200, in the year of the invasion. It swelled to 2,500 over the next five years, then trickled away into a final withdrawal a month before the Republicans lost the White House in 2008.
There were smaller deployments - Iceland sent 2 soldiers, for instance. But it all paled behind the the US at 150k and UK at 46k. Which goes back to the whole problem with a NATO internal conflict. The US is the backbone of European defense. Again, what do any of these countries plan to do against an aircraft carrier group? Nobody seems to have a serious answer.
Serious question: how will a carrier group fare in arctic ice during winter? Will it be what is needed to hold an Arctic island after showing up all bristly in the summer months?
While the USA’s relatively slim arctic-ready forces are deployed on the Atlantic side of the ice, what will be happening on the pacific side?
An answer: they can take it, but when winter comes, holding it will be difficult. The northern NATO members have notable infantry that can use the ice to advantage, and there are only five or six harbours of interest in Greenland.
Honest reaction to a serious question. The American military complex isn’t about specific fighting doctrine. It’s by far the world’s largest logistics organization. The airlift capacity of the military likely means that a carrier group wouldn’t have to stick around.
I have mental images of carpet bombing paths through sea ice. Ice is tough, but 500lb dumb bombs do pack quite a punch, and there is a big fleet of bombers that would operate with relative impunity once air dominance is achieved with the aforementioned carrier group.
200, in the year of the invasion. It swelled to 2,500 over the next five years, then trickled away into a final withdrawal a month before the Republicans lost the White House in 2008.
There were smaller deployments - Iceland sent 2 soldiers, for instance. But it all paled behind the the US at 150k and UK at 46k. Which goes back to the whole problem with a NATO internal conflict. The US is the backbone of European defense. Again, what do any of these countries plan to do against an aircraft carrier group? Nobody seems to have a serious answer.
Serious question: how will a carrier group fare in arctic ice during winter? Will it be what is needed to hold an Arctic island after showing up all bristly in the summer months?
While the USA’s relatively slim arctic-ready forces are deployed on the Atlantic side of the ice, what will be happening on the pacific side?
An answer: they can take it, but when winter comes, holding it will be difficult. The northern NATO members have notable infantry that can use the ice to advantage, and there are only five or six harbours of interest in Greenland.
Honest reaction to a serious question. The American military complex isn’t about specific fighting doctrine. It’s by far the world’s largest logistics organization. The airlift capacity of the military likely means that a carrier group wouldn’t have to stick around.
I have mental images of carpet bombing paths through sea ice. Ice is tough, but 500lb dumb bombs do pack quite a punch, and there is a big fleet of bombers that would operate with relative impunity once air dominance is achieved with the aforementioned carrier group.