All Things Russia & Ukraine

[old salt]

Amid much fanfare, Germany has committed to increase their contribution to NATO's joint defense force on the E flank from the current 20 to 4000, to be based in Lithuania ...provided Lithuania constructs facilities to base them, & bears the costs of their presence, ...estimated to take place in... 2026. ...so much for the Rapid Response Force.

https://www.dw.com/en/germany-to-statio ... a-66031051

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ge ... 023-06-26/

They have 1,000 not 20 based in Lithuania according to your first article. But not where the base to be built is, there it's 20.

They lead NATO's battlegroup in Lithuania. 300 tanks and 1,000 other German combat forces doing maneuver training in Lithuania, 3rd such since 2022? Or ever?

Are you simply saying that NATO should have much larger forces in the Baltics and Poland? Or Germany specifically?

That may be correct.

imo -- NATO should decide the forward force level needed. I think all the EU members, UK & Canada should contribute combat troops. but Germany most of all. I think it should be overwhelmingly non-US force with only enough US presence to enable interoperability & US reinforcement if/when necessary.

The Germans only have 20 permanently stationed in Lithuania. The rest of the 1000 rotate in & out. The majority of the brigade remains in Germany.
They have a larger number there now for this show of force exercise. They will return to Germany after the exercise & NATO summit there.
It's a publicity stunt, now 9 years since Russia's first incursion into Ukraine & NATO began bolstering the E flank. How many US forces have rotated in & out since then on lengthy deployments ?

Here's the composition of the NATO battle group currently in Lithuania :
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_136388.htm
Host nation: Lithuania
Framework nation: Germany
Contributing nations: Belgium, Croatia, Czechia, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal and the United States

https://abcnews.go.com/International/wi ... 20reported.

Germany’s military, the Bundeswehr, has already been present in Lithuania, which borders Russia and Belarus, for six years with several hundred soldiers. There, Germany leads a NATO battlegroup with currently about 1,600 soldiers, including about 780 from the Bundeswehr, dpa reported. It was not immediately clear what would happen to this unit when the new German brigade is stationed in Lithuania.

So, 1,000 at any given time...you want them to bring their families, live there for years?
Yup, that's why Lithuania would need to build such infrastructure.

You ask, "How many US forces have rotated in & out since then on lengthy deployments ?"...I have no idea, didn't see that in your links, though I may have missed it...do you know? How many are "permanently based" in Lithuania? I'm guessing darn few, but this ain't my field of knowledge...feel free to share info.

As to your preference, I have no argument with the bulk of such NATO forces being non-US, but as I've said numerous times, we like to take the lead in force and weapon deployments. Gives us greater say. And, on balance, that's been a very good thing for the US.

But I have no objection with wanting our European allies to lead in forward deployment in the Baltics...a lot closer to home with their families than for American soldiers.

And from what you posted, sounds like the Germans are indeed taking the lead in this.

We now have a few US personnel permanently stationed in Poland on the V Corps staff. The majority of NATO combat power & non-national forces along the E flank are US forces on recurring rotational deployments, normally 9 mos in length, usually requiring shipment back & forth of their armored vehicles & support equipment. I've posted the details since it began in 2017.

The Germans have been in command of the portion of the combined NATO force based in Lithuania. They are finally committing to permanently basing more troops there to fill out the ranks of the brigade.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation ... ic_Resolve
https://www.army.mil/article/238882/v_c ... _in_poznan

[MDlaxfan76]

Amid much fanfare, Germany has committed to increase their contribution to NATO's joint defense force on the E flank from the current 20 to 4000, to be based in Lithuania ...provided Lithuania constructs facilities to base them, & bears the costs of their presence, ...estimated to take place in... 2026. ...so much for the Rapid Response Force.

https://www.dw.com/en/germany-to-statio ... a-66031051

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ge ... 023-06-26/

They have 1,000 not 20 based in Lithuania according to your first article. But not where the base to be built is, there it's 20.

They lead NATO's battlegroup in Lithuania. 300 tanks and 1,000 other German combat forces doing maneuver training in Lithuania, 3rd such since 2022? Or ever?

Are you simply saying that NATO should have much larger forces in the Baltics and Poland? Or Germany specifically?

That may be correct.

imo -- NATO should decide the forward force level needed. I think all the EU members, UK & Canada should contribute combat troops. but Germany most of all. I think it should be overwhelmingly non-US force with only enough US presence to enable interoperability & US reinforcement if/when necessary.

