Germany tries to sell tanks to Saudi-Arabia

[Kanastrous]

Setting aside the political/moral angle - assuming that the Leopard 2 and the M1s that the Saudis are upgrading are more-or-less equivalent equipment, is there a good reason to take on the extra logistical burden of fielding two entirely different models of tank, to fulfill what I assume would be the same battlefield/crushing protesters role? Perhaps I missed reading it, but there isn't any obstacle to the Saudis buying more M1s, is there?

[Sea Skimmer]

Setting aside the political/moral angle - assuming that the Leopard 2 and the M1s that the Saudis are upgrading are more-or-less equivalent equipment, is there a good reason to take on the extra logistical burden of fielding two entirely different models of tank, to fulfill what I assume would be the same battlefield/crushing protesters role? Perhaps I missed reading it, but there isn't any obstacle to the Saudis buying more M1s, is there?

More M1s would be superior, it is a better non crew burning tank anyway, but the Saudis never think in terms like that. They know they can't maintain the stuff they buy with local personal the first place, they have to hire foreign people to help out, so for them it actually makes more sense to diversify weapons purchases so any one nation cutting off technical support matters less. The Saudis actually tried to buy the Leopard II back in the 1980s but Germany said no because Israel opposed it. The Saudis were then going to buy a neat Brazilian tank but the Gulf War killed that off and made them buy M1 tanks. That was the last major US arms sale to Saudi until the very recent deal for 30 billion in aircraft.

[Zaune]

More M1s would be superior, it is a better non crew burning tank anyway, but the Saudis never think in terms like that. They know they can't maintain the stuff they buy with local personal the first place, they have to hire foreign people to help out, so for them it actually makes more sense to diversify weapons purchases so any one nation cutting off technical support matters less.

A shortage of trained personnel doesn't preclude them from manufacturing spare parts locally, with or without the benefit of a license, and they should certainly have the necessary technical capability in-country from keeping their oil industry in spare parts and tools. Neither do they necessarily have to employ a set of contractors who are specifically trained to work on one particular armoured vehicle, with the possible exception of the gas turbine-engined Abrahms.

Don't think they're really thought this one through.

[Wing Commander MAD]

More M1s would be superior, it is a better non crew burning tank anyway, but the Saudis never think in terms like that. They know they can't maintain the stuff they buy with local personal the first place, they have to hire foreign people to help out, so for them it actually makes more sense to diversify weapons purchases so any one nation cutting off technical support matters less.

A shortage of trained personnel doesn't preclude them from manufacturing spare parts locally, with or without the benefit of a license, and they should certainly have the necessary technical capability in-country from keeping their oil industry in spare parts and tools. Neither do they necessarily have to employ a set of contractors who are specifically trained to work on one particular armoured vehicle, with the possible exception of the gas turbine-engined Abrahms.

Don't think they're really thought this one through.

Wouldn't manufacture of knockoff Abrahms parts (or really any parts obtained from or used by American defense contractors)pontentially sour the whole US-Saudi relations somewhat? That might anger the defense contractors who supply/maintain the foreign manufactured vehicles, since it would cut directly into thier profits. I don't know about other countries, but US defense contractors have certainly shown their ability to influence their government.

[Kanastrous]

The Saudis could probably try to negotiate a license to produce parts locally. Although since the idea behind producing parts domestically seems to be independence from the US suppliers, it seems to kind of presuppose conditions under which the relationship has soured, already.

[Sea Skimmer]

A shortage of trained personnel doesn't preclude them from manufacturing spare parts locally, with or without the benefit of a license, and they should certainly have the necessary technical capability in-country from keeping their oil industry in spare parts and tools.

They don't, not even remotely. Saudi has little industrial base and the oil industry is also still largely run by foreign workers and foreign parts. Saudi industry maxes out at making rebar and sheet metal. Nearly a third of the entire population is foreign workers, which is impressive when you remember that 40% of the Saudi population is under age 15 in the first place. Anyway you greatly underestimate the trouble that manufacturing all the required parts for something as complicated as a modern main battle tank takes. Items like complete engines, all the electronics, gun tubes ect.. are completely beyond what they can do. That's after years of trying to diversify too; in practice diversification has just turned into more chemical refining and gold mining.

[Kanastrous]

The Saudis *did* manage to come up with the Al-Faris...although their purchase of foreign-made vehicles probably shows that it was sufficiently behind the technical curve to get a "pass" from their own government, and it's certainly no M1 or Leopard 2 (or Bradley, or Pirhana, or etc...)

Whether Al-Faris is more than locally-welded steel over all-imported components, I don't know.

