tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post587308273903918774..comments2023-11-17T03:55:40.736-05:00Comments on Ink Spots: Estonia as a model for future coalition contributionsLilhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18373158801523577733noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-78082674208279433572009-11-04T14:11:27.500-05:002009-11-04T14:11:27.500-05:00I have to echo Gunslinger here. It doesn't mak...I have to echo Gunslinger here. It doesn't make any sense to build training/advising formations in an army that has no experience fighting on its own. How would Estonia send 1,500 troops to do "capacity building" when they've got less than 300 in Afghanistan today? And how would they help a partner country build capability in infantry operations, for example, when they've got no experience operating that way themselves?<br /><br />It's telling that we have U.S. units training European OMLTs in Germany before they deploy.Gulliverhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12558335790019565924noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-12461488270967786892009-11-04T12:27:03.385-05:002009-11-04T12:27:03.385-05:00I hardly think Estonia is the right choice for NAT...I hardly think Estonia is the right choice for NATO's capacity building force. They've done well with cyber-warfare and should keep at that - especially with the threats that NATO faces on that front (from Russia and China to say nothing of independent operators). Just like the Lithuanians should stick to water purification.<br /><br />I'd rather the Germans or French (welcomed back to the fold...) do the capacity building. Not former Soviet-bloc states who could probably use a little more capacity building of their own.Jason Fritzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18335313679058470722noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-89338996937512447182009-11-04T12:23:29.291-05:002009-11-04T12:23:29.291-05:00I would rather Estonia developed a permanent capac...I would rather Estonia developed a permanent capacity building capability. A dedicated force of 5,000 trainers and emedded advisors that permanently deployed around 1,500 troops around the world in capacity building missions. These could be a combination of civilian and military.Anandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03040200275831896147noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8755035051021414780.post-78721794925561657432009-11-04T12:13:16.825-05:002009-11-04T12:13:16.825-05:00I totally agree that smaller allies should develop...I totally agree that smaller allies should develop more niche capabilities to support the larger nations who do the brunt of the fighting.<br /><br />But I totally disagree that the UK shouldn't have infantry battalions because they only support US operations. Looking beyond the threat of COIN, the UK still requires the ability to put soldiers on the ground in various places - and not just in support of coalition operations. But in light of allied operations, the US is limited by its small professional force (and political challenges in deploying National Guard forces) and I firmly believe that the supplement of UK (and Canadian and Australian forces) is very important. We can't bemoan NATO-member nations not providing soldiers to the fight and then say they should focus on other things. As an American, I don't want the brunt of maneuver/COIN warfare to fall squarely on the shoulders of our forces while everyone else is working logistics and shaping operations.Jason Fritzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18335313679058470722noreply@blogger.com