The Germans only have 20 permanently stationed in Lithuania. The rest of the 1000 rotate in & out. The majority of the brigade remains in Germany.
They have a larger number there now for this show of force exercise. They will return to Germany after the exercise & NATO summit there.
It's a publicity stunt, now 9 years since Russia's first incursion into Ukraine & NATO began bolstering the E flank. How many US forces have rotated in & out since then on lengthy deployments ?

Here's the composition of the NATO battle group currently in Lithuania :
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_136388.htm
Host nation: Lithuania
Framework nation: Germany
Contributing nations: Belgium, Croatia, Czechia, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal and the United States

https://abcnews.go.com/International/wi ... 20reported.

Germany’s military, the Bundeswehr, has already been present in Lithuania, which borders Russia and Belarus, for six years with several hundred soldiers. There, Germany leads a NATO battlegroup with currently about 1,600 soldiers, including about 780 from the Bundeswehr, dpa reported. It was not immediately clear what would happen to this unit when the new German brigade is stationed in Lithuania.

So, 1,000 at any given time...you want them to bring their families, live there for years?
Yup, that's why Lithuania would need to build such infrastructure.

You ask, "How many US forces have rotated in & out since then on lengthy deployments ?"...I have no idea, didn't see that in your links, though I may have missed it...do you know? How many are "permanently based" in Lithuania? I'm guessing darn few, but this ain't my field of knowledge...feel free to share info.

As to your preference, I have no argument with the bulk of such NATO forces being non-US, but as I've said numerous times, we like to take the lead in force and weapon deployments. Gives us greater say. And, on balance, that's been a very good thing for the US.

But I have no objection with wanting our European allies to lead in forward deployment in the Baltics...a lot closer to home with their families than for American soldiers.

And from what you posted, sounds like the Germans are indeed taking the lead in this.

We now have a few US personnel permanently stationed in Poland on the VII Corps staff. The majority of NATO combat power & non-national forces along the E flank are US forces on recurring rotational deployments, normally 9 mos in length, usually requiring shipment back & forth of their armored vehicles & support equipment. I've posted the details since it began in 2017.

The Germans have been in command of the portion of the combined NATO force based in Lithuania. They are finally committing to permanently basing more troops there to fill out the ranks of the brigade.

So...overwhelmingly non-US permanently stationed is the current reality, and lead by the Germans in the Baltics. But yeah, we are indeed the superpower...

Am I correct that most of our deployments focus on Germany? About 3X any other country?
Second biggest group of US in Europe has been Italy? But Britain and now Poland close? 10k+ each?

Or are our folks more distributed now?
It would make sense that since the invasion we've increased forward.

[old salt]

Amid much fanfare, Germany has committed to increase their contribution to NATO's joint defense force on the E flank from the current 20 to 4000, to be based in Lithuania ...provided Lithuania constructs facilities to base them, & bears the costs of their presence, ...estimated to take place in... 2026. ...so much for the Rapid Response Force.

https://www.dw.com/en/germany-to-statio ... a-66031051

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ge ... 023-06-26/

They have 1,000 not 20 based in Lithuania according to your first article. But not where the base to be built is, there it's 20.

They lead NATO's battlegroup in Lithuania. 300 tanks and 1,000 other German combat forces doing maneuver training in Lithuania, 3rd such since 2022? Or ever?

Are you simply saying that NATO should have much larger forces in the Baltics and Poland? Or Germany specifically?

That may be correct.

imo -- NATO should decide the forward force level needed. I think all the EU members, UK & Canada should contribute combat troops. but Germany most of all. I think it should be overwhelmingly non-US force with only enough US presence to enable interoperability & US reinforcement if/when necessary.

The Germans only have 20 permanently stationed in Lithuania. The rest of the 1000 rotate in & out. The majority of the brigade remains in Germany.
They have a larger number there now for this show of force exercise. They will return to Germany after the exercise & NATO summit there.
It's a publicity stunt, now 9 years since Russia's first incursion into Ukraine & NATO began bolstering the E flank. How many US forces have rotated in & out since then on lengthy deployments ?

Here's the composition of the NATO battle group currently in Lithuania :
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_136388.htm
Host nation: Lithuania
Framework nation: Germany
Contributing nations: Belgium, Croatia, Czechia, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal and the United States

https://abcnews.go.com/International/wi ... 20reported.

Germany’s military, the Bundeswehr, has already been present in Lithuania, which borders Russia and Belarus, for six years with several hundred soldiers. There, Germany leads a NATO battlegroup with currently about 1,600 soldiers, including about 780 from the Bundeswehr, dpa reported. It was not immediately clear what would happen to this unit when the new German brigade is stationed in Lithuania.

So, 1,000 at any given time...you want them to bring their families, live there for years?
Yup, that's why Lithuania would need to build such infrastructure.