[Sea Skimmer]

The Al-Faris has an imported engine, imported transmission, imported suspension, imported heavy weapons. I'm not sure they ever even produced more then 100 of them before throwing in the towel. Other then that the thing is a welded steel box with some truck axles under it. Not very impressive for a project which they proudly claim took 16 years. The company that made it normally assembles SUVs.

[[R_H]]

Interestingly enough, according to the article "The Geopolitics of Weapons Procurement in the Gulf States"

The Gulf defence market, however, has its limits. The most important of all is its lack of quantitative and qualitative trained human resources to operate and maintain the new, technologically advanced equipment effectively. During the 1990-91 Gulf War, the Saudi Army under the American Joint Forces Command comprised two National Guard battalions, a squadron of Tornado airplanes and a mechanized brigade of 5,500 men. Virtually all were Pakistanis, who had 100 tanks and 90 armoured vehicles at their disposal. During the war, Saudi Arabia put in a further order for 315 American M1-A2 tanks. In 1998, however, 200 of these 315 tanks had been placed in storage.

Anyone have an idea how many are in storage as of recently?

So most of those 200 Leopards/T90s etc could end up in storage and not shooting demonstrators.

Further more, the article mentions that compared to Turkey and Egypt, for example, the Gulf states and Saudi Arabia are unable to license produce.

[Pelranius]

Jordan is even producing its own upgrades to various British AFVs. I take it that the Saudis don't bother with building any sort of actual industry because they simply don't care?

[Kanastrous]

I should imagine they care. Their problem is that they simply are not capable.

[Winston Blake]

Jordan is even producing its own upgrades to various British AFVs. I take it that the Saudis don't bother with building any sort of actual industry because they simply don't care?

It's broader and deeper than that:

As for equipment, a vast cultural gap exists between the U.S. and Arab maintenance and logistics systems. The Arab difficulties with U.S. equipment are not, as sometimes simplistically believed, a matter of "Arabs don't do maintenance," but something much deeper. The American concept of a weapons system does not convey easily. A weapons system brings with it specific maintenance and logistics procedures, policies, and even a philosophy, all of them based on U.S. culture, with its expectations of a certain educational level, sense of small unit responsibility, tool allocation, and doctrine. Tools that would be allocated to a U.S. battalion (a unit of some 600-800 personnel) would most likely be found at a much higher level—probably two or three echelons higher—in an Arab army. The expertise, initiative and, most importantly, the trust indicated by delegation of responsibility to a lower level are rare. The U.S. equipment and its maintenance are predicated on a concept of repair at the lowest level and therefore require delegation of authority. Without the needed tools, spare parts, or expertise available to keep equipment running, and loathe to report bad news to his superiors, the unit commander looks for scapegoats. All this explains why I many times heard in Egypt that U.S. weaponry is "too delicate."

I have observed many in-country U.S. survey teams: invariably, hosts make the case for acquiring the most modern of military hardware and do everything to avoid issues of maintenance, logistics, and training. They obfuscate and mislead to such an extent that U.S. teams, no matter how earnest their sense of mission, find it nearly impossible to help. More generally, Arab reluctance to be candid about training deficiencies makes it extremely difficult for foreign advisors properly to support instruction or assess training needs.

Regarding Jordan, I admit I don't know much about it, but I have read that under King Abdullah II a lot of reform has gone on that has pushed Jordan more and more towards becoming like a Western country, including massive economic reform and efforts to gradually introduce democracy. He seems non-traditional and pro-Western, attending a school in America, doing officer training in Britain, making an appearance on Star Trek, and ordering the Jordanian military to help move equipment for filming Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (because he loves Transformers). So my guess is that Jordan's industry is more capable due to the long efforts of more open-minded leadership.

[Thanas]

Yeah, but he is a massive outlier and one shall not forget that Jordan or any of the other smaller states there have always been melting pots.

[Sea Skimmer]

Jordan never had oil money or vast floods of Soviet aid, so they have to do better at life. They also inherited as an independent nation an actual tradition of competent military service. They could not keep up the quality of the Arab Legion, but they’ve always been better then the Arab average. In any case, they do still have some British technical assistance, but nothing like the Saudi system.

The Saudis were so bad in 1990 they literally didn’t even have gas trucks or field kitchens for the forces they had; all support came from static depots staffed with foreigners which became a rather large liability when suddenly it looked like they’d actually have to fight a war. The Saudi National Guard was almost remotely competent; but it also only operated relatively light weapons and wheeled armored vehicles for a very specific reason; maintaining and even just driving stuff like that is way easier then tracked heavy equipment. In Desert Storm IIRC the Coalition ended up pairing up the Saudi National Guard units with Qatari forces to provide them with tank and artillery support. The regular Saudi army did about nothing.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

I should imagine they care. Their problem is that they simply are not capable.

