Jump to content


Photo

Does/did The Rn Need Qe Class Aircraft Carriers.


  • Please log in to reply
203 replies to this topic

#181 lastdingo

lastdingo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,653 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Germany

Posted 26 July 2019 - 0931 AM

My consideration is not fiscal. Read the link I provided. You can think of carriers in terms of lives. You can think of it in terms of NHS service quality.

 

You are back at nebulous feelings stuff (and frankly, the empire was crumbling and Musketeer wasn't really important to that process - India had already broken away years earlier).

 

 

 

 

Can you put a price on that? No. And thats the problem.

 

No, it's not. I did already show that the burden on proof is on your side, not mine.

 

 

If that was the case, we wouldnt build a nuclear deterrent either. Costs money, never be used, right?

 

That's about deterrence. I did already show that the carriers are inefficient for deterrence of attack against UK or NATO, so deterrence is no argument pro carrier.

 

 

I will keep insisting that you either accept the fact that you are basing your opinion on feelings rather than ratio or do the impossible; actually build a ratio by providing a proper cost:benefit analysis. Again, the burden of proof is on you.


  • 0

#182 Burncycle360

Burncycle360

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,546 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 26 July 2019 - 1022 AM

Keep in mind Stuart you are debating with someone who specifically sets out to be contrary to any global foreign policy that might involve intervention because he feels like military forums need this for balance, and to be fair at least he's open about it.  As a contrarian, he feels he's doing God's work to counter his perception that there are too many war hawks to the point where anyone not supporting isolationism is equivalent to warmongering. On the whole probably not worth additional stress or frustration on your part trying to change his world views, even if he will take that as a win.

That attitude has been state policy at least twice in the past, and both times the decision has come back to bite the UK.  Fool me three times...


 


  • 0

#183 lastdingo

lastdingo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,653 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Germany

Posted 26 July 2019 - 1026 AM

Burncycle, the UK has not been in NATO twice before. That's a huge difference which devalues historical analogies as the one you attempted to make.

Moreover, it proved obvious by military history that it wasn't the capital ships that Britain neglected too much in advance of both world wars. It was the army.


  • 0

#184 KV7

KV7

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,921 posts

Posted 26 July 2019 - 1055 AM

'Isolationism' is the most dishonest concept. A country can be engaged in diplomacy without also having an extensive military-political 'sphere of influence'.

The conceit is in thinking that being 'globally engaged' means trying to be a miniature US, steaming CV through the South China Sea of doing a little regime change here or there.

Suppose we re-ran history post-45 with the UK military being roughly twice the size as it was historically - would anything good have come of it ? The welfare of UK citizens would surely have been lower, but the effect on the rest of the world would also have been negative as there would have been a tendency to try and keep the colonies - and then the usual wars to keep them would have continued.

 


  • 0

#185 Nobu

Nobu

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,780 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 26 July 2019 - 1219 PM

What should be considered is that at least London has the maneuvering room to choose a policy that would otherwise be restricted by the interests and power of a deeply entrenched military industrial complex. It is questionable whether Washington has the same.

 

It is essentially a representation of what policy decisions would be like at a more evolved level on Fukuyama's end of history timeline. Whatever one may think of it, this should be kept in mind regarding it.


  • 0

#186 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,248 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orkney, Scotland, UK
  • Interests:But it's got electrolytes! They're what plants crave!

Posted 27 July 2019 - 0547 AM

Just a heads up that I think a post of Ryan's disappeared* whilst I was nowhere near an edit menu but whilst I was reading the thread on my phone. I have no idea how that happened, but I'm going to quit viewing TN on a phone from now on. Apologies, Ryan.

 

*It said something like "Since 1945, the US has retained a very large and powerful military, but without becoming dirt poor in the process."


  • 0

#187 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,248 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orkney, Scotland, UK
  • Interests:But it's got electrolytes! They're what plants crave!

Posted 27 July 2019 - 0900 AM

Keep in mind Stuart you are debating with someone who specifically sets out to be contrary to any global foreign policy that might involve intervention because he feels like military forums need this for balance, and to be fair at least he's open about it.  As a contrarian, he feels he's doing God's work to counter his perception that there are too many war hawks to the point where anyone not supporting isolationism is equivalent to warmongering. On the whole probably not worth additional stress or frustration on your part trying to change his world views, even if he will take that as a win.

That attitude has been state policy at least twice in the past, and both times the decision has come back to bite the UK.  Fool me three times...


