Reply With QuoteFixed........:POriginally Posted by gastrion
Ha ha Touché...
Fixed........:P
I don't think it is really about that, many European countries have been very valuable to ISAF. Obviously if the US wanted to, they could of deployed more troops but at what cost? Things would probably be pretty different..
Regardless, that isn't what this is about. European nations still will need the F-35 very badly and going without it or in too few of numbers will result in them relying on the US to fight a bulk of their wars, or they could take the risk of having less results & more casualties.
China cannot afford sinking ships of their biggest customers.
Europe isn't striving for a US-scale expeditionary force , because it sees no need for it. It cannot afford wasting billions of Euro's to build up to the capability to invade and occupy 3rd world countries. Because in this modern world it seems counterproductive and a waste of resources.
o no? then how do you explain the eu battle groups? Every nation needs to have a strong military, its one of the pillars of a country. You need military forces to enforce peace on those who threaten it and you need a military to garantee the safety of your population. Even the EU knows this but they want to have a first class seat for the price of an economy class seat and that isn't going to work.
Not exactly true
Right, because the European defence projects we participated in have been examples of true industrial perfection...
The Netherlands, like any other European country, has no inclination or desire to stimulate the (European) defence industry within the current financial climate. The JSF program provides domestic companies and industries opportunities within an innovative and beneficial sector no other European program or project would be or have been able to provide.
(I dare say that the European Union will not be able to overcome its problem of dissension and disjuncture that create heterogeneity within the national defence structures of it's member states, as they lack the will and focus to do so -and probably rightly so..)
The fact that we won't be buying the 2nd batch of F-35A's shouldn't come as a surprise; Official memo's dating back from 2003 have been suggesting exactly that.
However, seeing the fact that defence minister Hillen just recently spoke of interoperability and collaboration with Belgian counterpart, it might very well be a possibility that RNLAF will receive 52+2 F-35A's with the rest being allocated to Belgian Air Component.
Last edited by Sneeuwbaard; 05-15-2012 at 05:57 PM. Reason: typo
Bad journalism is bad.
We know that the Netherlands is going to receive one f-35 in august and the next one in march next year. That is about all that is known. Everything else are speculations.
The 85 is a bare minimum required by existing defense doctrine. The reduction of this number would be first preceded by the disbandment of some wing, hot discussions about the acceptable-needed level of dutch participation in international missions etc.
Such events didn't happen yet.
And I don't see such things happening until the Netherlands get greenleft-SP government. Or EU will start with another round of massive disarmaments.
Here is the reason why:
http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/bestande...nging-f-16.pdf
I think the netherlands should go for a EURO based fighter, such a the Eurofighter, Dassault Rafale and the SAAB GRIPEN, this woud stimulate European markets and improve the curent economic status in EU, maybe the other "smaller" countries should go for another option instead of the F-35 such as Denmark, Netherlands and probably Norway, the best option for these countries is the Gripen...however they did already put alot of time and money into this, it'd be a waste to change now, maybe earlier in the project.
But hey I'm no politician or military specialist, so i could have said utter BS.
Denmark is looking into several options.. Future Gripen is very interesting in my opinion. But I think we'll end up with a very small number of F-35's(about 24) supplemented with either UCAV's or a COIN aircraft(like Super Tucano) or both.
Some advantages of flying American hardware though. Deployed in the same area as the USAF nine out of ten times. They use US airfields and training areas to train Dutch pilots because our tiny, flat country doesn't offer enough training possibilities. If they need to perform maintenance they can just use American facilities in theatre. E.g. the Apaches or Chinooks that were deployed in Afghanistan for years did not have to be flown home for larger maintenance because the US had that capability it in theatre. You won't have that same advantage if you buy a Swedish yet or European helicopter.
Why ? Because they are small, they should buy something less capable ?
I agree with your point, but it doesn't mean they can't buy European based military equipment and share hardware and maintenance with other european countries in the theater of battle, e.g. (hypothetical) french nh-90's and german nh-90's and spanish nh-90's deploy in the same base, but i do agree with you, americans bring a s**t load of stuff to they're bases for maintenance.
no, but i do think the Gripen NG will be a very capable aircraft, it should fullfill Durch requirements, plus they should be able to get a better deal from the Swedes than from the JSF group *cough* America...
but as i have already said..I'm no politician or military specialist, so i could have said utter BS.
no need to get pissed, just giving my opinion...
Exactly my point, they should be able to get a larger amount of Gripen NG's for a good price, but everyone has to judge it cause it's small and Swedish...
P.S. (off topic, sorry) did the Danes develop or look into any UCAV's recently...?
Posting Permissions