Let's be a bit more realistic shall we? This is a kingdom that has a completely incompetent military as it is.

[K. A. Pital]

She is not alone in there. The whole leadership of Die Linke is like that. Lafontaine for example received five-figure sums for talks and got snippy when his first class suite was not available etc. Gysi was a Stasi informant....and of course, there is the whole business of the die Linke claiming to abhor Hartz IV while actually trying to keep their own labor costs down by paying just about that to their own employees. If you truly want a left-wing politician with integrity, you have to look at the Greens, who got a number of them (like Ströbele).

Oh, I know that the old-timer leadership of the Linke is composed of Stasi informants, their whores and the like. It's not like you opened my eyes here. And even if the Linke are hypocritic about their own wages (I'm not sure if politicians in Germany work full-time?), it doesn't make Hartz-IV, as a concept, problemlos, shall we say. And yes, I know Ströbele and, frankly, Germany is one of the nations I'm more closely watching on the political field, so I follow quite a great many politicians - maybe due to my ancestry, maybe because it's the mother of all left-wing ideas. *laughs* I must say I just picked a communist figure who wasn't a Stasi informant or married to a Stasi informant (because in Russia and post-Soviet space in general we don't have this problem, oppositionary leftists in general generally aren't connected with the KGB service, due to the natural fact that the KGB transitioned into the FSB and is now a "tool of capitalist opression"), and also had hot looks. Skgoa won, though, his left-wing girl candidate was better

So my positions are too dictatorial?

Nah, I was talking about your social-democratic positions (Erhard, soziale Marktwirtschaft, et cetera) which is the same thing she says Germany should "return" (well, not return to, but "implement on a new level") - something you might agree with.

The problem is that to this day she refuses to commemorate any victim of that oppression, nor does she vote for continued research for the evils of the Stasi. On the contrary, she (and her whole party) tried to squash this by trying to deny funding for the center of historical research.

I'm not sure the left-wing opposition here in Russia vote against historical research on the KGB/NKVD, that problem is totally alien to me. But considering the leadership and rank-and-file of the Linke consists of Stasi informants and even often Stasi officers themselves invited by said leaders (Gesine had a habit of doing so), it doesn't look as much more than trying to protect themselves from possible lustration. Like I said, Russia's special services even in Soviet times weren't comparable to the Stasi in outreach and penetration of the populace, and most of our left opposition and oppositionary leadership doesn't have KGB ties. Perhaps I've underestimated the impact of that problem in Germany - but in this case, would it not be better if old farts like Bisky, Gysi, Lotsch etc. would get replaced by younger folks like Wagenknecht, who at least have no Stasi ties? You know, once that change of generations happens, the Linke might lose a good deal of their Stasi garbage.

You've got to be pretty delusional to think that the west desired the Berlin wall.

I don't think neither I nor Sarah are delusional because of claiming that the fate of the wall was decided primarily between Moscow and Washington. Not that Washington wanted the wall, you know. Besides, Khrushev correctly noted that the West was giving him signals on "how" to solve Berlin's problem - on 26th of July Kennedy didn't mention the freedom of population transfer in Berlin as one of the key requirements put forth by the USA; and it was American requirements which the USSR paid the greatest attention to during the late 50's Berlin crisis. You are well-versed in history and I'm sure you know all this. The USSR wanted that wall during any and all critical crisis moments when confrontation with America became stronger, proposals to make a wall or a barrier were coming from Khrushev and Beria even during the 40's crisis (at the time Stalin rejected them, claiming that they're fundamentally against the concept of united Germany which he thought about).

So are many of the other opposition parties.

Are they now?

SPD und Grüne tun es und schweigen. Denn schon unter Rot-Grün hat es im Innenministerium eine besondere Projektgruppe »Golf« gegeben. Da auch die Regierungsparteien kein Bedürfnis haben, den Grenzfall Saudi-Arabien in der Öffentlichkeit zu debattieren, mosert nur die Linksfraktion und schob eine kleine Anfrage nach, die auf Bearbeitung wartet.

"Es spricht grundsätzlich nichts dagegen, dass Deutschland anderen Ländern Ausbildungshilfe gibt", sagt der SPD-Innenexperte Dieter Wiefelspütz. Hier entstehe aber der Eindruck, als würden "deutsche Polizisten zur Exportförderung missbraucht".

And that's all? No mention of Saudite bullshit Sharia "laws" and their behaviour in Bahrain and sponsorship of terrorism. Only "German police is misused", heh.

