Categories
Options
They shall have wars and pay for their presumption – politicalbetting.com
They shall have wars and pay for their presumption – politicalbetting.com
It's not like defence has been a notable exception to the general picture. Army cut by a third. Nearly all weapons procurements behind schedule. Navy barely has any seaworthy ships. Concerns about nuclear weapons.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Fifth Columnist like SKS
Not necessarily on the same plate
When I went to Malta, I checked and they wanted a passport valid for six months. Mine had only three left, so I replaced it before checking in.
Not really hard, and would have saved any hassle at all.
That's not my department,' said Wernher von Braun.
The Tories have simultaneously cut defence capacity, while continuing with outdated and incompetent procurement - often driven by prestige rather than practicality.
The problems go back long before 2010, but it's no longer possible to pretend they aren't there.
There's little or no scope for massive increases in spending - and even if there were, it would likely be futile without reform.
Is there anyone in Labour's team with a clue ?
Well, as the Conservatives continually cut military spending, why the surprise that people have noticed? Oh yeah, because the Heil exists to weaponise ignorance and stupidity so that people interpret the real cut as an increase.
Game over boys. People have seen through you.
Now this downside is pretty small, and there are technical fixes for the worst of it. Then we're down to the useful life of a passport being 9.5 years instead of 10. But it is another bit of grit in the system.
Since 2003 when our son emigrated to New Zealand we have travelled extensively world wide and this rule applies so we renewed our passports accordingly
There is a tedious nature of the continual bewailing of our previous membership of the EU, not least because 'we have left and there is no prospect of us rejoining the single market or freedom of movement'
The quotes are by one Sir Keir Starmer just this week, and reaffirmed by the EU as well at the same time in connection with the review of the treaty next year when they reaffirned they will not reopen UKs membership
It is a forlorn hope but time to move on on the EU membership and to be fair it seems Starmer agrees
1. Straightforward transfer of public wealth to the capital owning classes via the usual suspects. (BAE, Lockheed Martin, Thales, etc.)
2. Scaffolding of the tremendously fragile English national vanity (Red Arrows, horses, brass bands, etc.)
3. Dig-a-hole-and-fill-it-in job creation exercises in politically opportunistic locations (Ajax, T31, etc.)
...
99. Ensuring the territorial integrity of the UK and security of overseas possessions.
There is no money
The bigger issue is that this Conservative government isn't trusted on anything, so why should defence be exempt from that?
And in the case of defence, how much military capability is appropriate for a significant (but not as significant as it likes to believe), fairly rich (but probably poorer than it thinks) nation to have? If we don't know what we're trying to do, our chances of doing it are slim.
I don't know if Starmer will engage on this level. I doubt it. He'll probably just ignore the issues and do tory style stealth cuts as that is the path of least resistance and he'll have more interesting and important things to worry about than the Russians turning up off fucking Beachy Head - which seems to be a contemporary tory obsession.
It's a small extra hassle to add to the pile. It's what we voted for, and it's not going to be reversed soon. But that doesn't mean that we shouldn't be aware of the pile of hassles we have created for ourselves.
And of that which is in circulation people prefer it to be spent on other things.
To combine two discussions this morning I'll point out that the UK spent over £70bn on foreign holidays in 2023, a tourism deficit of almost £40bn.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/leisureandtourism/datasets/monthlyoverseastravelandtourismreferencetables
The UK government is effectively borrowing money from foreigners to fund people having foreign holidays.
The young will be paying the costs via taxation.
https://twitter.com/annaturley/status/1773764032295551092 (an Anna Turley screen grab for reasons I will explain below)
He decries "the nonsense that happens in Westminster" - by his party. In government. Who pay him to sit in the House of Lords. Where the nonsense happens.
He goes on. "I'm not directed, whipped, or told what to do by any political party". Really Ben? You are the Conservative candidate. Not an independent. And you ARE a member of the House of Lords.
You say "my only loyalty is to the people of this region". Really Ben? Your trips to London to vote with the Conservative Party whip on 4th, 6th and 20th March?
https://members.parliament.uk/member/4991/voting?page=1
Is it possible that the Lord Houchen of the money is only resting in their account is perhaps a wazzock?
UPDATE - I asked these questions on his Facebook page (without using the word wazzock). Comment deleted and my primary Facebook profile blocked.
What a wazzock.
David Cameron is perhaps particularly notable for being both a defence cutter and a Middle Eastern warmonger.
