Times details proposed UK defence cut options
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,974
Received 2,881 Likes
on
1,231 Posts
Old World conquests on a new World map, I don't think South Korea existed when we were sailing around ruling the world... Just think what we might have had if we hadn't poured all that money into foreign countries building their infrastructure.
Reminds me of the apocryphal report of the conversation when GWB's team made enquiries about the cost of acquiring the freehold of the US Embassy in london from the Duke of Westminster. The Duke responded that the freehold need not be at all expensive - in favct he would be prepared to exchange it for the simple return of one of his family possessions.
"Oh, which one?" the US ambassador asked
"Virginia" was the reply...
PDR
We need to spend more to keep up with the Joneses sorry Putin
My father has a saying one has to speculate to accumulate 
Army chief to call for investment to keep up with Russia - BBC News
Running a country is not a lot different to running a corporation....re investment.
Will anyone like to put their hands in their (deep) pockets and help out the CGS?
thus seeing their returns in a few years
Referring to my thread I started on Russia developing /constructing their LHD - I have just been reading about the KA-52K Alligator shipboard trials / embarkment in the receent Russian Helicopters Magazine.
cheers
Army chief to call for investment to keep up with Russia - BBC News
Running a country is not a lot different to running a corporation....re investment.
Will anyone like to put their hands in their (deep) pockets and help out the CGS?
thus seeing their returns in a few years Referring to my thread I started on Russia developing /constructing their LHD - I have just been reading about the KA-52K Alligator shipboard trials / embarkment in the receent Russian Helicopters Magazine.
cheers
Boffin - I came to the conclusion several years ago that 2% just isn't enough for the UK
We've taken a NATO "aspiration" which includes countries who have never had a significant armed forces or out of area history (Denmark, NL, Belgium etc) and turned it into a hard & fast rule that is ruining our defences
Any historic view would suggest 3 or even 3.5% is required - and that's without adding in the SSBN
We've taken a NATO "aspiration" which includes countries who have never had a significant armed forces or out of area history (Denmark, NL, Belgium etc) and turned it into a hard & fast rule that is ruining our defences
Any historic view would suggest 3 or even 3.5% is required - and that's without adding in the SSBN
The 2% is a political figure, conjured-up to make some (poorly) defined NATO spending statement. What if, we needed 10% to survive? Or 50%? 
The things that matter are, that the defence spending is sufficient to provide the reliable defence of the nation. Therefore, the definition of the level of spending depends on the need. That is what the Gov should be doing, not fudging the spending, define the need, you Pollies!
OAP
The things that matter are, that the defence spending is sufficient to provide the reliable defence of the nation. Therefore, the definition of the level of spending depends on the need. That is what the Gov should be doing, not fudging the spending, define the need, you Pollies!
OAP
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,974
Received 2,881 Likes
on
1,231 Posts
I did find his speech quite good, though rapid and driving everywhere did seem to be at odds with each other, it's all ok if your future conflict is in a handy close at hand landmass, but a road trip to Afghanistan would have been neither rapid nor practical, your other problem is getting agreement from every other country on route to allow your Army to pass through.
The rapid deployment also seems to falter if the helicopter force is chopped as the original post suggested, you cannot rapidly move equipment, supply's and manpower around a battlefield without them.
I do wonder how he is going to get this rapid deployment to the likes of an incursion into say Latvia if they take out bridges, rail and road infrastructure. The road from Kuwait back to Iraq comes to mind.
His comments about how well Germany did this during WW2 got me thinking, Germany's early success with blitzkrieg had a different scenario, Germany was attacking, therefore the fleeing populace was moving away from you making rapid advancement possible, when you are moving to defend surely you are bogged down by the road network being blocked by those fleeing towards you.
The rapid deployment also seems to falter if the helicopter force is chopped as the original post suggested, you cannot rapidly move equipment, supply's and manpower around a battlefield without them.
I do wonder how he is going to get this rapid deployment to the likes of an incursion into say Latvia if they take out bridges, rail and road infrastructure. The road from Kuwait back to Iraq comes to mind.
His comments about how well Germany did this during WW2 got me thinking, Germany's early success with blitzkrieg had a different scenario, Germany was attacking, therefore the fleeing populace was moving away from you making rapid advancement possible, when you are moving to defend surely you are bogged down by the road network being blocked by those fleeing towards you.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: over the rainbow
Age: 75
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sir Keith Speed, who has died aged 83, was Margaret Thatcher’s minister for the Royal Navy until he was sacked in 1981 after protesting against cuts to the service, months before Argentina invaded the Falklands.
Sir Keith Speed, former Navy minister ? obituary
Sir Keith Speed, former Navy minister ? obituary
I had the opportunity to chat with Keith Speed some years later whilst he was on a visit. He "resigned" of course. "Basically, there was nothing else that I could do."
Then he gently chuckled.