Again, there is nothing on the left which makes this anything different than the other opposition parties did. Look up some of Schultz' speeches or Ströbeles.

Ströbele's party is a tad smaller than the Left, but I concur; the German Greens are not the worst type of left-wing politicians. I might not like their rather radical anti-nuclear views, though, did it occur to you? So yes, as far as opposition to capitalism, bailouts and the like goes, I would support both Strobele's party and Linke (it's not like their positions heavily diverge there), but once it comes to nuclear power, I'd think a bit on whether I should support the Greens here. Immediate phaseout without building up necessary technology will make Germany eat up more Russian gas - hardly a welcome development.

That is pretty much not what you want to argue here. You are trying to paint this as if there is a vast majority of Germans unhappy with the soziale Marktwirtschaft. At the best they are calling for modifications, but definitely not the socialist/communist utopia nonsense you espouse.

Who said anything about utopia, Thanas? I said they're not happy with the current way of things. Being unhappy with current system doesn't mean they automatically know what they want to replace it with and that the replacement should be a "utopia" as opposed to simply non-utopian, but improved socio-economic system. Being angry with something doesn't mean they're all commies or something, I just noted that capitalism as a concept doesn't enjoy a high level of support in Germany. That's pretty much obvious, Germany has always been rather to the left even as Europe itself goes.

It won't. The Linke failed to capitalize on any of these topics in the recent elections, which were held only a few months ago. They are widely regarded as jokes outside a very small percentage (about 4-6% of the populace). There are much more serious political parties like the Greens who also do not sound like complete nutcases and actually can bring up some solutions.

I'm not sure if you can seriously be that oblivious. Greens and the Left have been growing at the same time, and with virtually identical results. The Left got 12% of the vote in the parliamentary elections of 2009, and the Greens got almost 11%, both posting huge gains. The Left failed in the recent elections in the West (big surprise, the West doesn't like the Left, or so Captain Obvious told me), but in the East their popularity has been quite impressive. You can say that Ostalgie is growing, but I'd wonder just how many years have to pass and why is Ostalgie 20 years later stronger than it was in the 1990s? That doesn't follow. And frankly, considering how open the Left is about being communist (in fact, they've been often running into that problem - just say "communism" and lose a few percent of the vote), I'm not sure their electoral successes can be a magnitude greater than they already are, with the society still regarding communism as nothing more than a Cold War boogeyman. A shift in perception will take many years (and a change from the current Stasi-tied leadership to younger people with no security ties, which will finally make threats like "We'll check your party for Stasi ties" vain). Greens and the Left effective say the same when it comes to the economy (well, more or less, there's always gonna be some difference), and I think they're more or less the same in foreign policy as well (not ignoring Israel's bullshit colonizer policies in Palestine, for example, or legitimately being concerned about Saudi Arabia). I'd say the biggest problem with the Greens is their radical anti-nuke policy, the Left's biggest problem is Stasi oldtimers in the party, and the biggest problem with mainstream parties like the CDU, SPD, etc. is that they've commited lots of stupid and damaging shit in the recent five years and no longer deserve to be that big. I'd favor a greater decentralization in the Parliament, so that there'd be coalitions. Not sure how that will work out in the future, considering the last Red-Green coalition had their share of bullshit. *shrugs*

[Thanas]

Oh, I know that the old-timer leadership of the Linke is composed of Stasi informants, their whores and the like. It's not like you opened my eyes here. And even if the Linke are hypocritic about their own wages (I'm not sure if politicians in Germany work full-time?)

You misunderstand me. Their politicians pocket the full wages of 7000+ Euro per month. Their secretaries and staff however are paid Hartz IV in many cases.

it doesn't make Hartz-IV, as a concept, problemlos, shall we say.

And I was not arguing that it did, just highlighting the hypocrisy of a party that publicly lambasted Hartz IV and called it inhuman and then took the first opportunity it had to lower its own wages to that level.

I must say I just picked a communist figure who wasn't a Stasi informant or married to a Stasi informant

No, you just picked one who is married to somebody who defrauded people on the order of millions. I don't know which one is worse.

Nah, I was talking about your social-democratic positions (Erhard, soziale Marktwirtschaft, et cetera) which is the same thing she says Germany should "return" (well, not return to, but "implement on a new level") - something you might agree with.

Trust me, there are a lot of nuances I do not agree with her on. Because her idea is basically to tax everything and tax "the rich". Big on words, short on substance.

