Your personal opion does not change available data.<br /><br />And BTW it is also clear when you check data, that filling depleted units with new soldiers is the better way, this discussion was settled in many cases already during the 19th century. <br />Ulenspiegelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16681823070584500277noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-66061062269290377092024-03-14T15:15:24.379+01:002024-03-14T15:15:24.379+01:00"So to create a reserves-grade senior NCO [....."So to create a reserves-grade senior NCO [...] or junior officer [...] takes about two years in peacetime conditions IF and only if the ambitions are kept modest."<br /><br />It's really a question of ambition. I'd rather prefer the army to have enough 2-year reserve lieutenants than a handful of 3-year reserve lieutenants and mostly 90 day wonders.S Onoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-30870681089299608782024-03-14T13:52:04.816+01:002024-03-14T13:52:04.816+01:00My personal rule of thumb concerning training is o...My personal rule of thumb concerning training is one peacetime year per level. Meaning you can get a competent specialist in a year (including basic/ait and ojt), a passable squad leader in two years (same as previous, plus jnco course and some actual experience) and a junior officer in three (mustangs, promoted jncos. Again half a year of courses and hal a year of experience). The actual experience is paramount for reserve component - it serves to cement and ingrain in memory what was learned during the courses. <br />Such training structure and annual refresher training of about three weeks per years will get you passable second-line battalions two-three days after mobilization.leo715noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-56981716566765228292024-03-14T07:08:44.925+01:002024-03-14T07:08:44.925+01:00The North Sea coast largely defends itself through...The North Sea coast largely defends itself through its geography. You'd just have needed a few mines and guns to defend it, not a battlefleet supported by a fleet of cruisers and torpedoboat destroyers.<br />https://defense-and-freedom.blogspot.com/2014/11/german-north-sea-coastal-defence.htmlS Onoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-11954960828686322402024-03-14T07:06:23.085+01:002024-03-14T07:06:23.085+01:00It's a war in all but name. Ukraine could boar...It's a war in all but name. Ukraine could board & seize ships that are not registered to Russia (ship registration is a farce anyway), but are exporting Russian goods.S Onoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-21053809903809542782024-03-14T01:35:04.341+01:002024-03-14T01:35:04.341+01:00I think regular mobilisation exercises are really ...I think regular mobilisation exercises are really vital. Total mobilised strength means nothing if it is only valid on paper.<br />Large scale exercises with non-professional troops are also vital to train good officers and NCO's, armies fight with what they have, not on theoretical allocations of equipment or trainned personnel.BenLewis1175https://www.blogger.com/profile/05846666364857192862noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-80995837911846004972024-03-14T00:58:24.560+01:002024-03-14T00:58:24.560+01:00I have to disagree; 2 years is nowhere near enough...I have to disagree; 2 years is nowhere near enough time to train up sufficient cadres.<br />2 years essentially gives you enough time to train up a single generation of competent junior leaders such as NCOs and low ranked officers. But any near peer war that lasts longer than half a year (and that is very much pushing it) will require quite a bit more than a single generation of such junior leaders.<br />Similarly, 6 months for basic training for basic infantry is optimistic. That is about the amount of training time required for infantry training on a WW1 level (and indeed was about the time used during WW1). To create useful units on the modern battlefield, I'd wager double that; i.e. 1 year of training time for basic infantry. After 6 months, at best you'd get infantry that can operate as single isolated platoons in low intensity or defensive warfare.<br /><br />Battle experience (as in experience with intensive combat) about halves the additional training time for junior leaders and cuts down NCO training time to a third, but still.<br /><br />Additionally, while the 14 day strength is indeed a good mark for when one should expect for example German units to reach the frontline in force, it is most certainly not peak mobilization strength. Reservists need to be formed up into their units and trained up again prior to deployment to obtain competent units and such training takes about 3 months during wartime conditions so peak mobilization strength is reached no earlier than the 3 month mark and more likely at around the 6 month mark (beautifully shown by the Ukrainian counteroffensive of fall '22).<br /><br />So to get back to the issue of cadre strength, I'd consider a time frame of 10 - ideally 15 - years of continuous conscription (2 year term) to produce full cadres (any older candidates will be too old by the time the fighting starts to be truly effective). If you expect losses that are in any way proportional to your enemy's and the size of your army, you can effectively sustain 1 year of fighting and army expansion with about 2 years of previous conscription (so one cadre generation).<br /><br />As for the matter of creating new units rather than reconstituting depleted (or rather shattered) old ones: This is and was done, because it is easier and more effective to build and train a new unit, rather than trying to fill up existing units that have lost most of their strength. In the latter case, you'd still need to spend about the same time training and integrating the new arrivals while diluting the experienced parts of the unit, so it is easier and more effective to create a new unit with all the veterans stuffed together into one experienced core sub unit that can act as reserve or spear tip and back up the new inexperienced parts.