“German army ‘standing bare,’ limited in combat readiness, top chief says”

Listen to this article0:00 / 2:001X BeyondWords

Germany’s highest-ranking military officer cast doubt on the Germany army’s combat readiness, claiming that years of neglect have left it in a questionable state amid the ongoing Ukrainian-Russian war.

Inspector of the Army Lt. Gen. Alfons Mais described the army as “standing bare” and said it would be limited in its capabilities should it be asked to assist in a NATO mission in a post he shared on his LinkedIn profile, Stripes.com reported.”

“After Russia invaded Ukraine earlier this week, the international community has been put on notice and German Defense Minister Christine Lambrecht placed the country’s defense forces on national alert, Stripes.com reported.

But Mais claimed in the post that the army would be limited in its capabilities to assist in a NATO mission: “The options we can offer policymakers to support the Alliance are extremely limited.””

Comment: Well, well pilgrims. Angela Merkel has been bleeding the Bundeswehr white and leaving it a hollow shell. Hell, even the UK has some deployable capability. The “cheese eating surrender monkeys” have quite a lot of combat power. pl


This entry was posted in Borg Wars, France, Germany, Russia. Bookmark the permalink.

22 Responses to “German army ‘standing bare,’ limited in combat readiness, top chief says”

  1. Degringolade says:

    I think that, just maybe, this isn’t a bug, this is a feature.

    Remember, NATO was created to:

    “to keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down,”
    Hastings Ismay, 1st Baron Ismay

  2. tedrichard says:

    against any serious peer power nato is all hat no cattle and has been for some time.
    the germans are merely stating the already widely understood.
    throwing money won’t change that anytime soon.
    since ….diversity is our strength… has become both the usa and nato military mantra the joke is on us. the usa military pl is not what it was when you were active.

    • Bill Roche says:

      I left V Corp in ’71, the German Army was a joke then and hasn’t improved. NATO was an American show. Western Europe criticized the US but took our money and our military for granted. They’ve traded military capability for socialists economy. This isn’t a recent phenomena. B/Y the English, French, Russians, and Germans, which nations were willing to pay for a military pre ’14, pre ’45, and after WW II? Today the West is naked against the Russian bully. I read this a.m. that Msr. Le’Spaghetti reminds Putin NATO has nukes. I think he knows that already. God forbid nuclear war is the only resort against the return of the Russian Empire. Then again, borscht, beef stroganoff, and kielbasie and dumplings, were always favorites for me.

  3. Fred says:

    Angela also shuttered a great deal of civilian nuclear power plants in favor of “green” power; and opened the borders to immigrants who are Germany’s strength. It’s almost like the important objectives were transforming the culture, not serving the german people or defending the country. At least the Russians are willing and able to sell them natural gas.

    • cobo says:

      and, of course, since she isn’t listed on the ygl website, she couldn’t possibly be working toward the goals of the wef

    • jim ticehurst says:

      Yes I agree with that oint
      Angela Was Raised in EAST GERMANY..Communist Controlled..She Got A
      Communist Education..and Joined Communist Youth Grous..He Was
      Intelligent..Active Got Noticed..And Promoted..and Had Regular
      Youth Group Meetings Organized In EAST GERMANY..

      In West GERMANY..SCHULTZ,,Was Raised A Socialist..Grew Up at
      Same Time As Angela.. As A YOUTH..He frequently Traveled To
      EAST GERMANY..And Attended The Same Meetings As ANGELA
      I Have NO Doubts THEY Met..And Maintained CONTACT,,

      SCHULTZ Also Has a GREENS Coalition To Form Hiss
      PARTY/ Administration…..

      • rho says:


        I am quite certain that Scholz and Merkel did not personally meet before 1990 at the very earliest. Angela Merkel only started to get involved in party politics in late 1989, even though she was a member of several socialist mass-organisations, but that was not at all unusual in East Germany. For example, the “Society for German–Soviet Friendship” had over 6 million pro forma members, that was more than one third of the East German population.

        • PRC90 says:

          Young Angela did very well in the DDR, would have been regarded as very reliable, and her Stasi (sic) file would have been large and very revealing.
          I have no doubt it found a good home somewhere other than Angela’s bookcase, and that she was occasionally reminded of its contents.

  4. Ghost_Ship says:

    Because recruitment and training have been outsourced to private businesses, the last time I checked the British Army can place in the field a single full strength brigade.

  5. ISL says:

    Dear Colonel and SST,

    Could a lack of readiness not just on the part of Germany, explain the lack of NATO tank games since 2018?


    From what I can tell, CSTO tank games are quite intensive – including water, mud, and not driving on paved roads, compared to the NATO tank games.

  6. Hank Somers says:

    So, is this serious talk about getting into the fight against Russia?? So far surprisingly— if we’re are to believe reports— it hasn’t been a cakewalk in Ukraine and every minute I’m seeing more international punitive actions against Russia (sanctions, banning of airlines flying in airspace, FIFA boycotts, et al.). So I’m guessing Russia having to then take on other country’s militaries ganging up on Russia might make give the Russian options very limited. Lose a war in her homeland or go nuclear.

