Germany is one of the largest military spenders in the world, why is its military so underfunded?

On base day care centers and bail outs for HK.

They are spending less than the uk and france.

>Be at the center of two world wars
>Get away with doing the least work of the great powers once Europe is united
Might as well just auction their land off to nations using them as bases

Attached: 1480043657746.jpg (400x246, 15K)

Germany role in NATO is logistics. Germnany spends a disproportionate amount of their budget on transport aircraft and logistic bases. Ask anyone who got injured in Afghanistan where they went for medical treatment. The UK's role is more focused on naval strength, while Frances role is multi-purpose.

RAMSTEIN GANG

Smart post

rest of the thread not so smart

Everything is more expensive in Germany, UK, France. Arms industry is privately owned. In France it's partly government-owned, but it's still expensive. Higher wages, all sorts of bullshit expenses, and so on.
That's why Russians have far more capable military with a similar budget. It's also because they inherited Soviet MIC, which suffered during 90's and early 00's but a lot of it remained operational at some level. Partly it's because Russian military is still half-conscript. Russians do suffer from corruption, but they don't spend money on bullshit. They lag behind in electronics department though, but they caught up compared to where they were in past (not being able to make thermals and buying French for example).
Comparing budgets is a shit way of assesing the military capabilities. That way you'd think Saudis are anything but a ridiculous joke, or that Israel is meh.

Noone here wants to police sandholes or defend vodka drinkers that hate us () against vodka drinkers too drunk to hate us. Bundeswehr thus consists mostly of overpaid, undismissable retards who couldn't find a job otherwise.

>undismissable
Sounds like my kind of job.

That doesn't really mean anything when you consider the fact that "units ordered" for the Russian military amounts to more of a wishlist than a representation of future strength.

fuck off with your facts. they don't fit our narrative here.

>Russians do suffer from corruption, but they don't spend money on bullshit.
Russia bought back a bunch of T-34s last year. I get that it's a drop in the budgetary bucket, but when you're doing shit like that it's hard to play the "economically responsible" card.

>Russia bought back a bunch of T-34s last year.
>Russia bought more T-34 than T-14 last year
I know they're for decorative pieces, museum pieces and parade tanks, but sucking your own dick to how much of a drubbing you gave the Jerries in "the great patriotic war" can only get you so far.

This. What else would they do? They have no oversea colonies to defend and no aggressive neighbors to defend against. They produce and export for others

It also doesn't help when the tank you're buying back is one of the most produced tanks in history, which you built. I mean I get that it's not practical to tool up to build new ones, but you'd think that a nation so eager to show the things off would have held onto a couple more of the 84,000 of the fucking things.

It's surrounded by allies.

Why would it need a military?

It's the complete opposite. France is a banana republic where corruption is accepted as something normal by the people. In Germany, there is much more transparency in politics and the use of public funds.

The only person you can ever rely on is yourself. This applies on a national level as well.

The US military has a lot of military infrastructure in Germany like Ramstein hospital. Doesn't mean casualties flew back on German aircraft, or that the Germans had anything to do with it.

30 years of budget cuts and selling spare parts for scraps, combined with rampant political meddling

>They lag behind in electronics department though

sigh. actually their electronic and internet deps are the best of the world right now. they even manage to connect via phone and to fuck NATO heads with A.I. voices.. inclusive fucking head of CIA and Pentagon.

Attached: apEIONhuIdTaG6UAmA5vmJx_Yf4tIH5Y2eTBzOaPLtQ.jpg (818x758, 101K)

it is called respect for own history. thats something nazi supporting anglos and jews cant even know about.

Bullshit.

>Germnany spends a disproportionate amount of their budget on transport aircraft and logistic bases.

Both the UK and France both have more potent logistics divisions and more worldwide bases. Germany doesn't even have any strategic airlifters, they max out at the A400 tactical.

> Ask anyone who got injured in Afghanistan where they went for medical treatment.

US and UK handled MERT and bringing people out. US handled their own, UK handled their own as well as the Danish, Tongan, and their local area Afghan army. Germany just did ssome opf the minor nations as a stopover, not because they're big on it.

>The UK's role is more focused on naval strength

The UK's role is expeditionary warfare. That covers all three with a focus on logistical projection and support. Significantly more than Germany.

>while Frances role is multi-purpose.