There is also what is surely an urban myth but I would like to think it is true, that it was put back on the target list when the Soviets realised ordinary servicemen hated the MoD so much they might well switch sides if the Soviets blew it up for them.
Spend all the money on defensive kit. As long as no missile, ships, planes etc can hit British territory then that’s the most important thing. Defensive kit can also be used in conjunction with European allies if we need to get involved stopping the Russians and their tank from driving through Poland.
Blow it all on Iron dome and patriot. Keep the nuclear subs as a last resort threat. Bring recruitment in house and make it rewarding for NCOs who are about to retire or quit to run it.
Our problem with defence is that we have Imperial pretentions to an oceangoing Navy with pointy ships and pointy nosed planes without either the funding or the manpower to deliver.
It's not so much that we have obsolete weapons (indeed for most conceivable enemies slightly obsolete would be fine) but rather obsolete pretensions.
This did end conscription, which I think was a positive change and long overdue, but it did have its downsides.
*Until the moment he suddenly wasn't.
The more recent the PM the more deserving of criticism they are.
It's Lib Dem policy to rejoin the SM and while being likely on the opposition benches next Parliament they may well be need for 2029.
It's impossible to resist the polling forever.
Rejoin: 48% (=)
Stay out: 32% (=)
via @wethinkpolling, 27-28 Mar
And more interesting:
EU Membership Voting Intention:
*UK must adopt Euro*
Rejoin: 39% (+1)
Stay out: 40% (-1)
via @wethinkpolling, 27-28 Mar
It looks like increasingly people are less bothered by keeping Sterling. Perhaps because people rarely use cash anymore, so it's just numbers on a card account.
Thatcher did have the relative benefit that the Labour of Foot and Kinnock was even weaker on defence.
Given our geography, even if the Government feels it can't afford the spectrum of capabilities that it would like, you'd at least think it could be persuaded to fork out for a functioning navy?
'Shetland: Photographer wins global prize with image taken in Scotland'
Mr. Pigeon, highly unlikely. Money is tight, and Labour will always be happier spending on areas such as Health or Education rather than Defence.
Even the Mail has noticed.
Labour should be brave and cancel that , instead putting that into public services and defence. I fear they’ll chicken out and just go along with it .
https://www.redmolotov.com/cleethorpes-tshirt
For fans of the "Brexit is like having children" theory, the country is now looking for boarding schools that stay open during the vacations. We might balk at the cost, but on the other hand...
I still prefer the "Brexit is a ghastly heirloom that we can't get rid of just yet, because we know Uncle Nigel will go off on another one" model.
https://www.business-standard.com/article/international/macron-proposes-european-political-community-to-include-nations-outside-eu-122051000207_1.html
aiui spent in trickle fashion over some years. cf also HS2.
Spread that out over 20-30 years though, and what % of defence spending does it actually entail in the long run. 10%? 20%? A chunk for sure, but to the exclusion of substantial spending elsewhere that should deliver a lot?
In theory it is possible to have a 10 year old passport with 9 months left, and be refused entry.
I was thinking of the 2004 spending review which cut budgets elsewhere substantially, including the merging of infantry regiments and the withdrawal of several types of aircraft.
Any political effect will be to stoke xenophobia and the idea that foreigners are pushing "Britons" around and shouldn't be trusted. Few who voted Leave will have enough intelligence to work out that a close union with foreign countries might make travelling to them less of a hassle.
Note the absence of stories about getting ripped off when changing money.
Foreigners like their children.
Skegness etc would be fed from Nottingham/Leicester.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/mar/30/it-was-built-for-80-vehicles-were-expecting-six-the-big-brexit-border-posts-that-may-never-be-fully-used
If Trump gets in what do Truss and co think will happen to Ukraine ?
It's like the Two Ronnies racing pigeon/duck sketch - Trident looks like a white elephant, it misfires like a white elephant, it's expensive like a white elephant, it's irrelevant to today's defence needs like a white elephant, and we keep trying to convince ourselves it is a lethal deterrent feared by dictators the world over. The coalman has done us again. Remember when he sold us that day old labrador pup that turned out to be a hamster?
Until 1998 we still had nukes we could deliver by air - that was a truly independent nuclear deterrent, and that's what we should resume, whilst letting Trident be phased out. Spend the difference on conventional forces.