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-62376749080940361112024-03-14T00:39:52.488+01:002024-03-14T00:39:52.488+01:00The Navy did succeed in stopping the Russian navy ...The Navy did succeed in stopping the Russian navy and stopped any threat to the North Sea coast, it also made the UK hold back one of its army corps in Norfolk.<br />The more significant side is actually in the Med, where they delayed the Algerians and brought the Ottoman Empire onto the Triple Alliance's side, stopping defeat in 1915.<br />Poor diplomacy was the real thing which lost Germany WW1.BenLewis1175https://www.blogger.com/profile/05846666364857192862noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-77414714188527669722024-03-14T00:31:25.470+01:002024-03-14T00:31:25.470+01:00Theoretically though the loss of even a couple of ...Theoretically though the loss of even a couple of ships may cause almost all the rest to switch flags, to Russia's detrimentBenLewis1175https://www.blogger.com/profile/05846666364857192862noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-5766125011103899582024-03-13T09:27:31.907+01:002024-03-13T09:27:31.907+01:00Russia already attempted to blockade Ukraine and l...Russia already attempted to blockade Ukraine and learnt that the West doesn't tolerate a blockade of grain exports that would force famines in many poor countries.<br />Russia already played all its conventional cards and the nuclear cards are self-defeating - its hand is empty.S Onoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-25275191627891410692024-03-13T07:47:10.972+01:002024-03-13T07:47:10.972+01:00Another theory with the underlying assumption that...Another theory with the underlying assumption that the enemy won't reply in kind.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-26967686862639248152024-03-12T23:21:57.858+01:002024-03-12T23:21:57.858+01:00That's quite an interesting proposition...IIRC...That's quite an interesting proposition...IIRC the vast majority of the ships the Russians use to sell oil and other commodities are from a third party to easily bypass the sanctions. I don't know if they can attack them legaly, being that technicaly they are at a state of war, it's possible... They could use the Q-ships system to harrass ships if the Russian Black fleet would have been efective in putting a naval blockade...but they seem to be content to rest in a corner after loosing so many ships... seems that Jeune École 2.0 style harrasment from the coast is enough. balrog2005https://www.blogger.com/profile/10440015172185409511noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-33311778434599604162024-03-12T22:29:34.705+01:002024-03-12T22:29:34.705+01:00That is exactly the argument though. We need to ge...That is exactly the argument though. We need to get it through the heads of a population that has been raised on the idea of meekness as a virtue for at least the last 40 years BEFORE the Russians march on Berlin.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-85799436603714343192024-03-12T22:19:41.255+01:002024-03-12T22:19:41.255+01:00A great idea in theory, but I'm unsure how the...A great idea in theory, but I'm unsure how the West (and neutral states) would take it. I imagine the Ukrainians would have done it by now if their backers were okay with it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-26659447141337095082024-03-09T02:26:26.091+01:002024-03-09T02:26:26.091+01:00drones like dji already have target tracking softw...drones like dji already have target tracking software , its extremely good . better than most military systems as its update and improved a few times a year . what needed is for fpv drones ability to just fly over a target and shoot down rather than aim at a target head on ,which is harder , and by shooting down you avoid getting stuck on a net Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-24071732044294945792024-03-08T11:29:35.630+01:002024-03-08T11:29:35.630+01:00LNG prices are back to ordinary levels.
https://fr...LNG prices are back to ordinary levels.<br />https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PNGASJPUSDMS Onoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-75365533837378510502024-03-08T01:11:11.730+01:002024-03-08T01:11:11.730+01:00Victoria ''F*ck the EU'' Noland, i...Victoria ''F*ck the EU'' Noland, indeed...oh, she was sacked 10 years later ? It took quite a long time... Obviously the US have nothing to do with the present Ukraine situation, of course... right now selling a triple or cuadruple the price of LNG that before the war and having NATO totally gearing up again, I mean I know that Putin is the best NATO recruiter right now but still... there is a little more.<br />So yeah, goodbye, as usual like Syria, Europe will got the refugees and pay the reconstruction bill, the gas bill and some fool will even put some new shiny war fleets ready to be used in some neo-cons style foolish military adventures against Iran or even China... Saying that Ukraine is not a US problem is like throwing a molotov cocktail in a house and accusing the people inside to have too many flamable objects.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-31347513511475210012024-03-07T11:47:24.994+01:002024-03-07T11:47:24.994+01:00You pretended that Germany doesn't do its part...You pretended that Germany doesn't do its part. By your own link's info Germany directly spent more than 1/3 the aid to Ukraine as the U.S:, while having 1/4 the population AND Germany paid more than that through its net payer status in the EU, which outspent the U.S..<br />U.S. valuation of equipment aid is known to be bogus and much of the other aid is actually investment in production capacity inside the U.S... And on top of that Germany has almost 1 million Ukrainian refugees, while there are almost none in the U.S..<br />American intel aid to Ukraine doesn't cost anything; it's like copying already existing software.