Saudi Arabia wants even more German MBTs

[Skybird]

http://www.defencetalk.com/german-saudi-tank-deal-twice-as-big-as-planned-report-43221/

Saudis are on buying tour for new tanks, having scratched the American M1A2 off their wish list in favour of the German made Leo-2A7, a version that specialises in desert and urban warfare.

Some time ago it was reported that they wanted 300, which spiked an angry uproar in German parliament, due to the questionable nature of the customer.

As has become known now, the Saudis want even more. The talk is now about 600-800 Leopards. They would be built in Spain, which produces already the Leopardo-2E under license.

While the 10 billion euro deal would help German arms maker Kraus-Maffay who suffers from the shrinking of german forces, and while it may be flattering to see the German tank once again pointing the American rival to second place, I am nevertheless totally opposed to this deal. To deliver your best equipement to your most determined enemy who already plays foul on you and already finances armed attacks against you, is no wise decision. Like I am also against type-214 submarines delivered to Pakistan. I am sure the French or somebody else may have less scruples and would love to replace the Germans in both deals. But still. The lack of wisdom and morals in others cannot be the example I allow myself to get guided by.

Let's see how this ends. German government is split, with CDU-led defemce ministry saying now and FDP-led economy ministry saying yes and Merkel saying nothing and opposition yelling all day long.

[joegrundman]

yeah, but they don't use MBTs to conduct armed attacks on you, so take the money and be happy :arrgh!:

[Catfish]

In "Defence Talks", right lol.

Also read this morning that the Saudis want to buy 800 Leopard tanks.
And maybe they just paint all those tanks pink to cheer up their population, who knows.
:hmm2:

Certainly Germany never delivers weapons in regions of crisis.
But then Saudi-Arabia is a stable, dependable dictatorship. :haha:

[Skybird]

Remarkable.

Of the five owners of Krauss-Maffay, one has spoken out against the deal, saying his family was terrified when they saw TV images of Saudi tanks rolling into Bahrein. He has approached the German president, Gauck, directly, and formally requested him to not give his permission for the deal, if it would ever reach that far a stage that a treaty would be brought up for Gauck to sign.

German link (http://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article106637099/Ruestungsfabrikant-gegen-geplanten-Leopard-Export.html)

[Herr-Berbunch]

. . when they saw TV images of Saudi tanks rolling into Bahrein.

The troops, not tanks, were there at the invitation of the Bahraini government, it wasn't Saudi wanting lebensraum.

. . . please note that the Bahraini government appealed to the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) Peninsula Shield forces to enter the Kingdom and help protect vital strategic interests during the days of violence and security unrest. Source (http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/letters/letters-saudi-forces-in-bahrain-to-help-2297956.html)

And the thirty tanks seen crossing the King Fahd Causeway on the back of trailers were Bahraini tanks returning from Kuwait.

On the same day, however, the Bahraini government admitted to the existence of the tanks; although it insisted that the vehicles in question had been of Bahraini, not Saudi, origin.
;There are no Saudi Arabian tanks in Bahrain,; Bahrain's information ministry said in a statement on Tuesday. The statement went on to claim that the tanks identified in news reports as having crossed the border Monday evening were Bahraini tanks returning from Kuwait, where they had taken part in national day celebrations.
Tanks identified Monday evening were Bahraini tanks returning from Kuwait National Day celebrations, where military from several allied countries participated in an event commemorating Kuwait's liberation in 1991,; the statement noted.
Bahrain government says no Saudi tanks in country
Kuwait National Day, which commemorates Kuwait's liberation from the British in 1961, falls on February 25. Kuwait Liberation Day, which commemorates the liberation of Kuwait from Iraqi occupation in 1991, falls on February 26.

[Skybird]

One tyranic autocracy asked another tyrannic autocracy for help, and the latter sent troops and armoured personell carriers to crack down on protesters.

Around 60 people are said to have been shot to death. The number of wounded is unknown, but estimated to be several times as high.

The sectarian violence goes on until today.

And so one of the five owning families of Krauss-Maffay says they were shocked by those Saudi tanks/troops/carriers/whatever moving into Bahrain and helping in putting down protest.

I do not take side in the Bahraini mess. The opposition probabbly is the same kind of fundamentalist mess like in Egypt, Libya, Syria. I just think it is not wise to give our best weapons into the hands of our worst enemies that smile in our faces while they finance terror against us, finance Salafist violence in Germany (currently a prominent chain of events unfolding over here), and rfemain to be an enemy to Israel, all the time arming themselves as well to crck down on any protest movement of their own. The Leopard-2A7 is streamlined for urban warfare and thus is an ideal platform to supress riots or fight in urban civil war.

[BarjackU977]

I am sure the French or somebody else may have less scruples and would love to replace the Germans in both deals.

