SSBN:


They can't hand them over to Chad or Cameroon. Those countries lack the expertise and infrastructure to manage 4th Gen aircrafts. Romanians and Belarussians fly Chads fleet of MiG-29's

And France won't help keeping them flying. Think about that mean France can control there air force. Don't do what France says no more air force

Henry240:

Yes, i agree that things could be done better, but this is an ambush, didn't US special forces (Green Berets) recently suffer an ambush in Niger republic?

Some of these things are unavoidable, however it is not frequent. I believe this is the second incident of an ambush in the combat zone in the last 7 months.

The other was the attack on the UN convoy.

It is not possible to police that entire area, we would need to deploy 200k men within that region to effectively police it. We currently have 20k - 25k in the entire NE area of operations.

The USA army and Niger forces where not wiped out and reinforced. But you are correct. Ambushes by there nature are built to wipe out the defenders fast.

IbnSultaan:


Nigeria is no longer an active support base what is left for the group is hardcore members and fighter who conceive civs across the border. I agree completely peace involve socioeconomic strategy and most importantly stop flow of men and wen across the sahel

Being g reduced to small Cadre of hard core die hard does not weaken them. Sure they can no longer hold massive tracts of land but they still have the means to strike out and do harm.



The only real way to wipe them out is to create a safe area security wise to deal with the root causes of there power. Education, economy and perversion religion.

[img]https://scontent.fcpt5-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/22089814_1632953653446344_3202441468937215261_n.jpg?_nc_eui2=v1%3AAeEzMhLaRuGB64O3jbmZHwYqAiAq_xZGp7HVi-4gqplaUsfJPDCnt_NE7r06-ftk1VaqpT0n9wnjII50TUiP8HbkuRVHLwligmDf-vqh8jZhrw&_nc_pt=1&oh=a30125b8eaa9ba432a06a2c98f4723c4&oe=5A84F9A1[/img]


SANDF with Roni pistol carbine and a pistol

SupremeCourt:
A defector becomes propaganda machine for those who grant him asylum. Simple logic. True numbers of dead in Cuba vs RSA war will never be known, cold war era is full of secrets, lies, and half truths. I think Cuba won the war by frustrating RSA to call for final truce treaty deal.

south Africa actually got all it's demands met all and Angola is capitalist not Communist

Seems first article was wrong it was Niger troops not Nigerian. Us solders where green berria

http://abcnews.go.com/International/us-military-service-members-killed-niger/story?id=50293782



Joint Nigerian USA patrol in Niger ambushed 3 Americans dead 2 wounded unknown of local forces or Insurgent losses.

Odunayaw:
and what significance is this in a military thread? This Is how thread conflicts start

How? Just a picture of Nelson Mandela in Nigeria.

ActivateKruger:


I don't, I'm referring to the yellow, green (and blue belly) patterns they have been using for almost 40 years.

don't fix what AInt broke

Hrmnn:


Crew training and experience also played a role. The FAPLA tank crews had no idea what they were doing and frankly, no business being in a tank.

In his book "The Cuban Intervention in Angola", Edward Georges mentions that FAPLA was so short on tank crews sometimes they received their first crash training only hours before being sent into battle.

As opposed to the Ratel 90 and Eland 90 crews who were held to much higher standards, had to complete thorough gunnery training, and had logged considerable time on their weapons.

Any piece of equipment is only as good as the men behind it.

Heard account's of crews littraly shackled in to there tanks

ActivateKruger:


Actually it wasn't just a scout, Elands did that perfectly. It was also for selectively destroying enemy armour behind enemy lines then hit the dust back to the safe zone.

as i said long range raider. But it was never at any point ever seen as a tank destroyer. All so the eland had very big mobility issues and not nearly good enough endurance to make it a good scout for our mechanized forces

ActivateKruger:


The 76 is no longer powerful enough against modern armour that's why the SANDF downgraded the Rooikat 76 to a fire support vehicle not the tank destroyer it was initially designed to be. If you had to take it to a modern conventional war then the 105 is the way to go.

rooikat was never a tank hunter and it not fire support even though it cam do that. it a long range raider and scout. even in the 1980s they knew the 76mm was not a true at gun

Covert1:


I see the jingoists are at it again. Southie ego can't just be massaged. The chief mega-lomaniac frummie and the the side-kick andrewza and their appendages continue to hype about non-existent prowess subtly to run others down. Everyone knows the truth which is SANDF capabilities only exist on paper. If u calmed down u bet we might just allow u a moment in the sun.


