PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Military Aviation (https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation-57/)
-   -   Cost plus 50 (https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/619264-cost-plus-50-a.html)

Martin the Martian 9th Mar 2019 21:59
Cost plus 50
 
So how much are we likely to end up paying for the 48th Fighter Wing and the other USAF assets in the UK?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...ing-u-s-troops

Bing 10th Mar 2019 11:45
Can we increase the rent?

oldmansquipper 10th Mar 2019 12:14
Chris Grayling will find the money from somewhere...

Melchett01 10th Mar 2019 12:37
I was talking to a US DOD liaison officer a while back on the issue of ‘the special relationship’. I did suggest that from either side it could be viewed as being one sided ie the U.K. always begging, the U.S. always seeking to extract a high price. His view from the DOD seat was that the U.K. already paid its way, largely in kind through strategic access and basing and political support. We would do well to remember that in any discussions.

octavian 11th Mar 2019 10:33
Given the quality of our brexit negotiators and those negotiations, I don’t think we should be holding our collective breaths ��

Lyneham Lad 11th Mar 2019 11:34
In The Times 'Comment' section today.

Nato is not an American protection racket

Trump’s plan to make his allies pay the full cost of US troops on their soil may backfire on him

melmothtw 11th Mar 2019 13:40
It should be noted that the US does not base its forces here or anywhere out of charity, but because it is in its strategic interests to do so. I'm a big fan of the US, but if I were Germany, Japan or Korea right now I would be tempted to tell Trump to bog-off.

teeteringhead 11th Mar 2019 14:14
So long as the Brxit team or Mother Theresa don't do the negotiations!

As someone said, she's the only person who could go into DFS and pay full price for a sofa.

Asturias56 12th Mar 2019 10:45
Originally Posted by Melchett01 (Post 10412351)
I was talking to a US DOD liaison officer a while back on the issue of ‘the special relationship’. I did suggest that from either side it could be viewed as being one sided ie the U.K. always begging, the U.S. always seeking to extract a high price. His view from the DOD seat was that the U.K. already paid its way, largely in kind through strategic access and basing and political support. We would do well to remember that in any discussions.
My understanding is that the whole point of the "special relationship" is that it isn't a treaty or commercial agreement - it's two countries who are joined at the hip in all sorts of way and who find it jointly beneficial to work closely together on a whole range of items.

Can you imagine any other country lending it's engineers to another (as the US Coast guard does to the RN currently) or having British officers and civil servants embedded in places like RAND who look at future US requirements (and hence strategy) - I don't think so.

It's not about money - it's about interests and outlook - and trust

Harley Quinn 12th Mar 2019 11:42
Originally Posted by melmothtw (Post 10413726)
It should be noted that the US does not base its forces here or anywhere out of charity, but because it is in its strategic interests to do so. I'm a big fan of the US, but if I were Germany, Japan or Korea right now I would be tempted to tell Trump to bog-off.
Absolutely right, let's see how committed Germany, Japan or Korea are to standing on their own.

melmothtw 12th Mar 2019 12:21
Why should Germany, Japan and Korea not be able to 'stand on their own', while...I don't know, Hungary, Thailand and Vietnam can?

And why are these 3 countries being singled out? Australia, Poland, the UK and many other also host US forces.


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:53.


Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.