Originally Posted by
pr00ne
Corbyn! Corbyn? CORBYN????? Is that the best you can do? Honestly? Corbyn! If you really do think that the most vexing question on defence policy of all time is what would have happened if Corbyn was in power then I feel SO sorry for you and your total lack of even a toehold grasp on reality! Corbyn is not in power. Corbyn has never been in power, Corbyn will never be in power, now get a grip!
As to the Tories never being a banana skin on defence before, then I am afraid that you are again totally deluded! Try 1956, Suez and the greatest foreign policy disaster in British history. Swiftly followed by the 1957 Defence White paper, the worst defence white paper in history with ramifications echoing on down the years. Then there was 'Options for change', 'front line first', 'defence costs study,' the 2010 Defence White paper, selling of the MoD married quarters stock to a Japanese Bank, the closure of Military hospitals, MFTS, the carrier nonsense over CTOL/VSTOL, and before that, way before that, the halving of the aircraft establishment of 8 Sqn TEN years before their replacements were in service, the premature retirement of the Vulcan and Recce Canberra squadrons before the Tornado was anywhere near in service, The John Nott Defence White paper of 1981 gutting the Royal Navy; ALL of these fopas were carried out by Tory Governments. I am cross with you for making me go all Jonathan Pie!
Ok, take it easy Sir, or court will be adjourned and you'll have to see the Judge in his Chambers, or whatever it is. Yes indeed I'm not overlooking the disastrous defence decisions of many a post-war tory government. However, some of your examples are a little disingenuous. Options for Change was unavoidable following the Conventional Arms in Europe Treaty, I will give the Front Line First asset reduction exercise in 1994. The next big budget cuts were under Labour, SDR and the unwieldy titled Delivering Security in an ever changing World, translation, more heavy cuts. 1957 was the other great tory defence disaster, I understand Mr Sandys had a particular soft spot for the Navy and Marines, he though the Army and the RAF were only good for soaking up the National Service flotsam and jetsam. He was certainly wrong about the manned fighter. Even when we had about 12 Squadrons of Bloodhounds fully deployed about 1963, luckily, Lightnings and Javelins mks 8 and 9, still equipped about eight squadrons in Fighter Command, but were to lose more. The biggest sin was that the Bloodhounds were reduce to two squadrons over the next two years or so. The hidden devil in the detail is largely, both tory and labour have acted with a bare minimum approach. However, it is Labour which has had to fight off a prominent left-wing, which have always given the unmistakable impression that they would be utterly reckless with the nation's military posture. That's why I mention Corbyn, this is the same chap who had too close a relationship with people fronting the murder of British Servicemen in the 1980s. He has revealed how he would have reacted recently over Ukraine, opposing the supply of British, or any other arms and munition to Ukraine, he thinks as Bean Counter Sunak, I always suspected he thought deep down, that there is a negotiating point to be pursued. Only difference, Corbyn would have, through his stance, seen Ukraine over run by Russians by now. Can you remember the position of the Labour Party in the 1930s, since proud of their anti-appeasement position. If this was some kind of award, they should have handed it to Neville Chamberlain, the true recipient. I can explain this assessment.
FB