Didn't you read the scholarly lecture from Nigeria's Chief of Air Staff? Or as usual u turn a blind eye. Save for air-air refueling, Nigeria still has force projection capabilities even to SA if there is a peculiar need as in the case of Gambia despite heavy involvement on the home front. Money is not our problem. Fuel is not our problem. We have shown capacity and strike capability in the past, in the present and if need be in the future. That's a fact validated by NAF as I've alluded here many times that the Nigerian Air Force can deploy on multiple centers of war.

Nigeria is a federation with nigh-independent governing entities of the centre in Abuja with full paraphernalia of office and budgets at it's own discretion. Yours is a unitary system whose revenues, budgets and administration are centralized. Nigeria's informal output alone trumps your whole economy by the billions. Understand that our formal economy is by far larger than yours and Nigeria's economy alone will total about 50% of Africa's output in some 20 years on present trajectory. That's the reality and would be reality. Nigeria is beyond your matrix of power. Don't compare us ok! We have challenges, but so do others. We don't share potentials. Never will.


Stop insulting us. We set you free. That's the history.

How the hell will you project air power to South Africa? From what base will you operate that gives you the range?




Do you have any prove of this billions of money over South Africa? I provided a link that shows SA budget is 5 times larger than yours. It your job to dispute this with facts. All you doing here in chest beating in a vain attempt to look bigger.

Henry240:

NAF flew to South-Africa and participated in the AU exercise despite the insurgency. It will also participate in a SADC exercise if invited.

Financing a budget from loans doesn't mean there is no money, it simply means that it is quicker to finance that way while revenue is generated through the various government revenue generating agencies.

The reason why NAF might not participate would be because assets are stretched and dedicating assets operations outside the sub-region would not be feasible.

NAF deploying to Gambia is farther than NAF deploying to Angola for instance.

If I Remer that was a transport aircraft. This entire debate has been about fighter jets. So keep things grounded. I am sure they would send another transport aircraft to SADC mission.



All I am saying is that I can not get a loan if my debt is 50% of my budget



That's my point. Naf is busy and there fighters are stretched.

Algerian1:
BMP-2 Berezhok IFV during last exercise Algerian army

ATGM 9M133 Kornet are not mounted during the exercise

A deadly piece of kit. Those ATGM would be very effective on the open ground of North Africa.

Henry240:

Nigeria is a federation. Federal government budget is not state government budget, neither is it the local government budget.

That simply means the figures do not represent facts.

Our provinces all have there own budgets and revenue stream. So what's your point. Defence budget comes from federal government my statement was that Nigeria does not have the money to fly there jets to SA to take part in war games and same with SAAF. Maybe if Nigeria was not fighting a war NAF could afford to waste money to join the annual SADC air force war games.



All so I do not see the states budgets adding much if your federal government all ready has all most 50% of its budget being loan money.

barineh:


Proof or shut up for ever!

South Africa has the 36th largest budget in the world where Nigeria is ranked 8th. You littraly can not match the raw spending power of South Africa if South Africa wanted to throw every thing In to defence


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_government_budget



You may get more info by clicking on the citastions

overhypedsteve:
dude. If Nigeria was serious with its military, never once would there be any reason to compare it to any military in SSA. The money is there. The will isn't. Why spend millions of dollars on a military exercise when the dummies at the helms never see threats, they see investment opportunities, future stock growth but they don't see threat. Over 2billion dollars stolen in defense spending under one government.