France's role is interventionalist and EEZ projection. Again, far more than Germany.

Why would Germany fund Ramstein?

They are ahead in some areas and behind in others. In general, they are still lagging behind. But they bridged the gap significantly.

At the same time they're still trying to get an aircraft AESA to work at a time when GaN AESA are a thing in the west.

God, I miss our Cold War Bundeswehr ;_;

Go back to Jow Forums no one wants you here on /litepol/

Why are you retards making these posts
He's not even right, like that other fag said UK and France both focus on deploying what power they have worldwide, both are better than Germany in operational air and sealift capabilities, both actually operate worldwide, and when France needs help getting it's shit places it asks the British
Frogs and bongs are also the actual close allies of the EU (or were) because they actually did shit and understood they were the only ones willing or capable of operating as an individual military might

But their transport fleet isn't that comparatively large and nor should it destroy the budget for everything else in the German military.

>both actually operate worldwide
Germany should operate worldwide to do what, exactly?

Support NATO operations.

Those are not compulsory

Of course not, Germany would be kicked out if that was the case.

Why else would you focus on logistical support if you weren't going to operate worldwide???
Maybe because their military actually is just a monetary sinkhole

Then Germany has nothing to do on a global level
Should they buy a couple nuclear carriers to just sail around and visit beaches?

Support NATO in the role they choose to "specialize" in

But their transport and logistics is shit

And how many are in actual service?

Yeah, they spend so much that they can't even get their military spending up to 2% like NATO requires

FPBP

Building mosques and sex change clinics

>In Germany, there is much more transparency in politics and the use of public funds.
doesn't matter, cause most of the funds get wasted anyway

They literally pay for the Israels submarines. They give out free fucking subs to kikes while they have to replace machine guns with broomsticks.

Attached: 1bed7a93.jpg (1280x1024, 82K)

Germany basically turned the Bundeswher or whatever into a 9-5 job, so literally
>fuckton of admin fees, because every modern company NEEDS 3 HR workers for every 5 actual workers
>big paydays for officers
>lotta bennies
>intel intel intel

Now, if i'm being held by terrorists, GSG-9 showing up will be a day of praise. They do have good units. But its hard to do anything with an active military when your overall spending plan is
>buy at big upfront cost
>dont maintain it or modernize it, just work it till it breaks
>coulda fixed it but you needed to remodel the daycare center at the base and pay for a new internet plugin that tags any mention of 1488
>finally get crumbs to pay for new jets and helicopter parts, or new trucks, thus starting the cycle annew
>repeat 10 years later

Because 50% of their military funding goes to Israel. Same as America sending billions there to prop up their banana republic economy.

I swear Jews are just well funded Arabs, same level of intellect and inbreeding, same lack of civilization.

Comparing T14 to 2A7 is really reaching. T14 has active protection system, pre triggered era, better composite armor and it is designed to reflect radar in a way to make it look like ground clutter like a literal stealth tank. 2A7 is a legacy tank with some more applique armor, it's more comparable to T-90 but even there the Russians did a redesign of the basic hull whereas Germans just slapped more armor on.

>muh joos

>implying they arent to blame for almost everything

without those orders the shipyard would have gone bankrupt already....

>Implying you aren't a paranoid cuck with mental issues

>religion of cuck™ member calls people cucks

YES IVAN. T-14 TRULY STRONGEST TANK IN WORLD. CRUSH STUPID CAPITALIST TANK.

He isn't wrong though. The T-14 does offer drastically new design features over the Leopard 2A7, whether said features actually work is another thing however.

Attached: bets_protected_tank_in_the_world.jpg (1784x1286, 282K)

Attached: leopard_2a6_armor.jpg2.jpg (1280x1430, 297K)

Attached: leopard_2a6_tower_01_of_27.jpg (2256x1496, 495K)

At least from what I understand the Bundeswehr has been wrecked mainly by over twenty years of uncordinated and aimless budget cuts, an extremely messed up administration and bureaucracy, dysfunctional and underfunded maintenance, failed privatization efforts and twenty years of public desinterest in defence matters.

Why is the Leo 2 so perfect

Oh man, where can I buy ornaments like those?
My wife would kill for them.

