So the Septics don't think we're up to it!

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by soleil, Jan 16, 2014.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. T'graph: "Former US Defence Secretary Robert Gates Voices Concerns Over UK Military"

    "Robert Gates told the BBC that cuts in the number of military staff would limit the UK's global position.

    The Government is planning major cuts to the Armed Forces. The Army is being cut from 102,000 to 82,000 over a number of years, with the 20,000 posts expected to be gone by 2020.

    Navy numbers are expected to fall by 6,000, while the RAF will lose 5,000 staff.

    Mr Gates, who served under presidents Barack Obama and George Bush, told BBC Radio 4’s Today Programme that naval cuts were particularly damaging, noting that for the first time since the First World War Britain does not have an operational aircraft carrier."

    Video: Former US defence secretary Robert Gates voices concerns over UK military - Telegraph
  2. Defence cuts mean Britain is no longer full military ally of America, ex-US Defense Secretary Robert Gates warns | Mail Online

    Just because we haven't got an aircraft carrier for the first time since WWI it appear that our colonial friends (or at least one of them) seem to think we can't operate sufficiently to be a "full military ally". Given the swinging defence cuts that may be the case however when you consider the Septics version of a carrier with more aircraft ranged on deck then the RAF have in service ... what exactly did our "through deck cruisers" add to the party ... 12 harriers??? OK I know what damage Harriers can inflict first hand (or at least could when we actually had some) ... 12 Harriers don't exactly stack up against the sheer number of aircraft the Septics cart around on one carrier!

    Typical DM rerporting though ... picture supposed to be showing "Army" troops look suspiciously like a fine bunch of booties ... get it right FFS!
    • Like Like x 4
  3. His opinion isn't shared by any of the US Forces I've worked with, who seem to consider us their absolute bezzers in every way. I'm talking 12 pints of Schorschbrau level bezzering.
    • Like Like x 3
  4. He may be talking bollox at Force Unit level but, if we look at the bigger picture, we shouldn't argue with him. We all know we've been shrunk to implosion point. Maybe a drip from Sammy Septic is needed to concentrate the minds of those mendacious buggers in Westminster and Whitehall.
  5. By all accounts they've been sorely unimpressed by our antics ever since they had to boot us out of Sangin and take over.
  6. That came down to numbers not ability, and in that respect he's right. Could we have put more boots in the area? Probably. Was our commitment to Herrick under manned? Certainly.

    We took the nastiest areas of responsibility and did what we could whilst being woefully underprepared and under manned. The fact that we didn't embarrass ourselves and actually made some headway in these areas is somewhat miraculous.

    The yanks happily ignored RC South for years safe in the knowledge that ourselves and the Canadians were doing all the hard work and having a 'mare. They knew what was happening the whole time but they were to busy getting pasted despite their superior numbers in the more benign areas of RC East.

    Late to the party but claiming the result? American habit that.
    • Like Like x 2
  7. sgtpepperband

    sgtpepperband War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    They'll be making a Hollywood film abut how they hunted down and killed Osama bin Laden next...

    Oh. :shock:
  8. Face it, he's right, during his tenure we lost the Harriers and that was the first step downwards, we're critically short on hulls, the service is a shadow to what it was during the Cold War or even the 90s. Now we're slashing the army and trying to recruit more reservists to fill the gap but failing even to accompish that. David Cameron says we've got the 4th largest defence budget in the world, it doesn't feel like it
  9. Maybe it's the 4th largest defence budget in the Third World.
  10. No it doesnt - so by the power of the Internet, here's the figures:

