"US to send Small Armored Force to Europe" Topic

It appears the USA is planning to stage 150, or so tanks and other armored vehicles in Eastern Europe.

I suspect to send a message of our resolve, and to act as a trip-wire, in case the shooting starts.

The article even mentions splitting this force amongst five plus nations, and/or regions, and breaking them down into units as small as a company.

link

I guess they've not heard that armor should be committed in mass, in order to be effective.

Seems to me the force will do little other than to confirm a very weak commitment to NATO, though on the plus side, at least our troops will be getting a little fresh air in new surroundings, during any exercises they may participate in, and earning some frequent flyer miles.

Wonder if they're going to reopen Graf? Ah, the good 'ole days….

Graf is still open.

Isn't 150 tanks more than most individual armies in Europe these days?

It's not 150 tanks, but a mix of tanks and other armored vehicles.

It's a tripwire force like you said. Enough to show our allies, and the Russians for that matter that we're there, but not enough to be a true threat to the Russians. Actual tactics have nothing to do with it really.

Oh, 150 AFVs is roughly one heavy brigade.

The old Churchill quote is springing to mind. No idea if it's genuine or misattributed, but it makes a cynically valid point….

"I only need one American soldier to guarantee the security of NATO, preferably dead."

Well, they are closer to Mr. Putin's war(s) and of course the Middle East …

I just hope Russia doesn't cross any red lines, then watch out! Strong words to follow, well sorta strong.

"to act as a trip-wire"

They'll have a long wait then

Who's in charge? No really! Who?
I've seen kindergarten kids get on better and the chocolate was shared.

During the cold war the general state of affairs was that you wanted to avoid a situation where a Soviet soldier killed an American or vice versa.

Hence, sticking some guys in uniforms somewhere makes perfect sense.

With budget crunches and the general state of the world economy, I imagine soon it'll be more cost efficient to hire some locals to wear the appropriate uniforms. Might give a nice boost to the local economies as well.

Isn't 150 tanks more than most individual armies in Europe these days?

And there is the rub … some former strong NATO powers are down to 2 Divisions …

"Who's in charge? No really! Who?".

Why, Vladimir Putin of course, since according to the news postings on Yahoo, he's pretty much: master of the universe (my quote, based on all the positive press he's been getting there lately), "the most powerful man in the world", and the person with the WWIII-winning nuclear force, so…….

The rumors of the nuclear war on Mars that killed off life there, and gave it its red color cannot positively be linked to Mr. Putin, but some are suspicious (a real scientist has come up with the theory, and I added the Putin tie-in, just for grins).

Putin is a Martian !!!!!!!!!!!!!!????

Ah Weasel, you must have forgotten or not known of the American Major Arthur D. Nicholson shot by a Soviet sentry (24 Mar 1985) who then prevented the Major's driver from rendering first aid and Nicholson bled to death. Shooting an American, in and of itself, has proven not to be a deterrant, nor is beating one to death with pick handles like the North Koreans did. With the restrictive ROE that can be placed on soldiers by politicians, such forces now days can just become a static obstacle that an aggressor can just go around. This has happened with UN missions, like in Rwanda.

This is more symbolic than substantive. Countries like Poland demand "reassurance" against Russian aggression, and if sending over a couple of fighter squadrons and tank battalions will smooth over their feathers so be it.

Poland has a long term goal of having NATO bases stationed on it.

It has always opposed the Founding Agrreement of 1997 where by NATO limited stationing of "permanent and subtantial combat forces" in Eastern Europe.

The Germans still don't want NATO bases shifting East ward.

reuters.com/article/2014/06/25/us-germany-nato-east-idUSKBN0F00S120140625

But Germany is increasingly a non-player in NATO – shrinking forces and refusal to act in NATO operations like Libya (they even withdrew personnel assigned to NATO AWACS wing).

Anyhow the Russians are playing right into the plans of countries like Poland and the Baltic 3 (Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia) to contract their defence to Western NATO.

The Baltic 3 are particularly pathetic in military affairs – one does spend 2% of GDP on defence but it's extremely inneffective.