I think states that are not aligned to the Nigerian Afro centric interests should be wary of a Nigeria that is serious with its defense spending. Irrespective of what that nation think it has now or what it thinks it will have in future. A Nigeria that is ready to fund it's military would be able to fund and sponsor such military acquisitions and trainings as has never been seen in SSA.

Never once should poverty be seen as a limitation for Nigeria in defense spending. Cluelessness and corruption is, not poverty.

you know south Africans budget is far higher than Nigeria right, By a massive margin i dont mean economy i mean budget so yeah the money is not there

jakeporeshenko:

You just had to drag Nigeria into your daft argument, The amount NAF spends on Jet ful per month alone is enough to cover the cost of any SAAF and NAF friendly exercise.

It’ll be wiser to say we don’t have a requirement for such exercises, or just occupied with the war on terror.

I mean who are you to say what Nigeria can and cannot afford

yeah no you need all that funds to prosecute your air campaign. You really think you have the funds to fly your short legged air crafdt to SA.

newafricaken254:
watch this video and tell me where you see SAAF Gripen jets

 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBZYQAQdYSg

2011 was actually done by the cheetah C was there last training flights

newafricaken254:
the German tornado jets came to use the Denel Overberg Test Range (OTR)

that was the last time. Tornadoes have been here rather often. They have been here for good hope and in one of them the gripens had to stand down so that the tornadoes could actually attack the ship, since the gripens where holding them off so while.


Big problem with air craft coming here is cost. Nigeria cant afford to come here for example. Though SAAF does sends it pilots to fly in other countries. There are SAAF pilots flying Russian aircraft against Russians for example. SAAF has a lot of experince with other aircraft this way. Example look at our current air chief who qualified on the Mi8 and Mi24.

newafricaken254:
can any south African elaborate more about this incident !?

a group of guys approached a isolated gate at night. cant go in to detail since i dont feel like typing a lot. No one died a few R4s and a few mags where stolen. It was all so orchestrated by a ex solder who was later arrested.

newafricaken254:
answer the question,because we all know that south africa gripen jets have never undertaken any dogfight training exercises with a foreign air force in south Africa or foreign country

mmmmmmmmm you clearly done no research on this. They trained with a large number of countries in and out of RSA

kikuyu1:


I thought we agreed terrorist bs or their enablers have no place here!

ignoring them seems silly

Covert1:


I must confess I'm at a loss why I should respond to this. But for the sake u gave ur hypothesis I would leave you a few. U must forgive me though I laughed my sides out. I anticipated better. Where are the historical examples and facts you alluded to?

First we establish this is hypothetical. In the present world order Nigeria and France won't fight a direct war. Not gonna happen. Non-state actors may be a tool as always for political capital.

In foreign relations states adopt the use of force where they have a chance of military success. Where there is no military option they use instruments of the international order via the UNSC or such organizations to bring pressure to bear.

Speaking of historical examples & facts to warrant DiREct French intervention in a hypothetical war with Nigeria:

1. Nigeria has had conflicts with Cameroon in the past in which the Nigerian Army occupied it's territory for years and the Nigerian Navy policed it's contiguous waters. France did nothing about it but to use other foreign policy tools of pressure: The ICJ at The Hague. Nigerian military signals intelligence picked up presence of French military advisers in various engagements with Cameroon but that was the farthest the French came.

2. Nigerian military forces in the past have advanced as far as N'jdamena the capital of Chad. France did nothing about it. In fact reports had it then Gen. Muhammadu Buhari and his armored brigade stayed on after orders from Lagos to withdraw. He did eventually but at his own time of choosing.

3. Nigeria has had a breakaway republic called Biafra in the 60's. France gave material and political backing to Biafra yet Biafra collapsed. Nigeria was weaker then than it is now. France made no direct incursion except aid with mercenaries. Nigeria won that war.

4. There exist today many centers of conflict within Nigeria's borders exploited by unseen powerful foreign hands. Some of these conflicts are full blown wars that many countries around the world won't survive yet Nigeria is still standing thanks to our military which not only holds the fort but is deployed abroad. I think you should be unbiased and give credit where it's due.

