Germany plans massive upgrade in all branches of its military

[Audio]

For a start, those Typhoons desperately need upgrade.

 

[Thəorətic Muslim]

Is a strong-armed Germany good for the US or the Anglo-Saxons in general？

US-German relations are pretty solid.

As for a better German Military, it will be good for the US as it will allow it more flexibility to move the 40,000 soldiers we have there.

I dont think we should increase number of soldiers. Soldiers dont win wars anymore. I think we should invest more into new equipment.

Q: It always makes me feel a bit melancholy. Grand old war ship. being ignominiously haunted away to scrap... The inevitability of time, don't you think? What do you see?
James Bond: A bloody big ship. Excuse me.
Q: 007. I'm your new Quartermaster.
James Bond: You must be joking.
Q: Why, because I'm not wearing a lab coat?
James Bond: Because you still have spots.
Q: My complexion is hardly relevant.
James Bond: Your competence is.
Q: Age is no guarantee of efficiency.
James Bond: And youth is no guarantee of innovation.
Q: Well, I'll hazard I can do more damage on my laptop sitting in my pajamas before my first cup of Earl Grey than you can do in a year in the field.
James Bond: Oh, so why do you need me?
Q: Every now and then a trigger has to be pulled.
James Bond: Or not pulled. It's hard to know which in your pajamas. Q.

I think you missed the last 60 years. We have the EU. Why invade something that you already form a unity with?

Europeans learned spilling blood for economic fortune isn't really necessary.

 

[Audio]

Europeans learned spilling blood for economic fortune isn't really necessary.

Indeed, now Ukrainians and various EU nationals with immigrant backgrounds bleed for us in Syria and Iraq. And yes, it's for economic fortune.

 

[Götterdämmerung]

Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen said she plans to boost all branches of the military to make it ready for the 21st century. It will be interesting to see what exactly is planned. Some speculate that we buy additional jets and ships as well as tanks. If any contracts go to foreign countries is not known yet. Normally we give the contracts to german corporations.

How come none of the mainstream as well as the off stream media have reported about this?

 

[MarkusS]

How come none of the mainstream as well as the off stream media have reported about this?

Bundeswehr: Von der Leyen will über Etat-Erhöhung diskutieren | ZEIT ONLINE

maybe you should drop your wendy magazine abonemont and order a real newspaper

 

[Götterdämmerung]

Bundeswehr: Von der Leyen will über Etat-Erhöhung diskutieren | ZEIT ONLINE

maybe you should drop Our wendy magazine abonemont and order a real newspaper

I never need any subscription for any kind of magazine, I get them all for free.

Kriegsuschi (that's the nickname of the Mistress of War) wants to discuss about it, but the public is very much against it and the budget has nothing left for it.

Your mendacious title suggests the reader that the budget for the plan is already cut and dry, which it is definitely not.

 

[flamer84]

For a start, those Typhoons desperately need upgrade.

Which they won't get,nor will Germany invest extra money in defence.Markus is dreaming,Germany is hippie capital of the world,they'll never raise defence spending.

 

[Götterdämmerung]

Which they won't get,nor will Germany invest extra money in defence.Markus is dreaming,Germany is hippie capital of the world,they'll never raise defence spending.

I'd rather be a hippy country than a beggar country with a massive chip on its shoulder with regard to Russia.

 

[TheNoob]

BOOST YOURSELF BACK ON THE TOP 5 CHARTS GERMANY!
YOU CAN DO THIS :3

 

[Aepsilons]

Canada and Germany derail NATO request to increase military spending targets


LONDON — A NATO plan to get its members to agree to significantly boost their military spending has been derailed by Canada and Germany before it could be even presented to alliance leaders on Thursday when they meet in Wales.


With a backdrop of the worsening situation in Ukraine, NATO’s top commander U.S. Gen. Philip Breedlove and alliance secretary-general Anders Fogh Rasmussen said they wanted to use the summit to push countries to commit to spending two per cent of their gross domestic product on defence.


The U.S., Estonia, the United Kingdom and Greece are the only alliance nations who have met that target.


But Germany and Canada have both said they won’t agree to NATO’s two per cent target.


“We are open to increasing military spending when and where it makes sense and in response to particular needs,” a senior Canadian government official said. “But the notion of setting an arbitrary target does not make sense.”
The prime minister’s spokesman Jason MacDonald said Tuesday night that Canada has agreed to “compromise language” with NATO allies. But Canada will still not formally commit to the two per cent target.

“We agree with our NATO allies that it is important to continue increasing our defence spending, and we have committed to doing so,” he said in an email.

“We have agreed to compromise language with our NATO allies and the commitment agreed to will be reflected in the NATO Summit statement to be issued later this week,” he added.

“Regarding the 2%, specifically, it is an aspirational target and will be acknowledged as such in the Summit statement.”

Government officials estimate NATO’s plan would require a commitment of at least $60 billion in new spending over the next decade, something the Conservatives believe the Canadian public will not support. Other analysts say that to meet NATO’s plan, military spending would have to climb from its current $19 billion a year to $38 billion annually.

U.S. defence secretary Chuck Hagel asked NATO members to bring their country’s finance ministers to the summit so military spending could be discussed. But Finance Minister Joe Oliver did not accompany Prime Minister Stephen Harper, yet another clear signal Canada is not on board with the spending increase.

