Ze Germans vill fight to ze last Pole

[TimothyC]

Germany’s army is so under-equipped that it used broomsticks instead of machine guns

The German army has faced a shortage of equipment for years, but the situation has recently become so precarious that some soldiers took matters into their own hands.

On Tuesday, German broadcaster ARD revealed that German soldiers tried to hide the lack of arms by replacing heavy machine guns with broomsticks during a NATO exercise last year. After painting the wooden sticks black, the German soldiers swiftly attached them to the top of armored vehicles, according to a confidential army report which was leaked to ARD.

A defense ministry spokesperson said the use of broomsticks was not a common practice, and that the decision of the involved soldiers was "hard to comprehend." According to the ministry, the armored vehicles were furthermore not supposed to be armed. It remains unclear how many broomsticks were substituted for machine guns.

The awkward revelation on Tuesday came at the worst possible moment for Germany's defense ministry. The same day, Ukraine's army was about to suffer a defeat in the town of Debaltseve, putting a renewed focus on the question whether Europe's NATO allies would be able to manage the crisis militarily – without an American intervention, if necessary.

To make matters worse, the broom-equipped German soldiers belong to a crucial, joint NATO task force and would be the first to be deployed in case of an attack. Opposition politicians have expressed concerns about Germany's ability to defend itself and other European allies, given that even some of the most elite forces lack basic equipment.

The central European country was the world's third-largest arms exporter in 2013, but when it comes to Germany's own defense politicians have been unwilling to invest. In 2013, Germany spent only 1.3 percent of its GDP on defense -- a ratio which was below the average spending of the European members of NATO.

In an interview with local German newspaper Neue Osnabrücker Zeitung, the head of the country's green party Cem Özdemir argued that it was not only the lack of funding that posed a problem. "The financial resources are not being used efficiently," Özdemir said last September. According to him, Europe's armies only have one tenth of the strength of the U.S. Army, although they cost half of the defense budget of the United States.

The lack of equipment does not come as a surprise to close observers of the German army. Last year, the parliamentary defense committee was informed that out of 89 German fighter jets, only 38 were ready for use. The list of damaged items also included helicopters, as well as a variety of weapons.

After the lack of arms and vehicles was made public, Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen vowed to upgrade and repair the equipment. According to some soldiers and officers, the minister has so far failed to deliver on her promises.

According to the confidential report that was leaked on Tuesday, the German NATO task force would face serious problems if it had to intervene abroad. More than 40 percent of the task force's soldiers would have to do without P8 pistols, and more than 30 percent lacked general-purpose machine guns, known as MG3. Operating at night would be particularly difficult for Germany's armed task force, given a lack of 76 percent of necessary night viewers.

Germany's continuous equipment problems hardly match von der Leyen's public rhetoric. On Tuesday, she announced that Germany would overhaul its security strategy and become more active internationally and in eastern Europe in the coming years.

According to Reuters, von der Leyen said that Germany's new policy had to take into account the Kremlin's attempt "to establish geo-strategic power politics and military force as a form of asserting their interests." Critics, however, say that such statements remain pure rhetoric, as long as the financial resources dedicated to the German army are insufficient.

While none of this is surprising (and the idea that there would be anything that could draw Europe in that wouldn't also draw the US in is laughable), it does bear repeating.

[Thanas]

If you thought that was hilarious, just read the reports from Spiegel about the newest sub of ours. The yard messed up so badly they had to install a yacht radar for sea trials. Oh and somehow (despite it being fine on the previous boats of this class) the yard managed to mess up the galley - the exhaust is malfunctioning so that even cooking two sausages fills up the boat with smoke.

But yeah, our military is in shambles, what funds they have are used badly and they won't get more funding as long as the current Eurozone crisis continues.

[Simon_Jester]

Well, you know how it is. If the Germans are too feckless to worry about protecting themselves, and if Germans simultaneously pursue a policy of containing and opposing a large and well-armed rival...

