FB:

Like a lot of the Nu-Labia lot, Pr00ne chooses his stats carefully and selectively. Yes, 40Bn is the 4th largest defence budget in the world in absolute financial terms. If you express it as a proportion of GDP though (comes in about 1.7%, below the NATO mandated minimum of 2% IIRC) if you express it compared to the proportion of GDP of other nations, particularly the emerging nations and what it pays for, the value of sterling related to the currencies of the other nations you're comparing it to, what it gives them, what the costs are, then the picture becomes a bit different.

What you spend, compared to what you get, to what capability it gives you are different things. If we are spending that much but not getting as much for our money as the US, China, India, whoever, then it means we are either wasting too much, paying too much, salaries/allowances too high, defence inflation, etc etc etc and that others are getting it cheaper in larger volumes, if larger volumes is what is needed. Those are all things that should possibly be occupying DC's mind more when it comes to aping his hero Blair on the world stage rather than just thinking intervention anywhere anytime is always a done deal and that the forces will always cope no matter how thin they may be spread, no matter how resources and assets may be thinned out.

Whilst the world has changed a lot in the last 80 years, I find it staggering that the lessons of the 1920's and 30's seem to have been brushed aside and consigned to the bin of ignorance with such ease and in such haste. If the reductions are deliberate, to the point where we should be non-interventionist on the global stage, thats fine, but going in the direction we are doing yet keeping 4 SSBN's with a CASD policy seems dreadfully unbalanced. Not to mention that there may well be events in the future that we are going to have to be compelled to respond to that we are not going to have the means to respond to. Giving over West Midlands car factories to make bombs, bullets and Spitfires as per WW2 and just about getting to the point where we had the numbers and the personnel to be able to achieve what we did is a feat I dont think we're going to be able to repeat, if ever. Lets just hope that such a thing never occurs in the future, eh? But I'd sincerely hope that whoever does our strategic planning and vision for the next 30 years or so relies on a lot more than just "hope".

Lies, damned lies and statistics, as the old saying goes.

Golly... You've been telling us all for years how well off you are and how you've got it made... Don't worry, I'm sure you can get a job to supplement that pension... :\

DC is hooped whatever he does with this matter, if he gives credence to the "we will never manage" suggestion what message does that send to Libya and if he chooses to react as he has then it's ding ding all aboard the outrage bus.

I have had more than enough bollockings in my day to fully understand that it's rarely about punishing the individual, it's almost always about getting the message out as to where the line in the sand is drawn.

I doubt there were many junior and senior folk who thought once we became involved in Libya how on earth would we manage with everything else were are involved in at the moment but it seems we are coping and I doubt that's going to change as it's simply what we do.

The beauty of not cutting and running the first time things get a bit scary is that the long term rewards, whilst having taken a hit recently are still more than sufficient. Get a job, I think not but my recently renewed second passport is definitely going to come in handy :p

Don't worry about me... I'm far, far better off now than I would have been had I stayed in... Without all the grief and BS too... and I filled up my passport... :ok:

I am genuinely pleased for you, I really am.

I guess the main difference between us is I will have 38 and a half years of wonderful memories to look back on whilst, based on the frequency of your visits to this Military site you will go to your maker always wondering what might have been :ok:

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.

As of Nov next year I will not satisfy the rule for contributing in this forum so will not continue to do so :ok:

Depending on where we are on the planet and the availability of the net I genuinely don't know if I would peek or not, but I do know I won't be posting :ok:

SFFP:

The real difference between us is that I got what I needed from the military in 10 years and moved on to better things... I come back because, as you will find, the people out here are... err... "different"... You will find that you will miss the people but most probably not the job. If polled, I'll guarantee you that a significant majority of those who have left would concur. Maybe you are different... But that makes you odd, not me...;)

There was a very well written article in today's Times by Mathew Parris, about senior officers who have more interest in preserving their service than the defense needs of the nation. They should stay out of politics!

I read that piece. What is your opinion on the assertion that our Senior Staff are no good at actually running a war/conflict/police action ?

What did it say - for the benefit of non Times readers/subscribers?

WEBF - see post 19 on the Akrotiri thread for the Mathew Parris article.....

BBC News/Website Monday 27th June.....

"....For the members of 101 Squadron, while their aircraft may be getting on, there is still no sign of mission fatigue - at least not yet. The Navigator and detachment commander, Cat, says: 'I love the job I'm doing and I love the aircraft.'

She says it is rewarding to do a mission they been trained to do.
By the time she has finished punching the numbers into her pink calculator to work out how much fuel they can give away while making sure they have enough to return back to base."

I can think of more than a few Nav Plotters from the original Marham Valiant/Victor K Mk 1 days.... originators and pioneers of many AAR directional techniques.... whose growlometer reading will be off scale if they catch sight of this pish drivel.

Marham69 wrote: What a wonderfully apt Weegie word that is.

For all the undoubted magnificence associated with the English Language, there are times, now and then, when the use of "appropriate" words fails to convey the deepest sense of the moment.

I look forward to a better description of this article, but I suspect that none will be forthcoming.

A. A.
 

Yep, that's got my vote.

Mr Cameron/Dr Fox

You spoke, I'm off! - LJ

One found this quite amusing, the link on Dr Fox's website that links you to the MOD site for "ask a Minister"

Ministry of Defence | Contact us | Ask a Minister


It Says and I quote

Cameron got where is by being good at what he does ...

A self made man, up from a Dickensian childhood ...

Marham 69

You do seem to have a grievance that the Modern RAF has Female Aircrew - as shown by your posts on a previous thread regarding 32 Sqn.

May I suggest that you detail exactly what medals you earned during your time in the "Near East Strike Force" whilst a navigator on 32 Sqn Canberras- then we can compare them with the medals that the young Men and Women of today have earned on Active Service in the last few years.

Oh no! Not another medal-waving debate :ugh: