Trumps boost in defence spending

[panta615]

BBC reporting on a 9% increase but includes cuts elsewhere.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.bbc.co ... p/39108194

Interesting read.

Dave

[Mavke]

i wonder what this means for the Airforce Itself ...

[page_verify]

Or UK bases where there's rumours of large investment!

[TankBuster]

Or UK bases where there's rumours of large investment!

Yes, it will certainly be interesting to find out what this means for the USAF bases in the UK. We already know that LN is getting two F-35 squadrons on top of the 3x F-15 squadrons already there.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if there is also a U-turn on Mildenhall, especially with all the recent kafuffle with finding a new location for the RC-135 ops. Also, I cant see Trump being keen on spending money re-locating the 100th ARW away from a base that can fully support all the current operations that are asked of it.
RC -135 ops work fine from Mikdenhall, as do the AAR ops... Another case of 'if ain't broke, dont fiddle with it!!!'

TankBuster

[powerslave]

Or UK bases where there's rumours of large investment!

Yes, it will certainly be interesting to find out what this means for the USAF bases in the UK. We already know that LN is getting two F-35 squadrons on top of the 3x F-15 squadrons already there.


TankBuster

The F-15c's will have left before the F-35's turn up.

Ian

[page_verify]

I thought the F-15Cs were staying now, to make the five squadrons that will be there?

[powerslave]

I always thought they where leaving to be replaced by the f-35's,unless it's been reported else where that they are'nt.

[TankBuster]

Yep, there were mixed reports on the status of the F-15Cs once the F-35 arrive at Lakenheath, but over recent months it appears that there will be two F-35 squadrons in addition to the three F-15 squadrons already there.
I'm sure it was reported a while ago on Lakenheath's official Facebook page.

TankBuster

[Spitfire88]

As the government have already stated mildenhall will be sold any thoughts of a u turn on the decision is just wishful thinking.

[bizfreeq]

Yes because no British government has ever done a U-turn has it. If the US decides it would like to keep Mildenhall after all I cannot see any UK government refusing it.
As for the increase in the US defence budget, it still has to go through Congress so nothing is written in stone yet!

[TankBuster]

As the government have already stated mildenhall will be sold any thoughts of a u turn on the decision is just wishful thinking.

Consultations in this regard are still ongoing & to date nothing has been 100% set in stone yet. Yes the governments plan is to sell off Mildenhall, but that was after the Obama administration announced that it was no longer required by the USAFE. However, the Trump administration may have other ideas. Mildenhall is probably more favourable in Trumps view than any of the German bases at the moment because the UK is contributing that all important 2% into NATO whereas the Germans aren't...Trump has a real bee in his bonnet about that scenario. Unless the Germans cough up that 2% by the end of this year I wouldn't be at all surprised if Trump pulled USAFE assets out of Germany & re-located them to Poland, and or the UK. Poland pay their 2% into NATO & in recent months have seen a build up of US forces in that country.

TankBuster

[sft]

Senior politicians dont usually micro manage - they will throw the cash at the military and they will decide where to spend it. Of course the US military could review the situation, or a senior UK politician could have a quiet word in someones ear, but I suspect this is unlikely. You are correct about the 2%, but what bugs me is that the track record of Germnay is such, that when push comes to shove and some actual action of some kind is required, then Germany may not only fail to participate, but not even allow operations from their territory.... thus necessitating ops from the UK. So, in other words, we get reduced investment over many years, but then are "used" when required for some short term operation.

[Seahornet1]

Senior politicians dont usually micro manage ...

This is Trump. What senior politicians don't usually do has no relevance whatsoever....

[Reach1985]

I'd always guessed (though I stand to be corrected) that the Germans have an issue with the US military on their soil - I can see why many in Germany (and in German politics) might see it as a hangover from the Cold War and a rather imperialistic gesture from the US.

These days nothing is set in stone or certain but I'd imagine that from a strategic standpoint (at least in terms of air power) the UK is a much stronger proposition. The Americans have been here a long time, politically and operationally we have always allowed, for the most part, sensitive and secretive missions to be carried out from bases in the UK and with Brexit we are going to have to as a nation align ourselves more closely with the states in terms of trade relations.

The forward basing of tactical assets in the former Eastern Europe is good for a bit of sabre rattling but from both an infrastructure and security point of view is probably less than ideal. The UK as it has been since WW2 still seems like the best option for the basing of airpower in Europe looking forward.

The German question could well be answered by what is decided in terms of a strategy for the US Army in Europe as Ramstein and Spang are obviously critically important for those missions. Obviously over the past 10 years or so much of the heavy armour has pulled out of Germany and the strength of the army in Germany has been reduced. This was a direct response to a change in doctrine in the US towards a bigger focus on Asia / Pacific - but events of the past few years and renewed Russian aggression has got people at the top worried again.

[22A]

Widening the scope of this thread if I may. Britain's defence spending is 2% of GDP whilst America's is 14% of GDP. I don't know what China's is but it's been announced on the news China expects it's economy to improve by 6.5%. However their defence expenditure will increase by 7%.
Some of the extra funding will be spent on improving conditions for the service men & women.

[page_verify]

Senior politicians dont usually micro manage - they will throw the cash at the military and they will decide where to spend it.

Yes, even with Trump as president I suspect he'll never know of Mildenhall. His Secretary of the Air Force will and it's her job to manage where the big pot of cash gets spent, and to consider the guidance that it doesn't get spent on Mildenhall any more. It makes you wonder what the justification given to close Mildenhall was when you write it like that.

[TankBuster]

Probably something to do with Obama having a frosty relationship with the UK, but getting rather friendly with Merkel.
Trump however seems quite the opposite. Time will tell...

TankBuster

[page_verify]

Obama won't have heard of Mildenhall either - someone in USAFE will have a had a list of at least the 15 named USAFE bases and picked Mildenhall as the one "large" base to close.