You ask, "How many US forces have rotated in & out since then on lengthy deployments ?"...I have no idea, didn't see that in your links, though I may have missed it...do you know? How many are "permanently based" in Lithuania? I'm guessing darn few, but this ain't my field of knowledge...feel free to share info.

As to your preference, I have no argument with the bulk of such NATO forces being non-US, but as I've said numerous times, we like to take the lead in force and weapon deployments. Gives us greater say. And, on balance, that's been a very good thing for the US.

But I have no objection with wanting our European allies to lead in forward deployment in the Baltics...a lot closer to home with their families than for American soldiers.

And from what you posted, sounds like the Germans are indeed taking the lead in this.

We now have a few US personnel permanently stationed in Poland on the VII Corps staff. The majority of NATO combat power & non-national forces along the E flank are US forces on recurring rotational deployments, normally 9 mos in length, usually requiring shipment back & forth of their armored vehicles & support equipment. I've posted the details since it began in 2017.

The Germans have been in command of the portion of the combined NATO force based in Lithuania. They are finally committing to permanently basing more troops there to fill out the ranks of the brigade.

So...overwhelmingly non-US permanently stationed is the current reality, and lead by the Germans in the Baltics. But yeah, we are indeed the superpower...

Am I correct that most of our deployments focus on Germany? About 3X any other country?
Second biggest group of US in Europe has been Italy? But Britain and now Poland close? 10k+ each?

Or are our folks more distributed now?
It would make sense that since the invasion we've increased forward.

https://www.gov.pl/web/national-defence ... n%20Poznan.

Currently, a total of about 10,000 troops of the US armed forces are stationed in Poland, primarily as part of a rotational presence.

The U.S. V Corps Forward Command is one of the permanent U.S. installations in Poland, located at Camp Kosciuszko in Poznan.

[MDlaxfan76]

Amid much fanfare, Germany has committed to increase their contribution to NATO's joint defense force on the E flank from the current 20 to 4000, to be based in Lithuania ...provided Lithuania constructs facilities to base them, & bears the costs of their presence, ...estimated to take place in... 2026. ...so much for the Rapid Response Force.

https://www.dw.com/en/germany-to-statio ... a-66031051

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ge ... 023-06-26/

They have 1,000 not 20 based in Lithuania according to your first article. But not where the base to be built is, there it's 20.

They lead NATO's battlegroup in Lithuania. 300 tanks and 1,000 other German combat forces doing maneuver training in Lithuania, 3rd such since 2022? Or ever?

Are you simply saying that NATO should have much larger forces in the Baltics and Poland? Or Germany specifically?

That may be correct.

imo -- NATO should decide the forward force level needed. I think all the EU members, UK & Canada should contribute combat troops. but Germany most of all. I think it should be overwhelmingly non-US force with only enough US presence to enable interoperability & US reinforcement if/when necessary.

The Germans only have 20 permanently stationed in Lithuania. The rest of the 1000 rotate in & out. The majority of the brigade remains in Germany.
They have a larger number there now for this show of force exercise. They will return to Germany after the exercise & NATO summit there.
It's a publicity stunt, now 9 years since Russia's first incursion into Ukraine & NATO began bolstering the E flank. How many US forces have rotated in & out since then on lengthy deployments ?

Here's the composition of the NATO battle group currently in Lithuania :
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_136388.htm
Host nation: Lithuania
Framework nation: Germany
Contributing nations: Belgium, Croatia, Czechia, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal and the United States

https://abcnews.go.com/International/wi ... 20reported.

Germany’s military, the Bundeswehr, has already been present in Lithuania, which borders Russia and Belarus, for six years with several hundred soldiers. There, Germany leads a NATO battlegroup with currently about 1,600 soldiers, including about 780 from the Bundeswehr, dpa reported. It was not immediately clear what would happen to this unit when the new German brigade is stationed in Lithuania.

So, 1,000 at any given time...you want them to bring their families, live there for years?
Yup, that's why Lithuania would need to build such infrastructure.

You ask, "How many US forces have rotated in & out since then on lengthy deployments ?"...I have no idea, didn't see that in your links, though I may have missed it...do you know? How many are "permanently based" in Lithuania? I'm guessing darn few, but this ain't my field of knowledge...feel free to share info.

As to your preference, I have no argument with the bulk of such NATO forces being non-US, but as I've said numerous times, we like to take the lead in force and weapon deployments. Gives us greater say. And, on balance, that's been a very good thing for the US.

But I have no objection with wanting our European allies to lead in forward deployment in the Baltics...a lot closer to home with their families than for American soldiers.

And from what you posted, sounds like the Germans are indeed taking the lead in this.

