Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by soleil, Jun 25, 2011.
The heart of the site is the forum area, including:
Armed Forces Day Celebrations: Public Show Of Support Expected Across UK | UK News | Sky News
Not that I buy red-tops but there is a good library (newspaper & magazine rack) in Waitrose that I perused while Mrs.F was busy getting in a bottle of Pimms.
Good article from the Mirror today:
THE bill for Libya is £260million and counting.
So that’s no money for cancer patients, care homes for the *disabled, the police, coast guards, lollipop ladies, the armed forces – but £260million to stuff down Colonel Gaddafi’s toilet.
And that is just the bill so far – a final figure of £1billion is being tossed around.
Sounds like a conservative *estimate to me. But it is all for a good cause – protecting innocent *civilians, right?
does that include the innocent civilians that NATO has blown to bits?
David Cameron has wasted £260million in Libya but because of his cuts to the armed forces, Argentina could take back the *Falklands tomorrow.
Cameron wanted his *Falklands moment – a quick, showy military victory won at the expense of somebody else’s son, somebody else’s husband.
And he may yet find the Falklands figure *prominently on his CV.
With the touchiness that always emerges when he is rattled, Cameron said last week that the Falklands would remain British forever – “full stop, end of story”. Not quite.
Maggie Thatcher had ships and men to send to the Falklands nearly 30 years ago.
But Cameron has sent the aircraft carriers to the scrapyard and too many ex-servicemen to the dole queue. If he is forced to fight for the Falklands, what’s he going to use – hot air?
What a bitter irony it would be if the Falklands became the Malvinas on David Cameron’s watch.
What rough justice it would be if, because of his cuts to the armed forces, some cynical Argentinian politician decided to send the boys in.
The British people do not care about Libya.
But they care deeply about the Falklands because many of us remember that they were won back at a high cost.
It was an easy victory for Thatcher – it was not easy for our fighting men.
Does our Prime Minister have any idea how many British servicemen gave their lives in the Falklands? As he thought that we were the “junior partner” of America during the Battle of Britain – when in fact the US was not at war, because Pearl Harbour had yet to happen – then I doubt it.
For Cameron’s information, 257 British servicemen died for the Falklands. Three Falkland Island women were killed. Seven hundred and seventy-seven British *servicemen were wounded – many with terrible burns that they will carry to their graves.
Despite what the likes of Thatcher, Tony Blair and Cameron may believe, there is no easy victory in war. But then Cameron knows nothing about history, combat or what a gun sounds like when it is fired in anger.
If Cameron had ever seen the effect of one single bullet on a man’s face, we would not be in Libya.
Cameron’s Old Etonian *arrogance can look *impressive when he is making a speech to the Tory party *conference without notes – but that same arrogance looks like pathetic, preening stupidity when he is telling senior *military figures to shut up.
Top generals are *increasingly critical about Cameron’s *military strategy – or lack of it.
But told Britain’s role in Libya is *unsustainable, Cameron simply barks: “You do the fighting and I’ll do the talking.”
Libya can never be won. The Falklands can certainly be lost – indeed, there is not much we could do if Argentina ever decided to take them back.
And if that happens, watch David Cameron’s career sink faster than the Belgrano.
A Prime Minister can play the great war leader, as Thatcher and Blair tried to do, or he can save the pennies by slashing the defence budget.
Cameron is attempting to do both and it will be his ruin.
And cost Britain much – in both blood and money.
Boring. Again people forgetting the Tories have only been in a dogwatch.
The day we were called into the hangar en masse and told 5000 of us were being made redundant and the harrier and numerous ships were for the chop labour were still firmly in power.
The writing has been on the wall for years and the SDSR was no shock. We sold our RN down the river for two massive pointless carriers which we don't need and now we are surprised?
How else were we going to pay for them?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I am not interested in whether or not this Tory led government are following on with New Labour's policies, what I am interested in is the defence of the realm and our Armed Forces not being used by politicians as their personal train set.
On Armed Forces Day I raise my glass to them all.
The Armed Forces have been the train set of politicians for centuries.The only variation has been the worthyness of the battle they are sent to fight.
It is the way it always has been and always will.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yours is not to reason why......yours is but to do and.........maintain the Hornby double O.
I'll drink to them also....ccasion5:
However it would be foolhardy to deploy your train set [FONT="]legitimately[/FONT] or otherwise if you have removed a large percentage of its wheels.
In a nutshell if this government and future ones want to play a leading role on the international scene we must have a sizeable and effective armed forces, that is if we retain our national sovereignty and do not become a sideline in a franco-german superstate. Fully agree with MLP about the carriers. Interesting stat I read today, the current cost of our misadventure in Libya is the equivalent of what we give away every 11 days in international aid, adding to that though how many Libyans wouldve have been butchered if NATO had allowed Bengahzi to fall.
Who knows, more than have been murdered in Syria?
And how many Libyans will be butchered if the NATO backed rebels win. I am at a loss to why we are there, last year it was all honkey dorey with Gadaffi and Blair, Gadaffi and Duke of York, Gadaffis son and his mates in London and the release of the Lockerbie bomber. The African Union have been demanding a ceasefire for weeks and no-one is listening to them.
I can only guess it is to do with Gadaffi making good ground with an EU style African EU and the abolition of the CAF (Central African Franc) and how much even more damage that will do to the EU. This is purely 'Gunboat Diplomacy' in the 21st century. Gadaffi has done **** all compared to some of the ***** on this planet.
Sorry chaps, I just realised I was way off thread :-|
No probs from this call sign on thread drift, you quoted a_m and both made bloody good points, wish I was intelligent.
On the subject of AF day, took my two little lads round Gloucester & Daring yesterday and have to say Gloucester was in superb nick, despite having come back off a deployment last in May and decommissioning on Thursday, so no support at all. Apparently the skipper wanted her to look good so the lads n lasses have been beavering away for the last few weeks and did it show! Compared to the Ark back in Feb where you could see she'd been stripped (not a pop at her ships company, different circumstances for the Ark), D96 looked like she was at R1. A real credit to the crew to have the pride to do that despite decommissioning four days later - Fleet is losing a fine ship & crew.
Separate names with a comma.