Those aren't ornaments

From the wiki article on the Dolphin class:
>First budgeted in July 1989 and ordered in January 1990, by November the order was cancelled due to budget reallocation aimed at countering Iraqi threats made against Israel following the Iraqi invasion and annexation of neighboring Kuwait during leadup to the 1991 Gulf War. Funding for first two boats (Dolphin and Leviathan) was fully subsidized by the German government to restart the construction program and the third (Tekumah) received a 50% subsidy. During the first Gulf War, it was revealed that German firms had assisted Iraq with modernizing its ballistic missile and chemical weapon programs, thanks in part to lax enforcement by German customs, in violation of the Missile Technology Control Regime protocols which West Germany had in 1987 acceded to.[16] These enhanced missiles brought Israeli cities into Iraqi targeting range for the first time and included supplies and factories for modern weaponized mustard and nerve gas.[17][18] Though not a belligerent in the Gulf War, Israeli cities were nevertheless bombarded with these upgraded Iraqi missiles.[19][20] To compensate Israel for war related damage and economic losses[18][21] and keep German shipyards occupied with a high profile project in the post Cold War defense spending downturn,[22][23] then Chancellor of Germany Helmut Kohl approved an assistance package to German industry including the construction of two Dolphin-class submarines.[24][25]

It also helps when you have what, 100 Leos for every T-14 the enemy has?

That's kinda moving the goalposts, though

>The T-14 does offer drastically new design features over the Leopard 2A7
Other than the unmanned turret, not really. This was something that's been explored many times in the US and other NATO countries.If you want to see what a true next gen tank will look like, watch this:
youtube.com/watch?v=6GAtSfkqUN4

Attached: napoleonmbt.png (1049x513, 189K)

I Life here in Germany, it' s a Nation of fags, WE so more for Refugees. I hate this coutry!!!!

Hardkill APS, and the armoured capsule are two major notable features. A point where the T-14 definitely suffers is it only provides a max 12x gunner sight, whereas the M1a2 is doing 50x. Also, there's no point posting a vaporware video.

Having a magical wonderweapon is pointless if you can't produce it in large enough numbers to be effective. I think it's on topic
Even if the T-14 is better than the Leo (and I doubt it), having 6-7 deployed isn't going to make that big of a difference

I'm merely arguing from the position of the design itself. Not the real-world economics and policies that affect its acquisition rate vs the Leopard 2A7.

Never understood this fashion with touch screens. They are worse by a large margin for routine based activities because they require you to look at what you are doing, thus not being possible to multitask. They can work for some applications, maps for example but for general use buttons work far better and have a much more tactile and responsive feel compared to a touchscreen. Especially with gloves on and in battle.

>Hardkill APS
Already been deployed on various western MBTs.
>armoured capsule
Isolating the crew from the ammunition entirely is probably the most distinctive feature of the T-14, but this is really just catching up to NATO.
>Also, there's no point posting a vaporware video
Already been demo'd in an M113. Not vaporware.
youtube.com/watch?v=PaaxCZ99vYw

I guess it would help since you can customize menus and for example add extra commands without remaking the entire thing

The Bundeswehr had massive cuts 30 years ago with the end of the Cold War. A lot of their equipment was retired or sold. Inheriting tons of equipment from the former NVA costed them money because it all had to be stored, sorted, scrapped, or practically given away. A lot of personnel from both East and West retired from the military.
So with less materiel needed it resulted in stagnation of what was in service; less fear of impending conflict, less things to maintain, less personnel, less budget.

Now in the 21st century things cost more (and are generally expected to last longer and do more missions) Factor that with the lack of a threat of a large scale war in Europe and it becomes harder to justify increased military spending. The options become put the existing budget into maintaining mostly older stuff, or retire things and buy less units of newer things. Right now, Germany is kind of trying both and so there is not enough money to cover it all.

Fuck the jews make some funny videos

Imagine how many palestinian kids will this thing kill in autonomous mode

T-14 has drone integration. Which means the commander controls a tethered drone high up in the sky as another component of battlefield awareness.

Qatar has ordered 200 2A7s. Hungary has ordered 44 2A7s. Russia has ordered 170 T-14s.

The fuck are you saying dumbass, look at some medias like Mediapart or Le Canard Enchaîné that yell at anyone who will listen when a minister used 200€ of taxi. The last big scandal was caused because the minister of the ecology or some bullshit like dat was surprised eating lobsters
burgers need to shut up fuck sometimes

Didn't they want like 2000 T-14 between 2015-2020?

