German defence woes (latest from The Times)

Nor do Brunssum or Naples. The component commands, LCC, ACC, MCC, NCISG and NSHQ are subordinate to Allied Command Operations (ACO), not the JFCs.The closest they get is when they are leading the NRF, but even then the bulk of the components are national contributions (NATO Force Structure) not from other NATO HQs (NATO Command Structure).

Ulm will generate the Joint Logistic Support Group (JLSG) for NRF rotations, and other missions, and will have subordinate national contributions under command for this purpose.

Suffice to say, I was down there at the beginning of July doing a site survey for their NATO CIS installation and am pretty well up to speed with these things.
NCISG is not a component HQ; it is a tactical level entity under the CyOC as the Cyberspace Domain Component. JFCs are assigned Component HQs for specific operations. JSEC will not be assigned Components. There is currently a Standing Joint Logistic Support Group embodied at Mons, under a UK 1*.
 
Last edited:
NCISG is not a component HQ; it is a tactical level entity under the CyOC as the Cyberspace Domain Component. JFCs are assigned Component HQs for specific operations. JSEC will not be assigned Components. There is currently a Standing Joint Logistic Support Group embodied at Mons, under a UK 1*.

Suffice to say, in my daily work I am intimately involved in NATO Joint C2 CONOPS development.
The NCISG part was illustrative as it provides the SSG, which, if you look at the NRF structure is a component, but doesn't exist in its own right as a standing HQ. You're right about the current JLSG setup, but it will move once Ulm is at FOC.
 
As I said altruistic. No one, never ever, would have thought of: "Better fighting WW3 on European soil than at home". It does indeed some funny things to the landscape and housing estate. Most of those young West Germans which did gaze soulfully and wistfully through the fence at our East German brethren had to do their national service, so maybe the gazing wasn't as soul- and whistfully as you imply. Yor "running dog lackeys" were in as deep as the rest of Western Europe, or does anyone think the Russians had overlooked this nice little island with all its militrary installations?
No pox on the Murricans for "keeping us safe", but be honest stationing troops in Western Europe was and is to some extent essential for your own safety.
No one was safe... if the sh*t had hit the fan the US and the UK would have been first among NATO to be nuked.
Yeah... that 6 month National Service must have been a bitch.
 

Krautman

War Hero
No one was safe... if the sh*t had hit the fan the US and the UK would have been first among NATO to be nuked.
Yeah... that 6 month National Service must have been a bitch.
It was 15 months plus afterwards reserve excercises that in my case add up to nearly 3 years. So what do you want to imply?
It is doubtful that it would have come to nukes. In any case those nice SS-20 and NBC-Weapons weren't for decoration either, so just save your breath. We were all in this shit together.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
Any new EU Army will still need funding. While Germany bumps along at just over 1 percent of GDP, nothing meaningful will emerge. Less, in fact, than with the US on side.

The rewriting of history to state how the EU beat communism, totally dismissing the overwhelming contribution of the US, and NATO, is shaming and shameful. If the EU Army is an attempt to get out of the 2 percent commitment to NATO, it will fail. You need to spend, period. The US has repeatedly, and generously, on behalf of others.

Germany can’t say it hasn’t had enough help, encouragement or warnings. That those exhortations have become more strident is its fault, not the US’s.
 

JCC

Old-Salt
NATO was defensive organisation designed to stop the USSR rolling over Western Europe. Now the USSR has gone to be replaced with a mildly Nationalistic mid-weight power with a GDP circa. Italy and a population of about 140 million.

We may not like how it's run or governed but we do seem to have a lot of opinions about how other countries run themselves nowadays but still stagger along with them. They don't seem to have a lot of territorial ambitions apart from some border straightening - much like some other countries in the EU; Spain vs Gib; Hungarian "lost lands" etc.

The Chinese are building up their forces in Africa and the Indian Ocean, see Gwadar, and are now cast as an existential threat to Western economies; the US are pivoting towards them. Is Russia really that big a problem ?

Has NATO turned in a self-licking lollipop that keeps looking to big up Russia to keep itself going ? To what extent are the Germans correct ? Would it be more useful to allow the EU to make its peace with Russia
 
Last edited:
Talking of funding, Germany appears to be about to stop the Solidarity Tax that was designed to bring East Germany up to something approaching Western standards. There will be some happiness in the West but some grumbling in the East perhaps. The SPD agreed to reducing the tax which brought in €18.9 billion last year but are against abolishing it altogether as they want to use it for education and climate protection.

This doesn't resolve the military funding issues.

German government moves to end 'solidarity tax' for eastern Germany | DW | 11.08.2019
 
Last edited:
NATO was defensive organisation designed to stop the USSR rolling over Western Europe. Now the USSR has gone to be replaced with a mildly Nationalistic mid-weight power with a GDP circa. Italy and a population of about 140 million.