Harper arrived in London on Tuesday and will attend the summit on Thursday and Friday.

Germany has also rejected NATO’s call for the two per cent commitment. Ursula von der Leyen, Germany’s defence minister, says the amount of money being spent on the military is more important than measuring it as a percentage of the GDP.
Germany spends about 1.3 per cent of GDP, or around $44 billion, annually.

Defence analysts point out that under the Conservatives, spending on the Canadian military has fallen to one per cent of the GDP, going below the 1.3 per cent spent by Jean Chrétien’s Liberal government during the so-called “decade of darkness” of military spending cuts of the 1990s.

The Conservatives, however, counter that Canada’s defence budget has increased significantly since 2000, when it was a little more than $12 billion annually. It is now around $19 billion.

Besides the drop in spending in relation to the GDP, NATO officials have raised concerns that the Conservative government has started a slow retreat from the alliance in other key areas.

They point out that Canada decided against further contributions of troops to any followup NATO training mission in Afghanistan.

Equally concerning to other NATO countries is Canada’s decision to withdraw from the alliance’s various surveillance programs. The move, announced in 2011, will save about $90 million a year, according to documents obtained by the Citizen.

The shutdown of Canada’s contribution to NATO’s airborne warning aircraft, known as AWACS, will save about $50 million a year, according to the records obtained under the Access to Information law.

Another $40 million a year will be saved as a result of Canada’s withdrawal from NATO’s Alliance Ground Surveillance Program, which would see the purchase of advanced unmanned aerial vehicles to conduct surveillance and intelligence gathering.

Canada has been involved in NATO’s AWACS program for more than 25 years and the aircraft were seen as key to the alliance’s operations. AWACS were used by NATO during the Libyan war and are operating in support of the alliance’s response to the crisis in Ukraine.

Canada and Germany derail NATO request to increase military spending targets | National Post

 

[Schutz]

Or just get a few nukes, no one is going to mess with you when you tell them you have 50 missiles pointed at their capital.

 

[Thəorətic Muslim]

Or just get a few nukes, no one is going to mess with you when you tell them you have 50 missiles pointed at their capital.

So your solution to an ever greatly expanding world of conflict is to add WMDs to the equation. *mind blown*

Indeed, now Ukrainians and various EU nationals with immigrant backgrounds bleed for us in Syria and Iraq. And yes, it's for economic fortune.

I don't understand.

 

[Aepsilons]

Or just get a few nukes, no one is going to mess with you when you tell them you have 50 missiles pointed at their capital.

What's the point? Germany, as a member of NATO is protected by said organization's collective nuclear deterrence. For the second, she's a signee of the Non Nuclear Proliferation Pact, whose abrogation would be antithetical to Germany's history of upholding contractual agreements.

I'm in the position that the Bundeswehr can increase its conventional forces without having to go nuclear. Perhaps budget can allocate more resources to MBT forces as well as a fast reaction force in the event of any future European exigencies. Afterall, in such an event, the Bundeswehr would coordinate with the armed forces of France, Spain, Britain, Italy, Austria, Poland, Denmark, Belgium, Netherlands, Greece, Turkey, et al. Germany is not alone , but is part of the collective NATO force as well as the much larger European Union.

 

[Audio]

I don't understand.

Someday you will. I don't mean to sound patronizing, but it's 2 am, and am not in the mood for lenghty posts.

But you can look into, connections between Germany and Qatar (how at height of crisis Qatar was injecting EU corporations with fresh liquidity in exchange for a few percent stake-VW being the exception with 17% stake), pipeline that Assad refused to be built from Qatar onward to EU (Putin pressured him so EU can't diversify energy supply, Assad did offer alternative pipeline from Iran but that at the time was unacceptable due to Iran-pariah status, ironically, now EU-mainly French delegation representatives already visited Iran seeking trade), German SF in Kurdistan helping now (why? Germany is pacifist, no), reports on how UK was preparing something in Syria as far back as 2009 (Cameron's zeal on bombing is not to be forgotten, he even called MP's from holidays, which they didn't approve and shot Cameron's suggestion down), eagerness of Frenchies to bomb Syria (planes were ready to depart, in a "high profile" mission taking off from France and flying non stop to Syria-5 tankers were meant to be used), availability of old weapons from Central EU nations (shiploads)

And this is just the top. I haven't even touched on US actions yet. Everyone and their mother has a hand in Syria. Poor people really. Though i blame Assad for not having the foresight on what will happen if he refuses. A good statesman would have known he was playing way out of his league. Aparently the other dictators gone with Arab spring weren't a lesson enough.

 

[TeesraIndiotHunter]

No, I'm thouroughly tall, blond and 'Arian'. But the fact that this is your response only confirms what I stated earlier.
You do not have to be Jewish or Israëli to be offended by revisionists and holocaust/genocide deniers, obviously.

No, I don't give a sh!t about you being Jewish or not.

I only feel that a Jewish guy should start a thread debunking holocaust denials argument one by one.

I can do it, but I am not Jewish. I do not have that kind of psychological/emotional attachment to holocaust. I won't be able to make an effective thread.

Anyways, move on