The slow, painful death of UK armed forces

[Razgovory]

Okay fine.  Then don't bitch about anyone else's foreign policy.  You get rid of the military, you abdicate any responsibility and say in international affairs.  Don't complain when another country throws around its weight in ways you think are unfair, or there is a war, or an injustice, or a genocide.  You've washed your hands of the whole business.  You want to secede from the world, fine.  Just don't hold little protests, or bitch about war and injustice.  Don't bother the rest of the world with your impotent whining.

err....the entire point of the military changes is to make Britain better at intervening when crap goes down in third world countries. Its only our ability to fight world war 2 all over again which is being removed as ww3 isn't going to happen.

Yes, Britain demonstrated that in Libya.  Was barely able to participate.

[Josquius]

Yes, Britain demonstrated that in Libya.  Was barely able to participate.

1: That was with the old outdated military that these cuts are working towards fixing.
2: Britain was one of the biggest contributers....

[Razgovory]

Yes, Britain demonstrated that in Libya.  Was barely able to participate.

1: That was with the old outdated military that these cuts are working towards fixing.
2: Britain was one of the biggest contributers....

It had to bum off supplies from the US...

[Neil]

Yeah, but that's the British strategy.  It's not the 19th century anymore.  Britain isn't a leader and won't ever go it alone.

[The Brain]

At least the UK regiments aren't very old. Swedish regiments OTOH...

[Admiral Yi]

Did Britain run out of bombs in Libya too?  I never saw a report which specified the countries that did.

[CountDeMoney]

Did Britain run out of bombs in Libya too?  I never saw a report which specified the countries that did.

Considering the RAF's contribution were only 8 aircraft, then 4 more after the US withdrew their strike aircraft, I'm pretty sure there were enough bombs to go around.

[Admiral Yi]

Considering the RAF's contribution were only 8 aircraft, then 4 more after the US withdrew their strike aircraft, I'm pretty sure there were enough bombs to go around.

That's a comparable contribution to other members of Teh Coalition of Countries Other Than Germany, yet presumably *someone* ran out of bombs.

[Sheilbh]

Considering the RAF's contribution were only 8 aircraft, then 4 more after the US withdrew their strike aircraft, I'm pretty sure there were enough bombs to go around.

12 planes, but 1300 sorties (second to the US with 153 planes and 2000 sorties).

That's a comparable contribution to other members of Teh Coalition of Countries Other Than Germany, yet presumably *someone* ran out of bombs.

Denmark, I think.  British and French aircraft don't, from what I understand, work with American munitions. 

[Admiral Yi]

Denmark, I think.

Oh well.  Can't give Denmark too much shit.

[Neil]

Denmark, I think.  British and French aircraft don't, from what I understand, work with American munitions.

I find that difficult to believe, given that the whole point of NATO was for the European allies to use American munitions, because they were economically weak and were going to have their ability to produce weapons destroyed by the Soviets anyways.

[CountDeMoney]

Considering the RAF's contribution were only 8 aircraft, then 4 more after the US withdrew their strike aircraft, I'm pretty sure there were enough bombs to go around.

12 planes, but 1300 sorties (second to the US with 153 planes and 2000 sorties).

Just imagine if they offered twice, or three times, as many strike aircraft.   Just imagine if they had a real strike carrier, and a real fleet air arm, instead of the Ocean.  Oh, wait they did.  It was called the Ark Royal.

And the principal reason they out-sortied the French with strikes is that the French were running substantial CAP, as they brought fighters to the party.

I applaud the plucky Brits for kicking in when they can, but you know damned well the SDSR and the 2020 model is right royal poo-poo.

At least Libya was within range of allied bases. The question the UK needs to answer is, what happens when the next hot spot isn't?

[Razgovory]

The answer is easy.  The UK just won't get involved.

[Ideologue]

The world is within range of Trident.  And what more do you really need?

[viper37]

The US would have to intervene.  You owe them for Iraq.

We don't fight colonial wars.

They'd call upon the Commonwealth anyway;  hell, I think the Canuckistani Navy is larger than the RN now.

no aircraft carrier and no submarine able to dive.  Well, actually, they can do the diving.  It's the 'coming back to the surface' thing they have problem with.