I guess they're just committed to being fools.

[Shrugs]

[Thanas]

Well, you know how it is. If the Germans are too feckless to worry about protecting themselves, and if Germans simultaneously pursue a policy of containing and opposing a large and well-armed rival...

I guess they're just committed to being fools.

Meh. We worry plenty, we just worry about the Greeks more. More funding for the military will happen when the news are dominated again by other issues. The main problems right now are:
- new subs being crappy. Not a problem of money, but rather the yard messing up.
- The Airbus transport plane. Partially a problem of money (damned thing costs way more than the plane we could have gotten instead) and partially European politics.
- the new helicopter sucks. More a problem of design than money usage.
On the other side, funding was approved for the new IFV and tank.

More money is needed for general equipment levels and I think (hope) it will get there.

[Tribble]

If you thought that was hilarious, just read the reports from Spiegel about the newest sub of ours. The yard messed up so badly they had to install a yacht radar for sea trials. Oh and somehow (despite it being fine on the previous boats of this class) the yard managed to mess up the galley - the exhaust is malfunctioning so that even cooking two sausages fills up the boat with smoke.

But yeah, our military is in shambles, what funds they have are used badly and they won't get more funding as long as the current Eurozone crisis continues.

Feel free to sell your sub and brooms to Canada, compared to what we have that's reliable cutting edge technology!

Perhaps Germany could lend us some helicopters as well? Ours have the slight problem of not being able to fly without crashing.

[Tribble]

Or how about our new drone which was just cancelled after five years of development because our safety inspector refused to sign off on it. Apparently nobody had the idea of checking the diagrams before building the first one.

Perhaps we can do a swap - we'll give you the civilian helicopters we are building for our military, and in return we could have some fuel so our ships can leave port? And maybe an engine or two so they don't have to use the tugboat?

If you'd like, we could also throw in a couple of couple of our jeeps. We'll even send you the tarps we use to collect all the oil and transmission fluids leaking out of them free of charge!

[Thanas]

Perhaps we can do a swap - we'll give you the civilian helicopters we are building for our military, and in return we could have some fuel so our ships can leave port? And maybe an engine or two so they don't have to use the tugboat?

Well, you're in luck. Our new corvette engines got a few screws lose and allegedly are in danger of losing the propellor at full speed. We will be happy to swap them for functioning tugboats.

[Tribble]

Perhaps we can do a swap - we'll give you the civilian helicopters we are building for our military, and in return we could have some fuel so our ships can leave port? And maybe an engine or two so they don't have to use the tugboat?

Well, you're in luck. Our new corvette engines got a few screws lose and allegedly are in danger of losing the propellor at full speed. We will be happy to swap them for functioning tugboats.

Fair enough. However, please be advised that you might experience a delay in the delivery as we may have to go raiding one of our museums for parts again.

[Thanas]

That's fine, we have to raid our retirement homes for crew anyway.

[Flagg]

Feel free to sell your sub and brooms to Canada, compared to what we have that's reliable cutting edge technology!

Perhaps Germany could lend us some helicopters as well? Ours have the slight problem of not being able to fly without crashing.

Well, our multi-purpose helis have the advantage of not being cleared to fly at all, so I assume they are 99% crash free. And I say 99% because I won't rule out us managing to crash one anyway.

You can also now buy our revolutionary Anti-tank helicopter with the revolutionary configuration of not having the Anti-tank gun installed. A brilliant move that is so daring nobody will ever believe it.

Or how about our new drone which was just cancelled after five years of development because our safety inspector refused to sign off on it. Apparently nobody had the idea of checking the diagrams before building the first one.

Just buy them from us. We took half your engineers after WW2 so might as well enjoy the fruit of their labor.

[Edi]

Quite a bit of the back and forth in this thread seems to be fallout from the Poland & Guantanamo reparations thread, so for the resolution of the issue I'm going to direct folks to my post there.

