So here's my question. How much more does the UK need to spend, assuming an ideal scenario of minimal waste and a perfect plan to modernise the armed forces to be fit for purpose today (rather than Government spending money on vanity projects, say)?
The Trump Presidency - Part 2
- Thread starter The Boy
- Start date
I dont think a US less Europe have to fear Russia. They can't even win against Ukraine, you'd think they'd march into Western Europe?
Nobody in Europe dared to put boots in the ground in Ukraine because of the Nukes. The EU has enough Nukes between themselves to deter Putin or Russia or even China
Even a nukeless conventional war, powerhouse like UK or France can hold their own against Russia 1 v 1.
Then there's nuke and Nato, even without the US. The Russian would be besieged by 10 plus EU nation on all Western front
US firepower comes from printing USD and government bond, which is a ticking time bomb. At one point those bonds will become worthless and the domino would fall, it could theoretically happen anytime now, all it takes is a perfect storm at financial market
Could the whole EU armed themselves to the teeth? They could, but at what cost? Education? Healtcare? I'd take my chance if I were the EU nations.
Nobody in Europe dared to put boots in the ground in Ukraine because of the Nukes. The EU has enough Nukes between themselves to deter Putin or Russia or even China
Even a nukeless conventional war, powerhouse like UK or France can hold their own against Russia 1 v 1.
Then there's nuke and Nato, even without the US. The Russian would be besieged by 10 plus EU nation on all Western front
US firepower comes from printing USD and government bond, which is a ticking time bomb. At one point those bonds will become worthless and the domino would fall, it could theoretically happen anytime now, all it takes is a perfect storm at financial market
Could the whole EU armed themselves to the teeth? They could, but at what cost? Education? Healtcare? I'd take my chance if I were the EU nations.
I don't know what poster said that Europe have Education and Healthcare thanks that US defends Europe and if US would not need to defend Europe they would be able to have Education and Healthcare....like their educational and healthcare private lobbies would let them change their current model
Where the hell are you getting that number from?
UK + France + Germany + Italy + Spain combined don't even reach 1000 in service.
From here
https://eda.europa.eu/webzine/issue14/in-the-field/optimizing-europe-s-main-battle-tank-capabilities#:~:text=The number of MBTs in,the short or medium term.
The EU is not only those countries. Poland itself has over 600
I think part of the argument is that these assets are scattered and difficult to coordinate.
Poland itself is the only one with a significant Armoured force.
All the ex-Soviet countries donated their tanks T-series tanks to Ukraine.
Greece is the only other country with a significant MBT force, but most of them are Leopard I's and M60 Patton's from the 1960's.
I really need to know where the rest of the tanks are, because this is a mental claim.
Numbers aside, without the US I doubt Europe has the capability to transport them all to where they'd need to go
Yeah, they'd have to be wheeled to Eastern Europe by train. No native airlift capacity.
I am not disputing your claims. Internet claims that EU countries has 5000 MBTs. you say that only 1000
I don't know why you left Poland out on your arguments
Didn’t realise you were Irish
Also Armoured divisions isn't just about MBT's. IFV's, APC's,
I never claimed 1000, what? You might want to re-read my comment.
It's basically, "5000 is an absurd number given the 5 largest militaries in Europe combined don't even reach 1000"
I never claimed 1000, what? You might want to re-read my comment.
It's basically, "5000 is an absurd number given the 5 largest militaries in Europe combined don't even reach 1000"
Oh Lord Christ, I found out where that article got the 5000 MBT's source from....
2022 Global Firepower Rankings : Possibly the worst source for military matters...ever
Jesus christ
France 406 MBT's? Okay...so how did that happen when the French only ordered 240 LeClerc Tanks?
(They confused French mobile firepower AIM Project for a tank) Amateur work basically.
2022 Global Firepower Rankings : Possibly the worst source for military matters...ever
Jesus christ
France 406 MBT's? Okay...so how did that happen when the French only ordered 240 LeClerc Tanks?
