Kosovo to form new military and join NATO?

1,459
United States
USA
http://www.stripes.com/news/kosovo-aims-to-form-military-force-and-join-nato-1.201794

14 years ago on March 14th, 1999, NATO began a bombing campaign on Serbia to stop harming the Kosovo Albanians. It was horrendous, as 7,000-9,000 Albanians and 2,000 Serbs were also killed. Houses were burned by Serb police, civilians beaten. The Albanians had burned important monasteries that dated back thousands of years. For the Serbs, Kosovo was their heart, but they risked that by beating innocents. Later, on February 17, 2008, Kosovo unilaterally declared independence from Serbia. More and more countries are recognizing the new state such as the US, UK, France, etc. However, Kosovo is growing now, and that includes the military/police. The current Kosovo Security Forces (Forca Segurise se Kosoves) is planning on forming a brand new heavily armed force. The current KSF is not an actual military, but instead protects borders and lots of other things. They are professionally trained by NATO. Currently, there are only 2,500 soldiers, 800 reserved. They are lightly armed with weapons like G36s, MP5s, Glock 17s, Uzis, AK47s, etc. They have been trained for a while now, and it's time for them to stand on their own.

j9x660.jpg


Here is more info about the KSF: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosovo_Security_Force

I was bored and felt weaponish/armyish :lol:.
 
Last edited:
Where are they going to get all their tanks from, and why do they need a lot of them? Are we talking M-1s? M-60s? T-80s? Challenger IIs, or just Chieftans?
 
Where are they going to get all their tanks from, and why do they need a lot of them? Are we talking M-1s? M-60s? T-80s? Challenger IIs, or just Chieftans?

It is unknown as of know. We only use Otokar Kobras from Turkey, but no tanks yet.

What is the significance of this story?

It is a huge step in a new direction for a country that is near to joining the EU, NATO, and other major organizations. This means that we can start peacekeeping in other countries, also. I understand if you don't care, but some people do.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Where are they going to get all their tanks from, and why do they need a lot of them? Are we talking M-1s? M-60s? T-80s? Challenger IIs, or just Chieftans?

Likely hand-me-downs from other countries. Nothing special, older Soviet-era tanks I imagine.
 
Why the emphasis on armor, though? Kosovo and the surrounding area aren't exactly great tank country. Unless they actually have lots of nice big deserts or plains that neither I nor Google know about.
 
There is enough open ground for heavy armour to be useful, and it is a cheap (in terms of older equipment) way to bolster basic forces.

If Kosovo are focusing on building up defensive forces (as they should be), it's a solid move.
 
Why the emphasis on armor, though? Kosovo and the surrounding area aren't exactly great tank country. Unless they actually have lots of nice big deserts or plains that neither I nor Google know about.

Kosovo has lots of open fields from abandoned farms and dirt roads. I highly doubt there are any deserts in Kosovo.
 
I think it's great that Kosovo wants to join the UN. That just means America has to defend them instead of just doing it because we're nice.
 
Spending money on a military means that the economy is turning. That's not bad.
 
Spending money on a military means that the economy is turning. That's not bad.
It's really bad, actually. The government is spending public funds on something which is totally unproductive. There's no income to be gained from a military, only very high expenses. Think about the ramp-up to WW2, especially in America. Yeah, everybody went back to work and the factories were busy building things for the war, but none of those things were useful to anybody but the military and most of them got destroyed anyway. All that labor was a waste. Then when it was over everybody found themselves lacking basic supplies as a result of high military consumption and domestic rationing. Obviously this isn't nearly as large a scale but it still has the same effect.
 
It's really bad, actually. The government is spending public funds on something which is totally unproductive. There's no income to be gained from a military, only very high expenses. Think about the ramp-up to WW2, especially in America. Yeah, everybody went back to work and the factories were busy building things for the war, but none of those things were useful to anybody but the military and most of them got destroyed anyway. All that labor was a waste. Then when it was over everybody found themselves lacking basic supplies as a result of high military consumption and domestic rationing. Obviously this isn't nearly as large a scale but it still has the same effect.

You're getting a bit too libertarian sometimes...

There is a dramatic difference between a nation switching to a full war time economy compared to a nation arming itself in a more passive manner.
 
Tanks have almost no use in a modern warfare, really. Infantry usually carries a lot of anti-tank weaponry (like AT missiles or rocket launchers) these days. Tank crews don't always see enemy soldiers hiding, but even modern MBTs are pretty vulnerable against infantry. Especially in an urban combat, which is common for the most of modern local war conflicts.
 
Tanks have almost no use in a modern warfare, really. Infantry usually carries a lot of anti-tank weaponry (like AT missiles or rocket launchers) these days. Tank crews don't always see enemy soldiers hiding, but even modern MBTs are pretty vulnerable against infantry. Especially in an urban combat, which is common for the most of modern local war conflicts.

I learned something new today. :lol:
 
Tanks have almost no use in a modern warfare, really. Infantry usually carries a lot of anti-tank weaponry (like AT missiles or rocket launchers) these days. Tank crews don't always see enemy soldiers hiding, but even modern MBTs are pretty vulnerable against infantry. Especially in an urban combat, which is common for the most of modern local war conflicts.

Which is why you use them alongside other forces that cover their weaknesses. A tank moving through a city with infantry supporting it is probably one of the most deadly combinations that you could face, with the exception of the city being levelled by artillery or air support.
 
Back