parsforlife Posted November 19, 2020 Share Posted November 19, 2020 The only thing under threat from reducing defence spending is our ego. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotThePars Posted November 19, 2020 Share Posted November 19, 2020 Apparently the tension in the MoD is between using the money to plug the gaps in defence spending from years before versus “modernising” the armed forces and preparing for future “digital warfare”. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D Angelo Barksdale Posted November 19, 2020 Share Posted November 19, 2020 New Command and Conquer looks fucking dogshit. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeTillEhDeh Posted November 19, 2020 Share Posted November 19, 2020 The increase in defence expenditure has very little to do with making the UK a superpower.The MoD budget has dropped by over 15% since 2010. Actual defence spending (excluding non-miliitary items such as pensions) now now stands at 1.7% of GDP compared to the Nato minimum 2% target.It's probably more to do with long term pressure from the US on its Nato allies to bear more of the brunt of Nato expenditure. France and Germany have both increased their defence expenditures in the past year or so because of that US pressure - Germany by over 10 % in the last year. The UK, as ever, are just following suit. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tamthebam Posted November 19, 2020 Share Posted November 19, 2020 I always quite liked the Soviet/North Korean military parades they had every year. At least you could see what the money is being spunked on. The only time I see military equipment is those old looking army lorries you see being driven by grim looking squaddies up the A1 or occasionally along the M9, the odd RAF flyboy (illegally?) buzzing Duns, Berwick or the Highlands and I saw a sub a few years ago in the Firth of Clyde. On that occasion I waved as my pension money sailed by... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coprolite Posted November 20, 2020 Share Posted November 20, 2020 6 hours ago, welshbairn said: Who out of our likely enemies do you think we could take on in a battle, even if we doubled our defence budget? The last conflicts we got stupidly involved in led to us getting kicked unceremoniously out of Basra and Helmand, forcing the Americans to bail us out. I think we should adopt a more Irish posture, keep our heads down and offer peace keeping assistance to the UN. The days of the UK being a global power are over, it's time to stop pretending. We could take the Isle of Man 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fullerene Posted November 20, 2020 Share Posted November 20, 2020 (edited) 9 hours ago, welshbairn said: Who out of our likely enemies do you think we could take on in a battle, even if we doubled our defence budget? I think we should try Spain again. That brings back fond memories. We would have to plan it properly because I still like to go there on holiday. I suggest they invade Pitcairn Island. That would give our boys something to do and theirs as well! Also it would far enough away that we wouldn't have to see any of the gory stuff. Plus it would probably involve a few naval battles. Much better than all these land invasions that get awkward. Maybe do a bit of piracy as well. That would be fun. Not sure if the Spanish would be up for it. I suggest we offer them Gibraltar in return. Edited November 20, 2020 by Fullerene 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Connolly Posted November 20, 2020 Share Posted November 20, 2020 Patel was made Home Secretary after previously being punted for having illegal meetings with foreign governments, it's unlikely a bit of swearing at an underling is going to cost her this job. She'll probably be upgraded to next in line to the throne instead. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renton Posted November 20, 2020 Share Posted November 20, 2020 (edited) 8 hours ago, NotThePars said: Apparently the tension in the MoD is between using the money to plug the gaps in defence spending from years before versus “modernising” the armed forces and preparing for future “digital warfare”. Part of the reason the review itself has been pushed back into February is that the Army's submissions have now been rejected on several occasions for being "unambitious" Basically the Air Force are more than happy to embrace AI and future tech: After all, they are going to be running Space Command, they are getting funding for the BAE Tempest fighter programme, they also have the 'Loyal Wingman/LANCA' programme and Swarming Drones programme designed to provide extra mass to their squadrons. They are also experimenting with secure "Combat Cloud" data services. The RAF has never had issues with finding the zeitgeist in military fashion. The Navy as well can happily pitch various AI and drone proposals, and in truth their balance of flexibility, persistence, visibility and the romantic attachment in the corridors of power to the senior service means they will have a decent review. The Army though, after a decade and a half of fighting counter insurgency operations just wants some money to upgrade equipment that is now many decades old. The Warrior IFV entered service in 1988 and is in the middle of a difficult upgrade programme. The CVT reconnaissance vehicles have been around since the 70s and is only now being replaced by the AJAX series of vehicles that has already over run costs massively. See also the Boxer MIV programme that the UK helped start, then dropped out of, then joined again at great cost. The Challenger tanks also need an upgrade to remain in any way viable in 2020. That's all before you get into the lack of modern artillery and lack of short range air defence that would be used against drones... I don't think defence should be the priority at the moment, but it's been put off for so long that the Army in particular simply isn't fit for purpose and probably won't be for another decade. There is no votes in defence, and no real foreign policy in this country beyond asking the US state department what it thinks. There is currently a debate as to whether the army should be lighter and more scalable for foreign ops, or whether the priority should be forward deploying heavy units to the baltic nations. Until they work that out in Westminster, the army in particular will drift along sucking up money with nothing to show for it. Edited November 20, 2020 by renton 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Blades Posted November 20, 2020 Share Posted November 20, 2020 Priti Patel - the c***s c**t! