T'graph: "SoS: Closer Alliance With France Good For Britain"

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by soleil, Oct 31, 2010.

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. Seaweed

    Seaweed War Hero Book Reviewer

  2. Pretty clear and unambiguous statements from Liam Fox ref the EU question (which directly adresses Seaweed's linky)

    QUOTE This is not, I must point out, a repeat of Tony Blair's trip to St Malo, where he called for deeper military co-operation through the EU. Nor is it a push for an EU army, which we oppose. This is about achieving real capability and tangible results – and proving that co-operation in Europe doesn't always have to be on an EU level, but can be on a state-to-state basis. UNQUOTE

    I, for one, can see a lot of merit in initiatives of this sort which do NOT give away our sovereignty not do they signal the thin end of the wedge for deeper and more painful defence cuts - it is just a paragmatic and grown up response to some pretty forbidding issues and provided the quid pro quo remains a 2-way street then we should be encoraging such discussion ... even if it is with the French ;-)
     
  3. Seaweed

    Seaweed War Hero Book Reviewer

    The real meaning is that alliance with France is an EU REQUIREMENT
     
  4. Where do you draw that conclusion from, I saw nothing in either report to support that statement (in fact quite the opposite in the article by Liam Fox!)
     
  5. Well at least next year's Trafalgar Night will be interesting.
     
  6. Amazing how the Dt can stand on its head just to support the Tories.

    Something reported elsewhere (not in today's DT article) is the supposed sharing of nuclear warhead testing.

    That just doesn't make sense (to say the least). Obviously the days of actual testing are long over - so I am sure we won't be joining the French in blowing holes under a Pacific Atoll to the disgust of the rest of the world (including ourselves).

    All modern "testing" is done by super-computer simulations and high-energy lasers. Britain has historically done this in close co-operation (i.e. piggy-backing) with the USA. Are we going to turn our backs on this close arrangements or are we to have two nuclear warhead test programmes ??????

    Something doesn't make sense.

    .
     
  7. Just watched Eammon Holmes give Liam Fox a real hard time re: should the Aregentinians decide that they wanted reinvade the Falklands, what would Britain do should the French say no to their carrier being involved, Liam Fox reply was it would be foolish for them to do so as our RAF Typhoons (4 in number) and our SSN's would deter any such show of force!!! :dark1:
     
  8. Spin it however you like Scouse but he has a good point - In '82 we had the square root of bugger all. This time round they know they could not just walk in "unopposed" (no sleight intended against the RM Det that did what was sensible and pragmatic at the time).

    The only reason the Argies had a pop in '82 was that they believed they could get in unchallenged and there was no way a country thousands of miles away could do anything to dislodge them.

    The very threat of nuclear submarines in '82 was a huge worry to the Argentinian Navy (even before Belgrano), why should it be any different now?
     
  9. I agree with what you say, how ever that is providing there is an SSN on task down that way but it was the fact mr Holmes was giving it big to Liam Fox who looked uncomfartable with the questions being asked, how ever you rightly said the Argies went and invaded back in 82 because Britain was cutting back on the Endurance and was about to sell the Invincible and history is about repeat its self as we are getting rid of the Ark and its aircraft, I'll bet the Argies are looking long and hard at the situation especially now there are oil rights involved :?
     
  10. The beautiful thing about SSNs and the "silent service" in general is that WE may know what the tasking is but our potential enemies do NOT - That is also why mining is such an effective weapon - the very possibility of there being mines in the vicinity makes forces operate in a very different (and anticipated) manner

    By the way, I didn't say the Argies invaded because of defence cuts, I said quite the opposite - they invaded because they needed a public distraction to keep the Junta in power. As far as I am concerned (and based on a lot of information that has become public since the war) defence cuts were coincidental to the invasion and the only real lesson was that if they had gone ahead before the Argies attacked, the job of winning back the Falklands would have been even more difficult
     
  11. Re: T'graph: "SoS: Closer Alliance With France Good For Brit

    You have to look at where the next major conflict will come from,will it be Iran or Korea or perhaps the creeping Muslim influence in Africa.
    If Israel takes steps to stop Iran,which they must even in strategic strike way,France will support them as they always have,the UK is full of Arabists in the FO and we may lean that way.
    Problems?I think there may be.
    If in fact the next major conflict starts because of water shortages in Yemen/Somalia or the Mid East countries snaffling all the water for their own,then co-operation will succeed to a degree but we and the French will ultimatley do what the USA requires no matter how much the French may hate it.
    A leading thinker ten years ago said the next war would be about water,he may be right.
     
  12. Re: T'graph: "SoS: Closer Alliance With France Good For Brit

    All doubters of this new entente cordiale, or as someone called it, entente frugale, Should read, 1000 years of annoying the french. Its written by Stephen Clarke, and is a tongue in cheek look at us versus the frogs.
     
  13. Re: T'graph: "SoS: Closer Alliance With France Good For Brit

    If there are any Buntings left, you'd better break out the new battle ensign, its the white cross on a white back ground. Can't find one? Ask the French, they have loads. They used them in the last two WW's.
    Roofs
     
  14. theres nothing wrong with france as a country, its just the garlic eating people that spoils the place. can't believe we have signed up with them, after all the history of wars with them and helping them out when they turn there backs on people and give in at the drop of a hat. will they help us if/ when the argies start again mmmmmmmmmm i dont think so, the president will be too busy feeling up his young wife as hes so scared that someone younger will come along and steal her away. he wont give a shite about helping us out, look wot they have done to the well behaved people they have camping out close to the ferry terminals and the euro tunnel who are so desperate to come to our beloved country and act as leaches on the honest tax payers we have.
    sod the french and all they stand for, get out of europe and stand alone as a country, it seemed to work before if my history isnt too far off.
     
  15. No problems broadside, thought I had a brain fart :confused4:
     
  16. Is this a way of telling us that the USA has told us that they will not give us the next generation of nukes? Obama has stated he wants to cut the number of warheads so has he told "Dave" to feck off?
     

Share This Page