Telegraph: "Britain Has To Decide Upon The Royal Navy's Role"

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by soleil, Mar 20, 2012.

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. 3 questions to ask a politician

    1. What percentage of UK society requires foreign goods in some form or another to survive

    2. What percentage of those goods comes by sea/container ship

    3. Precicely what are you doing to prevent any old african or other warlord from buying a fleet of fishing trawlers
    to board and sink every container vessel heading our way?

    Never mind the newly announced massive increases in russian and chinese naval budgets that will demand huge technology purchases
    very soon to respond to - can we even perform essential basic unarmed protection services?
  2. Britains role

    What Britain needs to do is decide on the role of its armed forces, the defense budget is based on the political aims and ambitions of the government, its not our job to police the world and to be first in to every little war or uprising that kicks off. We should only take unilateral action if there is a direct threat to the country or a British protectorate is involved; otherwise we join in at the request of our NATO allies and then only provide pro-rata support. As for the Navy, the SSBN’s are a “second strike weapon” put in place when the principal threat came from Russia, who are our missiles aimed at now, if its at places like North Korea, do they have the capability to wipe out land based silos spread round the country, if not, do we need a second strike capability and would 4 or 5 silos be more cost effective leaving more money to be spent on conventional weaponry.
  3. I think it is very wise to maintain a credible SSBN force in the RN, because you have the ability to protect your submarines within their own bastions. This is assuming of course you have the necessary ASW capability against counter-SSBN conducted primarily by SSNs. Without the current SSBN force you loose a ALL of your ability to counter a first-strike by another country possessing nuclear capability.
    The United States is slowly heading down the same path of the UK with it's diminished presence around the world, and this creates opportunity for other less friendly nations to take advantage of that weakness. In my opinion Britain's empire cost billions in blood and treasure in the same way that nation-building (and failures thereof) have cost the US billions also.
    It is essential for the UK to maintain it's SLOC (Sea Lanes of Communication), and the best way to do this is with a modern, well-equipped Navy having an emphasis on ASW (LRPA, SSNs, DD/FF and other systems). Mine warfare also is another essential element, especially in the acquisition of state-of-the-art mine detecting, clearing and deployment technology. The final leg of this balanced triangle contains the ability to strike and project power through the use of SSBNs for nuclear strike/deterrence, Aircraft carriers with strike aircraft and appropriate numbers of support/escort ships and finally a robust amphibious capability that can transport HM Marines to protect, provide humanitarian assistance, evacuation, and landing forces to conduct combat operations ashore...
    Watching what is going on in the UK is a frightening preview of what we face in the US if we don't get our own financial house in order...In the UK, you can thank the politicans for using the lure of drinking from the public trough as way to garner support for their coalition at the peril of the nation...

Share This Page