Comments on: Who’s contributing to the Libya mission https://habitablezone.com/2011/05/24/whos-contributing-to-the-libya-mission/ Sun, 12 Apr 2026 08:57:23 -0700 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: ER https://habitablezone.com/2011/05/24/whos-contributing-to-the-libya-mission/#comment-1061 ER Wed, 25 May 2011 01:42:04 +0000 http://184.73.169.189/?p=1139#comment-1061 Fascinating graphic. Actually, I expected our presence in the order of battle would be bigger, and I'm surprised there are so many Nato countries involved in more than a token role. I expected our contribution to be the major one, but I bet the graphic is a bit misleading. I'd wager a larger proportion of US assets are in support roles (AWACS, Aerial refueling, C&C, CAP, etc) for the simple reason our forces are more balanced and complete in that area. We have resources available for extended stays and total operations while I bet the Euros are flying a higher proportion of ground combat missions than their total numbers would suggest. There are political reasons for this, I'm sure Danish and Norwegian pilots want to log as many combat hours on their resumes as possible, they don't get much of an opportunity to do so otherwise. OTOH, some assets, like Tomahawks and Wart Hogs, are almost exclusively under US control. It's good training, especially for the Euros, who don't get a chance to operate in combat with their American cousins as much as would be necessary for a force designed primarily for European defense. This sort of exercise is expensive these days, so its nice to be able to combine combat and and training in one campaign. The US also has a difficult mission, to keep things going at a high tempo while keeping as low a profile as possible, for both domestic and international public relations purposes. You do realize this whole campaign, although perhaps not designed that way, is a clear signal to the world, particularly the MidEast and Russia, that Nato can quickly mobilize for and carry out desert warfare operations anywhere near the Mediterranean or the Red Sea/Persian Gulf Zone. You can count on lots of people taking notes. The military loves this sort of thing, after all, it's their job. It's a dress rehearsal--think of the Condor Legion in Spain back in the 30s. I participated in a NATO exercise like this myself (although there was no actual killing involved). Our NATO squadron (US, Brits, Canadians, Dutch and W Germans) pretended to invade Norway, and the Soviets pretended to defend it. Think of forty ships spread over a piece of the N Atlantic the size of Texas, in November. AARGH! Fascinating graphic. Actually, I expected our presence in the order of battle would be bigger, and I’m surprised there are so many Nato countries involved in more than a token role.

I expected our contribution to be the major one, but I bet the graphic is a bit misleading. I’d wager a larger proportion of US assets are in support roles (AWACS, Aerial refueling, C&C, CAP, etc) for the simple reason our forces are more balanced and complete in that area. We have resources available for extended stays and total operations while I bet the Euros are flying a higher proportion of ground combat missions than their total numbers would suggest. There are political reasons for this, I’m sure Danish and Norwegian pilots want to log as many combat hours on their resumes as possible, they don’t get much of an opportunity to do so otherwise. OTOH, some assets, like Tomahawks and Wart Hogs, are almost exclusively under US control.

It’s good training, especially for the Euros, who don’t get a chance to operate in combat with their American cousins as much as would be necessary for a force designed primarily for European defense.
This sort of exercise is expensive these days, so its nice to be able to combine combat and and training in one campaign. The US also has a difficult mission, to keep things going at a high tempo while keeping as low a profile as possible, for both domestic and international public relations purposes.

You do realize this whole campaign, although perhaps not designed that way, is a clear signal to the world, particularly the MidEast and Russia, that Nato can quickly mobilize for and carry out desert warfare operations anywhere near the Mediterranean or the Red Sea/Persian Gulf Zone. You can count on lots of people taking notes.

The military loves this sort of thing, after all, it’s their job. It’s a dress rehearsal–think of the Condor Legion in Spain back in the 30s. I participated in a NATO exercise like this myself (although there was no actual killing involved). Our NATO squadron (US, Brits, Canadians, Dutch and W Germans) pretended to invade Norway, and the Soviets pretended to defend it. Think of forty ships spread over a piece of the N Atlantic the size of Texas, in November.
AARGH!

]]>