Do you support the UK increase in the military budget?
- Thread starter ska invita
- Start date
AnnO'Neemus
Is so vanilla
Yes, instead of real live horses, they need to build one. It's worked before.
MickiQ
In My Defence I was left Unsupervised
The Virginia class are a stop gap until the SSN-A boats (a joint project between the UK and Australia) come into service. The UK subs will be built at Barrow-in-Furness and the Aussie ones in Australia. All the reactors will get built at the RR site at Raynesway in Derby. One of my neighbours works there and he tells me that they throwing up buildings and setting people on like there is no tomorrow as they ramp up ready for production.The Australians want to buy top line US submarines. Any intetest in UK?
'Does not inspire confidence': Congress committee questions US Navy heads amid AUKUS fears
The US Navy's head of weapons acquisitions says they have "a long ways to go" to increase shipbuilding to the necessary level to deliver on the AUKUS agreement to provide nuclear-powered submarines to Australia.www.abc.net.au
Australia plans to buy three American nuclear-powered submarines from the early 2030s.
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
If Afghanistan is anything to go by the tories would come out of it stronger than ever.
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
Why?
kebabking
Not a Girly Swot, but I like them....
The French.
Raheem
Well-Known Member
Because you can put your mind at ease, in the navy.
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
They can surrender to a pedalo just as easily as a battlecruiser.
Raheem
Well-Known Member
Skripal is a British citizen and a retired British spy. It may not have been Pearl Harbour, but it was most definitely an attack on the UK.
bcuster
Well-Known Member
Will it be a better sub than the Virginia? Cheaper, probably; as capable, I doubt it...
But, by all means, build your own...
kebabking
Not a Girly Swot, but I like them....
I disagree - if our friend Skripal had opened the door and got two bullets through the head, then that would have been the kind of thing you've described. Yes, lots of condemnation and a bit of howling, but essentially 'business as usual' and in the end, no one would have given a fuck because no one loses sleep over dead ex-KGB.
The fundamental difference - and importance - was in the manner of the attack and the potential for mass casualties.
Dawn Sturgess wasn't bad luck, she was - to be blunt - given the nature of the weapon used, and the indifference/incompetence of its use and disposal (and probably it's transport into the UK) astonishingly good luck. How we didn't have hundreds, thousands, indeed tens of thousands dead or critically ill is well into miracle territory - and it's that that makes the Salisbury attacks as well as the Litvinyenko attack with Polonium, not remotely 'house keeping', but as deliberate large scale attacks on the UK.
MickiQ
In My Defence I was left Unsupervised
My FiL talks through his arse about most things but he spent over 20 years in the RN and it's still very much a subject he cares deeply about.
He reckons the carriers are a waste of money just meant to fly the flag. Reckons doubling the size of the Type 45's and turning them into cruisers armed to the teeth with cruise missiles and drones would have bought the RN a lot more bang for a lot less buck.
We try to avoid even the slightest mention of anything like this when we go see Mrs Q's parents since once we turn him on we can't turn him off.
RD2003
Got a really fucking shitty attitude
In a country which has, more often than not and in its majority, defined itself in opposition to 'the west,' such a leader is not necessarily living in a parallel universe. If the Russian leaders think they're in an existential struggle with the west then they will behave accordingly, as we're seeing. And the fact that he is an authoritarian strongman is hardly new either, as everybody knows. That they have one now is largely down to the disaster that the Russian economy and society endured having followed western prescriptions post-USSR. They will have others when Putin is gone, if only because any opposition has, in our post-socialist world, nothing to offer other than, in essence, the very same approach that led to Putin in the first place.
Those who do seem to be living in a parellel universe are the ones who imagine that a country with an economy which is, at best, the size of Italy's can actually march into Poland and the Baltics, and then on to western Europe. These are the very same people who keep telling us that Russia has failed in Ukraine and deride the Russian military machine. Macron seems to think Europe is facing an existential threat. If Putin lives in a parallel universe then so does he. I doubt if Macron really believes this shit, however.
RD2003
Got a really fucking shitty attitude
Reminds me of when I travelled by train from Russia to Poland via Ukraine in 1996. A couple of what I regarded at my relatively youthful age as old women, Russians, came into our carriage, had a look around, and proceeded to take away the panel under a seat and deposit a large package before replacing the panel. Me and my companion were the only non-Russians present, and everybody else looked the other way, as did I when the initial curiosity faded and the penny dropped. When border guards boarded they seemed more interested in questioning me about my luggage and narcotics (personal use rather than supply), than in checking for smuggling.
When we reached Przemysl I watched from the window as the two women left the train in the company of three younger males. The friendly non-English speaking Russian stranger with whom I'd been trying to converse said what I understood to be 'Best not to look at them...' The Poles I was staying with told me that the route I'd travelled was known for stolen nuclear materials in transit, and that the group I'd witnessed were most likely the paid mules of gangster/state actors, and that somebody else was meant to receive the hidden package-possibly from among the border guards. I suspected they were trying to wind me up, and still do, if only because I haven't had any symptoms of radiation poisoning since, but it was perfectly believable under the circumstances in the ex-USSR at the time.