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted November 20, 2020 Share Posted November 20, 2020 9 hours ago, ICTJohnboy said: Unthinkable. It might be someone nice like Michael Gove or William Rees Mogg. Fucking Hell - if they're re-animating the dead it's only a matter of time before THAT witch gets another go at killing off the serfs. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Waldo Posted November 20, 2020 Share Posted November 20, 2020 BJ announces that Green recovery thing and an increase in Defence spending. If he announces something else I don't hate, I am taking it as a sign of fhe Apocalypse. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted November 20, 2020 Share Posted November 20, 2020 BJ announces that Green recovery thing and an increase in Defence spending. If he announces something else I don't hate, I am taking it as a sign of fhe Apocalypse.You can hate the fact that the green recovery money is £14 Bn less than the bomb the people money. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingRocketman II Posted November 20, 2020 Share Posted November 20, 2020 9 hours ago, DeeTillEhDeh said: The increase in defence expenditure has very little to do with making the UK a superpower. The MoD budget has dropped by over 15% since 2010. Actual defence spending (excluding non-miliitary items such as pensions) now now stands at 1.7% of GDP compared to the Nato minimum 2% target. It's probably more to do with long term pressure from the US on its Nato allies to bear more of the brunt of Nato expenditure. France and Germany have both increased their defence expenditures in the past year or so because of that US pressure - Germany by over 10 % in the last year. The UK, as ever, are just following suit. UK not one to shrink from international commitments* *please ignore any recent breaks of international law and the likely option to fund an increase in defence spending through failing to meet the 0.7% commitment on development aid 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Lambies Doos Posted November 20, 2020 Share Posted November 20, 2020 So Patel is a proven bully, nothing happens. So much for "speak up policies' 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotThePars Posted November 20, 2020 Share Posted November 20, 2020 2 hours ago, renton said: Part of the reason the review itself has been pushed back into February is that the Army's submissions have now been rejected on several occasions for being "unambitious" Basically the Air Force are more than happy to embrace AI and future tech: After all, they are going to be running Space Command, they are getting funding for the BAE Tempest fighter programme, they also have the 'Loyal Wingman/LANCA' programme and Swarming Drones programme designed to provide extra mass to their squadrons. They are also experimenting with secure "Combat Cloud" data services. The RAF has never had issues with finding the zeitgeist in military fashion. The Navy as well can happily pitch various AI and drone proposals, and in truth their balance of flexibility, persistence, visibility and the romantic attachment in the corridors of power to the senior service means they will have a decent review. The Army though, after a decade and a half of fighting counter insurgency operations just wants some money to upgrade equipment that is now many decades old. The Warrior IFV entered service in 1988 and is in the middle of a difficult upgrade programme. The CVT reconnaissance vehicles have been around since the 70s and is only now being replaced by the AJAX series of vehicles that has already over run costs massively. See also the Boxer MIV programme that the UK helped start, then dropped out of, then joined again at great cost. The Challenger tanks also need an upgrade to remain in any way viable in 2020. That's all before you get into the lack of modern artillery and lack of short range air defence that would be used against drones... I don't think defence should be the priority at the moment, but it's been put off for so long that the Army in particular simply isn't fit for purpose and probably won't be for another decade. There is no votes in defence, and no real foreign policy in this country beyond asking the US state department what it thinks. There is currently a debate as to whether the army should be lighter and more scalable for foreign ops, or whether the priority should be forward deploying heavy units to the baltic nations. Until they work that out in Westminster, the army in particular will drift along sucking up money with nothing to show for it. Aye I read in the FT that the most consensus seems to be around phasing out "boots on the ground" and relying more on the naval carriers to do the same job of deployment. Maybe we can take good ol' Blighty back to the days of perching up menacingly on the coast. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) Posted November 20, 2020 Share Posted November 20, 2020 (edited) 26 minutes ago, John Lambies Doos said: So Patel is a proven bully, nothing happens. So much for "speak up policies' Johnson is a proven anti-Semite. But none of the people who have suddenly developed a new found conscience for all things Jewish over the past few years seem to care. Edited November 20, 2020 by ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin_Nevis Posted November 20, 2020 Share Posted November 20, 2020 Head of bullying inquiry chucks it after the Talking Haystack backs the utter cuntress. LOL The United Kingdom is now basically Zimbabwe with shit weather and less dead farmers. 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bairnardo Posted November 20, 2020 Share Posted November 20, 2020 Head of bullying inquiry chucks it after the Talking Haystack backs the utter cuntress. LOL The United Kingdom is now basically Zimbabwe with shit weather and less dead farmers. And what are we doing about that last bit? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted November 20, 2020 Share Posted November 20, 2020 2 minutes ago, Day of the Lords said: Head of bullying inquiry chucks it after the Talking Haystack backs the utter cuntress. LOL The United Kingdom is now basically Zimbabwe with shit weather and less dead farmers. I reckon Alex Allan’s position will be given to Priti Patel. Home Secretary and Standards Adviser. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.