FJAG
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 12,942
- Points
- 1,160
I pretty much agree with you on this.Usual snark....
My point is that we are positioning a force forwards with lots of time to react. My expectation would be that we have heavy(ish) equipment available and a theater that would seem to be a good fit for heavy(ish) gear. Consequently I might have expected the movement of LAVs along with the Leos to new warehouses in Latvia so that those new air transports could flyover to drop into the LAVs.
Instead we are going to supply a new buy of MRZRs to sit in warehouses and supply light troops to the theater. As much of a fan as I am of light role troops I just find it strange.
If the LAVs that we have aren't going to be used in Latvia where are they going to be used? And if our domestic troops are going to be LAV based isn't that going to continue to be a drag on deployment - both with respect to reaction time and areas of deployment?
...
Why wouldn't the forward force be an entirely prepositioned LAV based force with flyover troops? Why wouldn't the domestic force be a lighter force, or at least have a larger light component, that could be rushed anywhere, including Latvia if necessary? We have already conceded that there is a role for light forces on the Russian front.
...
The less said about TAPVs the better.
I expect what is behind the way it is being done is pure numbers. It will take all six mech battalions to keep a combined battalion fed with 6 month rotos without killing everyone involved.
That left three light battalions as spares and therefore available to "bulk out" the brigade with flyover exercises. To turn them into a flyover mech (or combined arms) battalion would have required the placing of a battalion's worth of kit in Latvia and reassigning training LAVs in Canada from some of the mech battalions to the light ones. It strikes me that was a step that the army, for whatever reason, did not want to take.
While I think it is a poor decision from the Latvian brigade's point of view to add in a light battalion, I think it is a good decision for the light battalions as it will give them some valuable exercise experience in Europe and may finally lead to a proper equipping program for them. I personally think that we need to have several light battalions from a defence of the homeland point of view. That said giving them a European focus may lead to acquiring the wrong equipment for the Canadian role (which IMHO should have a greater northern focus)
![Clinking beer mugs :beers: 🍻](https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f37b.png)