Following the foregoing it is absurd to contemplate a direct French military intervention. If it could it would have on a pretext backed by NATO (case in point Libya). The US could only apply sanctions under Abacha. In fact the US fled Somalia. It has still not defeated the Taliban in Afghanistan the graveyard of empires. A former French president said of Nigeria "the Nigerian military is a large, well trained and highly capable force" and no one should underestimate them. Nigeria is not Libya. Syria has proven what a cohesive professional military high command can accomplish in the face of daunting challenges—it's holding together down to its NCOs and Syria's strategic global alliances is why Assad is still in power.

The Nigerian military has never lost a war. It is not a sitting duck. Based on current assets, Nigeria has TRACON which is fully integrated with it's Air defense command and Space Agency. It's electronic eyes and ears see well into other countries further afield. The Chinese don't want THAAD because of it's radar reach which essentially makes you a sitting duck for targeting. A well integrated air defense helps to track and shoot down aircraft even with less advanced SAMs. Thats the scenario playing out in east Ukraine against Russian backed rebels. The Roland's may not be S-400s but they are deadly to trespass in a well integrated air defense system. The French know better. The size of our armed forces, capacity and relative capability makes it an un-winnable war for France with negative public opinion back home and the attendant refugee question effectively ending it before it began. The Nigerian Army will bring the war to them in Cameroon or Chad and potentially farther. We have done it before. We will do it again if need be and France will do nothing.

Having said that Nigeria will not win a direct war against France but neither will France. The oil in Nigeria has many vested interests local and foreign that is beyond France alone. In addition Nigeria is arming and should appropriately for future wars that are unpredictable. The French have been known to be spoilers who start wars and run away for others to do the heavy lifting.

So you assume that because France never got involved directly it won't do it. Different presidents react differently. Some may be doves others hawks.

newafricaken254:
actually this article states the cubans used them and even transferred T-34 tanks to the angolan FAPLA link https://wwiiafterwwii./2015/09/06/t-34-in-angola-1970s-1980s/

nice find

Covert1:


Good response. Exactly what I anticipated from one who'd be intellectual in reason. I'd love to see your hypothetical war projections between Nigeria and France. You may give a detailed analysis on my page: African States - International Relations And Regional Power Balance here on Nairaland. It's only for intellectuals and thinkers. U seem quite the gentleman. When I'm finished in a few hours I'll look it up.

For now:

Why? The enemy is not a sitting duck—assuming in this case the hypothetical enemy is Nigeria against France.

In my hyperthetcal France is supporting Cameroon in a border dispute along with a possible breakaway region in Nigeria. In short there cause beli or justification is Nigerian forces attacked Cameroon and wide spread war crimes. Whether it true or not does not matter. I mean people make up war crimes and ignore real war crimes all the time.


France goal is simply bring the oil fields in to sphere of Influnce of this break away and or Cameroon. Most of the support frome France will be logical, air, naval and limited ground support. Nigeria navy stands no chance and if the NAF get to close to the war zone will die. End result Nigerian Navy and Air force never leave there bases France never attacks the bases. Naval and air Domanice is achieved with maybe one or Two air raids to drive home the point. Possibly putting a guided bomb on to a Nigerian war ship or even just bombing your dry dock and hitting your air base with bombs.


End result Nigeria army fights with no air support, after a few losses concedes defeat. France uses there carrier and Cameroon air bases. Chad will all so be on alert to if need be support. Chad being a French attack dog.



A highly unlikely war but this is the worst case seneinoro but if you plan to fight this then you can beat any thing g lesser.

newafricaken254:
i doubt most were T55/62 Tanks considering the numerous T-34's south Africans captured or destroyed

T34 where third and forth line tanks in the 80s and Cuba did not use them in Angola. During cuito Cuban tanks where the main tank force.

T34 where common in the fighting in the 60s and 70s and rarely seen in the 80s.


O and don't knock the T34 though it useless as a main battle tank even to day it a great fire support vehicle. I all so don't think we ever had one of our oliphants ever fight against any T34s. The Angolan T34s where easy targets for the AML90 and Ratels. Even Allouet K car gunships could take them out with there 20mm auto cannons.