Out of curiosity, why did you find relevant to go finger pointing, and why at the French in particular?

[Skybird]

Out of curiosity, why did you find relevant to go finger pointing, and why at the French in particular?
I said "the French or somebody else".

With "somebody else" I have America on mind, of course. They already have sold their buddies big ammonts of platforms of all kind. The French I mentioned because they are not shy at all to offer selling modern ATGM's, attack helicopters, fighterplanes and even nuclear technology to regimes like Gaddafi's Libya in order to sell their dream of the mediterranean Francophile zone of influence which is a hobby of France since long time.

[Jimbuna]

I should imagine Britain would have loved them to pick the Challenger.

I do wonder though why the need for 800? :hmmm:

[Herr-Berbunch]

It's a bloody big country! :yep:

[TLAM Strike]

I do wonder though why the need for 800? :hmmm:

Iranian Army: ~1800 MBTs
Syrian Army: ~4,950 MBTs
IDF: 1330 MBTs

[Skybird]

Syrian army's tanks:

almost half of those 5000 tanks are T-55s. Around 1000 are T-62 and around 1700 are T-72s, the first export model with several weakened features like thinner armour (T-72M). Roughly one quarter of their tanks is mothballed.

Iranian army:

a wild mix of American, British, Russian, Northkorean and Chinese tanks from the 50s, 60s and 70s and 80s. There is no modern tank in their inventory, as far as I know, although they have changed some Chieftains according to their own developement.

In open field battles, both armies do lack the MBTs that could stand against modern Western tanks. They are not only old, but also for the most have no thermals, which is a suicidal handicap. The ammunition is inferior as well, old rounds of overaged design. The tanks are thin-skinned by today's standards.

In other words, what they have is an impressive trek of rolling coffins, from a Western POV.

The Saudis maintain a tank fleet of around 1100 MBTs, amongst them 370 M1A2s, 460 Pattons, and over 300 AMX-30. A wish for 600-800 Leo-2s indicates they want to replace their aging M-60s and AMX on a 1:1 basis.

[TLAM Strike]

Syrian army's tanks:

almost half of those 5000 tanks are T-55s. Around 1000 are T-62 and around 1700 are T-72s, the first export model with several weakened features like thinner armour (T-72M)

Iranian army:

a wild mix of American, British, Russian, Northkorean and Chinese tanks from the 50s, 60s and 70s and 80s. There is no modern tank in their inventory, as far as I know, although they have changed some Chieftains according to their own developement.

In open field battles, both armies do lack the MBTs that could stand against modern Western tanks. They are not only old, but also for the most have no thermals, which is a suicidal handicap. The ammunition is inferior as well, old rounds of overaged design. The tanks are thin-skinned by today's standards.

You put an illiterate tribal moron in a Abrams or Leopard and it might as well be a Sherman or a Pz IV.

The level of training in most Gulf armies is abysmal (except in the elite counter terrorism units). Both for the fighting and the logistical troops, those states contract out their support to the West.

Countries like Syria and Iran while having equipment that is a joke by our standards supports it by them selves and has experience using it.

We are talking about a country where one of the king's nephews ran their flagship aground and broke it's keel.

[Skybird]

:D You won't hear me objecting.

But I would not include all of their commanders in the ridiculing. Crew training standard maybe be low, but so it was with the Iraqis as well - during the war '91 some of their commanders nevertheless did their best to set up a fight during the 4-day battle at Basra. These commanders suffered not from lacking competence, but inferior equipment, American commanders reported. I would expect comparing competence - at least determination - from special commandoes and infantry commanders of the Iranian RG guards, who are quite fanatical.

Still, in Syrian and Iranian tank forces I put no faith, especially when they get confronted in the open desert, by modern Western MBTs. Precision, range, sights, ammo and penetration power, armour, speed - they have everything against themselves.

Too bad for them all that there are export limitations on SBP-PE. :D

[Foo86]

O_o

[Kongo Otto]

Out of curiosity, why did you find relevant to go finger pointing, and why at the French in particular?

The 20th Brigade of the Royal Saudi Land Force displays a 155mm GCT self-propelled gun, left, and AMX-10P infantry combat vehicles during Operation Desert Shield.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2b/AuF1_and_AMX-10P_%28Royal_Saudi_Land_Force%29.JPEG/800px-AuF1_and_AMX-10P_%28Royal_Saudi_Land_Force%29.JPEG
They bought 90 GCT's, ~300 AMX 30 MBT, 300 Panhard M3 VTT (VTT=APC), 300 Panhard AML, 570 AMX 10P APC's in the past and it wasn't a problem to buy them. :yeah:
But the biggest weapons supplier is the USA.
So why shouldn't the Germans sell them the Leo's?