Also the coast is flatter, the sandy beaches are also more expansive than in Yorkshire (except for places like Scarborough), allowing much more ribbon development along the coast. You essentially have sandy or muddy beaches all the way from Gibraltar Point up towards Grimsby. In Yorkshire, even where there are expansive beaches (e.g. to the south of Filey), they are backed with high cliffs.
All this would have meant that the Yorkshire resorts, Scarborough aside, would have been more upmarket than the Lincolnshire ones that were more accessible. P'haps.
Edit: the exception is the coast to the south of Bridlington; but then to get there from the south, you need to cross the Humber. More difficult in the days before the Humber Bridge.
Even though they are 15 years away, the Aukus boats are having exactly the same effect on the RAN already - Hunter class frigates recently cut from 9 to 6 hulls.
It’s not as simple an equation as you might imagine. For one thing there is more chance of other European countries intervening under Trump than under Biden.
It’s positioned as some great negative for the country and it’s entirely the fault of politicians.
No one has any sense of personal responsibility
The day when Jesus is both alive and dead inside the tomb.
I dreamt about the next election last night, all i can remember is the first result was some Tory holding 'Halifax' and everyone losing their shit about it and the blues being on 260 seats and someone saying 'well, OK the polls might have been wrong'
Obviously lots of stuff in there about old geography teachers and submarines flying in the sky but clearly prophetic. I mean who isn't convinced by 260 seats and Con HOLD Halifax?!
Trump essentially never criticises Putin, and has literally taken Russia's side over his own intelligence agencies. Anyone thinking Trump will be tough on Russia is a clown. There is nothing ambigous about Trump's cosying up to autocrats and his unwillingness to support America's democratic allies.
I want to keep tactical nuclear capability.
Is it a genuine deterrent or a vestigial status symbol we cling on to as a former Great Power?
I do wish we would bin off the military-imperial crap and embrace our true global role as a cultural superpower. Ditch the nukes and the adventurism and instead build culture and tech industries.
Have you ever been to Withernsea? [Oh, hang on, you must have been!]
The East coast south of Bridlington all the way to Gibraltar Point is very dull, excepting Spurn and Gibraltar Point itself. There's no focal points really and there is seemingly no limit to the number of crappy caravan sites that can go up.
Part of it might be that it is eroding so fast there's nowhere to put down anything very permanent without substantial reinforcement (although that also applies in Scarborough).
There's also a failed Yorkshire resort at Ravenscar where all the streets were sold off-plan but the whole thing basically collapsed.
Anyway, that reminds me, it is probably time for a trip to Flamborough...even if that's also partially spoilt by crappy caravan sites.
They have to do the same thing slightly earlier.
I doubt there is anyone who will have to change their passport many more times in their life as a result
I realise this is liable to have been some sort of eurosceptic cheese dream, but it has stuck in my head.
Penny wise pound foolish short-termist culture at the Treasury - just like the £50bn pissed away on building enough of HS2 to negate the benefits, whilst wasting most money. Famously Gordon Brown delayed aircraft carriers by a year two to save money in the short term and meet this year's targets, increasing the overall cost by ~25% ie wasting £1-2bn and getting a worse outcome.
Cooking the books. eg Adding things into the Defence Budget such as pensions, and I think Trident was folded in in the last decade having been treated separately before. AFAICS that's mainly Cameron trying to hide salami slicing whilst in power. I could be wrong on this - not sure, but GCHQ - £2-3bn a year - could be in there as well.
Ill-considered privatisation culture, without maintaining adequate control. So now we are over a barrel being continuously porked by BAE on various fronts. Combine that with a fits-and-starts culture at the MoD, and guess what happens?
Gold plating. Which is basically continuous requirements changes whilst demanding "British made". Consider current armoured vehicle programmes, and compare the cost of our lets-deafen-the-troops versions, with buying from elsewhere. Ajax are costing £10m each, where we could have had CV90 (from BAE Sweden) for about 25-30% less off the shelf.
Project and programme management, impossible to do effectively in the face of pushmi-pullu politicians, about which a book could be written.
I'd add culture of secrecy - observe just how little is communicated in response to Commons' Questions for 'security reasons', and selecting shysters as Ministers - which I will leave there for the sake of OGH Jr.
I'm sure our resident pilot can be more detailed and more vitriolic, and correct me on some points.
I suspect the USA system is far worse however, given how corrupt their voting system is; I hate to think what % of the US Defence Budget is p*ssed away on pork barrels and earmarks.