Monday, July 23, 2018
German armed forces seem to be vanishing....
Thanks to Jonathan for the link!
via Opslens.com
The rhetoric of Donald Trump continues to dominate the headlines, including his press conference with Putin in Helsinki. This includes his criticisms of NATO, British Prime Minister Teresa May, and trade disagreements with the European Union. But more substantively, during a time in which Russia continues to undermine Ukraine and pressure NATO countries from Montenegro to the Baltics (what has been called the backbone of NATO), the German armed forces seem to be vanishing.The dirty secret?
This is something that has been noticed for years and is only starting to break through the noise because of Trump’s insistence that NATO countries pay more. Trump has a very good point—Germany’s parsimonious spending on the military has eroded their readiness considerably. Analysts report that Germany has 93 Tornado fighter jets that need “immediate” and “extensive” upgrades. The planes lack NATO identification and communications equipment that could be intercepted. That means they can’t participate in NATO missions. Germany only has five transport planes that are deployable, but they can’t operate at night because their cockpit lights are too bright. In a 2015 Syria mission, German officials said only 29 combat planes were ready.
The problems extend beyond complex aircraft. The Defense Minister reported that German soldiers did not have enough protective vests, winter clothing, or tents to adequately take part in a major NATO mission. During a training exercise, German soldiers resorted to painting broomsticks black to give them the appearance of machine guns. Soldiers then attached them to tanks and other armored vehicles. The country only has 95 combat-ready combat tanks to face a reported 20,000 Russian tanks. In recent anti-terror operations in Mali, half the tanks deployed reportedly broke down.
At the end of 2017, no submarines were available for deployment. The Germans’ new F125 frigates suffer from design flaws that have continually delayed their commission. Even if they are launched, they lack sonar and torpedo tubes making them vulnerable to submarines, at the very time that Russia is increasing its submarine activities.
In short, the German military is in a dangerous state of unreadiness. Germany, of course, exhibited the other extreme during World War II, where a highly cultured and educated society instigated barbarous and aggressive policies that plunged the world into war. But the other extreme is just as dangerous.
To cite one example of the results of this danger, a key report by the RAND Corporation found that the lack of heavy forces deployed by NATO is critical. If Russia invaded places like the Baltic States, they would capture the capitals and overrun the countries in as little as 72 hours. As World War II Germany should know, weak countries that respond with feeble answers and impotent gestures in the face of aggression will be gobbled up by their neighbors.
Despite the jacked up beyond recognition accounting methods used by some readers of this blog, its obvious that the German's aren't pulling their weight in NATO.
Despite the barking of the media and many ignoring the fact that previous administrations said the same, Trump was right.
As things stand today, NATO is more of a burden than a help. Reform is needed. If the Europeans refuse to shoulder their fair share of THEIR defense then the US should reconsider its commitment to the alliance.
USAF considering canceling orders for 590 F-35s!
via Air Force Technology...
In March, it was revealed that the United States Air Force (USAF) may cancel orders for as many as 590 Lockheed Martin F-35A jets – a third of its planned fleet of 1,763 – due to long-term cost issues. The news that one of the world’s best pound-for-pound fighter jets may be too expensive to operate and maintain in its current form comes at a critical juncture in its evolution. In April, F-35 flight test programme concluded System Development and Demonstration testing, a major milestone.Story here.
How were they able to squash this story? Even better...this news faded from the headlines till Thompson dredged it back up. Is he that fearful that this has gone from an "if" to an actual "do"?
F-35 troubles...focus on Loren Thompson's words, not my predictions!
A couple of days ago I posted an article by Loren Thompson where he worried about the future of the F-35.
The usual cast of suspects showed up and tried to portray his concerns as being recast .... in other words I altered the article to fit my prediction that the F-35 buy would be truncated and that it would result in a death spiral.
Read the entire article here, but let's take a few moments to pop out particular passages that prove that all the naysayers (and I was late to the party) are being proven right....
* Ironically, the Joint Strike Fighter was, at its birth, the Clinton Administration's all-purpose pretext for not spending money on other weapons. The program was so ambitious that it is a miracle the fighter has succeeded to the degree it has. But now the same kind of loose thinking that so frequently infects military investment plans in peacetime threatens to derail the one aircraft that can assure U.S. global air dominance through mid-century. And the place where that loose thinking is most out of control is the U.S. Air Force.That's right boys and girls. Thompson is telling anyone that reads this article that he believes the USAF is getting ready to search for a plan B to the F-35! Of course he lavishes praise on the plane. He says that it can assure global air dominance, but at the sametime says that the idea to move on from it ... to the point of being out of control is the USAF! That is a HUGE change!
* Because the Air Force version accounts for 72% of the joint buy, and because its "A" variant is the one that most allies want, investment choices that Air Force leaders make over the next dozen or so years will decide whether the F-35 achieves the role originally envisioned for it in revitalizing U.S. air power. If the Air Force scales back its current plan to buy 1,763 F-35s, that will have profoundly negative consequences for other military services, allies and overall U.S. security.That's an over the top statement but the warning is clear...at least from a Lockheed Martin, F-35 fanboy perspective. Thompson is scared shitless that the planned buy of 1700 plus F-35's will be scaled back.