Each maintains independent armies, independent navies and independent airforces even though these could be as small as 4 functional training helicopters (Estonian Air Force).

Basically they seem to be maintaining jobs for generals as opposed to looking at serious defence capability.

They should be pooling their resources – given their combined population they should be able to maintain military capability of Finland or if they're not aiming that high, Slovakia.

But instead of doing anything smart, they're hoping Uncle Sam will carry the weight. And to ensure the pot remains stirred, they're promising military aide to the Ukrainians thus increasing Russian agitation with NATO.

reuters.com/article/2014/11/26/us-ukraine-crisis-lithuania-idUSKCN0JA1MN20141126

I think NATO would be better off without these or most Eastern European countries who are essentially defence freeloaders.

I remember a old story where Soviet snipers were shooting at US soldiers from across a river. We had a supply dump there and we had orders not to shoot back. Some Captain got tired of it, jumped into a quad fifty and raked the Russians across the river. No record of casualties and the Captain was reprimanded. The sniping stopped….

Can't really blame the captain.

Hope he secretly got a medal for that.

Sounds like an fun story. I expect our Russian "friends" have one just like it

I agree with Major Mike and I had 2 tours on the DMZ in '84 & '85 … I'm not so sure about that other incident with the Quad .50 … no matter how much I like the story.

And when it comes to NATO, between the massive Western Euro militaries downsizing. In some cases nations have 2 whole divs or less. Plus some of the new Eastern Euro countries joining who can field very small to tiny combat assets to NATO forces. Unfortunately, once again, the US will have to provide literally, the Lion's share of forces … IIRC, at this time, and please correct me if my count is off. The US active duty assets is 4 INF Divs, 2 ARM Divs, 1 MTN Div., 1 ABN Div, 1 AASLT Div, 2 USMC Divs, 3 Stryker Bdes, 1 RGR RGT, 1 ABN RGT/BDE plus a plethora of Spec Ops units, ie: SF/DELTA, SEAL, etc. … That may be close to what most of the rest of NATO can field, not counting the Turks. Who are the 2d largest NATO Army, behind the USA. But as of late the Turk's commitment to NATO/the WEST may be in name only …

Amazed as to how the NATO alliance keeps so many Americans employed and in uniform, nice of them to help keeping so many taking home a pay check.

Lithuania has a 15K man army and zero tanks. I wonder what weapons they have to provide to the Ukraine. -The only weapons of any value would be their supply of Javelin ATMs which they have been accumulating alonq with the other Baltic States. I doubt that they'd be willing to give-up too many of those, especially since they're angering the Russians and the ATMs are their only deterrent.

In some cases nations have 2 whole divs or less. Plus

2 divisions is actually huge by European standards. Most have 2 brigades or less and often they're incomplete brigades without a range of arms like heavy armour, air defence, reconnaissance, intelligence etc.

Yes, like I said, with all of NATO, not counting the questionable Turks … those NATO Nations may not have enough to equal what the US has …

Amazed as to how the NATO alliance keeps so many Americans employed and in uniform, nice of them to help keeping so many taking home a pay check.

Some one has to do it … And again, I'll quote one of us here on TMP, Thomas Hobbes …

… America is the key cornerstone of Western defence. It's the underpinning of the Western system. It's the backbone for our way of life.

If it's bleeding out fighting pointless battles then that's bad for all of us in the Western world.

And again, I have to agree …

It's a repeat of the naval arms race before WW1. Most can't play because the cost is too high.

What is the cost of maintaining say, 2 divisions worth of troops with state-of-the-art equipment, top-of-the line tanks, high degrees of training and a solid, reliable supply chain backing them up?

Who foots that bill?

With the state of the world economy in general and the state of many east european countries financials, good luck getting that appropriation bill funded.

Most things in life come down to either who stands to make money from something or who has to pay for that thing. Then we wonder why Nowherestan and the democratic republic of cantfinditonamap fields an army of 37 guys and most of a BMP.

The traditional conundrum, "Guns or Butter" …

I find that increasingly the answer is "neither".

Don't get me started !!!!!!!!!!