The crux of the matter is that the post-Soviet culture of lawlessness wasn't vanquished by the Putin regime but was incorporated into it. The regime sought to restore order but not law, and this was both because things had already gone too far and that all the main actors had become embroiled in it. If not for western-prescribed 'shock therapy' economics, and western indulgence of the new class of supposed entrepreneurs, a different Russia could have emerged although it would have been difficult.
This is the Russia that will endure, as it's unchallengeable from within and without. And no increase in the UK's military budget, based on either an imaginary march into Europe or the notion that there will be an endless chain of Salisbury incidents, can alter this.
Last edited:
A380
How do I change this 'custom title' thing then?
We could call one of the new boats HMS Shanon and you could name one of the Virginia class USS Chesapeake then we could find out…
RD2003
Got a really fucking shitty attitude
Much of this thinking arose from the delusional belief, widespread at the time, not least among those who tell everybody what to think, that the fall of the Soviet Union represented the ultimate victory of 'the west.' That the Soviet Union itself was based on western ideas seemed to have escaped them, as did the possibility that with its demise, along with the ideas it represented, however distantly, the world would see the ideological and political free-for-all that now rages, western societies included.
The delusion of permanent western victory and the accompanying notion of a forever-stable world, lasted little more than a decade. The disorientation of our own leaders can be seen in that they now have to recreate a new cold war, largely justified by drawing on the one that's passed into history. The coming military conflicts will only distract from the threats, existential for humans, that loom on the horizon.
Last edited:
bcuster
Well-Known Member
I see what you did there. Good one, shipmate!
Humberto
Margin (martian) margin
Russia has an army over 1 million soldiers. And is in an axis with others. I don't know if Italy's economy is small ( I assume you mean GDP which is not the whole picture anyway) but the UK has 75,000 regulars. It's not about 'marching in', rather that a particularly hostile state is on a war footing and economically is ready in that way. And the UK is not in a good position at a time when Nato's strength may be undermined in its position as a deterrent and in terms of its capabilities.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
NATO is the force that needs to be deterred much of the time. While I think it is misguided to blame NATO for Russia's invasion of Ukraine, they don't suddenly become the good guys just cos Russia is now starting wars too.
Humberto
Margin (martian) margin
That's right, it is and it's terrible. But if you want this country to suffer, and do penance for it you are in for a rude awakening when the reality sets in. Part of that is having a capable and competent defence. I don't know what the high ground you assume will achieve.
RD2003
Got a really fucking shitty attitude
Reaching back to the idea of an 'axis' is pure nostalgia, looking back to a time when the world was more comprehensible than it currently is. A battle against 'the Nazis,' or between the Communist evil and the God-fearing west was one thing, but the post-communist world of multiple antagonisms is unfathomable to us. Hence the reaching back to what appear simpler times. If Russia is part of an axis it's hardly the one that was created by Hitler, if only because it's much more unstable than even his was, and, in any case, Russian aims are clearly not in any way Hitler-like.
Russia may have a million soldiers, but still we are told that it's incapable of winning in Ukraine-which may well be the reality. In which case, where is the threat to Britain outside of some cyber attacks which are inevitable now that it's possible to carry them out, and probably reciprocated anyway, or some isolated incidents where Russia, not very effectively, goes after its own on our soil?
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Defence against what, and how? All I see the British army doing is invade and attack. Iraq, Afghanistan... I don't see any defence going on.
Raheem
Well-Known Member
When did you see that? We can possibly add Libya, but none of it is what you are currently seeing.
RD2003
Got a really fucking shitty attitude
Britain already has 'a capable and competent defence' for the threats it faces. The idea of increased defence spending is dependent on inventing new threats.
Humberto
Margin (martian) margin
No food in the shops. Unless you think Britain at any time soon will be self reliant.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
That's not what Britain's most recent military campaigns have been about, though. The Ministry of Defence is misnamed in reality. It is mostly a Ministry of Attack.
discokermit
Well-Known Member
russia is run by serious people. china is run by serious people. iran is run by serious people.
we are run by fucking idiots. thats the biggest danger. if we werent run by fucking idiots it would be the equivalent of billions being spent.
we are run by fucking idiots. thats the biggest danger. if we werent run by fucking idiots it would be the equivalent of billions being spent.
Last edited:
RD2003
Got a really fucking shitty attitude
If there's ever no food in our shops as a result of conflict with a foreign power then it will be mostly due to a failure of British diplomacy.
Humberto
Margin (martian) margin
Did I say otherwise? I asked you if you think the UK should do penance for it now 20 years later when hostile states are lined up against us. What good would it do?
Similar threads