Now, let us return to the regularly scheduled program in this thread, namely picking our jaws up off the floor after examining the reports of the state of the German military.

Holy crap...

[Dartzap]

Could be worse, im sure the RAF and RN are still replenishing missile stocks used in Libya. And functiinal planes for the new carriers.

[Simon_Jester]

At least the British had stockpiles? There's a difference between "having trouble replacing munitions expended in battle" and "having trouble replacing munitions that were never expended at all and just wound up past their sell-by date."

It's like, it reflects an error on my part if I run out of milk. It reflects a special kind of stupidity on my part if I keep milk in my refrigerator until it turns into yogurt. It reflects an even greater kind of stupidity on my part if I then stick an empty jug painted white in the fridge in an attempt to pretend that I still have milk.

Now, it's not like I didn't know this was going on, but I'm still trying to parse what this makes me think about the state of modern Germans, in light of this, the Greek affair, and the questions raised by the Ukrainian civil war.

Just buy them from us. We took half your engineers after WW2 so might as well enjoy the fruit of their labor.

That's mostly have to be stuff the US was using in the '50s, '60s, and '70s then. But you're right, the Germans might honestly be better off with such equipment. It was cheap, and designed to be used by draftees so the standard of technical complexity couldn't get too high. Both of which favor the penny-wise, pound-foolish buyer.

Although if they ever had to fight a competent military with equipment from the 1980s and later they'd be out of luck... but then, it's not like that wouldn't be the case anyway.

[Flagg]

Just buy them from us. We took half your engineers after WW2 so might as well enjoy the fruit of their labor.

That's mostly have to be stuff the US was using in the '50s, '60s, and '70s then. But you're right, the Germans might honestly be better off with such equipment. It was cheap, and designed to be used by draftees so the standard of technical complexity couldn't get too high. Both of which favor the penny-wise, pound-foolish buyer.

Although if they ever had to fight a competent military with equipment from the 1980s and later they'd be out of luck... but then, it's not like that wouldn't be the case anyway.

I know, Simon. I was joking about modern advancements based on Nazzie scientists.

[General Zod]

Wait. Germany has an army? I thought they haven't had one of those in years.

[Simon_Jester]

They used to be a speed-bump meant to force Soviet T-72s to slow down and use their hazard flashers on the way across West Germany. But like all inadequately maintained street features, they were worn away by erosion and pfenning-pinching stupidity.

That's mostly have to be stuff the US was using in the '50s, '60s, and '70s then. But you're right, the Germans might honestly be better off with such equipment. It was cheap, and designed to be used by draftees so the standard of technical complexity couldn't get too high. Both of which favor the penny-wise, pound-foolish buyer.

Although if they ever had to fight a competent military with equipment from the 1980s and later they'd be out of luck... but then, it's not like that wouldn't be the case anyway.

I know, Simon. I was joking about modern advancements based on Nazzie scientists.

Understood, and acknowledged. I figured it was a good opportunity to extend the joke.

After all, if, out of said pfennig-pinching stupidity, the German people lack the willingness to do what it takes to maintain modern weapons, maybe they would be happier with more primitive weapons. The results would be disastrous if they ever actually had to use their weapons, but that would have happened anyway.

And there's always the "belligerent pushy arrogant forty-five-kilo weakling" approach to international diplomacy to fall back on as an alternative. Because that works out so very well!

[Irbis]

- The Airbus transport plane. Partially a problem of money (damned thing costs way more than the plane we could have gotten instead) and partially European politics.

What alternative plane pray tell?

Now, let us return to the regularly scheduled program in this thread, namely picking our jaws up off the floor after examining the reports of the state of the German military.

Jaw dropping? What?

It was all expected and frankly entirely natural state of affairs after vassal bootlickers DOUBLE PLUSGOOD military alliance was dragged into aggressive wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Suddenly you had budgets spent not on military training or inventory maintenance, but on upkeep of occupation forces FREEDOM fighters on another continent.