I wonder how many of the chapter T34s we even brought to south africa. I know most where given to Unita and any we left in SWA is now in Namibian hand. I suspect we left most of them in Angola.



All so wonder how many of the option tanks we still have. I know we have a few T55s captured including some from a shipment, we gave a few to Rhodesia and Zimbabwea still uses them and there is the T72s we bought I know those still work. Still there no complete list on South Africa war loot and how much of it could be made operational.

Covert1:


Nonsense.

If it is nonsense say why, I can back up all my points with facts real world examples and facts. Yet because it goes against your naritive you say it is nonsense.

Nicheey:



okay ,to begin with I'm not even near "patriotic"
second I never said we had the best air defence system Nigeria is over

923,768 km²


there's no way France could raid our airspace completely like the person i quoted stated ,without having their jet shot down

France has over 2billion investment in Nigeria ,compare to any francophones nations around ,why would they want to risk that over mere cameroon?

if France is stupid enough to back France ,then Nigeria will just slip to Russia for backing ,after all most of our military hardwares comes from Russia ,and also special forces

finally Nigeria is in peace time (I mean no external aggression with her neighbors) before the insurgency and after you'll see Nigeria military has acquired a way too many hardwares ,strict trainings and others ,that's just how it is ,why hunt when there's no animals to he hunted??

where was France when general buhari pursue tchadians deep into their capital?? 1983

or when Nigerian battalion March into Yaoundé during abacha's regime??

Nigeria military possessions are enough for now ,if the needs arises I'm sure you'll see Nigeria acquiring hard wares like the days of Nigeria -Cameroon's dispute over bakassi

My opinion though

Size of the country does not matter and they don't need to capture Nigeria. Did NATO occupy Libya? Cameroon hyperthytical what if but it does show how France has influence in Africa and many friends.


The French Air force could easily maintain air superiority over Nigeria for the duration of what ever they doing. Of course it will not be for ever. The best Air defence Nigeria poses is the Roland a French system they built and they know all it limitations.


As was stated wars of occupation are rare in Africa but let's say there is a border dispute between Cameroon and Nigeria. If France backs Cameroon Nigeria looses.



Russia won't help you. They don't get any thing from Nigeria in fact Nigeria is a larger oil supplier so if you are weakened and in turmoil oil prices goes up and Russia benefits. But if you African do the look to Russia for aid at best China but even then they need the west more than Africa.



Any body in Nigeria that thinks they can win a full blown war against France is crazy. The French army is while trained, experienced in African war fare and battle tested. Of all the NATO members there is no better force for fighting in Africa. They have access to plenty of local bases, troops in country, allies and the Money to best any nation in the Francephobe region.

jln115:

I took note, but when im talking armour I mean firepower as in guns!! BAE Iklwa still only has a 30mm so not really Armour by definition, only the Ratel 90 is close to what you could consider as light armour.

Maybe someone like andrewza or frumentius might want to join our debate........I think they might have a bit more to add with regards to our current doctrine, than me and you....well certainly me anyway!!

andrewza/frumtius the question is: In terms of our current doctrine, have we somewhat moved away from our manoeuvre/mobility warfare doctrine like we had in the border war era, to a more attrition type warfare doctrine? and what in your opinion is the way to move forward? Is manoeuvre warfare still the order for a day in Africa or is has the African theatre moved more to a attrition type warfare?

Feel free to add to the question Mr Kruger!

South African milltary do training according to defence review is to use manvour elements of the mechnized force to postion and engage the enemy from long range. So our doctrine is very much not attrision. More Armor is due to improvements in the weapons of the enemy and that it can be done with out compromising mobility.


Added to the top motorized battalions are to secure lines of Comuncastion and defend vital points freeing up mechnized and Armored battalions to attack.


Light and specialized infantry will operate behind enemy lines


But if you look in to the training and war games you can see mobility is still how we will fight our wars.

jln115:

Ok iwasn't taking the Napoleon era in to account

Even before that France was winning Germany never beat France in ww1