tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1835455773953043846.post4609283022710870888..comments2024-01-12T18:59:05.080+00:00Comments on Defence With A "C": Cambodia, Tanks & the Resurrection (Admittedly, not a headline I ever thought I'd write)Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1835455773953043846.post-86279680220732318712019-04-24T22:53:58.787+01:002019-04-24T22:53:58.787+01:00I am not sure whether forward deployed is a better...I am not sure whether forward deployed is a better option than maintaining an expeditionary capability. I agree that it is best to keep the threat as far away as possible but a deployable expeditionary force including tanks is potentially more flexible than a forward deployed one. <br /><br />Regarding equipment numbers we do seem to have chosen the Tiger tank model rather than the Sherman. Our kit is great but heavy on the maintenance and logistics and difficult to build in numbers due to the cost/resources required to create them. History suggests this may not be the best option when fighting a peer. <br /><br />Good to have you back. I enjoy your posts.Mikehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12485228199384554693noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1835455773953043846.post-48524218356626713302019-04-24T04:53:53.911+01:002019-04-24T04:53:53.911+01:00Contributing ground forces to a vital alliance for...Contributing ground forces to a vital alliance for UK interests is not a bad idea. Having British Heavy Metal so near Scandinavia and Poland would apart from contributing to collective deterrence, place Britain within driving distance of some very interesting defence cooperations.<br /><br />Tanks are also no less deployable from a base on mainland Europe. Just like American material from Marine Corps Prepositioning Program-Norway was regularly deployed to Iraq, British heavy metal would not be static and undeployable force.<br /><br />In the end, I suppose my final argument for basing British Heavy Metal is political. It would be a display of commitment to NATO and Europe. British and European displays of commitments toward each other can hopefully avert a dearth of trust until post-Brexit relations can normalise. I would also suggest that Britain should endeavour to actively engage in at least some of the non-EU regional defence cooperations to offset reduced influence over EU defence integration. Søringshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08640861530359044255noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1835455773953043846.post-25620627268800185712019-04-22T16:17:51.421+01:002019-04-22T16:17:51.421+01:00Tanks in Germany, defend only Germany.
It's j...Tanks in Germany, defend only Germany.<br /><br />It's just madness for the UK to cut, Deep Sea ASW assets to fund tanks, and Germany to cut tanks to fund DSASW.<br /><br />Forward defence is all well and good, but, tanks in Germany are only "forward defence" on that flank, and historically has been a bad idea.<br /><br />Tanks in Germany are worthless if Japan invades Burmese East India, and they're useless if France folds like a cheap suit and our badly depleted ASW assets that are sized to stop submarines leaving the Danish strait instead of BrestDomohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00240964731398145995noreply@blogger.com