Jump to content


Photo

Hms Queen Elizabeth


  • Please log in to reply
1173 replies to this topic

#1161 DougRichards

DougRichards

    Doug Richards

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10,263 posts

Posted 09 December 2019 - 0737 AM

Im serious Doug. Im not worried about the military threats to these carriers, but the political threat is very real.

 

I understand that Stuart.  Either the UK (or parts of it) will become a new Costa Rica under American interests, or be somehow absorbed into being a 'department' of the Prussian / French coalition.


Edited by DougRichards, 09 December 2019 - 1657 PM.

  • 0

#1162 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,288 posts

Posted 09 December 2019 - 0800 AM

Join CPTPP. An economic bloc, even if having company privilege mysteries, its not a political bloc. Plently of friendly English speaking countries in it but with distance for some identity comfort zone.
  • 0

#1163 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 55,677 posts

Posted 09 December 2019 - 0810 AM

Jason, I think that misunderstands the problem. The problem is the SNP are agitating to become independent, so they (ostensibly) can rejoin the EU. And the Labour party have promised to give them a second referendum if they win. They dont want an alternative. They just want any excuse they can have to gain independence, because they, like ours, have a generation of politicians on the make and damn the consquences.

 

Granted Labour arent likely to win, but it illustrates, when people have fears that Brexit will cause the split of the Union, they are probably right. And at that point how affordable these will be, is an open question.

 

Im fearful these will prove a last hurrah. Lets hope im wrong.


Edited by Stuart Galbraith, 09 December 2019 - 0811 AM.

  • 0

#1164 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,288 posts

Posted 09 December 2019 - 0828 AM

Yeah.. that's a big problem.

A thought I had some time ago since watching some of the parliament debates when May was still PM, I was rather struck in the procedures. In some way, its admirable how so easily points and questions can be raised so quickly and openly. As a principle, it would seem great. But the manner it was being done felt rather toxic. I haven't known anything about the SNP except mention of them here on the forums, but when seeing the kinds of digging for egg trowing arguments by SNP representatives, then I got a sense of how troubling their agenda was. And then there was Corbyn of course with his flare. One thing I noticed was that each time PM May answered a made question, she would always answer by reference to the person asking the question as "my honorable friend" or something like that. Obviously non-existant in US political scene. But from the little of Japanese pailaiment debates that I watched, such usage to that degree of title is not used. So I thought about. Maybe its tradition in UK parliament. Or maybe it was something newly evolved. Maybe its a way to indicate respect to the person even if questioning opinion is vastly different and if the person was from a different part of the Kingdom. To the latter, it almost felt like begging to not separate by using the title. Well just some loose wondering thinking from the observation.

Edited by JasonJ, 09 December 2019 - 0829 AM.

  • 0

#1165 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 55,677 posts

Posted 09 December 2019 - 0849 AM

Its the adversarial Parliamentary system. Unlike Europe, which is collegiate and forced to form Governments, the British response has been to form big power blocks that can bulldoze through what they like, and then swap when the opposing side wins. This had a lot to commend it 200 year's ago. Today, perhaps not so much.

 

Yeah, they always refer to them as an honorable friend or honourable gentleman/woman/member, even if they are insufferable shit. :D Its tradition, we dont call people by names either, unless its a list dating from the Victorian period of descriptive nouns for people who dont know what they are talking about.

 

 

Well, I guess we shall see what will come. In the meantime we Brits can take comfort in at least one thing that seems to be going right.


  • 0

#1166 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,007 posts

Posted 09 December 2019 - 1646 PM

Im serious Doug. Im not worried about the military threats to these carriers, but the political threat is very real.

 

You're not worried about military threats to these giant highly vulnerable white elephants. That's reassuring :)


  • 0

#1167 Nobu

Nobu

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,214 posts

Posted Yesterday, 01:02 AM

It remains to be seen how any UNSC P5 nuclear weapons state reacts to the loss of one of its carriers. It may not be pretty.


  • 0

#1168 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,288 posts

Posted Yesterday, 01:03 AM

It remains to be seen how any UNSC P5 nuclear weapons state reacts to the loss of one of its carriers. It may not be pretty.


PRC right? :)
  • 0

#1169 Nobu

Nobu

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,214 posts

Posted Yesterday, 01:48 AM

 

Im serious Doug. Im not worried about the military threats to these carriers, but the political threat is very real.

 

You're not worried about military threats to these giant highly vulnerable white elephants. That's reassuring :)

 

For better or worse, they have been protected by the political power of those strong enough to deploy them in various ways.


  • 0

#1170 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 55,677 posts

Posted Yesterday, 02:59 AM

 

Im serious Doug. Im not worried about the military threats to these carriers, but the political threat is very real.

 

You're not worried about military threats to these giant highly vulnerable white elephants. That's reassuring :)

 

No. Because although military threats there are, I think they are overblown, and overly reliant of Russian hype of weapons that have yet to be successfully demonstrated.

 

You need to stop and consider why the Russians are so deprecatory to British carriers, and struggle to keep a rusty Soviet relic afloat and actually aim im to try and replace it.

https://en.wikipedia.../Project_23000E

 

From back in 1998 when we started posting on this, I was always clear the real threat to these carriers is political. I believe it still is.


Edited by Stuart Galbraith, Yesterday, 03:00 AM.

  • 0

#1171 Nobu

Nobu

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,214 posts

Posted Yesterday, 11:28 PM

A major power deploying a carrier is the equivalent of placing a political chip on its shoulder and daring anyone in the world to knock it off.

 

It is a symbol of the confidence a major power has in itself.

 

In contrast, a minor power deploying a carrier is just as recognizable, in symbolism far less flattering.


  • 0

#1172 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,288 posts

Posted Yesterday, 11:42 PM

That's pretty much it. Along with political power is economic power. As well as other forms of responsive military power. It's all in a package. Getting a carrier is like getting a new sharp tip for the whole spear. Without it, the weight of the spear is the same but the tip is more blunt so penetrates less.
  • 0

#1173 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,664 posts

Posted Today, 09:58 AM

That's pretty much it. Along with political power is economic power. As well as other forms of responsive military power. It's all in a package. Getting a carrier is like getting a new sharp tip for the whole spear. Without it, the weight of the spear is the same but the tip is more blunt so penetrates less.

 

The quarterstaff is a traditional British weapon and more effective than one might think. ;)

 

 

But there certeainly is the need for an overseas deployable platform to protect all those overseas territories.


  • 0

#1174 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 55,677 posts

Posted Today, 10:10 AM

Well we still have to defend the Falklands. And I was reading the other day, Argentina was looking at the JF17. No idea how realistic it is they can afford it though.

 

In truth, there isnt THAT much Empire left to defend now. But we still have agreements with a lot of countries on mutual defence. A carrier is still one of the better options to defend Belize, even after all this time. Clearly as a platform, these have a lot to offer British overseas territories in the aftermath of tropical storms, which are likely to become ever more common. Its not going to be short of work.


  • 0