I'm not sure the left-wing opposition here in Russia vote against historical research on the KGB/NKVD, that problem is totally alien to me. But considering the leadership and rank-and-file of the Linke consists of Stasi informants and even often Stasi officers themselves invited by said leaders (Gesine had a habit of doing so), it doesn't look as much more than trying to protect themselves from possible lustration. Like I said, Russia's special services even in Soviet times weren't comparable to the Stasi in outreach and penetration of the populace, and most of our left opposition and oppositionary leadership doesn't have KGB ties. Perhaps I've underestimated the impact of that problem in Germany - but in this case, would it not be better if old farts like Bisky, Gysi, Lotsch etc. would get replaced by younger folks like Wagenknecht, who at least have no Stasi ties? You know, once that change of generations happens, the Linke might lose a good deal of their Stasi garbage.

Unless she changes her voting record on that, I see no reason to believe that this will ever change. Especially not because Wagenknecht has a long habit on courting the votes of the old guard. Have you ever come to a political meeting of hers?

I don't think neither I nor Sarah are delusional because of claiming that the fate of the wall was decided primarily between Moscow and Washington. Not that Washington wanted the wall, you know.

But that is what she is saying. Maybe it got lost in translation, but that is exactly what she is saying.

Besides, Khrushev correctly noted that the West was giving him signals on "how" to solve Berlin's problem - on 26th of July Kennedy didn't mention the freedom of population transfer in Berlin as one of the key requirements put forth by the USA; and it was American requirements which the USSR paid the greatest attention to during the late 50's Berlin crisis. You are well-versed in history and I'm sure you know all this.

Yes, I also know that this is not accepted as anything but apologia.

So are many of the other opposition parties.

Are they now?
*snip*
And that's all? No mention of Saudite bullshit Sharia "laws" and their behaviour in Bahrain and sponsorship of terrorism. Only "German police is misused", heh.

First, how nice of you trying to conflate the reaction to a minor training agreement to the sale of tanks. Second, you must not have watched any of the parliamentary debates.

Ströbele's party is a tad smaller than the Left, but I concur; the German Greens are not the worst type of left-wing politicians.

They are not smaller than the left. They are a lot larger and will collect at least twice, if not three-four times the votes the left will get.

I might not like their rather radical anti-nuclear views, though, did it occur to you?

Yes, but nuclear power in Germany is dead and will stay dead. Thank god.

So yes, as far as opposition to capitalism, bailouts and the like goes, I would support both Strobele's party and Linke (it's not like their positions heavily diverge there), but once it comes to nuclear power, I'd think a bit on whether I should support the Greens here. Immediate phaseout without building up necessary technology will make Germany eat up more Russian gas - hardly a welcome development.

Meh. The Russians need our money as well, gas is cheap...

Who said anything about utopia, Thanas? I said they're not happy with the current way of things. Being unhappy with current system doesn't mean they automatically know what they want to replace it with and that the replacement should be a "utopia" as opposed to simply non-utopian, but improved socio-economic system. Being angry with something doesn't mean they're all commies or something, I just noted that capitalism as a concept doesn't enjoy a high level of support in Germany. That's pretty much obvious, Germany has always been rather to the left even as Europe itself goes.

Capitalism as according to the US model, no. Capitalism as according to the German model, yes. That is the mistake you are making here. When people talk about the German system, they hardly use the word capitalism, they use Soziale Marktwirtschaft. This is why you cannot take the poll seriously because it asked with regards to capitalism without qualifying it.

I'm not sure if you can seriously be that oblivious. Greens and the Left have been growing at the same time, and with virtually identical results. The Left got 12% of the vote in the parliamentary elections of 2009,

Let us stop right there. THis was during a deep period of disillusionment when people decided to just throw their vote away, coupled with still lingering resentment of Hartz IV. Lafontaine and Gysi were doing very well trying to get the protest vote. Since then, they have become a joke. They failed to get any ground in the west. In Bremen, the most left of all countries in the west, they barely managed to get into Parliament. They fail to capitalize on the current crisis as well - they are projected at around 8%, whereas the Greens get 24+ percent. See why the left does not matter on a national stage?

and the Greens got almost 11%, both posting huge gains. The Left failed in the recent elections in the West (big surprise, the West doesn't like the Left, or so Captain Obvious told me), but in the East their popularity has been quite impressive. You can say that Ostalgie is growing, but I'd wonder just how many years have to pass and why is Ostalgie 20 years later stronger than it was in the 1990s? That doesn't follow.

It does follow. Remember how many people who liked the western way immediately moved out of the east? The east of Germany is dieing out at a rapid pace. The well-educated are leaving for the west (Generalizing, this is not true for regional areas like Dresden or Berlin). The east is underpopulated and still struggling economically. It is easy to see why the left would be popular there due to high unemployment, lack of people who like the status quo etc.