    Yearbook 2013 – World's top 15 military spenders[edit][TABLE]
    [TD="align: left"]The world's top 6 military spenders in 2012.
    Figures sourced from the SIPRI Yearbook 2013.[/TD]
    [TABLE="class: wikitable sortable jquery-tablesorter"]
    [TH="class: headerSort"]Rank[/TH]
    [TH="class: headerSort"]Country[/TH]
    [TH="class: headerSort"]Spending ($ Bn.)[SUP][3][/SUP][/TH]
    [TH="class: headerSort"]% of GDP[/TH]
    [TH="class: headerSort"]World share (%)[/TH]
    [TH="class: headerSort"]Spending ($ Bn. PPP)[SUP][3][/SUP][/TH]
    [TD]World total[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]1,753[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]2.5[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]100[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]1562.3[/TD]
    [TD][​IMG] United States[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]682.0[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]4.4[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]39[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]682[/TD]
    [TD][​IMG] People's Republic of China[SUP]x[/SUP][/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]166.0[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]2.0[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]9.5[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]249[/TD]
    [TD][​IMG] Russia[SUP]x[/SUP][/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]90.7[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]4.4[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]5.2[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]116[/TD]
    [TD][​IMG] United Kingdom[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]60.8[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]2.5[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]3.5[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]57.5[/TD]
    [TD][​IMG] Japan[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]59.3[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]1.0[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]3.4[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]46.0[/TD]
    [TD][​IMG] France[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]58.9[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]2.3[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]3.4[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]50.7[/TD]
    [TD][​IMG] Saudi Arabia[SUP]y[/SUP][/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]56.7[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]8.9[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]3.2[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]63.9[/TD]
    [TD][​IMG] India[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]46.1[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]2.5[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]2.6[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]119[/TD]
    [TD][​IMG] Germany[SUP]x[/SUP][/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]45.8[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]1.4[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]2.6[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]42.8[/TD]
    [TD][​IMG] Italy[SUP]x[/SUP][/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]34.0[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]1.7[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]1.9[/TD]
    [TD="align: right"]31.0[/TD]
  11. .....or the 3rd largest defence budget in the Fourth World.....:slow:
  12. Googled it - we're 4th alright - marginally above Japan and France. US, China, Russia top 3 - no surprises there. No easy solution to the problem - kit's getting more expensive, pensions bill is rocketing due to increasing life expectancy, etc etc. Depressingly, I have to agree with our Ham Shank from across the Pond.
  13. wave_dodger

    wave_dodger War Hero Book Reviewer

    Hull, kit, shiny stuff - we may eventually get, we're losing on the people front and as the economy starts to grow we will suffer ever more and thats across all three services.

    We have the inherent ability to offer the US support but we lack the people to execute it.
  14. This topic has been well covered but:

    The harriers were ****ed. Sentimentality alone couldn't keep them airborne. They had to go.
    • Like Like x 3
  15. Fair enough about the Harriers being tired... but we didn't replace the capability, did we? And now we're without a Carrier... and there's a scary shortage of boats and grey things at sea - the Yank has got a point.
  16. I think his point is flawed in reality. The US likes us because us going with them adds some legitimacy to whatever they are doing. They are not going to replace us with anyone who has a bigger military and they still need a friend to rock around with them.
    I predict the special relationship does not change.
  17. Well they are being replaced, it depends on what you say replaced the capability the capability has been replaced and intact probably made better. Its just not here right now. And on the aircraft front thats down to delays with a US defence contractor.
  18. Which is hardly Cameron's fault as he couldn't immediately pluck a replacement out of his arse. It's the fault of successive governments failing to plan ahead and the service infighting causing huge damage to the bigger picture.

    Not sure how the apparent shortage is 'scary'. We just have less units doing pointless, bullshit deployments for the sake of it.

    To be honest. I'm glad this bum fondler of a septic thinks we're no use. Perhaps they'll stop asking us to help in their crappy wars they keep starting under false pretences.
    • Like Like x 5

  19. Nail firmly on head Monty....well said !
    • Like Like x 1
  20. A short while ago the Septics were getting all wound up to give the Syrian government a pasting with the UK's help. Then, thanks to public opinion, Cameron lost his nerve and with it the good will of the Septics who were counting on us to give the show legitimacy. What we see in this latest statement is belated sour grapes for apparently letting them(the Septics) down.

Share This Page