If no financial crisis
Thread Starter
pr00ne,
I never suggested that Attlee and Bevin were Stalinists, I said Bevan, as in Aneurin Bevan, was, as oppose to Ernest Bevin. Yes, AFVG, isn't it easy to get the lettering jumbled now and again. Everything else you said was conjecture. TSR2 was cancelled by the incoming Labour Government as was the F-111, not because of Tory Party cuts but because as you yourself pointed out, the devaluation of the pound to try and increase export orders because their public spending programme was growing beyond the country's ability to pay for it. But the Wilson Government, according to you, appears to have not wanted to do a lot of things they did anyway. I accept that they didn't cause the cancellation of AFVG, but, as you would I'm sure make the case if it was a Tory Government, it was cancelled on their watch. I did point out that they then proceeded with the MRCA, a clear follow on derivative. I also don't understand why you got upset at me about the Labour Defence Study Group, I said their recommendations were ignored. But what about the Carrier cancellations, this brought about the resignation of the 1st Sea Lord, Admiral Sir David Luce and although no longer in office, former CDS, Lord Mountbatten, wasted a lot of time and energy trying to reverse the decision himself. On a tangent away, I thought his relinquishing of the CDS post must have been incorrectly portrayed in 'The Crown' after almost six years incumbent and being 65 years old, I'd have thought, Royal connections or not, it was overdue time for him to retire, not pushed out prematurely by a lefty government.
FB
I never suggested that Attlee and Bevin were Stalinists, I said Bevan, as in Aneurin Bevan, was, as oppose to Ernest Bevin. Yes, AFVG, isn't it easy to get the lettering jumbled now and again. Everything else you said was conjecture. TSR2 was cancelled by the incoming Labour Government as was the F-111, not because of Tory Party cuts but because as you yourself pointed out, the devaluation of the pound to try and increase export orders because their public spending programme was growing beyond the country's ability to pay for it. But the Wilson Government, according to you, appears to have not wanted to do a lot of things they did anyway. I accept that they didn't cause the cancellation of AFVG, but, as you would I'm sure make the case if it was a Tory Government, it was cancelled on their watch. I did point out that they then proceeded with the MRCA, a clear follow on derivative. I also don't understand why you got upset at me about the Labour Defence Study Group, I said their recommendations were ignored. But what about the Carrier cancellations, this brought about the resignation of the 1st Sea Lord, Admiral Sir David Luce and although no longer in office, former CDS, Lord Mountbatten, wasted a lot of time and energy trying to reverse the decision himself. On a tangent away, I thought his relinquishing of the CDS post must have been incorrectly portrayed in 'The Crown' after almost six years incumbent and being 65 years old, I'd have thought, Royal connections or not, it was overdue time for him to retire, not pushed out prematurely by a lefty government.
FB
Last edited by Finningley Boy; 13th Sep 2020 at 16:13.
pr00ne,
I never suggested that Attlee and Bevin were Stalinists, I said Bevan, as in Aneurin Bevan, was, as oppose to Ernest Bevin. Yes, AFVG, isn't it easy to get the lettering jumbled now and again. Everything else you said was conjecture. TSR2 was cancelled by the incoming Labour Government as was the F-111, not because of Tory Party cuts but because as you yourself pointed out, the devaluation of the pound to try and increase export orders because their public spending programme was growing beyond the country's ability to pay for it. But the Wilson Government, according to you, appears to have not wanted to do a lot of things they did anyway. I accept that they didn't cause the cancellation of AFVG, but, as you would I'm sure make the case if it was a Tory Government, it was cancelled on their watch. I did point out that they then proceeded with the MRCA, a clear follow on derivative. I also don't understand why you got upset at me about the Labour Defence Study Group, I said their recommendations were ignored. But what about the Carrier cancellations, this brought about the resignation of the 1st Sea Lord, Admiral Sir David Luce and although no longer in office, former CDS, Lord Mountbatten, wasted a lot of time and energy trying to reverse the decision himself. On a tangent away, I thought his relinquishing of the CDS post must have been incorrectly portrayed in 'The Crown' after almost six years incumbent and being 65 years old, I'd have thought, Royal connections or not, it was overdue time for him to retire, not pushed out prematurely by a lefty government.