We may not like how it's run or governed but we do seem to have a lot of opinions about how other countries run themselves nowadays but still stagger along with them. They don't seem to have a lot of territorial ambitions apart from some border straightening - much like some other countries in the EU; Spain vs Gib; Hungarian "lost lands" etc.

The Chinese are building up their forces in Africa and the Indian Ocean, see Gwadar, and are now cast as an existential threat to Western economies; the US are pivoting towards them. Is Russia really that big a problem ?

Has NATO turning in a self-licking lollipop that keeps looking to big up Russia to keep itself going ? To what extent are the Germans correct ? Would it be more useful to allow te EU to make its peace with Russia
Just because the Soviet Union ended does not mean that Muscovites have given up the desire to reclaim post WW2 territory one way or another.
 

JCC

Old-Salt
Just because the Soviet Union ended does not mean that Muscovites have given up the desire to reclaim post WW2 territory one way or another.
They may still have the desire but it would be more appropriate to ask are they likely, or capable, of acting on them ? And if they did are we prepared (£$£$£) to oppose them by force to stop title to a few fields or a few dying industrial regions changing hands, especially if the majority of the inhabitants are supportive or indifferent ?

Europe is full of desires for other people's territory but we still don't prepare to fight them: List of territorial disputes - Wikipedia
 
It was 15 months plus afterwards reserve excercises that in my case add up to nearly 3 years. So what do you want to imply?
It is doubtful that it would have come to nukes. In any case those nice SS-20 and NBC-Weapons weren't for decoration either, so just save your breath. We were all in this shit together.
No you weren't, - still not paying your way in NATO either. Germany grew rich under the US/UK defence umbrella... Sure the Cold War ended 30 years ago... for many of us it was hot in places (not for you) ...... short memories, ingratitude, resentment.... well... apart from Berlin when the wall went up!
 

Krautman

War Hero
No you weren't, - still not paying your way in NATO either. Germany grew rich under the US/UK defence umbrella... Sure the Cold War ended 30 years ago... for many of us it was hot in places (not for you) ...... short memories, ingratitude, resentment.... well... apart from Berlin when the wall went up!
Forgotten MC 14/3? That would have been nukes on German soil or do you doubt that? So just stop bullshitting me with supposed nuclear attacks on America or the UK. Short memory, ingratitude, resentenment and a good portion of envy obviously made you forget some essential facts obviously. Germany grew rich because it had and has a potent economy, not because of the how do you call it "US/UK" defence umbrella that was indeed a NATO defence umbrella. We fulfilled our obligations back then. Contrary to your allegations the Cold war never went hot for NATO:
  1. on the territory of any of the Parties in Europe or North America, on the Algerian Departments of France, on the territory of Turkey or on the islands under the jurisdiction of any of the Parties in the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer;
  2. on the forces, vessels, or aircraft of any of the Parties, when in or over these territories or any other area in Europe in whicH occupation forces of any of the Parties were stationed on the date when the Treaty entered into force or the Mediterranean Sea or the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer.
A dodgy war in SE Asia or in another shithole is not covered by the NATO treaty, really simple.
 
Forgotten MC 14/3? That would have been nukes on German soil or do you doubt that? So just stop bullshitting me with supposed nuclear attacks on America or the UK. Short memory, ingratitude, resentenment and a good portion of envy obviously made you forget some essential facts obviously. Germany grew rich because it had and has a potent economy, not because of the how do you call it "US/UK" defence umbrella that was indeed a NATO defence umbrella. We fulfilled our obligations back then. Contrary to your allegations the Cold war never went hot for NATO:
  1. on the territory of any of the Parties in Europe or North America, on the Algerian Departments of France, on the territory of Turkey or on the islands under the jurisdiction of any of the Parties in the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer;
  2. on the forces, vessels, or aircraft of any of the Parties, when in or over these territories or any other area in Europe in whicH occupation forces of any of the Parties were stationed on the date when the Treaty entered into force or the Mediterranean Sea or the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer.
A dodgy war in SE Asia or in another shithole is not covered by the NATO treaty, really simple.
Are you really serious or just trolling? The reason Germany managed to get grow its economy was largely due to the detterent presence of US and UK troops...

I am not saying anything about German workers or anything but things would have been different if you just left Germany to fend for itself while also not giving it any Marshall plan aid
 

Krautman

War Hero
Are you really serious or just trolling? The reason Germany managed to get grow its economy was largely due to the detterent presence of US and UK troops...

I am not saying anything about German workers or anything but things would have been different if you just left Germany to fend for itself while also not giving it any Marshall plan aid
I'm really that serious. What about a neutral Germany like Austria or Switzerland or Sweden? No growth? No potent economy? I don't think so. The ERP was a kickstart for the German economy, no doubt about that, but it wasn't the sole factor. Just try to be a bit realistic. Fact is: Until 1993, the first year the German defense budget got below 2% GDP ,Germany managed to have an army of 500000 personnel, the defense budget was nearly every year in the 3,x% range and we fulfilled our obligations resulting out of the NATO treaty.
 
