# Berlin Mulls Deploying Spy Jets to Southern Afghanistan



## vonGarvin (23 Dec 2006)

http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,456013,00.html

"It happened faster than expected: NATO has requested in a confidential letter that the German military deploy German Tornado surveillance and fighter jets to Afghanistan. Berlin has agreed to comply -- and the German parliament will not be given a chance to debate the matter."

"Between Christmas and New Year, US C-17 transport planes will unload heavy German Marder tanks at the German military's central headquarters in Mazar-e-Sharif."

*My Note:* the "Marder" is not a tank, for those who don't know, but a MICV (Mechanised Infantry Combat Vehicle).  It is roughly 37 tons, very heavily armoured and armed with a 20mm cannon and 7.62mm coax.  Given the high mine threat in theatre, one could imagine that the Marder 1A5 would be deployed.  Rheinmetall only made 74 of these variants, and they were deployed for some time to Kosovo.  The Marder was designed to fight wave after wave of Russians, and therefore it is very heavily protected.  There is a replacement in the works.


"The German air force, the Luftwaffe, put together a "small package" of six Tornados and 250 ground troops that could be stationed in Kabul or Mazar-e-Sharif by late spring."


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (24 Dec 2006)

> "Between Christmas and New Year, US C-17 transport planes will unload heavy German Marder tanks at the German military's central headquarters in Mazar-e-Sharif."



 :rofl:

And what conceivable good will they do there?  Join the rest of the German contingent behind the wire?


----------



## vonGarvin (24 Dec 2006)

Probably more for NATO's sake that for effective use in A'stan:
"What do you mean we are doing nothing?  We have Marders in theatre....."
 :


----------



## rmacqueen (24 Dec 2006)

They may also be trying to get around the "national caveats" by bringing in troops and equipment to free up other NATO troops to go down south.  If they can expand their area of responsibility then others can move around.  Also, the use of the Luftwaffe for surveillance in the south I don't believe violates their caveat and enhances our ability to catch the bad guys in the border regions.  It is not an ideal situation but finding away around some of the politics is better than nothing.


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (24 Dec 2006)

They're not freeing up anyone.  MeS has been a German camp since the Germans entered theatre.  They have a well-earned reputation for doing *nothing*, even in this benign part of the country:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,450397-2,00.html



> At first glance, the activities of the German soldiers in Mazar-e-Sharif seems a little odd. Hardly any of the 1,380 German soldiers who have come to Camp Marmal so far have left the giant barracks to date. They keep the cafeteria running, take care of vehicles and logistics and stand guard -- not to forget cultivation of the nursery.
> 
> Soldiers patrol in vehicles outside -- mainly to secure the camp. They distribute schoolbooks and pens to children in the city, chat with merchants and passersby, smile and wave a lot. When the largest hospital in Mazar-e-Sharif burned down in September, they were there to help out with doctors, medication and tents.
> 
> ...



As for the _incredibly low-risk_ deployment of reconnaissance aircraft, even that's causing great angst:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,456068,00.html



> Deployment of German Planes to Afghanistan Sharply Criticized
> 
> By Severin Weiland in Berlin
> 
> ...



If they're unwilling to participate in a meaningful fashion, they should stay home.  Fast-air recce isn't exactly a mission-critical capability.  From their lukewarm participation in Kabul, to their do-nothing stance in MeS, to their completely inadequate attempts to "train" the ANP, the Germans haven't exactly stepped up to the plate.


----------



## observor 69 (24 Dec 2006)

Germany is the most powerful nation in Europe.  It is still struggling with the burden on the national conscience of WWII. The war from 1914 to 1989 is over. It is imperative that Germany with it's industrial and economic wealth step up to it's international responsibilities. The Chancellor, a product of a repressive communist state, does not appear to be the right Chancellor for the challenges facing Germany at this time, internally or externally.  This is not to imply that Germany should go full bore in Afghanistan, that is a decision for the government of the day to make. The present contribution might be a satisfactory political compromise, but it falls short as a military contribution from a country of Germany's potential.


----------



## Mourning (24 Dec 2006)

Baden  Guy said:
			
		

> Germany is the most powerful nation in Europe.  It is still struggling with the burden on the national conscience of WWII. The war from 1914 to 1989 is over. It is imperative that Germany with it's industrial and economic wealth step up to it's international responsibilities. The Chancellor, a product of a repressive communist state, does not appear to be the right Chancellor for the challenges facing Germany at this time, internally or externally.  This is not to imply that Germany should go full bore in Afghanistan, that is a decision for the government of the day to make. The present contribution might be a satisfactory political compromise, but it falls short as a military contribution from a country of Germany's potential.



Yes, and that puts it mildly.

Think wat Schroder would have done if he had won the last national German elections :-X.

Anyway, I wonder why all of a sudden the use of the term "NATO-solidarity" isn't applied anymore by the Germans? : They sure used it a lot during the Cold War when if there would be war with the Warsawpact  other countries would have to fight on THEIR soil and sacrifice troops there.

What's worse, they actually critisize what OUR countries are doing in the south, while they are sitting in their "tourist" camps in the north where virtually nothing happens . Maybe we should exchange places with them and let them try their "approach" in the South, while our troops take a brake in the north?

Regards,

Mourning 8)


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (24 Dec 2006)

Personally, I found the glee that greeted Germany's weaseling out of further deployments (at the recent NATO summit) intellectually and morally repugnant - but it may be just me.  I'm a tad biased.

Mourning:  exactly.


----------



## George Wallace (24 Dec 2006)

Baden  Guy said:
			
		

> Germany is the most powerful nation in Europe.  It is still struggling with the burden on the national conscience of WWII. The war from 1914 to 1989 is over. It is imperative that Germany with it's industrial and economic wealth step up to it's international responsibilities. The Chancellor, a product of a repressive communist state, does not appear to be the right Chancellor for the challenges facing Germany at this time, internally or externally.  This is not to imply that Germany should go full bore in Afghanistan, that is a decision for the government of the day to make. The present contribution might be a satisfactory political compromise, but it falls short as a military contribution from a country of Germany's potential.



Whoa There!   Baden Guy

Germany was the most powerful nation in Europe, but lost a lot of clout when the Wall came down and they had Reunification and more or less doubled their Welfare Rolls.  They have allowed all persons claiming "German ancestry" to return and have Citizenship.  This brought in many Russians and Poles and such, some of whom have come for the 'free ride', some have brought in the 'Russian Mafia', and others have created other social problems.  The German Government also relaxed it's Laws on "Guest Workers" and now permits them to own property and businesses.  The 'Face of Germany' has changed greatly since 1990.  It will take a couple of generations before it returns to any of its' former 'glory' that it had in the 1980's.


----------