Then he gently chuckled.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Aylesbury
Age: 58
Posts: 378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sir Keith Speed, who has died aged 83, was Margaret Thatcher’s minister for the Royal Navy until he was sacked in 1981 after protesting against cuts to the service, months before Argentina invaded the Falklands.
Sir Keith Speed, former Navy minister ? obituary
Sir Keith Speed, former Navy minister ? obituary
Plainly, there is a price that can be put on honour and integrity these days. £300 a day about covers it.
Jabba TG12,
What?
Show me where the Times has ever been right and me wrong.
What?
Show me where the Times has ever been right and me wrong.
Cazalet33,
If you define a country's "greatness" by the amount of foreign territory that is conquers and colonises may I suggest that you are living in the wrong century?
To call the UK a "broken reed" of a country is totally ignoring the influence, affect and world wide interests that the UK has in 2018. And that doesn't have to mean owing and occupying other people's countries either.
If you define a country's "greatness" by the amount of foreign territory that is conquers and colonises may I suggest that you are living in the wrong century?
To call the UK a "broken reed" of a country is totally ignoring the influence, affect and world wide interests that the UK has in 2018. And that doesn't have to mean owing and occupying other people's countries either.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Aylesbury
Age: 58
Posts: 378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just because officially nothing can be publicly admitted to as wrong, or suspect, or could be done better, its not a case of all in the garden being rosy all the time because the culture of being on message 24/7/365 says so.
If you'll pardon my directness, you come across like an MOD Press Officer or perhaps a little less kindly, a 1980's Zampoliti . "Nothing to see here, move along, less chattering at the back, stop whinging, no questioning the chain of command..."
You're not a Common Purpose Graduate by any chance, are you?
To address the matter of The Times... given the pitiful state of journalism these days, articles such as this are leaked deliberately from within, as a number of posters have alluded, as a "softening up" exercise, to take the temperature of the water as to what is or is not considered a potential step too far. Organs such as The Times merely embroider what they have been leaked and use that to wring as much revenue from Outraged Of Tunbridge Wells on a daily basis as possible. No smoke without fire, as they say.
Thats not to say that all three of these eventualities may or will come to pass. But combinations of them almost certainly will, as has been openly discussed here. To dismiss the whole lot as merely a pile of journalistic froth is somewhat disingenuous.
Jabba TG12,
Not part of ANY culture. I'm not just as down beat and glass always half empty as most of the types on here.
I also don't constantly hark back to when I was in claiming that it was better then and that that was when we had a REAL Air Force!
When I joined there were similar types knocking around then all dribbling on about "back in my day" and when we had troopships, sand flies, ricketts and constipation!
I also don't classify the health and prosperity of my country by how many fast jet squadrons, warships and overseas bases it has. Sorry!
I have no message to be "on" 24/7 365.
As to not questioning the chain of command...
Not part of ANY culture. I'm not just as down beat and glass always half empty as most of the types on here.
I also don't constantly hark back to when I was in claiming that it was better then and that that was when we had a REAL Air Force!
When I joined there were similar types knocking around then all dribbling on about "back in my day" and when we had troopships, sand flies, ricketts and constipation!
I also don't classify the health and prosperity of my country by how many fast jet squadrons, warships and overseas bases it has. Sorry!
I have no message to be "on" 24/7 365.
As to not questioning the chain of command...
So, the "Modernising Defence Programme" will be done by MOD after all!
The BBC report that Gavin Williamson has persuaded the PM to allow him to conduct the review. Typical May, kick the ball down the road and see if things resolve themselves. Not exactly dynamic leadership.
OAP
The BBC report that Gavin Williamson has persuaded the PM to allow him to conduct the review. Typical May, kick the ball down the road and see if things resolve themselves. Not exactly dynamic leadership.
OAP
A good thing if it insulates defence spending from being robbed to pay for other security spending in the current "fiscally neutral" review. But presumably unhelpful if the Chancellor sees it the same way as the press - ie where any increase in defence funding would be a victory for Williamson and a defeat for him.
And of course Spreadsheet Phil knows the MoD better than most and will have a good idea of just how efficient or otherwise it is. On the positive side, with defence being unusually high on many Tory mps' list of concerns, May won't want to see a Williamson resignation so he may have a certain amount of leverage there. Unsatisfactory fudge may be the most likely outcome, with high profile items saved and continued trimming elsewhere in what they hope will be an under-the-radar sort of way.
And of course Spreadsheet Phil knows the MoD better than most and will have a good idea of just how efficient or otherwise it is. On the positive side, with defence being unusually high on many Tory mps' list of concerns, May won't want to see a Williamson resignation so he may have a certain amount of leverage there. Unsatisfactory fudge may be the most likely outcome, with high profile items saved and continued trimming elsewhere in what they hope will be an under-the-radar sort of way.
SofS states in House that Modernising Defence review need not be fiscally neutral.
A long way from anything concrete, but at least a start - although the cynic in me wonders how much money HMT will take away!
A long way from anything concrete, but at least a start - although the cynic in me wonders how much money HMT will take away!