Dr Fox

[occhips]

BBC News - Fox says ex-MoD chiefs partly to blame as job cuts loom (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15120821)

For once Lord West has spoken sense...

[NutLoose]

Liam Fox told the Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/sep/29/liam-fox-ministry-of-defence) the MoD had "consistently dug a hole for itself

So you have the Minister of Defence trying to blame everyone else, but wait a minute, shock horror the MOD is HIS Ministerial Dept.. The buck as they stay rests at the top, no matter which party in power, the Chief of the Airstaff, Head of the Army etc cannot simply call up XYZ and order one of anything be it a tank or a Typhoon without Government approval........... and why did we get in this place??
Well, could have something to do with going to War(s) without the equipment to sustain / win it and then being forced to buy the equipment needed, again due to Government miss-management from the outset, be it this time or the last time they were in power, or the bunch of clowns in between..

[Trim Stab]

I disagree...


"It would take a very little shift in resources from areas like foreign aid, the welfare budget, the National Health Service - a tiny, tiny fraction of those budgets - into defence would give us the capability to be able to build up to the force he's talking about," he said


I know it is painful for those employed in defence to accept, but any rational and civilised democratic government should strive to reduce defence spending and increase spending on foreign aid, welfare and health (and education). If defence spending does not decrease every year as a proportion of total public expenditure, then democracy is not working...

[Geehovah]

I agree Trim Stab. The world is so much safer since the end of the Cold War....................................

Hmmm

[jindabyne]

Sorry Trim Stab, but that is so utterly wrong. And I hope that you and yours live to prove me wrong. Should you understand me ----

And having spent a deal of time in the Cold War, I also agree with Geehovak.

Work it out!

[Trim Stab]

Geehovah - indeed, we no longer face the risk of total annihilation - is that not good enough for you? Do you lament the cuts in defence spending since 1995?

[Melchett01]

If defence spending does not decrease every year as a proportion of total public expenditure, then democracy is not working...

Got to disagree with that one - please don't mistake democracy for security; to do so misses the point that you as a country may well be democratic, peaceful and stable, but that is to ignore the fact that the other factors have a vote in the overall situation. Look at Germany in the 1930s; democractically elected government, but hardly what you would descirbe as peaceful or secure for the rest of us.

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

Trim has a valid point PROVIDED we stop messing about globally. Once we pull out of the 'Stan and provided we look no further than protecting our own shores then we could quite probably shrink down numerically even more.

[Trim Stab]

Melchett - you're whitewashing history. Understanding of international relations has advanced immeasurably since the 1930s when the WW1 victorious nations imposed impossible war reparations on the WW1 losers.

Our best form of defence is to encourage the spread of democracy and human rights - simply because genuinely democratic countries never go to war with each other. We won the cold war, and a form of imperfect democracy is at least implanted probably irreversibly in our former adversaries. Progress in our own country should be measured by spending on health, education and welfare - not on defence. If the proportion of our defence spending was increasing at this time, then it would be indicative of failing policies.

[Biggus]

If you cut back on the amount you spend on insurance every year, despite the fact that the cost of premiums is rising with inflation, eventually you find yourself under insured, with the resultant almost inevitable consequences.....


It's not rocket science... :ugh::ugh::ugh:

[Pontius Navigator]

any rational and civilised democratic government should strive to reduce defence spending and increase spending on foreign aid, ...

So THEY can afford to buy our arms and equip their arms and fight amongst themselves.

[Ken Scott]

Trim Stab - with your stated pacifistic opinions and your non-military background, I've often wondered why you stalk these threads. It is, after all, for

Military Aircrew - A forum for the professionals who fly the non-civilian hardware, and the backroom boys and girls without whom nothing would leave the ground. Army, Navy and Airforces of the World, all equally welcome here.

I believe you have expressed an interest in flying the FSTA (conflict of ideals?) but just why do you hang out here and not with your civvy mates?

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

If you cut back on the amount you spend on insurance every year, despite the fact that the cost of premiums is rising with inflation, eventually you find yourself under insured, with the resultant almost inevitable consequences.....


It's not rocket science... :ugh::ugh::ugh:

But how about if you cut back on the amount you spend on insurance each year whilst at the same time reducing your overall risk..........

Not stating it's a rocket science analogy but surely it's another spin on things.

