| Britain Defence Capability 13:00 - Mar 3 with 1852 views | Churchman |
An interesting Sky commentary on Britain’s ability to defend itself.
https://news.sky.com/story/bri
The years of cuts, neglect and disinterest are there for all to see. Too late now. The warnings of over a decade of increasing uncertainty - ignored. Still, the scrapyards have been kept busy and cuts in real terms will continue.
Tell everyone the spend might increase one day while lumping in other budgets into Defence like the security services equals cuts, but don’t tell anyone. Just hold another review and have a good laugh.
The world is getting more dangerous by the day and all we have left is Starmer bleating on about international law - which doesn’t exist any more. He is in complete denial. Hiding. Nice to see him saying no to Trump for once, but in doing so he has not made this country more safe? Quite the opposite in my view.
I’d have preferred Sir Kier to stop creep@rsing Trump around other issues, not this one. I’m with Australia and Canada on this. The Iranian regime is Stone Age and despicable and if somebody wants to try and reduce their capability to harm others, good for them.
If a massive drone and missile strike is launched against Akrotiri (precisely what I’d do) it’ll be rubbed off the map and so will British service people as there’s literally no means to defend it. Perhaps with a few sticks the poor undefended people based there can make catapults and bring them down that way.
It’s been obvious for so long what needed to be done, yet other priorities came first and still do.
Just a view.
|  | | |  |
| Britain Defence Capability on 13:10 - Mar 3 with 1245 views | DJR |
The post I made on the Rubio thread at about the same time could be said to strengthen the case you are making, albeit in a jocular way. |  | | |
| Britain Defence Capability on 13:14 - Mar 3 with 1200 views | giant_stow |
Given we have the 5/6th largest defense budget in the world, where does all the money go? Can't all be Trident and putting major's families through public achool... |  |
| |
| Britain Defence Capability on 13:18 - Mar 3 with 1175 views | J2BLUE |
Starmer co-ordinated a response with key European allies.
Why would you launch a massive attack on Akrotiri?
Starmer can't win really. Either way he would get criticism.
It can be defended. They are likely to send a type 45 destroyer there which can shoot down missiles. We can also shoot down drones. Not ideal to waste expensive weapons on drones but we can if we need to. |  |
| |
| Britain Defence Capability on 13:21 - Mar 3 with 1141 views | Churchman |
| Britain Defence Capability on 13:10 - Mar 3 by DJR |
The post I made on the Rubio thread at about the same time could be said to strengthen the case you are making, albeit in a jocular way. |
It does!
The wording should be ‘the only destroyer HMS Duncan’. That’s all there is and I doubt it could be deployed on its own anyway even if they can find anyone to man it and some ammunition to fire from it.
A sensible option would be to give Akrotiri in perpetuity to the US (along with Chagos and Gibraltar) and fund it. Alternatively, just pull out of these places and give them to the countries they sit in. We have no use for them now. | | | |
| Britain Defence Capability on 13:24 - Mar 3 with 1117 views | DJR |
| Britain Defence Capability on 13:18 - Mar 3 by J2BLUE |
Starmer co-ordinated a response with key European allies.
Why would you launch a massive attack on Akrotiri?
Starmer can't win really. Either way he would get criticism.
It can be defended. They are likely to send a type 45 destroyer there which can shoot down missiles. We can also shoot down drones. Not ideal to waste expensive weapons on drones but we can if we need to. |
Whatever view one takes of Starmer's stance in relation to Iran (and he is not in an easy position), one thing that has changed compared to recent years is that the main opposition party takes a different line and tries to score political points.
The same has happened in relation to Diego Garcia. [Post edited 3 Mar 13:26]
| | | |
| Britain Defence Capability on 13:32 - Mar 3 with 1056 views | Churchman |
| Britain Defence Capability on 13:18 - Mar 3 by J2BLUE |
Starmer co-ordinated a response with key European allies.
Why would you launch a massive attack on Akrotiri?
Starmer can't win really. Either way he would get criticism.
It can be defended. They are likely to send a type 45 destroyer there which can shoot down missiles. We can also shoot down drones. Not ideal to waste expensive weapons on drones but we can if we need to. |
They are striking at anyone and everyone. The Arab states have the capacity to hit back. That base is defenceless. An easy target. But it is strategically important and rubbing it before the Americans grab it (it’s the sort of thing Trump would do) and use it would make sense.
Just random ideas.