Thousands of armoured vehicles, tens of thousands of trucks, hundreds of thousands of guns, millions of ammunition units, all was either destroyed by enemy, spent, or worn to half wreck by use. Poland, for example, lost almost entire fleet of helicopter gunships and transports we had in Iraq either to enemy fire or material fatigue - in the end, what remained was "gifted" to Iraqi government as it was basically scrap that was uneconomical to even ship home.

On top of that, you had overlord dictating his vassals PARTNERS what to do with their armies - namely, change them to colonial light units that can provide well funded occupation contingents, often at the expense of the rest of the army, based on outlandish soon forgotten even in USA (infamous Stryker brigades). End result - chronically underfunded army minus units that were being blooded in Iraq losing men and vehicles there reducing the only well funded, experienced units around into bloody, disrupted mess at the end of the tour.

And it was not just land forces - let's see, how does Polish Navy look after NATO mandated reforms?

Soviet era ships (pre 1989):

1x Corvette
3x Fast Attack Craft
1x Submarine

This is mainstay of the whole navy. 30 year old ships, and virtually all we have to defend 700 km long shore. But fear not! We started new construction programs!

In construction:

1x Corvette

Ah, yes. Infamous ORP Gawron. Can someone guess when construction started? Why yes, if you answered "1999" give yourself a cookie. Fast, well armed ship, stealth construction, the works. We were supposed to build 7 of them, sadly, as of 2015, Gawron is currently the only one land based corvette in the world, construction not finished, due to...

NATO mandated ships:

2x Frigate
4x Submarine

This looks dangerous, eh? Huge, powerful force?

Well, our decidents thought so too in 2001 when US embassy called to sell us two OHP frigates. NATO expects you to pick up some slack, they said. Money was quickly moved off Gawron program to purchase them - sadly, turns out both ships we 45 years old, came with 2 (read: two) expired missiles per ship, had rusted through hulls, onboard systems so old ATARI computers were faster (but that doesn't matter, they broke and no one makes replacement parts anymore) with engines so worn out Bismarck's ones are in better shape, even accounting the whole 70 years on sea floor thing.

Not that it stopped us, we take our commitments seriously. A few hundred million dollars in repairs (and one of OHP's decommissioned for spare parts) later we finally have one boat that can somewhat reliably make a trip somewhere without sinking. Don't expect it to fire anything, though.

Funny story there - in desperation, we bought modern missile system to be installed in OHP. Turns out hulls were so rusted ships would have fell apart under strain, but luckily it turned out (we really tried) there was no space or energy to power them aboard anyway. One serious modification later and the new missiles are now on mentioned before Orkan class Fast Attack Crafts. Funny how that worked out.

The submarines, well, are 5 midget subs. Why five when my list mentioned 4? Well, it's because we got 5 of them to gut one for spare parts immediately. That's expected when the subs in question were ex-Kobbens, ex-Type 207, ex-Klasse 205 subs. Yes, that's no mistake, that is literally 55 year old class of ships that managed to serve in 3 navies before we got them. Of course, they were modernized, but you can guess how "effective" they are. Well, when they work, because they can't take to the sea when the weather isn't perfect. Actually, scratch that, half of them can't go to sea at all because we had to cannibalize more to keep 1-2 of them afloat.

And to think some of more Russophobic politicians planned to decommission big, modern Improved Kilo submarine (one mentioned on top, ORP Orzeł) just because it was Russian made and leave only Kobbens around...

Actually, I lied. We have one more, big, modern ship, made after 1989. It's ORP Xawery Czernicki. Sadly, it's kind of useless in defence of our borders, as it's logistic/tanker battlegroup support ship. Of which we have exactly zero. It took part in both Iraq and Afghanistan invasions, resupplying US ships (on Polish taxpayer dime) and acting as base for our commando units acting as US cannon fodder, firing some of first shots of the war in 2003.