I'm not the one shouting about the death spiral...a paid consultant of Lockheed Martin is sounding the alarm!
Sorry for the long passage but this is the juiciest tidbit of all! This is the part where Thompson raises the skirt on his favorite airplane and at the same time gives us a sneak peek behind REAL DEAL SIMULATIONS that the USAF is running.
* The biggest idea captivating Air Force leaders is that "near peer" adversaries, meaning Russia and China, are catching up with U.S. warfighting technology and may soon surpass it. The service stated in its Air Superiority 2030 Flight Plan that "the Air Force's projected force structure in 2030 is not capable of fighting and winning" against the "array of potential adversary capabilities" it will likely face. You might infer therefrom that the service needs to buy stealthy, networked F-35s faster, but its flight plan highlights other items.
For instance it wants a "penetrating counterair" capability -- maybe a plane, maybe a family of systems -- that can operate within Russian and Chinese air space circa 2030. That would enable it to protect the Air Force’s next-generation bomber in attacks on the most densely-defended targets, or conduct search-and-destroy missions against time-sensitive targets. Obviously, this would require greater endurance than traditional fighters. It also wants unmanned strike and reconnaissance aircraft that can survive in contested airspace, perhaps directed by pilots in penetrating planes.
In addition, it wants all of its warfighting assets linked by a robust network so that each operator can benefit from the reconnaissance and kill capabilities of all the others, and any attrition of assets can be covered via redundancy in the system. And these assets would not be confined to air-breathing platforms -- the network would stretch across multiple warfighting "domains," including space and the electromagnetic spectrum. Electronic and cyber warfare would be ubiquitous in the high-end battlespace it envisions.
Meanwhile, at the low end of counter-terror and counter-insurgency operations, the service wants to acquire planes less costly than the F-35, perhaps turboprops rather than jets, that can deal with enemies who lack their own air forces or air defenses. So F-35 potentially ends up in a squeeze play between the lower-cost systems envisioned for addressing irregular threats and the higher-capability systems needed to address future near-peer competitors. Add in all the other stuff needed for space resilience, mobility, training and so on, and the F-35 program of record starts to look shaky.
Why do I say that?
Because according to Thompson's own writings the F-35 is not good enough in a peer conflict and is much too expensive in low end warfare.
He verifies what many have said. The F-35 was born to fight a fight that no longer exists, it took too long to get into service and its already obsolete.
Thompson is worried that USAF leadership will drop the fiction and develop a new fighter because it knows that the F-35 won't be competitive in a future fight.
If this pisses you off, save the drama for Thompson.
I'm popping passages from an article he wrote. I don't believe that I'm reading him wrong here. He's connected and he obviously believes that the USAF is about to bail.
Quite honestly it makes sense too.
Remember Mattis saying that the services had two years to get its act together cause the gravy train would be over and sequestration would return?
2019 is it. If they don't have it by then then we'll see some tough choices being made.
The F-35 is gonna be cut. They took too long, played too many games and now its time to pay the piper. How do we know? Thompson told us so!
Sunday, July 22, 2018
Is Iran fearful of, or warning us about a possible war?
via Reuters.
Iranian President Hassan Rouhani on Sunday cautioned U.S. President Donald Trump about pursuing hostile policies against Tehran, saying “war with Iran is the mother of all wars”, but did not rule out peace between the two countries.-----
Addressing a gathering of Iranian diplomats, Rouhani said: “Mr Trump, don’t play with the lion’s tail, this would only lead to regret,” the state new agency IRNA reported.-----
“America should know that peace with Iran is the mother of all peace, and war with Iran is the mother of all wars,” Rouhani said, leaving open the possibility of peace between the two countries, at odds since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.
“You are not in a position to incite the Iranian nation against Iran’s security and interests,” Rouhani said, in an apparent reference to reported efforts by Washington to destabilize Iran’s Islamic government.
Separately, a top Iranian military commander warned that the Trump government might be preparing to invade Iran.Story here.
“The enemy’s behavior is unpredictable,” Tasnim quoted military chief of staff General Mohammad Baqeri as saying.
“Although the current American government does not seem to speak of a military threat, according to precise information it has been trying to persuade the U.S. military to launch a military invasion (of Iran),” Baqeri said.
I've heard Iranian bluster my entire life, but this seems different. First you have the threat of war but also (apparently) a hope for peace. That's unusual if you take away the obvious...they want to preserve the chance for maintaining what's left of the nuke deal with the Russians and EU.
But if you take it at face value then this gambit by the Administration might pave the way for a real deal.
Why do I say that?
They've got to be paying attention to the N. Korean deal. They apparently know (and I suspect) that part of that deal will probably include some type of security guarantee by the Russians (and/or the Chinese).
If Trump's meeting with Putin can somehow arrange some type of limited agreement (how they'll work it with Iran supporting every terror outfit in the region is beyond me) for protection then maybe they can make lemonade.
Who knows?
What I do know is that we're seeing a first for the Iranians. A threat mixed with a hope for peace.
Ya gotta act on openings like that. Besides if you fail then you've lost nothing...everything simply reverts to the status quo between the two countries....
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)