FB
I never suggested that Attlee and Bevin were Stalinists, I said Bevan, as in Aneurin Bevan, was, as oppose to Ernest Bevin. Yes, AFVG, isn't it easy to get the lettering jumbled now and again. Everything else you said was conjecture. TSR2 was cancelled by the incoming Labour Government as was the F-111, not because of Tory Party cuts but because as you yourself pointed out, the devaluation of the pound to try and increase export orders because their public spending programme was growing beyond the country's ability to pay for it. But the Wilson Government, according to you, appears to have not wanted to do a lot of things they did anyway. I accept that they didn't cause the cancellation of AFVG, but, as you would I'm sure make the case if it was a Tory Government, it was cancelled on their watch. I did point out that they then proceeded with the MRCA, a clear follow on derivative. I also don't understand why you got upset at me about the Labour Defence Study Group, I said their recommendations were ignored. But what about the Carrier cancellations, this brought about the resignation of the 1st Sea Lord, Admiral Sir David Luce and although no longer in office, former CDS, Lord Mountbatten, wasted a lot of time and energy trying to reverse the decision himself. On a tangent away, I thought his relinquishing of the CDS post must have been incorrectly portrayed in 'The Crown' after almost six years incumbent and being 65 years old, I'd have thought, Royal connections or not, it was overdue time for him to retire, not pushed out prematurely by a lefty government.
FB
Thread Starter
pr00ne,
You're certainly right about the Tory mass cuts through Sandys in 1957 and his attempt to all but disband the RAF or remove its reason for existing, he was a keen fan of the Navy and I never found out if his end of the manned fighter approach extended to the Fleet as well, I suspect not as I don't think they sustained a comparable loss of squadrons. I never understood the Cameron defence review with the logic of only two not three fast jet types? Surely it should depend on what each of the three did best of all and how many/few would approach the irreducible minimum. The problem with the Labour Party over defence and other areas of government isn't so much, I suppose, the party in power, the country has always elected right leaning Labour Government's ie Red Tories. It gives pause for thought when you think that there have only been three Labour PMs who prevailed in a General Election, Attlee, Wilson and Blair, since 1945. The party's club foot has always been their strong left leaning element, the Foot, Benn, Heffer and even Kinnock types. The latter still remained committed to unilateralism. Even now, I posted earlier my reasons for not voting for the party under Starmer, its not unanimous among Labour MPs currently, but he has according to his published voting record consistently opposed military operations against Daesh. When you cast your mind back to 2014/15, that "outfit" were carrying all before them across the middle east!
FB
You're certainly right about the Tory mass cuts through Sandys in 1957 and his attempt to all but disband the RAF or remove its reason for existing, he was a keen fan of the Navy and I never found out if his end of the manned fighter approach extended to the Fleet as well, I suspect not as I don't think they sustained a comparable loss of squadrons. I never understood the Cameron defence review with the logic of only two not three fast jet types? Surely it should depend on what each of the three did best of all and how many/few would approach the irreducible minimum. The problem with the Labour Party over defence and other areas of government isn't so much, I suppose, the party in power, the country has always elected right leaning Labour Government's ie Red Tories. It gives pause for thought when you think that there have only been three Labour PMs who prevailed in a General Election, Attlee, Wilson and Blair, since 1945. The party's club foot has always been their strong left leaning element, the Foot, Benn, Heffer and even Kinnock types. The latter still remained committed to unilateralism. Even now, I posted earlier my reasons for not voting for the party under Starmer, its not unanimous among Labour MPs currently, but he has according to his published voting record consistently opposed military operations against Daesh. When you cast your mind back to 2014/15, that "outfit" were carrying all before them across the middle east!
FB
If the credit crunch hadn't happened in 2008, where would we be now?