I'm not sure their electoral successes can be a magnitude greater than they already are, with the society still regarding communism as nothing more than a Cold War boogeyman.

And rightfully so, seeing as there is no chance it will work unless Europe falls into ruin.

A shift in perception will take many years (and a change from the current Stasi-tied leadership to younger people with no security ties, which will finally make threats like "We'll check your party for Stasi ties" vain).

There won't be such a shift. Not in your lifetime. (unless Europe gets ruined by a catastrophe).

Not sure how that will work out in the future, considering the last Red-Green coalition had their share of bullshit. *shrugs*

You can just look at the states here. There are quite a few states where the left is a member of the ruling coaliton. Did they do anything there? No.

[K. A. Pital]

No, you just picked one who is married to somebody who defrauded people on the order of millions. I don't know which one is worse.

To be fair, were it my will, neither fraudsters nor former Stasi officers should be in politics. On the other hand, you have to build with what you have, sad as it is. The German left doesn't look much less corrupt and inept than the Russian left, anyway. I'm sure there's enough people who don't have huge black stains on their reputation in the lower ranks - it is the leaders which are a problem, just like here.

Trust me, there are a lot of nuances I do not agree with her on. Because her idea is basically to tax everything and tax "the rich". Big on words, short on substance.

I'm sure you do. I don't see a fundamental problem with "tax the rich" from a social-democratic position, however. That's a far better proposal than "tax the poor", you know.

Unless she changes her voting record on that, I see no reason to believe that this will ever change. Especially not because Wagenknecht has a long habit on courting the votes of the old guard. Have you ever come to a political meeting of hers?

Nah; I might go and see one of those for myself if and when I get to Germany (though clearly I'd first choose drinking a few bottles of beer with someone like you who I know is a decent person to listening to someone I don't know)

But that is what she is saying. Maybe it got lost in translation, but that is exactly what she is saying. ... Yes, I also know that this is not accepted as anything but apologia.

"If the wall was avoidable under the circumstances back then is for historians to decide. However, it's a fact that it was decided primarily not in Berlin, but rather in Moscow and Washington." I'm not sure how much one could lose in translation, and I'm sure my command of German is not as lackluster as to lose such a huge nuance here as "Washington desires the wall". I don't think that's an "apologia", not any more than pointing out, say, that the fates of Greece and Eastern European states were not decided by their own governments but at Yalta by the Great Powers.

First, how nice of you trying to conflate the reaction to a minor training agreement to the sale of tanks. Second, you must not have watched any of the parliamentary debates.

A minor training agreement which came after Saudis brutally crushed Bahrain, right? There should have been a bigger outrage by all means. And yes, I can't actually watch them, my Deutsche Welle TV for some reason shows unimportant entertainment for most of the time, as opposed to political news.

They are not smaller than the left. They are a lot larger and will collect at least twice, if not three-four times the votes the left will get. ... Yes, but nuclear power in Germany is dead and will stay dead. Thank god.

*shrugs* Well, let us wait then. If they are indeed a lot larger (in terms of membership), that's good, and if they'll get like 24-25% of the vote, that would also be good. The ruling coalition killed nuclear power anyway, I don't see how the Greens could be any more damaging to that. As for "thank god", I'd say we'll have to wait until 2020 to see what happens.

Meh. The Russians need our money as well, gas is cheap...

You mean the Russian oligarchy needs you money, and funding Gazprom, Russian's primary tool of imperialism and political bullying in post-Soviet space, is a worthwhile goal. Not sure I can support either. I'd rather have Germany gain energy independence.

Capitalism as according to the US model, no. Capitalism as according to the German model, yes. That is the mistake you are making here. When people talk about the German system, they hardly use the word capitalism, they use Soziale Marktwirtschaft. This is why you cannot take the poll seriously because it asked with regards to capitalism without qualifying it.

Oh, I see. So Germans really don't call their nation's order as "capitalism". Must learn German culture better.

Let us stop right there. THis was during a deep period of disillusionment when people decided to just throw their vote away, coupled with still lingering resentment of Hartz IV. Lafontaine and Gysi were doing very well trying to get the protest vote. Since then, they have become a joke. They failed to get any ground in the west. In Bremen, the most left of all countries in the west, they barely managed to get into Parliament. They fail to capitalize on the current crisis as well - they are projected at around 8%, whereas the Greens get 24+ percent. See why the left does not matter on a national stage? ... It does follow. Remember how many people who liked the western way immediately moved out of the east? The east of Germany is dieing out at a rapid pace. The well-educated are leaving for the west (Generalizing, this is not true for regional areas like Dresden or Berlin). The east is underpopulated and still struggling economically. It is easy to see why the left would be popular there due to high unemployment, lack of people who like the status quo etc.

