Originally Posted by
Heathrow Harry
I think both sides of this argument are pretty well aware of the directions we're both coming from - we both feel the other is wrong (and maybe deluded) - and neither side shows much sign of converting the other.
I would summarise as follows:-
Pro's - a real upgrade/restoration of a major force multiplier that will enable performance of tasks we can't do currently and will also enable us to do some current tasks better
Anti's - at best a nice-to-have but will have a really negative effect on the future overall force structure, operation and manning of the rest of the Navy
Both would probably be happy if there was proper funding that allowed a decent sized and resourced navy that could include carriers
You pays you money and take's your choice
We've managed to keep the argument (relatively civilised)- certainly compared to some others but rather than loop round again ad-infinitum I suggest we await events...............
Sorry to say HH, I for one think it is much worse than that..fanatics will not clam-up!
Apart from that, the position is absurd, like arguing for a standing UK Army of 1,000,000 combat troops or an RAF with 1000 combat aircraft, it just doesn't fit the reality of the UK place in the world. However, for those who see the big skimmers as some sort of holy grail, they are great. To me, they represent a grave mistake in UK Defence procurement that has (and will) cost the rest of UK Defence dearly in terms of other important capabilities and in depth of resource or reserve capacity we might need if, God forbid, we get into another serious confrontation.
OAP