Yes, Starmer would get criticism whatever he did. Part of the job. So why not try doing the right thing for once? What is the right thing? Errr I’ve no idea, but my gut instinct is that he should have let them use U.K. bases. Right or wrong? Happy to be persuaded he was right in this because he might be. | | | |
| Britain Defence Capability on 13:37 - Mar 3 with 1015 views | J2BLUE |
| Britain Defence Capability on 13:32 - Mar 3 by Churchman |
They are striking at anyone and everyone. The Arab states have the capacity to hit back. That base is defenceless. An easy target. But it is strategically important and rubbing it before the Americans grab it (it’s the sort of thing Trump would do) and use it would make sense.
Just random ideas.
Yes, Starmer would get criticism whatever he did. Part of the job. So why not try doing the right thing for once? What is the right thing? Errr I’ve no idea, but my gut instinct is that he should have let them use U.K. bases. Right or wrong? Happy to be persuaded he was right in this because he might be. |
It's not defenceless. We can shoot down drones and a destroyer will be sent for missiles.
It's obviously not ideal and we should ensure adequate protection for all bases in the future or pull out of the country as you say.
In the short term I think Iran have far more important targets than our base. It would seem like a pointless waste to me. | |
| |
| Britain Defence Capability on 13:42 - Mar 3 with 988 views | Bent_double |
Well I hope your wrong, mainly because my son is currently at the base in Akrotiri.
But yes, the decades of cuts have decimated the military - I don't actually blame all the various governments/PMs over the last 20 years, Europe was becoming safer, why spend billions on weapons that probably wouldn't be needed, when that money could be spent on health, education, infrastrcture instead? |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Britain Defence Capability on 13:47 - Mar 3 with 972 views | giant_stow |
| Britain Defence Capability on 13:42 - Mar 3 by Bent_double |
Well I hope your wrong, mainly because my son is currently at the base in Akrotiri.
But yes, the decades of cuts have decimated the military - I don't actually blame all the various governments/PMs over the last 20 years, Europe was becoming safer, why spend billions on weapons that probably wouldn't be needed, when that money could be spent on health, education, infrastrcture instead? |
You're right about the peace dividend, but less so about recently. I think the writing's been on the wall since Russia's full invasion of Ukraine, what 4 years ago? | |
| |
| Britain Defence Capability on 13:51 - Mar 3 with 949 views | hype313 |
6 Days before HMS Duncan will be in Cyprus.
Can we ask the Iranians to hold fire for a week? |  |
| |
| Britain Defence Capability on 13:57 - Mar 3 with 921 views | Guthrum |
| Britain Defence Capability on 13:37 - Mar 3 by J2BLUE |
It's not defenceless. We can shoot down drones and a destroyer will be sent for missiles.
It's obviously not ideal and we should ensure adequate protection for all bases in the future or pull out of the country as you say.
In the short term I think Iran have far more important targets than our base. It would seem like a pointless waste to me. |
Another aspect is it seems to have been Hezbollah in Lebanon who launched the drones at Akrotiri. They are now rather busier than they were a day or two ago.
Especially with the new attitude of the Lebanese government, who appear - verbally, at least - to have turned on Hezbollah and are attempting to cut them loose to take the consequences of having fired on Israel.
For context, Hezbollah have for decades been a significant political and independent military force in Lebanon. Parties allied to them are actually part of the government and the parliamentary Speaker constitutionally has to be a Shi'a Muslim. However, the other sectors in Lebanon - Christians, Sunni Muslims, Druze - have long resented Hezbollah and their Tehran-backed strength. I get the sense that they are perhaps using the battering of Iran to alter the balance in Beirut, too. This has the potential to get very nasty, as anyone who remembers the 1970s and '80s will know. |  |
| |
| Britain Defence Capability on 14:02 - Mar 3 with 905 views | StokieBlue |
812 drones launched at the UAE so far.
They are ridiculously cheap to make and launch in comparison to missiles.
From 2027 the Type 45 will have laser defence systems to take out drones.
SB |  | | |
| Britain Defence Capability on 14:09 - Mar 3 with 879 views | Churchman |
| Britain Defence Capability on 13:42 - Mar 3 by Bent_double |
Well I hope your wrong, mainly because my son is currently at the base in Akrotiri.
But yes, the decades of cuts have decimated the military - I don't actually blame all the various governments/PMs over the last 20 years, Europe was becoming safer, why spend billions on weapons that probably wouldn't be needed, when that money could be spent on health, education, infrastrcture instead? |
I hope your son is ok and it was precisely the likes of him I was thinking of.