In terms of military posture, the SDSR may well have gone ahead in 2010, but quite likely under a Brown Government. The outcome (for all the history of the left and the armed forces) would likely be less far reaching in terms of cuts. Looking forward to the present from then, today the Tornado and Harrier would still be in service, the former in smaller number than as of 2010. The F-35 programme would continue apace but centred on Lossiemouth. Leuchars would have continued as normal with three Squadrons of Typhoons, however, the total number in service would likely have been halted at five squadrons plus OCU and OEU. Cottesmore would also likely have survived. Further, the Nimrod MRA4 would have been fully established at Kinloss. Likely, the Leuchars airshow would also have continued and been held today! That's also supposing no Covid 19. Correspondingly, the Army and Navy would also be bigger, the Navy would have taken receipt of two or three more T45 Destroyers, the Army would retain perhaps two additional Armoured Regiments and two or more Infantry Battalions. There would also be perhaps a greater emphasis on a more permanent and substantial NATO presence in Poland and the Baltic states. Likewise other NATO forces would have pursued their more expanded re-equipment programmes prior to the financial crash of 2008.
FB
In terms of military posture, the SDSR may well have gone ahead in 2010, but quite likely under a Brown Government. The outcome (for all the history of the left and the armed forces) would likely be less far reaching in terms of cuts. Looking forward to the present from then, today the Tornado and Harrier would still be in service, the former in smaller number than as of 2010. The F-35 programme would continue apace but centred on Lossiemouth. Leuchars would have continued as normal with three Squadrons of Typhoons, however, the total number in service would likely have been halted at five squadrons plus OCU and OEU. Cottesmore would also likely have survived. Further, the Nimrod MRA4 would have been fully established at Kinloss. Likely, the Leuchars airshow would also have continued and been held today! That's also supposing no Covid 19. Correspondingly, the Army and Navy would also be bigger, the Navy would have taken receipt of two or three more T45 Destroyers, the Army would retain perhaps two additional Armoured Regiments and two or more Infantry Battalions. There would also be perhaps a greater emphasis on a more permanent and substantial NATO presence in Poland and the Baltic states. Likewise other NATO forces would have pursued their more expanded re-equipment programmes prior to the financial crash of 2008.
FB
It's hard to think of a time in history when the UK's defence was more assured?
At least conventionally ( not sure of Cyber other such forms of warfare)
so if there had been extra money what would an extra squadron of Typhoon or an extra battalion do for our security?
Personally I'm against spending more than we need on defence - how much is enough?
Especially when you are in an alliance.
But the bottom line is I'd rather more money went into the NHS.
Thread Starter
Do you think we spend too little on defence??
It's hard to think of a time in history when the UK's defence was more assured?
At least conventionally ( not sure of Cyber other such forms of warfare)
so if there had been extra money what would an extra squadron of Typhoon or an extra battalion do for our security?
Personally I'm against spending more than we need on defence - how much is enough?
Especially when you are in an alliance.
But the bottom line is I'd rather more money went into the NHS.
It's hard to think of a time in history when the UK's defence was more assured?
At least conventionally ( not sure of Cyber other such forms of warfare)
so if there had been extra money what would an extra squadron of Typhoon or an extra battalion do for our security?
Personally I'm against spending more than we need on defence - how much is enough?
Especially when you are in an alliance.
But the bottom line is I'd rather more money went into the NHS.
FB
PS Then along came Cameron and the financial crisis and HM Forces, certainly not the NHS, bore one hell of a brunt. Again, kindly don't misunderstand, but I don't recall wide spread closing down of Hospitals and laying off of Doctors, Specialists and Nurses, and believe me, I'd have been appalled if there had been. But I also recall the screaming because the NHS wasn't getting an inflation busting increase in spending despite the climate of the time. One Doctor at the time had the shear audacity to phone up LBC and rant about the money going to defence spending while the NHS got the crumbs falling off the table. Really! Perhaps I just don't understand it all, but I do know folks expect perfection and an instantaneous response when there is a problem, then we can get back to penny pinching again.
Last edited by Finningley Boy; 14th Sep 2020 at 08:24.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: cheshire
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah, but at least you get ~120 of them, with an ability to be in more than one place at one time.