We now have a few US personnel permanently stationed in Poland on the VII Corps staff. The majority of NATO combat power & non-national forces along the E flank are US forces on recurring rotational deployments, normally 9 mos in length, usually requiring shipment back & forth of their armored vehicles & support equipment. I've posted the details since it began in 2017.

The Germans have been in command of the portion of the combined NATO force based in Lithuania. They are finally committing to permanently basing more troops there to fill out the ranks of the brigade.

So...overwhelmingly non-US permanently stationed is the current reality, and lead by the Germans in the Baltics. But yeah, we are indeed the superpower...

Am I correct that most of our deployments focus on Germany? About 3X any other country?
Second biggest group of US in Europe has been Italy? But Britain and now Poland close? 10k+ each?

Or are our folks more distributed now?
It would make sense that since the invasion we've increased forward.

https://www.gov.pl/web/national-defence ... n%20Poznan.

Currently, a total of about 10,000 troops of the US armed forces are stationed in Poland, primarily as part of a rotational presence.

The U.S. V Corps Forward Command is one of the permanent U.S. installations in Poland, located at Camp Kosciuszko in Poznan.

That's what I saw, but this interactive map is out of date by a year...I was wondering whether materially changed.
https://www.axios.com/2022/03/23/where- ... ned-europe

[old salt]

Amid much fanfare, Germany has committed to increase their contribution to NATO's joint defense force on the E flank from the current 20 to 4000, to be based in Lithuania ...provided Lithuania constructs facilities to base them, & bears the costs of their presence, ...estimated to take place in... 2026. ...so much for the Rapid Response Force.

https://www.dw.com/en/germany-to-statio ... a-66031051

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ge ... 023-06-26/

They have 1,000 not 20 based in Lithuania according to your first article. But not where the base to be built is, there it's 20.

They lead NATO's battlegroup in Lithuania. 300 tanks and 1,000 other German combat forces doing maneuver training in Lithuania, 3rd such since 2022? Or ever?

Are you simply saying that NATO should have much larger forces in the Baltics and Poland? Or Germany specifically?

That may be correct.

imo -- NATO should decide the forward force level needed. I think all the EU members, UK & Canada should contribute combat troops. but Germany most of all. I think it should be overwhelmingly non-US force with only enough US presence to enable interoperability & US reinforcement if/when necessary.

The Germans only have 20 permanently stationed in Lithuania. The rest of the 1000 rotate in & out. The majority of the brigade remains in Germany.
They have a larger number there now for this show of force exercise. They will return to Germany after the exercise & NATO summit there.
It's a publicity stunt, now 9 years since Russia's first incursion into Ukraine & NATO began bolstering the E flank. How many US forces have rotated in & out since then on lengthy deployments ?

Here's the composition of the NATO battle group currently in Lithuania :
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_136388.htm
Host nation: Lithuania
Framework nation: Germany
Contributing nations: Belgium, Croatia, Czechia, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal and the United States

https://abcnews.go.com/International/wi ... 20reported.

Germany’s military, the Bundeswehr, has already been present in Lithuania, which borders Russia and Belarus, for six years with several hundred soldiers. There, Germany leads a NATO battlegroup with currently about 1,600 soldiers, including about 780 from the Bundeswehr, dpa reported. It was not immediately clear what would happen to this unit when the new German brigade is stationed in Lithuania.

So, 1,000 at any given time...you want them to bring their families, live there for years?
Yup, that's why Lithuania would need to build such infrastructure.

You ask, "How many US forces have rotated in & out since then on lengthy deployments ?"...I have no idea, didn't see that in your links, though I may have missed it...do you know? How many are "permanently based" in Lithuania? I'm guessing darn few, but this ain't my field of knowledge...feel free to share info.

As to your preference, I have no argument with the bulk of such NATO forces being non-US, but as I've said numerous times, we like to take the lead in force and weapon deployments. Gives us greater say. And, on balance, that's been a very good thing for the US.

But I have no objection with wanting our European allies to lead in forward deployment in the Baltics...a lot closer to home with their families than for American soldiers.

And from what you posted, sounds like the Germans are indeed taking the lead in this.

We now have a few US personnel permanently stationed in Poland on the VII Corps staff. The majority of NATO combat power & non-national forces along the E flank are US forces on recurring rotational deployments, normally 9 mos in length, usually requiring shipment back & forth of their armored vehicles & support equipment. I've posted the details since it began in 2017.

The Germans have been in command of the portion of the combined NATO force based in Lithuania. They are finally committing to permanently basing more troops there to fill out the ranks of the brigade.