Typical german reaction nowadays: "OH my god we sold them weapons and now they use it as weapons." :roll:

[Kongo Otto]

I should imagine Britain would have loved them to pick the Challenger.

I do wonder though why the need for 800? :hmmm:

The Saudis still have 460 M60A3 and ~300 AMX 30 MBT's which are a bit overaged right now and they want to buy new ones.
So no problem at all imho. :03:

[BarjackU977]

I said "the French or somebody else"

Well, I wanted to ask because there is quite a difference between "somebody" and "the French or somebody else". The French only are named.

Anyway, you answered why, so, thanks.

[Jimbuna]

It's a bloody big country! :yep:

Iranian Army: ~1800 MBTs
Syrian Army: ~4,950 MBTs
IDF: 1330 MBTs

Well as already explained...in the main we are comparing apples with oranges (IDF apart).

It still seems a large number...I'd have thought beefing up ground attack aircraft would have covered far larger areas of territory and obviously much quicker.

[Kongo Otto]

Iranian Army: ~1800 MBTs
Syrian Army: ~4,950 MBTs
IDF: 1330 MBTs

I assume you know that neither Syria nor Israel or the Iran have a direct border with Saudi Arabia.
So when it theoretically would came to an conflict with one of the mentioned States the Saudi Army or their assumed enemies would have to track trough Jordania or the Iraq and i highly doubt that one of this countires would allow that.

Otherwise the Saudi Army has as i said before ~780 overaged tanks consisting of M-60 and french AMX 30's which they want to replace.
So what.

[TLAM Strike]

I assume you know that neither Syria nor Israel or the Iran have a direct border with Saudi Arabia.
So when it theoretically would came to an conflict with one of the mentioned States the Saudi Army or their assumed enemies would have to track trough Jordania or the Iraq and i highly doubt that one of this countires would allow that. Well Iraq and Jordan are in no position to repel an attack by Syria and/or Iran. So Saudi Arabia would have to plan for a defense of those countries or a defense that assumes those countries have been overrun.

As for Israel all middle eastern nations consider it their top threat and plan to fight it. Border or no.

[Tribesman]

i highly doubt that one of this countires would allow that.


look at the countries

Well Iraq and Jordan are in no position to repel an attack by Syria and/or Iran. So Saudi Arabia would have to plan for a defense of those countries or a defense that assumes those countries have been overrun.

Not forgetting that some idiot handed one of those countries to the Iranian based supreme coucil for islamic revolution

[Kongo Otto]

Well Iraq and Jordan are in no position to repel an attack by Syria and/or Iran. So Saudi Arabia would have to plan for a defense of those countries or a defense that assumes those countries have been overrun.
As for Israel all middle eastern nations consider it their top threat and plan to fight it. Border or no.

I don't know but more and more i think that you don't really know the region. You should visit it, its worth a travel. There are some really pretty jewish synagogues in Teheran our Travel guide back then said there are 25 around the country. Also worth a visit are the Esther, Mordechai und Habakkuk Shrines in Hamedan or the grave of Daniel in Sush. :03:

Arabs talk much when the day is long, but there is a big difference between their words and their doings.
Syria is not able to attack Saudi Arabia, Jordan or the Iraq. The syrian Army is not even able to get rid of some not really well trained and (for now) not even well equipped so called "Freedom Fighters".
Syria is not a thread for Israel, they have to much trouble in their own henhouse and it never was a military thread at all before.
The Syrian Army tried four time against Israel and failed greatly four times.
They lost 870 MBT's alone in the Yom Kippur war 1973 against a smaller IDF at the Golan Heights .
They Syrian Army even failed against the Jordanian Army back in 1970 at the socalled Black September. When there is one absolutely overrated Army in the region, than it is the syrian Army. Period!
Jordan is one of the most stable nations down there and is not a thread at all for Israel.
In its momentary state also the Iraq is not a thread for Israel at all and i highly doubt that they are able to threaten anybody in the near future.

Iran is a major threat for the Israelis (funding terrorism), but even when Iran would start a ground offensive thru the Iraq, which they couldn't even perform in the first Gulf War 1980-1988, the Iraqis would fight them with all they have.
Take a closer look at the Iranian Tank Force, thats more a big museum than a capable Fighting Force not to talk about the problem with spare parts for their mostly overraged western tanks.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/moyen_orient/Iran/Index_Iran_army_ground_foces_military_equipment.ht m

And the Iranian Air Force, well i would estimate that they could fight the Israelis not longer than a day before the Iranians get shot out of the skies.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/iran/airforce-equipment.htm

As evil the Iranians may be, even the Ayatollahs know the word "suicide".
Do you really think that Israel would stand just at the side watching over the fence when such a Conflict would break out.?