(They confused French mobile firepower AIM Project for a tank) Amateur work basically.
Last edited:
Belgium looks wide open. Germany should take it. We need more coast.Oh Lord Christ, I found out where that article got the 5000 MBT's source from....
2022 Global Firepower Rankings : Possibly the worst source for military matters...ever
Jesus christ
hahaha - very good!!
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1294391/nato-tank-strength-country/
Greece 1365
Poland 612
Romania 345
Spain 327
Germany 295
France 222
Bulgaria 214
Hungary 208
Italy 200
Finland 200
Sweden 120
Croatia 75
Czechia 65
Slovenia 55
Denmark 44
Slovakia 36
Portugal 34
Netherlands 18
TOTAL EU: 4435
NATO without US: around 7000
And before claiming the quality of the EU tanks, you should take in account the quality of the Russia tanks also
So you don't consider Poland largest military in EU
I stand corrected though. But you certainly said the sentence:
"Where the hell are you getting that number from?" when they told you the 5000 MTB in the EU
That would be a fair point but that's not synonym to the US defending Europe or Europe having nothing to defend itself.
Last edited:
It will be - once it actually fills its outrageous backorder of equipment
(That I have no idea how they plan to fund)
Yep this number matches the Global Firepower numbers....sigh
God damn it, AfonsoAlves Rants about state of journalism when it comes to military matters #234234
You can dismiss but you don;t present alternative numbers
It also seems like the current argument is about going to toe to toe in armored combat like the 1940s. That's no longer necessary due to the superior airpower and manpat possessed by eu-nato.
Fair enough, give us some source.
And it depends entirely on who you are suppsoed to defend yourself against. Russia can barely handle Ukraine, so who are we talking about? The US or China, if it's the US then I don't want to hear anything about the US defending Europe.
For what it's worth, the number for Denmark corresponds exactly to official sources from the government.
The number for France also correspond to official figures, it's actually 225 Chars Leclerc.
The thing is that Global fire power might be a none reliable source for you @AfonsoAlves . I trust you because you know much more than me on this topic, but I don't know why these numbers would be so far off of official numbers. Surely they might have some numbers right? And I don't know why it is so outlandish to consider the EU being close to 5000 MBTs
Can we put a post limit on @AfonsoAlves for military shite? 1 per day to start.
It's not outlandish at all, there is 27 members an average of 185 isn't actually much.
Number of times Charles Leclerc binned it into the tires?
I’m positive that fecking armored vehicle is still faster than Ferrari car
On a different note - WTF is this cult shit as well?:
Former NFL player arrested for speaking out against the Huntington Beach, CA library putting up a plaque that in a tribute to Trump spells out the letters MAGA
https://archive.ph/2025.02.20-15300...com/chris-kluwe-arrest-vikings-maga/601225913
Former NFL player arrested for speaking out against the Huntington Beach, CA library putting up a plaque that in a tribute to Trump spells out the letters MAGA
https://archive.ph/2025.02.20-15300...com/chris-kluwe-arrest-vikings-maga/601225913
Like I said above, 75%. Anyone who doubted the "silent majority" claims about support for Trump should be reconsidering. They vast majority of this country wants this.
Statistically it's generally unlikely but in this case, it's not just american voters but also many wannabee american voters(immigrants) who are championing this man.
25% of the country explicitly voiced their support of what is happening and 50% of the country took a look at both options and were cool with whoever won's policies.
Is Vance acting for real (maybe, even simply parroting the lines given to him by the US Senate, apparatus or similar structured corps of a democracy) or just doing the good cop impersonation (aka, theatre for internal and external media) while putting his boss’ ramblings into a coherent narrative?
But using that logic then surely the Dems have support of 74%? Also, how do you know that some people who didn't vote wanted neither, not either?
I do understand your point, I'm just not sure it's really th case.