Should America have stationed troops to defend Europe?

Good question.

What, all the boated MWR facilities (PX, base housing, recreation facilities and whatnot) to keep the dependents happy? Or did you mean something else?

Shoot, look at Bosnia. They got a PX over there now. Why...?

edited 30th Sep '10 2:04:48 PM by pvtnum11

I've made some attempt to look for a breakdown of figures for Cold War spending in different theatres... nothing comes up on the first page.

I don't think that will be easy to find.

EDIT: On the subject of Europe defending itself... yeah, frankly, we can probably hold our own now if the Americans pull out. Plus it'll give the Russians less of an excuse to say "The whole western worlds against us." Improved relations between America and Russia can only be a good thing. Given that Britains GDP alone is almost twice the size of Russias, I don't think there's any good reason why we can't hold our own. That, I agree on.

edited 30th Sep '10 2:35:32 PM by GameChainsaw

I found reliable figures only for between 1988 to present.

Yes... don't underestimate Britain's military capacity despite the cost cutting and such. What we may lack in shiny new tech we make up for with quality of training, I believe.

Indeed. As Asterix once said: "The better the army, the worse the food. This keeps the soldiers in bad temper"

The British army must be very good then.

edited 30th Sep '10 3:38:25 PM by DasAuto

Bear in mind the Russians have the Spetznaz. They're like the SAS, but they have to bathe in blood as part of their psychological training.

EDIT: ^Indeed... wait a second! Hey, that was mean!

edited 30th Sep '10 3:38:43 PM by GameChainsaw

That doesn't make them any better unless they are vampires.

...

Are they??

edited 30th Sep '10 3:41:00 PM by DasAuto

^^ And there's over five times as many of them as the SAS.

edited 30th Sep '10 3:39:17 PM by MajorTom

Quantity doesn't always equal quality. Keep in mind the SAS is pretty much the model for all other special forces.

But let's step away from nationalistic chest-thumping.

Urr... the Spetznaz are a pretty formidable bunch themselves. I wouldn't like to back either side in a straight match. And Britains extensive war experience doesn't hold up when the Russians have the exact same thing. They still have plenty of veterans from other wars.

I wonder what the French and Germans have to offer...

edited 30th Sep '10 3:44:16 PM by GameChainsaw

Special Forces won't win a war by themselves anyway.

^This.

I wonder what the French and Germans have to offer...

Don't worry. What we may lack in shiny new tech and quality of training we make up for with ... err ... Heart!

I'd be more worried about Russian airpower. Its been fairly established that he who dominates the air wins the war.

^I don't doubt for a second your technology and training. Its German and French war experience that worries me.

edited 30th Sep '10 3:49:02 PM by GameChainsaw

I'd be more worried about Russian airpower

Military aviation! Much better!

Although the Flanker (and its variants) and the MiG-29 are formidable, I feel that aircraft such as the Tornado would at the very least be on a parity with them - the Typhoon would help to break the deadlock, as well.

The Tu-95 would be vulnerable to SAMs and QRA.

What about the jewel of both sides air fleet? The Russians have an answer for the Eurofighter 2000, that I know.

What about the jewel of both sides air fleet? The Russians have an answer for the Eurofighter 2000, that I know.

EF 2000 is the old name for it.

I assume you're speaking of the Flanker-F, right?

Comparing the tech, I believe the Typhoon would outclass it.

What about numbers? One Eurofighter is no good if the Russians can send 20 Flankers at it. As far as I know, we don't have many of the things.

Sorry, I'll look that up myself.

EDIT: Wait, the numbers are being cut... by 70%?!

edited 30th Sep '10 4:04:42 PM by GameChainsaw

^^^^^That's the only good thing that came from the Afghanistan war for Germany. Our nine-to-five Soldierdom was thoroughly shaken up as was the concept of the peacekeeping soldiers that never fire thier guns.

Shortly before Afghanistan the Bundeswehr had phased out mortars thinking they wouldn't need them any more. Mortars! And that's just one example of how stupid and cosy they had become since the end of the cold war.

They got better, though.

edited 30th Sep '10 4:05:00 PM by DasAuto

There's an important difference between Flanker and Flanker-F.

Got rid of mortars? Godd giref, what was the logic insanity behind that?

I'm concerned about Britains decision to axe so many Eurofighters... I know we're in recession but still...

I guess we can order more when this mess is over...

EDIT: Yeah, axing your most portable artillery pieces is not a good idea.

edited 30th Sep '10 4:11:14 PM by GameChainsaw

EDIT: Wait, the numbers are being cut... by 70%?!

Which aircraft? If it's the Typhoon, then

what is this i dont even

EDIT: QUESTION ANSWERED.

Anyway, I find it alarming we're cutting spending... in a war.

edited 30th Sep '10 4:11:26 PM by Flanker66

I got it wrong. Its 33%. We're losing 70 of the things... well I didn't even know we had 210 of the precious things.

EDIT: We don't have much use for elite fighters in a war where the foe has no airpower to speak of.

edited 30th Sep '10 4:13:11 PM by GameChainsaw