 

 

The thing about that is, I share many, but not all of LD's opinions, but got to them through rational thought, as I believe he did. I did not set out to be contrarian or to impart balance as that would mean compromising on my own opinions and beliefs. I don't expect anyone here to do that and I openly encourage people like Roman who have some opinions and a world view that sometimes differ greatly from mine because those views add greatly to the variety and depth of debate here. We could have become a right wing American circle jerk, like so many others, whereas I think we have all built something rare and precious here.


  • 0

#188 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,346 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Teutonistan

Posted 27 July 2019 - 0952 AM

 

Keep in mind Stuart you are debating with someone who specifically sets out to be contrary to any global foreign policy that might involve intervention because he feels like military forums need this for balance, and to be fair at least he's open about it.  As a contrarian, he feels he's doing God's work to counter his perception that there are too many war hawks to the point where anyone not supporting isolationism is equivalent to warmongering. On the whole probably not worth additional stress or frustration on your part trying to change his world views, even if he will take that as a win.

That attitude has been state policy at least twice in the past, and both times the decision has come back to bite the UK.  Fool me three times...


 

 

The thing about that is, I share many, but not all of LD's opinions, but got to them through rational thought, as I believe he did. I did not set out to be contrarian or to impart balance as that would mean compromising on my own opinions and beliefs. I don't expect anyone here to do that and I openly encourage people like Roman who have some opinions and a world view that sometimes differ greatly from mine because those views add greatly to the variety and depth of debate here. We could have become a right wing American circle jerk, like so many others, whereas I think we have all built something rare and precious here.

 

 

 

Hear! Hear! 


  • 0

#189 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 53,875 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 27 July 2019 - 1332 PM

Korea can into Carrier....

https://www.thedrive...to-carry-f-35bs
  • 0

#190 Burncycle360

Burncycle360

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,546 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 27 July 2019 - 1651 PM

 

Keep in mind Stuart you are debating with someone who specifically sets out to be contrary to any global foreign policy that might involve intervention because he feels like military forums need this for balance, and to be fair at least he's open about it.  As a contrarian, he feels he's doing God's work to counter his perception that there are too many war hawks to the point where anyone not supporting isolationism is equivalent to warmongering. On the whole probably not worth additional stress or frustration on your part trying to change his world views, even if he will take that as a win.

That attitude has been state policy at least twice in the past, and both times the decision has come back to bite the UK.  Fool me three times...


 

 

The thing about that is, I share many, but not all of LD's opinions, but got to them through rational thought, as I believe he did. I did not set out to be contrarian or to impart balance as that would mean compromising on my own opinions and beliefs. I don't expect anyone here to do that and I openly encourage people like Roman who have some opinions and a world view that sometimes differ greatly from mine because those views add greatly to the variety and depth of debate here. We could have become a right wing American circle jerk, like so many others, whereas I think we have all built something rare and precious here.

 


I don't think counterpoints are a bad thing, after all it forces one to take a look at their stance and assess whether it makes sense based on their world views (which can be irreconcilably different from anothers).  I'm just saying there's not much hope of them ever convincing the other of anything and it's not worth getting the blood pressure up.  Besides, we all know world problems are better solved at the pub over a few pints :D  only problem is, nobody remembers the answer by morning!


  • 0

#191 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,248 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orkney, Scotland, UK
  • Interests:But it's got electrolytes! They're what plants crave!

Posted 27 July 2019 - 1801 PM

That's why I don't get into labelling people as X or Y or accusing them of cowardice, socialism, war mongering, appeasement, being unpatriotic etc. as some do. I just want answers backed up by historical sources, observable reality and/or logic. "But we've always done it this way!" is an argument I have often heard in the workplace in opposition to change. It's no different here. That I'm on here now is indicative of the fact that there are no decent pubs within walking distance :)


  • 0

#192 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10,759 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:doko yarou
  • Interests:sleeping

Posted 27 July 2019 - 2111 PM

Korea can into Carrier....

https://www.thedrive...to-carry-f-35bs

 

It'll be ready to sail to Europe and contribute to NATO to keep the Baltics and UK safe by 2030.


  • 0

#193 Nobu

Nobu

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,780 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 27 July 2019 - 2211 PM

Suppose we re-ran history post-45 with the UK military being roughly twice the size as it was historically - would anything good have come of it ? The welfare of UK citizens would surely have been lower, but the effect on the rest of the world would also have been negative as there would have been a tendency to try and keep the colonies - and then the usual wars to keep them would have continued.