Oh, I forgot - we plan to acquire one more ship before 2020. Aforementioned ORP Gawron, which, after 17 years of sitting on slip, kind of became obsolete and dilapidated before it was even launched (planned in 2017). That's okay, though, it won't be finished as corvette (no money), it will end up as glorified patrol ship, with one cannon and two HMGs. Far weaker armament than much smaller Fast Attack Crafts mentioned before, but with pretty hefty (660 mln $) price tag due to need of general repair.

NATO - killing your army faster than any Russian invasion ever could, already here in your country!

[Thanas]

Thanas wrote:
- The Airbus transport plane. Partially a problem of money (damned thing costs way more than the plane we could have gotten instead) and partially European politics.

What alternative plane pray tell?

I can only speak for Germany, but iirc the Airbus was supposed to first only replace the Transall we were having. The German military looked into ordering Antonovs (sturdy, more reliable, cheaper, can carry more) from Ukraine. This was torpedoed quickly due to Nato pressure. Then the plan was to order from the Americans. American transport planes in general fly and are proven models.

Instead, it was decided to go the European route because France and Germany wanted a prestige object, a European plane. Ok but then Britain had to get involved. They were granted the engine contracts. And they failed at that, because the British government ignored the warning of the Rolls-Royce engineers that the existing engines were not powerful enough and that they had little experience with larger ones the partners were demanding. And then Airbus pulled the engineers to concentrate on the A380. Hooray.


***************
Btw, this is an article I posted before in the HAB, which shows the situation at summer last year.

[Kane Starkiller]

On top of that, you had overlord dictating his vassals PARTNERS what to do with their armies - namely, change them to colonial light units that can provide well funded occupation contingents, often at the expense of the rest of the army, based on outlandish soon forgotten even in USA (infamous Stryker brigades).

That's it? That's the excuse for the pathetic lack of Polish (and European) strategic vision? Americans told us to do it?

[Simon_Jester]

Irbis, in this post:

http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/posting.ph ... &p=3888816

Were you referring solely to the sad state of the Polish military, to the German military, or both?

Also, frankly... Poland has a population of nearly forty million. It boggles the imagination that they are unable to sustain a deployment of two or three thousand troops overseas while keeping up some semblance of a working procurement system.

The US has, granted, thirty times as much GDP to throw around... but it also maintained considerably more than thirty times as much overseas deployment of combat troops, while still keeping up a fairly functional procurement chain for air, sea, and land-based military hardware.

"The Yankees made us do it" may be part of the explanation but it can't be the entire explanation.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

On top of that, you had overlord dictating his vassals PARTNERS what to do with their armies - namely, change them to colonial light units that can provide well funded occupation contingents, often at the expense of the rest of the army, based on outlandish soon forgotten even in USA (infamous Stryker brigades).

That's it? That's the excuse for the pathetic lack of Polish (and European) strategic vision? Americans told us to do it?

What would you expect? Unlike the Americans, European nations have decent social welfare and healthcare. That obviously saps the budget. Add to the fact that European nations can't borrow as aggressively as the Americans, what were you hoping for?

[Irbis]

I can only speak for Germany, but iirc the Airbus was supposed to first only replace the Transall we were having. The German military looked into ordering Antonovs (sturdy, more reliable, cheaper, can carry more) from Ukraine. This was torpedoed quickly due to Nato pressure.

Ah, yes. We get that all the time, too. Either Russophobic politicians speaking against buying Russian equipment, or US embassy telling us to buy American. Even when its something our soldiers are already trained in, bases are set up to support, and something 50% cheaper than other offers.

Such as say, training airplanes - we just bought Italian M-346, and totally not Russian Yak-130. Green bars on now 'Italian' flag were brand new, even!

Then the plan was to order from the Americans. American transport planes in general fly and are proven models.

Slight problem here. C-130 takes aboard 20 tons. A-400 30 tons. What weights 30 tons? Why yes, Puma, new German IFV. No A-400, no Puma for German soldiers outside of Deutschland. Und then first IED makes everyone in Vaterland very sad.