So...overwhelmingly non-US permanently stationed is the current reality, and lead by the Germans in the Baltics. But yeah, we are indeed the superpower...

Am I correct that most of our deployments focus on Germany? About 3X any other country?
Second biggest group of US in Europe has been Italy? But Britain and now Poland close? 10k+ each?

Or are our folks more distributed now?
It would make sense that since the invasion we've increased forward.

https://www.gov.pl/web/national-defence ... n%20Poznan.

Currently, a total of about 10,000 troops of the US armed forces are stationed in Poland, primarily as part of a rotational presence.

The U.S. V Corps Forward Command is one of the permanent U.S. installations in Poland, located at Camp Kosciuszko in Poznan.

That's what I saw, but this interactive map is out of date by a year...I was wondering whether materially changed.
https://www.axios.com/2022/03/23/where- ... ned-europe

@ a year ago :

https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/R ... to-europe/

[old salt]

So...overwhelmingly non-US permanently stationed is the current reality, and lead by the Germans in the Baltics. But yeah, we are indeed the superpower...

conscripts mowing the grass does not equal effective combat forces.

[MDlaxfan76]

Amid much fanfare, Germany has committed to increase their contribution to NATO's joint defense force on the E flank from the current 20 to 4000, to be based in Lithuania ...provided Lithuania constructs facilities to base them, & bears the costs of their presence, ...estimated to take place in... 2026. ...so much for the Rapid Response Force.

https://www.dw.com/en/germany-to-statio ... a-66031051

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ge ... 023-06-26/

They have 1,000 not 20 based in Lithuania according to your first article. But not where the base to be built is, there it's 20.

They lead NATO's battlegroup in Lithuania. 300 tanks and 1,000 other German combat forces doing maneuver training in Lithuania, 3rd such since 2022? Or ever?

Are you simply saying that NATO should have much larger forces in the Baltics and Poland? Or Germany specifically?

That may be correct.

imo -- NATO should decide the forward force level needed. I think all the EU members, UK & Canada should contribute combat troops. but Germany most of all. I think it should be overwhelmingly non-US force with only enough US presence to enable interoperability & US reinforcement if/when necessary.

The Germans only have 20 permanently stationed in Lithuania. The rest of the 1000 rotate in & out. The majority of the brigade remains in Germany.
They have a larger number there now for this show of force exercise. They will return to Germany after the exercise & NATO summit there.
It's a publicity stunt, now 9 years since Russia's first incursion into Ukraine & NATO began bolstering the E flank. How many US forces have rotated in & out since then on lengthy deployments ?

Here's the composition of the NATO battle group currently in Lithuania :
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_136388.htm
Host nation: Lithuania
Framework nation: Germany
Contributing nations: Belgium, Croatia, Czechia, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal and the United States

https://abcnews.go.com/International/wi ... 20reported.

Germany’s military, the Bundeswehr, has already been present in Lithuania, which borders Russia and Belarus, for six years with several hundred soldiers. There, Germany leads a NATO battlegroup with currently about 1,600 soldiers, including about 780 from the Bundeswehr, dpa reported. It was not immediately clear what would happen to this unit when the new German brigade is stationed in Lithuania.

So, 1,000 at any given time...you want them to bring their families, live there for years?
Yup, that's why Lithuania would need to build such infrastructure.

You ask, "How many US forces have rotated in & out since then on lengthy deployments ?"...I have no idea, didn't see that in your links, though I may have missed it...do you know? How many are "permanently based" in Lithuania? I'm guessing darn few, but this ain't my field of knowledge...feel free to share info.

As to your preference, I have no argument with the bulk of such NATO forces being non-US, but as I've said numerous times, we like to take the lead in force and weapon deployments. Gives us greater say. And, on balance, that's been a very good thing for the US.

But I have no objection with wanting our European allies to lead in forward deployment in the Baltics...a lot closer to home with their families than for American soldiers.

And from what you posted, sounds like the Germans are indeed taking the lead in this.

We now have a few US personnel permanently stationed in Poland on the VII Corps staff. The majority of NATO combat power & non-national forces along the E flank are US forces on recurring rotational deployments, normally 9 mos in length, usually requiring shipment back & forth of their armored vehicles & support equipment. I've posted the details since it began in 2017.

The Germans have been in command of the portion of the combined NATO force based in Lithuania. They are finally committing to permanently basing more troops there to fill out the ranks of the brigade.

So...overwhelmingly non-US permanently stationed is the current reality, and lead by the Germans in the Baltics. But yeah, we are indeed the superpower...

Am I correct that most of our deployments focus on Germany? About 3X any other country?
Second biggest group of US in Europe has been Italy? But Britain and now Poland close? 10k+ each?