Well, if they're that much of a failure, we'll see that in the recent years.

And rightfully so, seeing as there is no chance it will work unless Europe falls into ruin. ... There won't be such a shift. Not in your lifetime. (unless Europe gets ruined by a catastrophe).

Why? Getting ruined by a catastrophe will give old-timers more power, as their popularity will rise regardless of their Stasi ties. But in any case, I'm not sure there won't be another financial crisis or even a far larger-than-now general economic crisis in this decade.

[[R_H]]

The A7+ is described, in various articles and by KMW as having "Non lethal capabilities" (KMW website) - what do those capabilities entail? Using the smoke grenade launchers to launch crowd control agents? Non-lethal ammunition for the main gun (IMI sells a what amounts to a giant flash bang, the 120mm M337 STUN).

NYT. Hilarity

In a raucous and passionate debate in Parliament on Wednesday, Jürgen Trittin, leader of the Green Party, declared that the government was “stimulating an arms race in the Middle East.” Joachim Pfeiffer, an economic spokesman for Mrs. Merkel’s party, promptly accused him of hypocrisy on the floor of the Bundestag.

Stimulating? If anything, Iran is stimulating the demand in the Middle East/Gulf region. The Saudis were anyways going to buy new tanks, if they don't buy Leos, they'll buy T-xx's, or more M1s, or Leclercs, or K2s etc.

“This would be a perfect tank to drive into Bahrain and crack down on any uprising,” said Jan Grebe, a researcher at the Bonn International Center for Conversion, a nonprofit research institute that deals with security and development issues. “It’s also a good tank to fight any demonstrations in Riyadh.”

Pff, why would it be the perfect tank? Further more, any half way modern tank could fight a demonstration or put down an uprising (I'm assuming he's talking about a civilian uprising).

He [Nick Brown, editor in chief of Jane's Internation Defense Review] cautioned that although the tanks could be used for urban warfare, they were better suited for military uses than shutting down protests. The armored vehicles sent into Bahrain were smaller ones from the Saudi national guard, rather than the best army tanks, and were used only to protect property, not against demonstrators.

(btw Egypt is buying 125 more Abrams)

Interesting tidbit from Defense Update Link

According to a report from the German magazine Der Spiegel, the German Government will soon approve a sale from the latest version of the Leopard A7+ to Saudi Arabia, which is interested in purchasing about 200 units of this advanced version tank, possibly for its Royal National Guards armored unit. Should this sale be realized, it would signify a change of the traditional Bundestag policy, preventing massive military hardware to the authoritarian- ruled Arab kingdom.

So why did the Kingdom first want to buy license built Leopards from Spain, but then from Germany?

[Sea Skimmer]

The A7+ is described, in various articles and by KMW as having "Non lethal capabilities" (KMW website) - what do those capabilities entail? Using the smoke grenade launchers to launch crowd control agents? Non-lethal ammunition for the main gun (IMI sells a what amounts to a giant flash bang, the 120mm M337 STUN).

As far as I can tell its just a paper 'we can add what you want' spec.

timulating? If anything, Iran is stimulating the demand in the Middle East/Gulf region. The Saudis were anyways going to buy new tanks, if they don't buy Leos, they'll buy T-xx's, or more M1s, or Leclercs, or K2s etc.

Pacifists always claim that buying weapons is ‘stimulated a new arms race’. Its utter nonsense but what do you want from idiots. The Saudis have around a thousand tanks right now, while Bahrain is one city. Literally one city, something like 75% of the entire island is off limits to the population full time.

Pff, why would it be the perfect tank? Further more, any half way modern tank could fight a demonstration or put down an uprising (I'm assuming he's talking about a civilian uprising).

It’s an institute founded to research and push world disarmament; you expect rational assessments of kill tech from them? If this was a sale of rusting Panzer IIIs pulled off the bottom of a river in Bavaria they’d say the same thing. Also the simple fact is Bahrain has no real history of being independent, its always been someone’s protectorate, for a long time that of Persia, and the Saudis and UAE will do anything to prevent the Iranians from regaining a foot hold on the southern side of the gulf. As well they should. Its just too bad Bahrain's own government forced the situation to go so violent so quickly when they probably could have easily negotiated out of it.

So why did the Kingdom first want to buy license built Leopards from Spain, but then from Germany?

The Spanish production line was active much more recently then the German line, and is now owned by General Dynamics. Thus political problems in Germany could be avoided, but it seems that the Saudis didn't think the smaller Spanish line could build the tanks they want quickly enough and shifted to Germany when the Germans hinted the political issues could be made to go away.

