UK Defence Equipment Plan 2021-2031

[SamYeager]

Originally Posted by NutLoose

You would think they would rip it up and start again as the world situation has changed in the last month significantly.

The problem with that thought is that it's not 1982 and we don't have a certain female PM in charge.

[Dan Gerous]

Originally Posted by SamYeager

The problem with that thought is that it's not 1982 and we don't have a certain female PM in charge.

Liz is ready and waiting.

[pr00ne]

Originally Posted by SamYeager

The problem with that thought is that it's not 1982 and we don't have a certain female PM in charge.

It was thanks to the policies and approach of that female PM's administration that we lost the Falklands in the first place!

[Not_a_boffin]

Originally Posted by NutLoose

You would think they would rip it up and start again as the world situation has changed in the last month significantly.

Thing is, ripping it all up and starting again is probably unnecessary. The fundamental question we need to ask ourselves is this - "Is the UK willing to significantly increase our forces in Europe (think BAOR and RAFG-lite) and is that contingent on the major European land powers actually pulling their weight?" The subsidiary question then becomes "how much can we afford - and does that compromise other UK security priorities in the wider world?"

The nub of it is whether we as a nation are prepared to conduct large-scale armoured warfare in the middle of Europe against a peer enemy. If we are, fine. Get the heavy metal on order, cull the Light Infantry capbadges and buy large stocks of ammunition. If we're not, then upscale the Combat Air force, enablers like Wedgetail and buy lots of ammunition.

[Asturias56]

"The nub of it is whether we as a nation are prepared to conduct large-scale armoured warfare in the middle of Europe against a peer enemy. If we are, fine."

You've hit the nail right on the head Boffin - - we're back to the 60's - do we prioritise Europe or East of Suez? there is only one answer I think

[Not_a_boffin]

Originally Posted by Asturias56

"The nub of it is whether we as a nation are prepared to conduct large-scale armoured warfare in the middle of Europe against a peer enemy. If we are, fine."

You've hit the nail right on the head Boffin - - we're back to the 60's - do we prioritise Europe or East of Suez? there is only one answer I think

I don't think there is. The world is a very different place to the 60s. For a kick off there is a much larger NATO land component much further east than it was - and a much reduced opfor..That directly affects the calculation - and of course brings into question the willingness (or otherwise) of certain powers to pull their weight. There is also a much larger and potentially more aggressive threat in the Asia Pac region, that was not there before and which may offer a threat to our interests globally.

Those factors mean it isn't a straight choice - and why we have to be absolutely clear as to any rationale that would support a willingness on the part of the UK to equip and train to fight a large-scale armoured war on the other side of Europe.

[Frostchamber]

Originally Posted by Asturias56

"The nub of it is whether we as a nation are prepared to conduct large-scale armoured warfare in the middle of Europe against a peer enemy. If we are, fine."

You've hit the nail right on the head Boffin - - we're back to the 60's - do we prioritise Europe or East of Suez? there is only one answer I think

I'd suggest it's not so much whether the UK is prepared to conduct large-scale armoured warfare in the middle of Europe, as a question of how the UK can best contribute to the overall western posture and capability - eg by playing to our strengths and maybe making a (better) contribution where we best can - which may not be on the plains of central Europe. Others in NATO may be better placed to do that while we major on other stuff.