Or are our folks more distributed now?
It would make sense that since the invasion we've increased forward.

https://www.gov.pl/web/national-defence ... n%20Poznan.

Currently, a total of about 10,000 troops of the US armed forces are stationed in Poland, primarily as part of a rotational presence.

The U.S. V Corps Forward Command is one of the permanent U.S. installations in Poland, located at Camp Kosciuszko in Poznan.

That's what I saw, but this interactive map is out of date by a year...I was wondering whether materially changed.
https://www.axios.com/2022/03/23/where- ... ned-europe

@ a year ago :

https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/R ... to-europe/

Right, we increased and moved forward after invasion of Ukraine.

[MDlaxfan76]

So...overwhelmingly non-US permanently stationed is the current reality, and lead by the Germans in the Baltics. But yeah, we are indeed the superpower...

conscripts mowing the grass does not equal effective combat forces.

As I said, we're the superpower...by design.

[old salt]

overwhelmingly non-US permanently ...is the current reality, and lead by the Germans in the Baltics.

conscripts mowing the grass does not equal effective combat forces.

As I said, we're the superpower...by design.

Germany is an economic & demographic superpower also. The combined EU even more so.

You're as misleading at fluffing the pillow as the Germans are.
They're in command of the NATO brigade in Lithuania - not the entire Baltics (3 nations, 3 NATO Brigades)
When the Brigade was formed in 2017, the Germans couldn't even provide any Leopard tanks.
The US had to send Abrams tanks from our deployed forces in Poland.

[MDlaxfan76]

overwhelmingly non-US permanently ...is the current reality, and lead by the Germans in the Baltics.

conscripts mowing the grass does not equal effective combat forces.

As I said, we're the superpower...by design.

Germany is an economic & demographic superpower also. The combined EU even more so.

You're as misleading at fluffing the pillow as the Germans are.
They're in command of the NATO brigade in Lithuania - not the entire Baltics (3 nations, 3 NATO Brigades)
When the Brigade was formed in 2017, the Germans couldn't even provide any Leopard tanks.
The US had to send Abrams tanks from our deployed forces in Poland.

Boo hoo, yes, we're the West's military superpower, as well as the economic and demographic superpower.

Not close.

We're 4X their population and 20% higher per capita GDP. And our per capita income is about 25% higher.

We like it this way.

You want Germany to carry more weight, no argument from me.

[old salt]

overwhelmingly non-US permanently ...is the current reality, and lead by the Germans in the Baltics.

conscripts mowing the grass does not equal effective combat forces.

As I said, we're the superpower...by design.

Germany is an economic & demographic superpower also. The combined EU even more so.

You're as misleading at fluffing the pillow as the Germans are.
They're in command of the NATO brigade in Lithuania - not the entire Baltics (3 nations, 3 NATO Brigades)
When the Brigade was formed in 2017, the Germans couldn't even provide any Leopard tanks.
The US had to send Abrams tanks from our deployed forces in Poland.

Boo hoo, yes, we're the West's military superpower, as well as the economic and demographic superpower.

Not close.

We're 4X their population and 20% higher per capita GDP. And our per capita income is about 25% higher.

We like it this way.

You want Germany to carry more weight, no argument from me.

Mexico's on our border, not Russia.

Germany has only manned 1/2 of one of the 3 combined NATO battalions sent to the 3 Baltic nations.
Their tankers didn't show up (in trucks) until 3 mos after Russia invaded Ukraine.
German forces were only 1/2 of one of 3 NATO Brigades in the Baltics,
https://www.dw.com/en/german-troop-rein ... a-60774606
https://www.euronews.com/2022/09/05/ger ... tern-flank

...& where the F are the combat ready surplus Dutch F-16's that have been sitting in the ramp for over a year now ?
Awaiting a big announcement at the next NATO summit or will nobody host the training other than Romania ?
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/06/2 ... s-00102916

[MDlaxfan76]

overwhelmingly non-US permanently ...is the current reality, and lead by the Germans in the Baltics.

conscripts mowing the grass does not equal effective combat forces.

As I said, we're the superpower...by design.

Germany is an economic & demographic superpower also. The combined EU even more so.

You're as misleading at fluffing the pillow as the Germans are.
They're in command of the NATO brigade in Lithuania - not the entire Baltics (3 nations, 3 NATO Brigades)
When the Brigade was formed in 2017, the Germans couldn't even provide any Leopard tanks.
The US had to send Abrams tanks from our deployed forces in Poland.

Boo hoo, yes, we're the West's military superpower, as well as the economic and demographic superpower.

Not close.

