On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 4:04 PM, [ Brainiac ] <arebacollins@gmail.com> wrote:

in summary:

1: a country's defense / armed forces' most significant investment: people, people, people. so compare military budget and number of boots to determine approximate spending per person. this means they can be paid better, recieve more training, spend more bullets in training, do more jumps and spend burn more fuel in mock ups, not forgetting eat better and all. this equates to BETTER MOTIVATION.

2: Military gear is generally expensive, so investing has to factor in a lot of things, serviceability, parts, training costs (for new equipment) and lifetime usage. It also has to factor in the country's strategic objectives (defense and offense) vis a vis the need for projecting force within its geopolitical sphere. This is where for instance purchasing a fighter may result in the procurement guys buying a less capable but more cheaper plane over a more capable counterpart. consider also that an expensive piece of equipment is only a missile / bad pilot / decay and rust trip away from being a very expensive bonfire.

3: Realities of the economy also dictate how strong a military is. consider this... buy some gen 4++ equipment in anticipation of escalation of hostilities and they dont come (the hostilities) for the lifetime of the equipment, or stash some alloted amount of cash for any eventuality and when hostilities come (say during a gen 5++ time), you buy the right equipment... most of the time these threats take time to build up into full scale hostilities, and just keeping enough hardware to hold off the enemy till supplies arrive may just be possible.

FACT: Kenyan pilots for instance are trained in a lot of western military hardware, and a KE pilot may be quite at home in an F-16 though we have none. so when the time comes and we need to run ops in an f-16, we will have both trained man and machine capable to the task.....

loads more if you just keenly go through the links i gave. its in there, you just need to be patient and read in between the lines bro!.

On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 3:50 PM, aki <aki275@gmail.com> wrote:

@Areba thks for the links. Please summarize because all I see on the chronicle site is people own views. I searched Jane's and nothing came up either. So am a bit confused whether using a hummer or a landrover to assault any location means experts view KDF any more professionals than other foreign trained armies. Like I followed Libyan news and discovered that the small Gadaffi force was really tough force and had it not been for the combined Nato air and sea power, hundreds of Qatar special forces on the ground, French--British--US military advisers, things may have turned out very differently.

some thots. :-)

Rgds.

_______________________________________________
Skunkworks mailing list
Skunkworks@lists.my.co.ke
------------
List info, subscribe/unsubscribe
http://lists.my.co.ke/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/skunkworks
------------

Skunkworks Rules
http://my.co.ke/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=94
------------
Other services @ http://my.co.ke

--

“The twentieth century has been characterized by three developments of great political importance: the growth of democracy, the growth of corporate power, and the growth of corporate propaganda as a means of protecting corporate power against democracy”
~ Alex Carey ~
Tel No: 0x2af23696

“The twentieth century has been characterized by three developments of great political importance: the growth of democracy, the growth of corporate power, and the growth of corporate propaganda as a means of protecting corporate power against democracy”

~ Alex Carey ~

Tel No: 0x2af23696