Yes, the ‘peace divided’ so beloved by governments for decades. All that lovely money directed to priorities. I get that.
But Gulf War 1 and 2 plus of course Afghanistan where so many of our military did amazing things a lot of the time without adequate kit or support screamed that there was a need. Yet successive governments couldn’t resist hollowing it out and thinking it’d be ok if they just looked a bit misty eyed on Remembrance Sunday.
Yet in 2014, Russia invaded Crimea and ripped up guarantees that the U.K., US and Russia signed. Not only did we ignore it, we also ignored the lessons. Get that headcount down, flog off everything if only to the scrap man. Salisbury - ignore it. It’s only a foreign country poisoning a few people with funny names here.
Then if we conveniently ignore everything else from terrorists to goodness knows what, Ukraine four years ago. Four years. Near enough the same amount of time as WW1. What have we as a country done in those years to face the obvious challenges of a more dangerous world? More cuts, more denial, pointless review can kicking, but in essence prioritise other things including pursuing at any cost crazy policies for political self and ‘the party’.
My rant is not particularly against Starmer. He might be as useful as a chocolate teapot, but his immediate predecessors were worse, some by a considerable margin. At least to my knowledge he’s not corrupt. | | | |
| Britain Defence Capability on 14:10 - Mar 3 with 874 views | DJR |
| Britain Defence Capability on 13:51 - Mar 3 by hype313 |
6 Days before HMS Duncan will be in Cyprus.
Can we ask the Iranians to hold fire for a week? |
It's sister ship is HMS Donuts.  | | | |
| Britain Defence Capability on 14:19 - Mar 3 with 836 views | Guthrum |
| Britain Defence Capability on 14:02 - Mar 3 by StokieBlue |
812 drones launched at the UAE so far.
They are ridiculously cheap to make and launch in comparison to missiles.
From 2027 the Type 45 will have laser defence systems to take out drones.
SB |
They are, but also a lot easier to intercept. Low, slow and audible, rather than stand-off/cruise missiles at high subsonic to hypersonic speeds or ballistic missiles arriving on a high-angle arc at 5,000 to 15,000 mph. | |
| |
| Britain Defence Capability on 14:24 - Mar 3 with 802 views | Guthrum |
| Britain Defence Capability on 13:14 - Mar 3 by giant_stow |
Given we have the 5/6th largest defense budget in the world, where does all the money go? Can't all be Trident and putting major's families through public achool... |
Technology is expensive. We tend to go for that, rather than numbers.
Which was effective for our job in NATO, but not necessarily so useful when standing on our own. | |
| |
| Britain Defence Capability on 14:27 - Mar 3 with 791 views | Tambu |
We are incapable of preventing people just wandering into the country. I think you mean our attack capability as these devices will be used in places other than here. |  | | |
| Britain Defence Capability on 14:31 - Mar 3 with 761 views | giant_stow |
| Britain Defence Capability on 14:24 - Mar 3 by Guthrum |
Technology is expensive. We tend to go for that, rather than numbers.
Which was effective for our job in NATO, but not necessarily so useful when standing on our own. |
Thanks for the answer, Guthrum, but it feels like other countries seem to get more for less. That statement is definitely 'feels' not 'reals' so I could be chatting sh1t. | |
| |
| Britain Defence Capability on 14:41 - Mar 3 with 729 views | OldFart71 |
When the Conservatives decided to cut the Army the idea was that many of the regular soldiers would then sign back on as reservists. It backfired and many who left would have been able to obtain decent jobs outside.
The Tories offered incentives for the ones that left to rejoin as reservists. Again it failed. Also i believe the closure of Army information premises has also had a detrimental effect on recruitment,
The Army itself is down from 120,000 to around 70,000.
Given that you can never rely on dictators, despots or whatever in the World it is never a good idea to be caught with your pants down. When you consider that according to many the Falklands was a touch and go situation and we are even more exposed militarily now it makes no sense. |  | | |
| Britain Defence Capability on 14:44 - Mar 3 with 716 views | StokieBlue |
| Britain Defence Capability on 14:19 - Mar 3 by Guthrum |
They are, but also a lot easier to intercept. Low, slow and audible, rather than stand-off/cruise missiles at high subsonic to hypersonic speeds or ballistic missiles arriving on a high-angle arc at 5,000 to 15,000 mph. |
I'm aware of that.
My point is that even if they are easy to intercept it's still costly whether you do it via air defences or planes. It's the cost discrepancy that is the issue here.
