Massive military cuts

Slightly off topic but with all these cuts, I've just read that Pakistan are to recieve £10million of aid for the country pledged by British ministers on top of £4 million actually raised here in the UK for their Flood crisis.

Yet Pakistan have to spend $100 million + on security against the threat of Al-Qaeda stealing their Nuclear arsenal, also it makes you really wonder how much they spend on research into higher yield weapons, as well as enhanced delivery systems.

If the likes Pakistan cannot sustain themselves maybe deals with the USA to get rid of them in turn for economic aid as well as assurance of protection against attack, similar to what has happend since then end of World War II i.e. Japan.
 
Last edited:
clv101 said:
We should adjust our commitments to match our pocket. 2.5% of GDP is too rich for us these days.
Click to expand...

The same should be true of Foreign Aid, Science Funding, Arts Funding...need I go on.

Unfortunately we live in a world where unstable countries can and do threaten not only our lives but our economic welbeing. The committments are neccessary.
 
Nelly said:
Slightly off topic but with all these cuts, I've just read that Pakistan are to recieve £10million of aid for the country pledged by British ministers on top of £4 million actually raised here in the UK for their Flood crisis.

Yet Pakistan have to spend $100 million + on security against the threat of Al-Qaeda stealing their Nuclear arsenal, also it makes you really wonder how much they spend on research into higher yield weapons, as well as enhanced delivery systems.

If the likes Pakistan cannot sustain themselves maybe deals with the USA to get rid of them in turn for economic aid as well as assurance of protection against attack, similar to what has happend since then end of World War II i.e. Japan.
Click to expand...

Amen to that, I was actually wondering that they other day...

Stelly
 
starfighter said:
This is why I think a Euro military would be better. We could spend less and retain nukes and carriers.

sorted. until the French surrender on our behalf.
Click to expand...

Joking or not, this type of comment irks me although I am not having a dig at you.

Do we label the Sudetenland Czechs as surrender monkeys or perhaps the Norwegians or Dutch ?

Why aim it solely at France ? They were incapable of repelling the German military as were the rest of occupied Europe although you could argue the gaff of the Maginot Line being avoided by using the Ardennes forest as a path

We had the natural barrier of the English Channel and North Sea and had we not, I can't see the UK fairing any better. Our military was no where near the strength of the Nazis' at the start of the war.
 
Von Smallhausen said:
Joking or not, this type of comment irks me although I am not having a dig at you.

Do we label the Sudetenland Czechs as surrender monkeys or perhaps the Norwegians or Dutch ?

Why aim it solely at France ? They were incapable of repelling the German military as were the rest of occupied Europe although you could argue the gaff of the Maginot Line being avoided by using the Ardennes forest as a path

We had the natural barrier of the English Channel and North Sea and had we not, I can't see the UK fairing any better. Our military was no where near the strength of the Nazis' at the start of the war.
Click to expand...

I agree, It wasn't intended to be taken seriously, I was simply highlighting the fact that if we share a military we no longer have full control. Obviously anyone with half a brain cell realises the French military is one of the best in the world. although I am not having a dig at you.
 
Von Smallhausen said:
Joking or not, this type of comment irks me although I am not having a dig at you.

Do we label the Sudetenland Czechs as surrender monkeys or perhaps the Norwegians or Dutch ?

Why aim it solely at France ? They were incapable of repelling the German military as were the rest of occupied Europe although you could argue the gaff of the Maginot Line being avoided by using the Ardennes forest as a path

We had the natural barrier of the English Channel and North Sea and had we not, I can't see the UK fairing any better. Our military was no where near the strength of the Nazis' at the start of the war.
Click to expand...

But they are French. That is reason enough. :p
 
starfighter said:
I agree, It wasn't intended to be taken seriously, I was simply highlighting the fact that if we share a military we no longer have full control. Obviously anyone with half a brain cell realises the French military is one of the best in the world. although I am not having a dig at you.
Click to expand...

Not at all.

It was more an observation at the wider picture and that the French comments are made a lot and not limited to this forum.
 
i think they should get rid of RAF as well they don´t really serve a purpose just lot of admin costs can take useful stuff put it into navy and army make it a lot more efficent. can also merge some of the regiments the main reason they probably haven´t done this is beacause of history of different regs and not having balls to do so i guess. should be able save a lot of money without losing that much.
 
The problem with defence budget is procurement. We need to look realy hard and ask our selfs how long are we going to pay bae millions for crap? Some weapons such us the hunterkiller subs do need to be built here as its trade that once lost it will be very hard to learn again. I think we should hold out on developing trident for a couple more years and build 3 carriers. The third being a multi use carrier that can replace hms ocean or sell it to india,
 
elmuzzy66. said:
The problem with defence budget is procurement. We need to look realy hard and ask our selfs how long are we going to pay bae millions for crap? Some weapons such us the hunterkiller subs do need to be built here as its trade that once lost it will be very hard to learn again. I think we should hold out on developing trident for a couple more years and build 3 carriers. The third being a multi use carrier that can replace hms ocean or sell it to india,
Click to expand...

HMS Ocean doesn't need replacing. She has only recently had her first refit. To build a third Carrier would be a waste of money.
 
Interesting:

The UK Ministry of Defence spent more than GBP500 million (USD776 million) during the past six years in purchasing and leasing unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) for use in the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. The information, released for the first time in late July by UK Defence Equipment, Support and Technology Minister Peter Luff, suggests the UK is the third-largest spender on unmanned systems in the world, behind the US and Israel
 
Over Clocker said:
Interesting:

The UK Ministry of Defence spent more than GBP500 million (USD776 million) during the past six years in purchasing and leasing unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) for use in the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. The information, released for the first time in late July by UK Defence Equipment, Support and Technology Minister Peter Luff, suggests the UK is the third-largest spender on unmanned systems in the world, behind the US and Israel
Click to expand...

What is spectacular about that quote? I thought it would be obvious and to be expected.
 
when are we going to get proper UAVs.

I mean without controls and life support, possibilities for fighter/bomber planes must be immense.

As well as slow moving solar powered planes with just a couple of long ranged air to ground missiles for strategical strikes against key players. A blanket of planes that can stay up for weeks, and can fire almost instantly. would put an end to missing all these key players.
Surely with missile design they can travel 100's of miles so you wouldn't need a huge number of them to cover a battle field or entire region of a country.
 
I think it will be some time before we have unmanned fast jets but one thing is for sure is that the fast jet pilot is soon headed to the scrap heap (or equivalent desk job that is).

It seems that development is being focussed more on the payloads rather than the UAVs. Why have a fast UAV able to fly somewhere quickly when you can strap a missile that has a 250nm range radius? The current UAV systems are more than capable to carry numerous weapons.
 
Captain Planet said:
Yeah, a MOVIE ;)
Click to expand...
Nevertheless, I'd rather err on the side of caution. Isaac Assimov would agree :D.

AcidHell2 said:
Partly, but mainly controlled by a human operator. programming or AI is no where near ready to take combat descions yet.
Click to expand...
That was my point! Aren't they planning some UAV 'airships' that float above effective missile range and can be taken control of by a human (or Skynet) as and when needed? Or did I dream that.
 
Over Clocker said:
None of those countries have nuclear weapons, or an aircraft carrier etc.

Really, it all boils down to whether the UK should maintain an expeditionary military force, eg we can project power. There are only 4 'Blue water Navies' left in the world at the moment, the US, UK, Russia and France.
Click to expand...

Has China not got a navy?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom