Originally Posted by
Just This Once...
I thought you were ex-military, presumably ex-RN?
If you are then surely you understand how classification amongst nations actually work. For example:
- If the RN used a piece of French military equipment that that the French wished to remain out of the public eye would the RN then release it?
- If the RN received intelligence from Bahrain would you expect the RN to publish it?
- If the RN provided berths for Canadian personnel that the Canadian government would rather keep discrete, would the RN publish the matter?
- If the RN rearmed in the US to provide discrete support for a UK-only op, would the RN just broadcast it?
- If the RN made a hurried port visit for bunkering and provisions in a South American port that publicly provided no formal support would the RN just invite the media?
- If the RN operated in waters that were high risk and with a capable adversary, would it broadcast its positions?
If the MoD steps away from Sovereign territory and makes use of only Sovereign controlled forces, equipment, support, logistics etc then yes, we are actually Sovereign. For everything else there is reality.
still serving.
If the UK allows rendition to take place, is that reality?
my fundamental problem is that we entered into a "war" nearly 20 years ago, and all it's done is cost us blood and treasure. We originally signed up for Afghanistan and now we find ourselves in West Africa - is that correct? When did we, as a country, agree to that? Why do we thrash Reaper crews when we've never been able to explain in policy why it's appropriate? How often have we had the discussion- in public - if the costs we are bearing are worth it?
or are we just going to run people into the ground because we don't have the balls to have a discussion about it? I note that I've deployed multiple times (and will again) to an operation that is not a formal Defence Task - whilst ignoring actual requirements.