<br /><br />2) German is a sovereign country and has the right to trade. Just as the U.S. traded with Russia. Even Ukraine did import natural gas from Russia (and AFAIK still does), btw. No blame here.<br /><br />3) So you agree that the 2% GDP spending 'obligation' in NATO is totally bogus? It has never been ratified. Anyway, my point stands; the U.S. wants other countries to believe that non-ratified agreements with it aren't worthless.<br /><br />4) Rwanda, Uighurs and Sudan were domestic conflicts, not aggressions state on state. The term "war of aggression" is defined and I use it correctly.<br /><br />5) One more LIE like that and you'll find your comments banned. I do not appreciate disinformation.<br />We literally wrote into the constitution a military spending boost worth more than two years of ordinary military spending.S Onoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-74212708730782757792024-03-07T02:47:57.004+01:002024-03-07T02:47:57.004+01:00The usual rubbish, deflection, and blame others wh...The usual rubbish, deflection, and blame others while taking no responsibility...<br /><br />1) It is laughable to claim that the USA is not massively aiding Ukraine. Germany is the largest economy in Europe, but lags in aid even compared to other EU and NATO nations! https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/how-much-aid-the-u-s-has-sent-to-ukraine-in-6-charts<br />Add in the value of U.S intelligence, targeting assistance, satellite communications, and secret weapons/aid etc., not to mention the additional spending appropriations since the article.<br /><br />2) Germany helped fund Russia with massive energy deals like NordStream. <br /><br />3) Only morons fail to understand the U.S. treaty process. It is very clear and you will be hard pressed to find a single diplomatic mission in Washington that does not understand what a document that is not ratified in Congress means.<br /><br />4) You twist and decry aggression only when it suits Germany; but have ignored genocides (Rowanda, Uyghurs in PRC, Sudan, etc.), territorial seizures (PRC invasion of Vietnam, etc.), and a host of other aggressions never having lifted a finger.<br /><br />5) The value of having Germany as an ally in the 21st century is akin to being "shackled to a corpse." Even in the face of Ukraine, Germany has done next to nothing to rearm. <br /><br />All this is meaningless: the Biden administration sacked, Victoria Nuland, chief neocon, anti-Russia hardliner, and architect of Ukraine policy; so even Washington knows this entire catastrophe is soon to wrap up. The impact on NATO is likely to be earth shattering.<br /><br />Bonne Chance!<br /><br />GABGABhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07580029460978121408noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-61428888218394260812024-03-06T10:10:51.531+01:002024-03-06T10:10:51.531+01:00That's not our current German culture, but wis...That's not our current German culture, but wishful thinking. It might happen after the Russians take Berlin again, but till then, we're likely to be woefully underprepared in money invested in armaments, in a sensible procurement and planning process, and in people willing to fight.KRThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10725091310284220350noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-17232770135139759362024-03-06T09:49:05.249+01:002024-03-06T09:49:05.249+01:00You're completely wrong. Germany did do vastly...You're completely wrong. Germany did do vastly more to send aid to Ukraine than the U.S.<br />https://www.statista.com/statistics/1303450/bilateral-aid-to-ukraine-in-a-percent-of-donor-gdp/<br />and unlike with the U.S., German aid is not accounting bullshit that greatly inflates the value.<br />Moreover, Germany hosts almost a million Ukrainian refugees at substantial expenses (26.65 bn € in 2023).<br />https://www.tagesschau.de/inland/innenpolitik/fluechtlingspolitik-kosten-100.html<br /><br />The Russo-Ukrainian War is a problem of the U.S. because it promised to help Ukraine in the event of it being under attack<br />https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum<br />and the U.S. doesn't want the entire world to believe that all agreements of this level (not ratified, bust signed by head of state) with it are worthless. Germany gave no such security assistance promise until a couple days ago.<br /><br />To face aggressors does not in all cases require to fight against them. I believe it makes no sense to send troops to the Pacific in case of a Sino-American War. We should send some troops (not too much to leave Europe unsecured against Russia) to U.S. West Coast (NATO territory) in such a case, maybe taking over air defence there. The rest of the effort should be diplomatic and economic including arms sales (paid in advance) to the U.S. and arms donations to East Asian countries under attack.S Onoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-24351439039568200772024-03-05T21:53:15.123+01:002024-03-05T21:53:15.123+01:00"We should treat any aggression committed by ..."We should treat any aggression committed by U.S., UK, France, Israel just as harshly as aggressions committed by Russia or China."<br /><br />Exactly who is 'we'? This blog has already advocated that ‘we’ stay out of any military action against the PRC – so there goes that moral canard.<br /><br />You can say 'we' when 'you' aka Germany, the wealthiest state in the EU, do your part. By every measure of effectiveness (funds, weapons, intelligence, etc.), the USA and UK have done far more to help the Ukraine than Germany or the EU. <br /><br />Ukraine is a European problem - the American public has zero interest in fighting in this tragedy and we have already done too much. We have serious problems of our own, particularly a failed state four times the size and ~60% more populous than Deutschland on ‘our’ border.<br /><br /> Bonne chance and yippee-ki-yay...<br /><br />GABGABhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07580029460978121408noreply@blogger.com