We're 4X their population and 20% higher per capita GDP. And our per capita income is about 25% higher.

We like it this way.

You want Germany to carry more weight, no argument from me.

Mexico's on our border, not Russia.

Germany has only manned 1/2 of one of the 3 combined NATO battalions sent to the 3 Baltic nations.
Their tankers didn't show up (in trucks) until Russia was massing troops on Uktraine's borders.
German forces were only 1/2 of one of 3 NATO Brigades in the Baltics,
https://www.dw.com/en/german-troop-rein ... a-60774606

...& where the F are the combat ready surplus Dutch F-16's that have been sitting in the ramp for over a year now ?
Awaiting a big announcement at the next NATO summit or will nobody host the training other than Romania ?
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/06/2 ... s-00102916

Do you imagine that I don't understand that you want the Europeans to be as warlike as us?

uhh, excuse me, "war-ready"...

Seriously, this is by design Salty...but hey, keep ignoring what I responded above re superpower status...I appreciate you're at least not cutting what I wrote.

[old salt]

overwhelmingly non-US permanently ...is the current reality, and lead by the Germans in the Baltics.

conscripts mowing the grass does not equal effective combat forces.

As I said, we're the superpower...by design.

Germany is an economic & demographic superpower also. The combined EU even more so.

You're as misleading at fluffing the pillow as the Germans are.
They're in command of the NATO brigade in Lithuania - not the entire Baltics (3 nations, 3 NATO Brigades)
When the Brigade was formed in 2017, the Germans couldn't even provide any Leopard tanks.
The US had to send Abrams tanks from our deployed forces in Poland.

Boo hoo, yes, we're the West's military superpower, as well as the economic and demographic superpower.

Not close.

We're 4X their population and 20% higher per capita GDP. And our per capita income is about 25% higher.

We like it this way.

You want Germany to carry more weight, no argument from me.

Mexico's on our border, not Russia.

Germany has only manned 1/2 of one of the 3 combined NATO battalions sent to the 3 Baltic nations.
Their tankers didn't show up (in trucks) until Russia was massing troops on Uktraine's borders.
German forces were only 1/2 of one of 3 NATO Brigades in the Baltics,
https://www.dw.com/en/german-troop-rein ... a-60774606

...& where the F are the combat ready surplus Dutch F-16's that have been sitting in the ramp for over a year now ?
Awaiting a big announcement at the next NATO summit or will nobody host the training other than Romania ?
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/06/2 ... s-00102916

Do you imagine that I don't understand that you want the Europeans to be as warlike as us?

uhh, excuse me, "war-ready"...

Seriously, this is by design Salty...but hey, keep ignoring what I responded above re superpower status...I appreciate you're at least not cutting what I wrote.

I want them to defend themselves (like they did during the Cold War) so we don't have continue to do it for them.

[a fan]

overwhelmingly non-US permanently ...is the current reality, and lead by the Germans in the Baltics.

conscripts mowing the grass does not equal effective combat forces.

As I said, we're the superpower...by design.

Germany is an economic & demographic superpower also. The combined EU even more so.

I agree.

But this attitude doesn't square with your insistence that the US is solely responsible for sea lanes everywhere, and that NATO can't possibly do their share.

Care to clarify?

[old salt]

overwhelmingly non-US permanently ...is the current reality, and lead by the Germans in the Baltics.

conscripts mowing the grass does not equal effective combat forces.

As I said, we're the superpower...by design.

Germany is an economic & demographic superpower also. The combined EU even more so.

I agree.

But this attitude doesn't square with your insistence that the US is solely responsible for sea lanes everywhere, and that NATO can't possibly do their share.

Care to clarify?

"Solely" is your characterization.
I often posted about USN joint operations & exercises with NATO & WPac allied navies. I posted examples of NATO out-of-area naval operations.
I posted articles about US combined flight ops & deployments with the Brits & French on each others carriers.
In this area as well, the US provides a disproportionate % of the necessary seapower.

[a fan]

"Solely" is your characterization.

Then I stand corrected, my apologies! We're on the same page here, too.

[Seacoaster(1)]

Interesting:

https://www.understandingwar.org/backgr ... ne-27-2023

[RedFromMI]

Interesting:

https://www.understandingwar.org/backgr ... ne-27-2023

+1

Thanks for the very informative link!

[MDlaxfan76]

overwhelmingly non-US permanently ...is the current reality, and lead by the Germans in the Baltics.

conscripts mowing the grass does not equal effective combat forces.

As I said, we're the superpower...by design.

Germany is an economic & demographic superpower also. The combined EU even more so.