Instead, it was decided to go the European route because France and Germany wanted a prestige object, a European plane.

That 'prestige object' means keeping high tech industry in EU. No orders, no more airplane factories, no more technologies, need for highly qualified engineers, or hell, even taxes. Buy American, and all the industry, together with jobs and money, moves to USA, locking EU to US planes in perpetuity. We're already on fast track with that with F-35, giving up A-400 too means EU aero industry reduced to Brazil level one at best.

Who as who, but Germans shouldn't need to be convinced about importance of keeping high tech industry home instead of outsourcing it to another continent. It's nearly impossible to restart high quality equipment production after you stopped. Just ask Russians how fall of Soviet Union worked out for their know how and technological development. Or frankly any of ex-Warsaw Pact military producers.

They were granted the engine contracts. And they failed at that, because the British government ignored the warning of the Rolls-Royce engineers that the existing engines were not powerful enough and that they had little experience with larger ones the partners were demanding.

Huh, maybe there is a lesson here. Such as 'guess where from we ordered big engines before allowing our own indigenous designs to wither and die'. Who knows, maybe it's even relevant one?

[TimothyC]

Then the plan was to order from the Americans. American transport planes in general fly and are proven models.

Slight problem here. C-130 takes aboard 20 tons. A-400 30 tons. What weights 30 tons? Why yes, Puma, new German IFV. No A-400, no Puma for German soldiers outside of Deutschland. Und then first IED makes everyone in Vaterland very sad.

Hey, it was only in operational service for 14 years prior to the A400's first flight. I mean, heck, it's not like they started within three years of each other. Oh, wait.

That 'prestige object' means keeping high tech industry in EU. No orders, no more airplane factories, no more technologies, need for highly qualified engineers, or hell, even taxes. Buy American, and all the industry, together with jobs and money, moves to USA, locking EU to US planes in perpetuity. We're already on fast track with that with F-35, giving up A-400 too means EU aero industry reduced to Brazil level one at best.

Uh, No. You guys would still have the rest of the Airbus line (the A350 program started in 2004).

[Simon_Jester]

On top of that, you had overlord dictating his vassals PARTNERS what to do with their armies - namely, change them to colonial light units that can provide well funded occupation contingents, often at the expense of the rest of the army, based on outlandish soon forgotten even in USA (infamous Stryker brigades).

That's it? That's the excuse for the pathetic lack of Polish (and European) strategic vision? Americans told us to do it?

What would you expect? Unlike the Americans, European nations have decent social welfare and healthcare. That obviously saps the budget. Add to the fact that European nations can't borrow as aggressively as the Americans, what were you hoping for?

Given that these are countries that share a land border with someone they themselves consider to be aggressive and grasping, I would "hope for," oh, 3% of GDP spent on the military rather than 1.5%. Which should hardly make the difference between 'decent' and 'indecent' social welfare and health care for the population as a whole.

Not willfully wasting what money they do have would be good too, but boondoggles happen to everyone so I don't want to play too big a blame game on that issue.

By all logic, the US should be the one with military spending at around 2% of GDP and the Europeans should be at more like 4%, not the other way around.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

Given that these are countries that share a land border with someone they themselves consider to be aggressive and grasping, I would "hope for," oh, 3% of GDP spent on the military rather than 1.5%. Which should hardly make the difference between 'decent' and 'indecent' social welfare and health care for the population as a whole.

Not willfully wasting what money they do have would be good too, but boondoggles happen to everyone so I don't want to play too big a blame game on that issue.

By all logic, the US should be the one with military spending at around 2% of GDP and the Europeans should be at more like 4%, not the other way around.

Ah nope. That logic doesn't exist. The United States spends way more money on defense because power projection is what it is aiming for. European nations, excepting the UK and France, aren't interested in power projection.

And governments in Europe are struggling to fucking balance the budget, and aiming to keep the deficit down. The United States hasn't made holding the deficit down as a policy.