observer Posted September 30, 2010 Report Share Posted September 30, 2010 We supposed to be having a Strategic Defence Review; which in theory, is a full scale analysis of future threats to our security and the provision of adequate assets to meet such probabilities. However, judging by Liam Fox's appeal to the PM, it appears the slash and burn of idealogical Tory cuts, are being solely driven by fiscal considerations. Perhaps they could start with abandoning our so call " independent" nuclear deterent, which isn't really independent of the US anyway, and perhaps bring our boys home from Afghanistan, if they want to save a few bob. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted October 1, 2010 Report Share Posted October 1, 2010 I thought they were talking about sharing a nuclear deterrent with the French, apparently we are to have it Mondays and Thursdays Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted October 1, 2010 Author Report Share Posted October 1, 2010 Wellington and Nelson must be spinning in their graves! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harry hayes Posted October 9, 2010 Report Share Posted October 9, 2010 Why don't we have a thinking review. In my time we have been engaged in about 10 or more individual conflicts. Â Would it not be better to be a big fish in a smaller pool rather than the other way about?. We seem to WANT to get involved in disputes and in doing so breed enemies and resentment. Â Just a thought. Â Happy days Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted October 9, 2010 Report Share Posted October 9, 2010 Why don't we have a thinking review. In my time we have been engaged in about 10 or more individual conflicts. Would it not be better to be a big fish in a smaller pool rather than the other way about?. We seem to WANT to get involved in disputes and in doing so breed enemies and resentment.  Just a thought.  Happy days  You be careful. That's bordering on common sense and could incur the wrath of the politicians. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted October 9, 2010 Author Report Share Posted October 9, 2010 That's the problem H, little "thinking" has been done in the past; Bliar went charging off into the sunset, following Bush into ill thought out Crusades, that in turn have alienated every Muslim on the planet. The problem of course is, that every Muslim is no longer "over there"; they're over here too. And allowed by successive liberal Governments to retain their cultural heritage, in the name of "diversity"; have been allowed to harbour and propagate radicalism in our own back yard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted October 10, 2010 Report Share Posted October 10, 2010 Â Complete crap Obs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted October 10, 2010 Author Report Share Posted October 10, 2010 Obviously, you don't monitor recent history or the statement to the Iraq Inquiry by the then head of MI6, The biggest threat to the UK at the moment, comes from inside it - either from Catholic Irish nutters or Muslim nutters - all a product of faith schools and so called cultural diversity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted October 10, 2010 Report Share Posted October 10, 2010 Is this the same Mi6 that did not oppose us going to War, and provided intelligence, Obs you were against the War and the intelligence for going to War, now you support the intelligence because it is telling you want you want to hear, Mr Blair made that mistake Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted October 10, 2010 Report Share Posted October 10, 2010 Didn't Blair believe the Americans rather than our own information which didn't fit in with the heroic plan? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted October 10, 2010 Report Share Posted October 10, 2010 ............and didn't he {allegedly} have Dr Kelly bumped off because he knew things that Bliar didn't want making public? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted October 10, 2010 Report Share Posted October 10, 2010 Are Intelligence at the time was little better than the Americans, Didn't Mr Kelly commit suicide. My point again as you both seem to have missed it is, Obsever is and was against the War in Iraq, But now the intelligence for such as it is, is telling him something he wants to hear, he is all over it like a rash. In my book that makes him at least as bad as Mr Blair, who it could be said did the same thing. He only hears what he wont's to hear and dismisses everything else Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted October 10, 2010 Author Report Share Posted October 10, 2010 The Head of MI6 spoke in hindsight, and thus presumably kept closer to the truth. The truth was, that the "intelligence" prior to the invasion was sketchy to say the least, and anyone with a modicum of IQ, wouldn't have swallowed the Iraqi missile hitting Cyprus in 45 minutes scam (read my post at the time!). Both Kelly and Blix were reporting NO WMDs, but that wasn't what Bliar wanted to hear, as he'd (allegedly) already agreed to regime change at a meeting at Bush's Ranch. SO - the intelligence wasn't conclusive, and didn't pretend to be; it was Tory Tony who sexed it up - and Joe Public fell for it. As for "the threat", all our security services believe it to be primary internal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted October 10, 2010 Report Share Posted October 10, 2010 it was Tory Tony who sexed it up - and Joe Public fell for it  A bit like your doing now ....................... Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted October 10, 2010 Author Report Share Posted October 10, 2010 Didn't fall for owt then, or now - the 7/7 bombers were all home grown products of religious indoctrination, taken one step further by radicalism - this, thanks to woolly liberal ideas of cultural diversity, which is in effect, constitutes seperate development. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted October 10, 2010 Report Share Posted October 10, 2010 Calm down Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted October 10, 2010 Author Report Share Posted October 10, 2010 See you've resorted to flippancy in the absence of an arguement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted October 18, 2010 Author Report Share Posted October 18, 2010 Seems the top for "threats" identified in the Defence Review are - Terrorism - Cyber attack - Pandemics - and some major international conflict. Whilst these tier one assumptions appear reasonably rational, there is no diguising the real motivation (IE cost cutting) behind them. However, assuming they really want to save money, could anyone explain how a Trident Nuclear capability helps in those tier one cases? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted October 19, 2010 Report Share Posted October 19, 2010 Seems the 'Grusome Twosome' have just scrapped the HMS Ark Royal, and its fleet of Harrier jets "with immediate effect" to save money with the priority on defence now being put on cyber attacks instead  So that apparently leaves us without an aircraft carrier capable of flying jets for around 10 years while two new vessels are built at a cost of ?5.2 billion.  OK !?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted October 19, 2010 Author Report Share Posted October 19, 2010 So, IF the Argies want their Malvinas back, we must ask them to hang on for 10 years, until we've a task force to stop them?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted October 25, 2010 Report Share Posted October 25, 2010 We could always ask our friends the Americans if we can borrow one of theirs, as they have lots Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted October 25, 2010 Author Report Share Posted October 25, 2010 Why stop there, we could pay them to fight our wars too! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted October 26, 2010 Report Share Posted October 26, 2010 Why stop there, we could pay them to fight our wars too! Â But would they win? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted October 26, 2010 Author Report Share Posted October 26, 2010 Wecould add that, as a penalty clause to the contract - so we'd probably get our money back! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.