[Thanas]

Trust me, there are a lot of nuances I do not agree with her on. Because her idea is basically to tax everything and tax "the rich". Big on words, short on substance.

I'm sure you do. I don't see a fundamental problem with "tax the rich" from a social-democratic position, however. That's a far better proposal than "tax the poor", you know.

Sure, but not if there is nothign there.

Unless she changes her voting record on that, I see no reason to believe that this will ever change. Especially not because Wagenknecht has a long habit on courting the votes of the old guard. Have you ever come to a political meeting of hers?

Nah; I might go and see one of those for myself if and when I get to Germany (though clearly I'd first choose drinking a few bottles of beer with someone like you who I know is a decent person to listening to someone I don't know)

If you go to Germany, we definitely should meet up.

That said, there is a recent brouhaha going on in the Linke because currently, there is a statement in their basic paper which states basically that the Left "comdemns stalinism as a system". Some linke now try to have that statement taken out or changed and suprise, surprise, they are basically from Wagenknecht's power base.

"If the wall was avoidable under the circumstances back then is for historians to decide. However, it's a fact that it was decided primarily not in Berlin, but rather in Moscow and Washington." I'm not sure how much one could lose in translation, and I'm sure my command of German is not as lackluster as to lose such a huge nuance here as "Washington desires the wall". I don't think that's an "apologia", not any more than pointing out, say, that the fates of Greece and Eastern European states were not decided by their own governments but at Yalta by the Great Powers.

I think at best that statement is ambigous, seeing how the question before that was phrased. Especially seeing how Washington clearly did not say "build the wall".

A minor training agreement which came after Saudis brutally crushed Bahrain, right? There should have been a bigger outrage by all means. And yes, I can't actually watch them, my Deutsche Welle TV for some reason shows unimportant entertainment for most of the time, as opposed to political news.

Strange. I was referring to the training agreement for border guards only, which was signed a long time before Bahrain AFAIK. What agreement are you referring to?

*shrugs* Well, let us wait then. If they are indeed a lot larger (in terms of membership), that's good, and if they'll get like 24-25% of the vote, that would also be good. The ruling coalition killed nuclear power anyway, I don't see how the Greens could be any more damaging to that. As for "thank god", I'd say we'll have to wait until 2020 to see what happens.

Fair enough. I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on the merits of German nuclear power. Given how I live near one that is also very old and cannot even withstand the impact of a cessna.....

You mean the Russian oligarchy needs you money, and funding Gazprom, Russian's primary tool of imperialism and political bullying in post-Soviet space, is a worthwhile goal. Not sure I can support either. I'd rather have Germany gain energy independence.

I'd like energy independence as well, but nuclear power is not going to give us that anyway, seeing how we import our uranium etc. anyway.

Capitalism as according to the US model, no. Capitalism as according to the German model, yes. That is the mistake you are making here. When people talk about the German system, they hardly use the word capitalism, they use Soziale Marktwirtschaft. This is why you cannot take the poll seriously because it asked with regards to capitalism without qualifying it.

Oh, I see. So Germans really don't call their nation's order as "capitalism". Must learn German culture better.

Well, some do. It is just that "Kapitalismus" is a bit of a dirty word and very imprecise when used in the German context anyway. It is mainly the left which uses Kapitalismus as a sort of slang word against the current system, precisely because of the negative context. When people say Kapitalism, Germans usually visualize Wall Street, madoff and 19th century Manchester capitalism.

Well, if they're that much of a failure, we'll see that in the recent years.

We will. BTW, the Left is currently in an open debate about some of their anti-semitic remarks or perceived anti-semitism, which has lead to some high ranking members sue each other in court. Link, in german. With stuff like that, it is easy to see why Die Linke is a non-factor when it comes to national politics, and no party wants to enter a coalition with them on the national level due to that.

[CJvR]

I'd like energy independence as well, but nuclear power is not going to give us that anyway, seeing how we import our uranium etc. anyway.

Well that is only for economic and enviromental reasons. There is still plenty of uranium left in Germany despite the DDR (IIRC the world's third largest uranium exporter ever) shipping much of it to the Soviets. It just cant compete with the cheaper imports.

[Sea Skimmer]

Its also totally feasible to stockpile a long term supply of uranium, say 10-15 years worth, as a strategic reserve on a scale nobody could ever manage with oil. All the more so since Germany is or at least was willing to reprocess nuclear fuel, greatly reducing the amount of new uranium feedstock needed. But I doubt that will ever happen and until then Germany is just as dependent on Saudi oil flowing, directly or indirectly, as everyone else in the west.