British Military Current Events

[Blackadder1916]

Is it a legitimate Canadian job?

CAST enters stumbles around the chat.

 

[Kirkhill]

CAST enters stumbles around the chat.

No doubt -

But in 1970 Germany was the main political thrust. Norway was a sideshow. The Army followed the politicians and paid exactly as much attention to it as the politicians wanted. Germany, 1 Canadian Air Division and 4 CMBG (1 Cdn Div) was the main thrust.

At the time of the Beatty paper we could have shifted focus to the North.

I still believe that that would have created a more useful post-Cold-War force.

 

[dimsum]

The Scandinavians seem to be busy against the Russians on our Right Flank.
The Americans seem to be busy against the Russians and Chinese on our Left Flank
And we seem to engage the Russians overhead occasionally.

NORAD detects, tracks and intercepts Russian and PRC aircraft operating in the Alaska ADIZ

NORAD detected, tracked, and intercepted two Russian TU-95 and two PRC H-6 military aircraft operating in the Alaska Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) on July 24, 2024. NORAD fighter jets from

www.norad.mil

“Overhead” is still pretty left-flank-ish, geographically speaking. That one was intercepted by F-16s, F-35s, and CF-18s.

 

[Kirkhill]

NORAD detects, tracks and intercepts Russian and PRC aircraft operating in the Alaska ADIZ

NORAD detected, tracked, and intercepted two Russian TU-95 and two PRC H-6 military aircraft operating in the Alaska Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) on July 24, 2024. NORAD fighter jets from

www.norad.mil

“Overhead” is still pretty left-flank-ish, geographically speaking. That one was intercepted by F-16s, F-35s, and CF-18s.

But we are still expected to show up, if only for moral support.

 

[dimsum]

But we are still expected to show up, if only for moral support.

You misunderstand me.

The CF-18s, and the Canadians in Alaskan Region, Western Air Defence Sector, Eastern Air Defence Sector, and NORAD HQ aren’t just there for moral support.

 

[Kirkhill]

You misunderstand me.

The CF-18s, and the Canadians in Alaskan Region, Western Air Defence Sector, Eastern Air Defence Sector, and NORAD HQ aren’t just there for moral support.

Thanks for the correction. My error.

 

[Blackadder1916]

No doubt -

But in 1970 Germany was the main political thrust. Norway was a sideshow. The Army followed the politicians and paid exactly as much attention to it as the politicians wanted. Germany, 1 Canadian Air Division and 4 CMBG (1 Cdn Div) was the main thrust.

At the time of the Beatty paper we could have shifted focus to the North.

I still believe that that would have created a more useful post-Cold-War force.

Except we had already shit the bed about CAST in Norway (Brave Lion) before the "Beatty paper" "Challenge and Commitment, A Defence Policy for Canada" was issued. And though it was only two short years before the Wall fell, the White Paper and a lot of project planning that emanated from it was basing the main effort on "Central Europe is the geographic focus of the wider contest between East and West. It is the centre of gravity in the balance of power. The greater concentration of of military power is found there. . . . is not necessarily the most likely place for conventional conflict to begin, . . . but it would quickly become the decisive battlefield". We hadn't won the Cold War, yet; that was still to be realized.

To somehow suggest that "The Army" was only focused on Germany because "politicians" wanted it so, gives more credit to the BGHs at NDHQ than they deserve.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Except we had already shit the bed about CAST in Norway (Brave Lion) before the "Beatty paper" "Challenge and Commitment, A Defence Policy for Canada" was issued. And though it was only two short years before the Wall fell, the White Paper and a lot of project planning that emanated from it was basing the main effort on "Central Europe is the geographic focus of the wider contest between East and West. It is the centre of gravity in the balance of power. The greater concentration of of military power is found there. . . . is not necessarily the most likely place for conventional conflict to begin, . . . but it would quickly become the decisive battlefield". We hadn't won the Cold War, yet; that was still to be realized.

To somehow suggest that "The Army" was only focused on Germany because "politicians" wanted it so, gives more credit to the BGHs at NDHQ than they deserve.

NATO's flanks were supposed to be protected by a 'Light Brigade' sized formation - the AMF (L).

As I had it explained to me once their main role was to ensure that, once the Russians invaded, enough casualties from contributing member states occurred to ensure that those countries had an excuse to enter the fray. Europeans were, and continue to be, notoriously gun shy when it comes to confronting Russia.

Light Brigade, indeed...

Allied Command Europe Mobile Force - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Kirkhill]

Except we had already shit the bed about CAST in Norway (Brave Lion) before the "Beatty paper" "Challenge and Commitment, A Defence Policy for Canada" was issued. And though it was only two short years before the Wall fell, the White Paper and a lot of project planning that emanated from it was basing the main effort on "Central Europe is the geographic focus of the wider contest between East and West. It is the centre of gravity in the balance of power. The greater concentration of of military power is found there. . . . is not necessarily the most likely place for conventional conflict to begin, . . . but it would quickly become the decisive battlefield". We hadn't won the Cold War, yet; that was still to be realized.

To somehow suggest that "The Army" was only focused on Germany because "politicians" wanted it so, gives more credit to the BGHs at NDHQ than they deserve.

I was trying to be civil.

 

[Rifleman62]

Although this is from 2012, it is unique.

Service medal awarded to hero's widow 06.12.12​

Corporal Bryan Budd & the Siege of Sangin | Victoria Cross | August 2006​

 

[daftandbarmy]

I'm sure this is nothing that standing up yet another 'even more special' light unit won't fix

A new report from the House of Lords International Relations and Defence Committee has raised concerns about the capability of the British Army, concluding that its current size is inadequate to meet NATO commitments and sustain large-scale conflict, particularly in light of lessons learned from the war in Ukraine.​

The report, titled “Ukraine: A Wake-Up Call”, outlines significant gaps in the UK’s defence posture and calls for urgent reforms to ensure the British military is prepared to counter growing threats from Russia.

Chaired by Lord de Mauley, the committee launched the inquiry in February 2024—two years after Russia’s unprovoked invasion of Ukraine—with the goal of assessing the conflict’s implications for UK defence policy.

The report criticises the UK’s current defence capabilities and warns that successive governments have allowed a gap to emerge between the UK’s global power ambitions and the reality of its military readiness.

British Army too small to meet commitments, Lords warn

A new report from the House of Lords International Relations and Defence Committee warns that the size of the British Army is inadequate to meet NATO commitments and sustain large-scale conflict.

ukdefencejournal.org.uk

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Perhaps reeling in the ambitions would bring the British Army back to being able to meet the commitments.

As my old economics teacher used to say: " If the government asks you how to raise the GDP Per Capita, you have to advise that they can either increase GDP or reduce the number of capita. It's not your place to deal with the moral dilemma."

 

[daftandbarmy]

Fire mission, over...