You cans still do that with buttons along the screen that change function with the selected weapon system. Just like what is done in planes.

>Already been deployed on various western MBTs.
Only the Merkava really. M1A2's are getting the Trophy system possibly soon, and the Altay hasn't entered service yet. Hardkill APS is still pretty niche.
>but this is really just catching up to NATO
Not sure what you're getting at here
>Already been demo'd in an M113. Not vaporware
And Poland made a CV-90 mock-up of PL-01 years ago. How many PL-01's do you think exist today?

In planes everyone wants a glass cockpit

>Which means the commander controls a tethered drone high up in the sky as another component of battlefield awareness.
Can the commander designate targets for the main cannon through the drone?

To fix bundeswehr you would need to fix German Federal Republic. That was doomed from 50's when they accepted the American idea of importing Turkish subhumans as workforce.

Attached: Bundeswehr-Bataillon-in-Storkow-bekommt-neue-Kommandeurin.jpg (1280x612, 128K)

He's talking about their software, their hardware is about 10 years behind and optimized for completely different things.

Their software, their mathematicians and programmers, are about fifteen years ahead of ours. They still have program optimization and go through line by line to pare a program down, we stopped doing that in the freaking 90s, its why we have such bulky and buggy programs on some of our newer aircraft. It's all cookie cutter shit.

Their theoretical knowledge (which is all you need for EWAR) is through the roof, they probably have more genius mathematicians graduate than all of NATO combined.

lol jews

>It also helps when you have what, 100 Leos for every T-14 the enemy has?
Yeah but Leo is more comparable to T-72BM and T-90 than the T-14. They have more late model T-72/90 than NATO has MBTs put together.

There were a few mentioned in thread so far:
1. The turret is optionally manned, a human loader and commander can fit in there if they want
2. The crew is an armored capsule which is fairly revolutionary idea of focusing armor where it counts
3. The shape of the tank is designed to reflect radar especially SAR into looking like ground clutter so the program filter deletes it
4. There are several active protection systems, from soft kill jamming, laser modulation, DIRCM, to hard kill systems that destroy projectiles
5. ERA is pre-detonated which means it can snap even the best KEW into tiny pieces before they hit the actual armor
6. Composite armor is roughly equivalent to Leopard, it's just shifted around (see:capsule)
7. Oh and something no one mentiones, its AESA radars are LPI and can track jets out to 100km and can target tanks ffs
9. The cannon is no slouch either

The only drawback to this design is I don't like the ammo stowage, it's spread out for safety with blowout panels but that just means you lose part of your ordinance if someone hits you with autocannon.

>If you want to see what a true next gen tank will look like
M1A3 is literally taking every point above from Armata, up to and including barrel launched missiles.

Yes but only if the target is visible to the cupola as well. The commander can slew the sensors of the tank in the direction of the target and designate that way.

It's not used for that though because drone is too far away for that to work, he mostly just uses it as part of battlefield awareness and maybe artillery fire.

>7... 9
Sorry it's 3:25 am here

>The turret is optionally manned, a human loader and commander can fit in there if they want
Source? That would be incredibly dumb if true.
>The crew is an armored capsule which is fairly revolutionary idea of focusing armor where it counts
Reducing protected volume is always good, not really revolutionary.
>ERA is pre-detonated which means it can snap even the best KEW into tiny pieces before they hit the actual armor
Modern APFSDS rounds have a frangible tip that activates before ERA, but that would work against most older rounds.
>The only drawback to this design is I don't like the ammo stowage
Nothing wrong with ammo stowage on the armata. Still uses the old carousel type design, but the crew not being in the turret fixes that problem.
>M1A3 is literally taking every point above from Armata, up to and including barrel launched missiles.
There's no such thing as an M1A3, and the last US gun-launched missile program was the MRM, which is very different to Russian designs.

Attached: autoloaderttb.jpg (1600x1366, 355K)

>The crew is an armored capsule which is fairly revolutionary idea of focusing armor where it counts
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_or_nothing_(armor)

I honestly thought that our software is so clunky and bug ridden because businesses saw software less as something that needs to be “perfected” by the time it releases but as something that can be continuously tweaked and patched up as problems arose. Software as a service, not as a product essentially; fucking bullshit if you ask me and leads to a lot less emphasis on quality control and just pumping out the product with the plan of fixing it later.