Oceanhawk wrote:
The EU has no SLBM Fleet
Firstly, SLBM stands for Submarine Launch Ballistic missiles, nobody has a "fleet" of those... you mean a fleet of ballistic missile submarines.
Yes, technically the EU as an entity in of itself has no actual military but its member states do. Perhaps when I said NATO that should had been a sharp clue. "Or since they are typically part of NATO" They meaning the nations that make up the EU, in part or whole.
Secondly, of course I was referring to Boomers but they technically carry SLBMs and hence are a fleet of them. Kind of pointless if their tubes are empty. I guess naturally we both being English speakers that I obviously meant that the missiles float around In the water and do not have a launch vehicle? Surely the reply will not be well technically they will not float but understand the sarcasm over your unneeded corrections.
Now since you mentioned two countries, ie UK and France (expense of individual units is irrelevant since my point was the US spends far more on Defense than many other countries combined. We are expected to carry a lot of things for other nations, ie do the heavy lifting.) how many other members of NATO have fleets of Boomers?
So could the retirement of them have more to do with saving money than simply they being obsolete? That was my point. They are not cheap to maintain. The reply is not that boomers cost more in of themselves either. Boomer due to what they carry have other strategic importance one of them being able to launch with little warning to OpFor unlike standard land based fleets of ICBMs. So the cost of Boomers of which you only mentioned TWO countries vs the cost of non USA NATO members maintaining bomber wings or even just one squadron was not cost effective to keep both running at the same time. Again the USA, a NATO member, who has a defense budget that dwarfs is expected to carry that burden. We still maintain B52 Bomber Wings and more than likely in a NATO scuffle with someone else we will use them on that OpFor.
Here are percentages of GDP spent by members of NATO, not this does not mean equal spending as countries have different GDPs. http://www.defenseone.com/politics/2015/06/nato-members-defense-spending-two-charts/116008/
Oceanhawk wrote:
As for the bombers, dont have them in a group of 5. Always in multiplies of 3. 3,6,9
Thanks for your feedback.
Ain't Nothing But A Thing!