 

Were it twice the size as historical, the existence of a more self-sustaining and export-oriented UK military industrial complex might have become a reality as well. The net effect of this on the welfare of the UK's citizenry would depend on its ability to compete in this sector.


  • 0

#194 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 53,875 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 28 July 2019 - 0134 AM

That's why I don't get into labelling people as X or Y or accusing them of cowardice, socialism, war mongering, appeasement, being unpatriotic etc. as some do. I just want answers backed up by historical sources, observable reality and/or logic. "But we've always done it this way!" is an argument I have often heard in the workplace in opposition to change. It's no different here. That I'm on here now is indicative of the fact that there are no decent pubs within walking distance :)

 

Chris, I flatter myself Ive done that all through this thread, and I get labelled as a fantasist.

 

People dont seem to  want facts. I keep posting up hour long lectures from the Atlantic Council and CSIS. Ive only ever heard Jason here ever admit watching them.

 

Personally, Im an argumentative tosser. Ive tried to dial it back to the occasions when I really have a dog in the fight. Sometimes, there are issues I feel very keenly about. But I will change my mind when someone makes a good argument.  I try to be fair. But the one thing ive noted, as soon as you start laying out evidence, as soon as you demonstrate you have a correct point, it starts getting personal. 'You are a fantasist', 'you are anti russian', 'you are anti Trump', you are anti Catholic.  Blah Blah Blah.

 

Its in the Tanknet DNA, it was probably that way when people were talking about Corne Durgs and M47s in the ARVN. Its probably far too late for a system reset now despite your good intentions.


Edited by Stuart Galbraith, 28 July 2019 - 0135 AM.

  • 0

#195 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,248 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orkney, Scotland, UK
  • Interests:But it's got electrolytes! They're what plants crave!

Posted 28 July 2019 - 0524 AM

 

That's why I don't get into labelling people as X or Y or accusing them of cowardice, socialism, war mongering, appeasement, being unpatriotic etc. as some do. I just want answers backed up by historical sources, observable reality and/or logic. "But we've always done it this way!" is an argument I have often heard in the workplace in opposition to change. It's no different here. That I'm on here now is indicative of the fact that there are no decent pubs within walking distance :)

 

Chris, I flatter myself Ive done that all through this thread, and I get labelled as a fantasist.

 

People dont seem to  want facts. I keep posting up hour long lectures from the Atlantic Council and CSIS. Ive only ever heard Jason here ever admit watching them.

 

Personally, Im an argumentative tosser. Ive tried to dial it back to the occasions when I really have a dog in the fight. Sometimes, there are issues I feel very keenly about. But I will change my mind when someone makes a good argument.  I try to be fair. But the one thing ive noted, as soon as you start laying out evidence, as soon as you demonstrate you have a correct point, it starts getting personal. 'You are a fantasist', 'you are anti russian', 'you are anti Trump', you are anti Catholic.  Blah Blah Blah.

 

Its in the Tanknet DNA, it was probably that way when people were talking about Corne Durgs and M47s in the ARVN. Its probably far too late for a system reset now despite your good intentions.

 

 

I bet you have at least one decent pub within walking distance though :)


  • 0

#196 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 53,875 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 28 July 2019 - 0527 AM

 

 

That's why I don't get into labelling people as X or Y or accusing them of cowardice, socialism, war mongering, appeasement, being unpatriotic etc. as some do. I just want answers backed up by historical sources, observable reality and/or logic. "But we've always done it this way!" is an argument I have often heard in the workplace in opposition to change. It's no different here. That I'm on here now is indicative of the fact that there are no decent pubs within walking distance :)

 

Chris, I flatter myself Ive done that all through this thread, and I get labelled as a fantasist.

 

People dont seem to  want facts. I keep posting up hour long lectures from the Atlantic Council and CSIS. Ive only ever heard Jason here ever admit watching them.

 

Personally, Im an argumentative tosser. Ive tried to dial it back to the occasions when I really have a dog in the fight. Sometimes, there are issues I feel very keenly about. But I will change my mind when someone makes a good argument.  I try to be fair. But the one thing ive noted, as soon as you start laying out evidence, as soon as you demonstrate you have a correct point, it starts getting personal. 'You are a fantasist', 'you are anti russian', 'you are anti Trump', you are anti Catholic.  Blah Blah Blah.