[[email protected]]

Since we live in a world with dwindling resources and a growing population, not to mention an imminent financial meltdown, democracy is not going to stop countries from fighting over those resources, neither will some liberal human-rights legislation.

[Finningley Boy]

My own take on the Defence situation is as thus; We need a Defence Force for our own borders. In addition we require a number of individually tasked Expeditionary Forces. Where possible these should combine Land, Sea and Air Assault capabilities. The Army would need to be of a size big enough to provide an occupation force to allow the expeditionary force to move on to push our borders further out. The expeditionary Forces, which would be identified as something along the lines as Task Force A and B etc, would ensure that Britain's enemies were held as far away from our shores as possible.:ok:

We would of course also require a Nuclear capability, both Tactical and Strategic to be able to respond in kind to any comparable threats from the foreigners!:ok:

FB:)

[Pontius Navigator]

genuinely democratic countries never go to war with each other.

TS, you are demonstrably wrong on this point.

We are, I think, a genuinely democratic country and we certainly went to war with another and I don't mean the Argentine.

I believe Turkey is also a genuinely democratic country and it invaded another genuinely peaceful and democratic country.

I won't stretch the point over Israel.

You could argue that Indonesia in the 60's had a genuinely democratic country.

Grenada?

Gibraltar?

Chap in Italy IIRC?

[Melchett01]

TS,

Not white washing history at all, merely plucking the first inconvenient truth out of the air at the time of typing. I'm sure there are many more examples that clearly demonstrate that democracy and security are far more complex notions than a zero-sum game.

Bear in mind that defence in the twenty-first century is only partially about physically defending the nation from an opposing force. With a foreign policy rooted in enlightened self interest that espouses pursuing and protecting national interests wherever they may be, then a viable military is one of the physical manifestations of protecting those interests. Unless you want to adopt a totally isolationist position and can guarantee that as a country you can meet all your financial, trading and resource needs internally then you will need some sort of military on top of that needed to guarantee the safety of the home base to protect those overseas interests because your interests are not necessarily the same as everybody else's interests.

And once you have accepted that you need a military, factor in the need to continually maintain and develop your military and the cost of defence inflation and I would suggest that it will be very difficult to achieve a perpetually declining defence budget. And whilst education and social welfare are a vital part of society, knowledge of the works of Wordsworth vice investment in defence aren't going to help you when the bullets start flying.

[althenick]

Progress in our own country should be measured by spending on health, education and welfare - not on defence. If the proportion of our defence spending was increasing at this time, then it would be indicative of failing policies.

Trim Stab
Excellent post considering your location. I have never seen seen a more subtle wind-up!

I cant wait to see where this is going!

[MG]

Trim Stab, if it helps I think you're right! I also think that Liam Fox has a point in that the Service Chiefs could have done more to help the situation and to look longer-term that the next UOR. We would be in less of a mess now, although there would inevitably have been cuts. I would not be surprised if there are those in government who would love to see a reduction or complete withdrawal of military personnel from the Ministry. The argument has always been how many policemen work in the Home Office or how many doctors in the Ministry of Health.

[foldingwings]

we no longer face the risk of total annihilation

How quaintly naive!

Foldie:yuk:

[Surrey Towers]

IMHO the Service Chiefs have altogether spent far too much time looking after the little corners of their domains and lost touch with the realities of our defence position. Their decisions over the past 10-15 years have been highly questionable - but to whom? They should have been reined in then but were not. That was a huge mistake.

Subsequent Defence ministers (there were many) had their own ideas and each either negated the other or the MoD showed itself to be ineffectual in dealing with changes as each minister saw it.

Our forces are dwindling at an alrming rate since Fox got the job. It makes grim reading when you tally up the numbers. Its not ALL about money, some of it is about claw cutting - a process that can cause severe bleeding if cut too deep!

It is not over yet and Fox will lay the blame at the feet of who happens to be standing the closest.

[Jayand]

The biggest reason we eventually, now have great kit is the two recent Middle eastern wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, unfortunately they are also a big part in why we can't afford the next ten years worth of mil kit or personnel.
Billions upon billions have been wasted in those dusty **** holes with NOTHING to show for any of it except the poor dead and injured.
If your looking for the people behind all this mess then look no further than mssrs Bush and Blair.