SB | | | |
| Britain Defence Capability on 14:51 - Mar 3 with 676 views | Benters |
| Britain Defence Capability on 13:32 - Mar 3 by Churchman |
They are striking at anyone and everyone. The Arab states have the capacity to hit back. That base is defenceless. An easy target. But it is strategically important and rubbing it before the Americans grab it (it’s the sort of thing Trump would do) and use it would make sense.
Just random ideas.
Yes, Starmer would get criticism whatever he did. Part of the job. So why not try doing the right thing for once? What is the right thing? Errr I’ve no idea, but my gut instinct is that he should have let them use U.K. bases. Right or wrong? Happy to be persuaded he was right in this because he might be. |
I think Starmer is trying to keep too many people in his pocket,and yes I think he should have let them use the Air Force bases.
When I was on the morning walk a big old Globemaster out of Charleston America flew over me heading East and something pretty big flew over my house from Lakenheath at lunch time. |  |
| |
| Britain Defence Capability on 14:52 - Mar 3 with 674 views | Guthrum |
| Britain Defence Capability on 14:31 - Mar 3 by giant_stow |
Thanks for the answer, Guthrum, but it feels like other countries seem to get more for less. That statement is definitely 'feels' not 'reals' so I could be chatting sh1t. |
Yes, some other countries will get more for less. A simple fact of relative prices (people and tech) in different economies.
However, it also depends on the military philosophy, which, in turn, is partly dictated by what a country can afford and the kind of war it expects to fight.
Some buy vast quantities of (relatively) cheap stuff and recruit/conscript huge numbers into their armed forces. Which is great if you need to put large garrisons in cities (e.g. to control your own population) or expect to face more 20th century style warfare. But it can come undone very quickly when encountering a higher tech enemy, even with numbers on their side (as per Iraq's experience in the Gulf War of 1991).
The UK has long favoured technology and elite/special forces over massed ranks. That is because we see our role more as support, spearhead and specialised operations than going toe-to-toe on a long battle-front such as we're seeing in Ukraine (we have the width of Europe and the Channel between us and most predicted enemies). The tech development is not always successful, takes a very long time and we don't get many units for our money - which can leave more far-flung bases underequipped. | |
| |
| Britain Defence Capability on 14:54 - Mar 3 with 653 views | giant_stow |
| Britain Defence Capability on 14:52 - Mar 3 by Guthrum |
Yes, some other countries will get more for less. A simple fact of relative prices (people and tech) in different economies.
However, it also depends on the military philosophy, which, in turn, is partly dictated by what a country can afford and the kind of war it expects to fight.
Some buy vast quantities of (relatively) cheap stuff and recruit/conscript huge numbers into their armed forces. Which is great if you need to put large garrisons in cities (e.g. to control your own population) or expect to face more 20th century style warfare. But it can come undone very quickly when encountering a higher tech enemy, even with numbers on their side (as per Iraq's experience in the Gulf War of 1991).
The UK has long favoured technology and elite/special forces over massed ranks. That is because we see our role more as support, spearhead and specialised operations than going toe-to-toe on a long battle-front such as we're seeing in Ukraine (we have the width of Europe and the Channel between us and most predicted enemies). The tech development is not always successful, takes a very long time and we don't get many units for our money - which can leave more far-flung bases underequipped. |
appreciate the time taken there and interesting stuff - ta | |
| |
| Britain Defence Capability on 14:56 - Mar 3 with 646 views | NthQldITFC |
| Britain Defence Capability on 13:32 - Mar 3 by Churchman |
They are striking at anyone and everyone. The Arab states have the capacity to hit back. That base is defenceless. An easy target. But it is strategically important and rubbing it before the Americans grab it (it’s the sort of thing Trump would do) and use it would make sense.
Just random ideas.
Yes, Starmer would get criticism whatever he did. Part of the job. So why not try doing the right thing for once? What is the right thing? Errr I’ve no idea, but my gut instinct is that he should have let them use U.K. bases. Right or wrong? Happy to be persuaded he was right in this because he might be. |
How about handing over the bases to the European Union, on the proviso that they let us back in and we form a European Defence Force? |  |
| |
| Britain Defence Capability on 14:59 - Mar 3 with 628 views | NthQldITFC |
| Britain Defence Capability on 14:10 - Mar 3 by DJR |
It's sister ship is HMS Donuts. |
I thought it was HMS PJ, but I still can't tell which is which. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