You're as misleading at fluffing the pillow as the Germans are.
They're in command of the NATO brigade in Lithuania - not the entire Baltics (3 nations, 3 NATO Brigades)
When the Brigade was formed in 2017, the Germans couldn't even provide any Leopard tanks.
The US had to send Abrams tanks from our deployed forces in Poland.

Boo hoo, yes, we're the West's military superpower, as well as the economic and demographic superpower.

Not close.

We're 4X their population and 20% higher per capita GDP. And our per capita income is about 25% higher.

We like it this way.

You want Germany to carry more weight, no argument from me.

Mexico's on our border, not Russia.

Germany has only manned 1/2 of one of the 3 combined NATO battalions sent to the 3 Baltic nations.
Their tankers didn't show up (in trucks) until Russia was massing troops on Uktraine's borders.
German forces were only 1/2 of one of 3 NATO Brigades in the Baltics,
https://www.dw.com/en/german-troop-rein ... a-60774606

...& where the F are the combat ready surplus Dutch F-16's that have been sitting in the ramp for over a year now ?
Awaiting a big announcement at the next NATO summit or will nobody host the training other than Romania ?
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/06/2 ... s-00102916

Do you imagine that I don't understand that you want the Europeans to be as warlike as us?

uhh, excuse me, "war-ready"...

Seriously, this is by design Salty...but hey, keep ignoring what I responded above re superpower status...I appreciate you're at least not cutting what I wrote.

I want them to defend themselves (like they did during the Cold War) so we don't have continue to do it for them.

I assume you mean their peak from the '70's to reunification?
Prior to 1970 they spent less per year in constant dollars than they have since 2014 and the taking of Crimea.

But at peak they had 2.5 X as many active military as today. Reunification allowed a huge reset in manpower, and no doubt some real reduction in readiness in all aspects. The Soviet Union, including its proxies East Germany, Czechoslovakia, Poland etc, were no longer the imminent threat they had been. Re-integration and development of East Germany was the immediate priority...a big task as East Germany was such a mess.

I assume you agree that was the case.

The Germans are definitely beefing up since 2014, and now accelerating since invasion.

[old salt]

overwhelmingly non-US permanently ...is the current reality, and lead by the Germans in the Baltics.

conscripts mowing the grass does not equal effective combat forces.

As I said, we're the superpower...by design.

Germany is an economic & demographic superpower also. The combined EU even more so.

You're as misleading at fluffing the pillow as the Germans are.
They're in command of the NATO brigade in Lithuania - not the entire Baltics (3 nations, 3 NATO Brigades)
When the Brigade was formed in 2017, the Germans couldn't even provide any Leopard tanks.
The US had to send Abrams tanks from our deployed forces in Poland.

Boo hoo, yes, we're the West's military superpower, as well as the economic and demographic superpower.

Not close.

We're 4X their population and 20% higher per capita GDP. And our per capita income is about 25% higher.

We like it this way.

You want Germany to carry more weight, no argument from me.

Mexico's on our border, not Russia.

Germany has only manned 1/2 of one of the 3 combined NATO battalions sent to the 3 Baltic nations.
Their tankers didn't show up (in trucks) until Russia was massing troops on Uktraine's borders.
German forces were only 1/2 of one of 3 NATO Brigades in the Baltics,
https://www.dw.com/en/german-troop-rein ... a-60774606

...& where the F are the combat ready surplus Dutch F-16's that have been sitting in the ramp for over a year now ?
Awaiting a big announcement at the next NATO summit or will nobody host the training other than Romania ?
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/06/2 ... s-00102916

Do you imagine that I don't understand that you want the Europeans to be as warlike as us?

uhh, excuse me, "war-ready"...

Seriously, this is by design Salty...but hey, keep ignoring what I responded above re superpower status...I appreciate you're at least not cutting what I wrote.

I want them to defend themselves (like they did during the Cold War) so we don't have continue to do it for them.

I assume you mean their peak from the '70's to reunification?
Prior to 1970 they spent less per year in constant dollars than they have since 2014 and the taking of Crimea.

But at peak they had 2.5 X as many active military as today. Reunification allowed a huge reset in manpower, and no doubt some real reduction in readiness in all aspects. The Soviet Union, including its proxies East Germany, Czechoslovakia, Poland etc, were no longer the imminent threat they had been. Re-integration and development of East Germany was the immediate priority...a big task as East Germany was such a mess.

I assume you agree that was the case.

The Germans are definitely beefing up since 2014, and now accelerating since invasion.

Look at what just W Germany contributed to NATO during the Cold War.
Reunification has, by now, made Germany even stronger, in relative & real terms.
https://www.bundeswehr.de/en/about-bund ... y/cold-war
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboo ... rce-189598