British Army With No Tanks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Legbreaker]

It's my belief the only reason there's talk of getting rid of tanks is because there isn't currently a credible threat that APCs and wheeled IFVs can't handle - it's all low level, counter insurgency stuff and peace keeping really.
It's a very big mistake long term to remove the heavy armour capability. Sure, there may be sufficient warning and lead time to obtain the hardware, but the skills and experience using them could well be gone. Without continual training, experimentation and practice, there's going to be some very hard, very bloody lessons to be learnt all over again made even worse by the continuing march of time and technical development.

[pmulcahy11b]

I can understand wanting a more mobile, deployable force -- that was the driving factor behind the Stryker program. But sometimes, you do need heavy armor, as the use of Stryker Brigades in Iraq has shown that there are situations they can't handle, and the M1s have to be called.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

It's my belief the only reason there's talk of getting rid of tanks is because there isn't currently a credible threat that APCs and wheeled IFVs can't handle - it's all low level, counter insurgency stuff and peace keeping really.
It's a very big mistake long term to remove the heavy armour capability. Sure, there may be sufficient warning and lead time to obtain the hardware, but the skills and experience using them could well be gone. Without continual training, experimentation and practice, there's going to be some very hard, very bloody lessons to be learnt all over again made even worse by the continuing march of time and technical development.

You're right, but if the British government doesn't consider Russia a "current" credible threat, then it's just not paying attention. If Russia rolls into one of the Baltic NATO member states, it's going to be too late for the UK and/or other NATO members who've gotten rid of their MBTs to build new ones.

I can kind of see why countries that only anticipate COIN ops in the future to offload their MBTs, although, as recent experience in Iraq has shown, there are certain jobs that MBTs do better than other options. To completely discount the possibility of war with another great power (one still equipped with thousands of MBTs) seems incredibly short-sighted, naive, and/or defeatist.

I hope the UK doesn't go through with it.

[Legbreaker]

The Curator of the Bovington Tank Museum mentioned in one of his recent videos https://youtu.be/8vDdOgG5CTc?t=285 the Brits are going ahead with a Challenger 2 major upgrade on the turret. The idea of getting rid of tanks is just a brain fart by those who would rather spend the money on arts and social programs.

[mpipes]

One thing I know; I am getting VERY resentful of NATO partners not spending even 2% on their military and depending on the US to save them in the next war.

The thing that really worries me is that I know I am not alone. Sooner or later, if these trends continue of our foreign partners just letting their militaries degrade to ineffectiveness, then the US is just going to say your on your own. NATO will exclusively become European. It is also going to lead to nuclear proliferation. I mean really, what do you think Poland or the Baltic States are going to do. Wait for Russia to reassert its traditional territory borders? All you need to do is look at how Russia is nibbling away at Ukraine to see the long term goals and trends.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

I feel too that the focus on Europe has made some of those countries shortsighted. While they may think Russia is not a "current" threat, China is a cause for concern.
While those countries might never directly get into a conventional war with China, they might need to go to the aid of an ally in the region. So having a military with good abilities for conventional war is a useful deterrent - you want to negotiate from strength, not from "We can get tank production online 10 months after the war starts".

[mpipes]

If they think they can just get rid of tanks one year and then have a tank force the next year, they will end up with a rude awakening. A viable tank force takes years to build up. If they get rid of tanks now, it will most assuredly leave the UK as a third tier land army for years. They may never recover. They have already slashed the fighter force to absurdly low levels. So 25 years from now, what do they do if Argentina annexes the Falklands? Or if Spain finally seizes Gibraltar? Lodge a strong diplomatic protest or just wave bye bye?

[RN7]

It was an idea put out by the mandarins in the British MOD to save money due to the economic impact of the virus.

The MOD has been taken for a ride a few times by the spivs working for British defence contractors such as with Nimrod and the Airbus tanker aircraft leasing deal. The accountants in the MOD are also notoriously tight about spending money. Just ask the Royal Navy who had to make due with warships that were far to small for their purpose for years because the MOD believed that extra steel meant extra money.

Upgrading the Challenger 2 is not really that expensive in the scheme of current British defence programmes. In the worst case scenario some tanks might be transferred to the Territorials and kept in readiness until they are needed. The Challenger 2 is sort of a deterrent in its own right to the likes of Russia. Its the most powerful tank ever built although other countries would dispute that fact. In reality it could take on five or more Russian and Chinese tanks and win.

[Fallenkezef]

Originally Posted by mpipes

One thing I know; I am getting VERY resentful of NATO partners not spending even 2% on their military and depending on the US to save them in the next war.

The thing that really worries me is that I know I am not alone. Sooner or later, if these trends continue of our foreign partners just letting their militaries degrade to ineffectiveness, then the US is just going to say your on your own. NATO will exclusively become European. It is also going to lead to nuclear proliferation. I mean really, what do you think Poland or the Baltic States are going to do. Wait for Russia to reassert its traditional territory borders? All you need to do is look at how Russia is nibbling away at Ukraine to see the long term goals and trends.

The only time NATO's article 5 was invoked was when America asked for help in Afghanistan and NATO lived up to it's commitments. Let's cut the hyperbole about America saving Europe thankyou very much.

Secondly the Crimean conflict arose from the EU's interference in Ukraine and the possible risk to the continued use of Crimean black sea ports so the Russians moved into secure those ports and destabilise a potential threat.

Now I'm not saying the Russians are the good guys or not a credible threat but they have been a credible threat since the great game of the mid 19th century. However Russia isn't bloody stupid, they got away with Ukraine due to very specific circumstances. They will continue to do what they do best and fight proxy wars, looking when and where to stir things up to their best advantage such as we saw in Syria.

As for Britain phasing out tanks, I think it's a matter of cost. Britain post-covid is basicly broke right now, we can't afford to upgrade the Challies. I wouldn't be surprised if we sell one of the QE class carriers over the next few years to be honest.

I can't say I agree with the decision but I do understand it. Classic government blindness, we have thought counter insurgency for the last 2 decades so we will always fight counter insurgency. This thinking was an indirect cause for the Falklands war back in 1982.

The lessons of Syria have been conveniantly ignored. We relied on politics and air power while Russia put boots on the ground and front line equipment in Assad's hands. Russia won.

The west will regret the trend to favour aviation and counter-insurgency warfare but it won't be in the Baltics we get our arse handed to us.

[Rainbow Six]

FWIW the British Government is now denying it plans to scrap all of its tanks

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...crapping-tanks

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...o-b431482.html

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54126146

https://news.sky.com/story/defence-s...tanks-12069861

[Fallenkezef]

Originally Posted by Rainbow Six

FWIW the British Government is now denying it plans to scrap all of its tanks

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...crapping-tanks

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...o-b431482.html

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54126146

https://news.sky.com/story/defence-s...tanks-12069861

Of course, PR nightmare.

They will continue to phase out Challies in favour of "light cavalry". My prediction will be a token force in the form of one armoured brigade built around the RTR with the rest of the British army either infantry or the new fangled "light cavalry".