  7. khc says:

    Probably as much an excuse to not bother getting involved as actual lack of preparedness (and the two are likely related–Germans probably let their military slip precisely b/c they didn’t want to bear the principal responsibility if things blew up in Eastern Europe vis-a-vis Russia). Given all the history, I can’t say I can blame them for wanting to stay out on whatever excuse.

    • Bill Roche says:

      I think you are kind. IMHO Germans, and the rest of the Europeans, “let” the Americans pay for the security of western Europe b/c they could. Well, the
      cat is out of the bag. Western Europe is prostate before the Russian bully. Putin’s message is that all the slavic untermenschen will be reabsorbed into the superior Russian genome and they will be glad of it. Given nuclear war is NOT an option, Putin informs Europe “I am restoring the former Russian Empire. What are you going to do about it”. Short of WW III carried on solely by America, with a 3500 mile supply line and “allies” w/o military clout, the answer is … nothing. All the talk of conventions, humanity, and civilized society does not change the first rule of existence; might makes right.

  8. rho says:

    Note that the longest-serving Minister of Defence during the 4 Merkel governments in Germany was Mrs Ursula von der Leyen, who is the current President of the European Commission in Brussels.


    While general combat readiness degraded, she was very successful with innovative military procurement projects, for example ordering specially tailored uniforms for female soldiers in the latter part of their pregnancy.

    Priorities, priorities…

  9. blue peacock says:

    Dunno much about German politics.

    However, we have have former Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder from the Social Democrat party, nominally leftist, who is a board member of Gazprom and on the payroll of Russian gas interests.

    Then you had Angela Merkel, nominally from the right, who shut down German nuclear power and increased dependence on Russian gas.

    Notice that Russian energy is exempt from the sanctions. In a way the Europeans finance Russia with their purchases of energy and other natural resources and then have their knickers in a knot when Russia invades Ukraine.

    Trump had it right. Why should the US borrow money from it’s kids to defend Europe notwithstanding the bulk of it goes to transfer wealth to the US military-industrial-congressional complex?

  10. Ed Lindgren says:

    Reminds me of a online post of Professor Martin van Creveld’s from several years ago.

    Creveld compares the Luftwaffe, circa 1940 – 1944, with the Luftwaffe, circa 2017.


  11. LondonBob says:

    Definitely not in favour of a large German military, my grandfather and great grandfather could tell you why.

  12. James Vanasek says:

    Col Lang,

    What do you think is Putin’s end game for the Ukrainian invasion? Given the lack of forces, it seems as if a long term occupation isn’t in the cards, otherwise the Russians could get bogged down fighting a guerrilla war.

    In my opinion, it seems like he wants to install a pro-Russian government in Kiev that would rule over the more pro-Russian Easter half of the country which would either seek admission to Russia or be independent under a Russian protectorate. Of course, those areas aren’t homogeneous (unlike Crimea) and would have a significant amount of pro-Western population which either would have to be subdue or forced to leave.

    I was also wondering what advice you’d give the Ukrainians in defending their country?
    Going toe to toe with the Bear is a fight they cannot win, so why wouldn’t the Ukrainian armed forces melt into the countryside and pick their spots such as attacking the Russians long supply lines or hitting isolated units in a long insurgency campaign? Such a struggle would seem to nullify the Russian Air Force and firepower (misses/artillery) advantages.

  13. Johnb says:

    You would need to think carefully about posting a German infantry regiment and/or Panzer brigade into Ukraine, there is history.
    Angela was born in Hamburg and went East when her father a Lutheran Pastor was posted to a Parish there, yes the Lutheran Church served on both sides of the divide. In fact it played a major part in the unrest and dissatisfaction that breached the Wall, Lutheran churches and their Pastors provided the political space for opposition to rally their forces.

  14. Bill Roche says:

    Let’s not count Ukraine out yet. Tomorrow is but the 5th day of war. If Kiev falls tomorrow the Ukrainian Gov’t will have to flee to Galicia w/t Polish border close. But if Ukraine can hold out for 10 days (I’m just guessing), aid in arms, ammunition, medical supplies, and food (I preferred the hash and eggs in my day) should arrive from NATO through Poland. On the evening b/f Appomattox, Lee could have released his men with instructions to join with Johnson and Beaureguard “somewhere” in the Carolina Mtns. But He despaired over the realities of CnC, coordination of guerilla forces, and supply, so he surrendered. Ukraine could wage guerilla war out of Galicia. Resupply and modern communications would be easier than those of 1865. Obviously this would give the Russians reason to go into Poland (much as Nixon did into the Parrot’s Beak to the anger of American socialist). I’m just talking out my derriere but I wonder what those w/real military experience think of this idea. Would a partisan/guerilla war be possible?

Comments are closed.