 

Its in the Tanknet DNA, it was probably that way when people were talking about Corne Durgs and M47s in the ARVN. Its probably far too late for a system reset now despite your good intentions.

 

 

I bet you have at least one decent pub within walking distance though :)

 

 

If I fancy walking 3 miles, sure.


  • 0

#197 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,248 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orkney, Scotland, UK
  • Interests:But it's got electrolytes! They're what plants crave!

Posted 28 July 2019 - 0529 AM

 

 

 

That's why I don't get into labelling people as X or Y or accusing them of cowardice, socialism, war mongering, appeasement, being unpatriotic etc. as some do. I just want answers backed up by historical sources, observable reality and/or logic. "But we've always done it this way!" is an argument I have often heard in the workplace in opposition to change. It's no different here. That I'm on here now is indicative of the fact that there are no decent pubs within walking distance :)

 

Chris, I flatter myself Ive done that all through this thread, and I get labelled as a fantasist.

 

People dont seem to  want facts. I keep posting up hour long lectures from the Atlantic Council and CSIS. Ive only ever heard Jason here ever admit watching them.

 

Personally, Im an argumentative tosser. Ive tried to dial it back to the occasions when I really have a dog in the fight. Sometimes, there are issues I feel very keenly about. But I will change my mind when someone makes a good argument.  I try to be fair. But the one thing ive noted, as soon as you start laying out evidence, as soon as you demonstrate you have a correct point, it starts getting personal. 'You are a fantasist', 'you are anti russian', 'you are anti Trump', you are anti Catholic.  Blah Blah Blah.

 

Its in the Tanknet DNA, it was probably that way when people were talking about Corne Durgs and M47s in the ARVN. Its probably far too late for a system reset now despite your good intentions.

 

 

I bet you have at least one decent pub within walking distance though :)

 

 

If I fancy walking 3 miles, sure.

 

 

:(


  • 0

#198 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,248 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orkney, Scotland, UK
  • Interests:But it's got electrolytes! They're what plants crave!

Posted 28 July 2019 - 0533 AM

Bearing in mind that it is obviously very much in the interests of the producer states to keep the export flow going, that all are staggeringly wealthy and tend to spend a lot of money on their armed forces, why aren't they participating more in protecting shipping in the region. We wouldn't expect the Saudis to come to our aid if their herring imports from Norway started getting interdicted off the Faeroes.


  • 0

#199 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 53,875 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 28 July 2019 - 0547 AM

Because we always have done it for them. Its a Saudi default to always get westerners to do their fighting for them.

 

In this case here, they got the French (along with some Pakistani's) to do their fighting for them.

https://www.globalse...mosque-1979.htm


  • 0

#200 Chris Werb

Chris Werb

    In Zod We Trust

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,248 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orkney, Scotland, UK
  • Interests:But it's got electrolytes! They're what plants crave!

Posted 28 July 2019 - 0602 AM

This will be a bit of a long post. :)

 

Last night, I was looking for a base a friend had served at British Army intelligence - Templer barracks, in Ashford, Kent. Of course it had been sold off and Google maps showed it being rapidly turned into one of those crappy commuter housing estates that blight southern England. However, in an old map of 1938, I saw a huge complex fed by multiple rail lines to the West of it and decided to trace that through later maps to discover what it was (for quite a while we were wary of putting names of defence installations on OS maps). A 1963 map revealed it to be Rowcroft Barracks, which I discovered was home to 44 District Workshops, REME. My own home town had 36 District (later Command) workshops REME. These were huge repair bases with a geographical responsibility for all the armed forces vehicles and mostly having at least one role specialisation (44 serviced and rebuilt Land Rover engines into the mid 1990s). It too is now gone, apart from a small corner of the once vast site which is now the Army Reserve centre for  133 Field Company, 103 Battalion REME, continuing the REME tradition in a small way. I then started reminding myself of the whole sorry saga of how the MoD's vehicle repair got civilianised, then privatised and gradually disbanded. This is what we have come to now.

 

1950s-70s

 

2005

 

2017

 

So now, the entire defence community in Scotland has to rely on six civilian vans run by a company called Babcock out of Catterick in England. This is obviously completely ludicrous, as was privatisation and, arguably, civilianisation before it. In wartime, is the man in a van actually going to show up?  Obviously we have to prioritise our spending, but somehow we can't afford the capability for our armed forces to repair their own vehicles, but somehow can afford two aircraft carrier battlegroups. To me that's simply a crazy state of affairs.


  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users