Forgotten MC 14/3? That would have been nukes on German soil or do you doubt that? So just stop bullshitting me with supposed nuclear attacks on America or the UK. Short memory, ingratitude, resentenment and a good portion of envy obviously made you forget some essential facts obviously. Germany grew rich because it had and has a potent economy, not because of the how do you call it "US/UK" defence umbrella that was indeed a NATO defence umbrella. We fulfilled our obligations back then. Contrary to your allegations the Cold war never went hot for NATO:
  1. on the territory of any of the Parties in Europe or North America, on the Algerian Departments of France, on the territory of Turkey or on the islands under the jurisdiction of any of the Parties in the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer;
  2. on the forces, vessels, or aircraft of any of the Parties, when in or over these territories or any other area in Europe in whicH occupation forces of any of the Parties were stationed on the date when the Treaty entered into force or the Mediterranean Sea or the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer.
A dodgy war in SE Asia or in another shithole is not covered by the NATO treaty, really simple.
I had quite a few conversations with German males during my time in the FDR; some amazing conversations, in fact; some lovely, enlightening views expressed by the average suited-and-booted pissed Boxhead about the Poles. I'm not fooled at all by modern German expressions of love and peace, sunshine.

Germany grew rich via the efforts of the UK and the USA to ensure you stayed "loyal" to the West after the last war. It stays rich by ducking its defence liabilities and by the economic vampirism of the weaker European economies. Remind me again, how much did the FDR steal from the bank accounts of the citizens of the DDR after re-unification? Real Bruderbund in action, German-style.

We'll be at your throats, or you'll be at ours, again in less than 30 years, I reckon. And won't it be fun, when it's all the Poles coming for you next time.
 
I know that many Americans remain geographocally challenged about the world beyond the borders of their state.* When the 3rd Shock Army was sitting on the Elbe, stationing large numbers of US troops in what was then West Germany made infinite sense, as there was no further east for them to be stationed in non-Warsaw Pact Europe. Roll forward 30 years and, quelle surprise, NATO's boundary with Russia has moved a thousand km to the east. Unless the USA wants trade Polish space for time, moving east makes sense, and Germany will thank you for it. What NATO thinks collectively, as the USA literally rolls a unilateral M1A2 through the NRFA, is another matter.

*Jonesy, this is a piss take, so keep your shirt on, as one who is aware of geography, if not international politicking.
3 Shock Army was facing off 1 BR Corps. The US troops were facing a different Soviet formation.
 

Glad_its_all_over

ADC
Book Reviewer
To inject some sense and history into this thread. The US and, to a much lesser extent, the UK, delivered *some* aid directly to first their zones, then, after it was formed, into Bizonia and much, much less directly to the FRG. Until 1956, the FRG had no armed forces beyond police and armed border guards - by fiat of the occupying powers. As soon as the Bundeswehr was launched, it recruited massively, with many SNCOs and officers with extensive wartime experience (although efforts were made to avoid recruiting the more obvious war criminals).

By the 1980s, the Germans had three full-strength Corps, proper ones, with real divisions and everything and a hugely intimidating Air Force, for a peacetime establishment of over 500,000 and a potential mobilised wartime establishment of a couple of million. The *only* other NATO nation on the Central Front which in any way compared with this was US Seventh Army, of two full-fat heavy metal Corps, V and VII, with a third corps, III, on REFORGER from the US, with its kit pre-positioned.

I'd remind you that, at the end of 1990, i.e. before the post-Cold War rundown, the whole of I (BR) Corps was effectively taken off the road in order to provide a short, two-brigade 1 (UK) Armd Div for GRANBY.
 
Forgotten MC 14/3? That would have been nukes on German soil or do you doubt that? So just stop bullshitting me with supposed nuclear attacks on America or the UK. Short memory, ingratitude, resentenment and a good portion of envy obviously made you forget some essential facts obviously. Germany grew rich because it had and has a potent economy, not because of the how do you call it "US/UK" defence umbrella that was indeed a NATO defence umbrella. We fulfilled our obligations back then. Contrary to your allegations the Cold war never went hot for NATO:
  1. on the territory of any of the Parties in Europe or North America, on the Algerian Departments of France, on the territory of Turkey or on the islands under the jurisdiction of any of the Parties in the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer;
  2. on the forces, vessels, or aircraft of any of the Parties, when in or over these territories or any other area in Europe in whicH occupation forces of any of the Parties were stationed on the date when the Treaty entered into force or the Mediterranean Sea or the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer.
A dodgy war in SE Asia or in another shithole is not covered by the NATO treaty, really simple.
Marshal plan??

You know the rebuilding of Germany so you wouldn’t repeat history again.
 

Top