It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Nelson would turn in his grave if he had to fight with the present Royal Navy

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 8 2005 @ 05:29 PM
link   
Wow, amazing what you find when you step out of your forums.

WE NEED SOME CHILL PEOPLE!




posted on Jul, 8 2005 @ 07:23 PM
link   
I think my point is that Britain is one of the Countries in the world that is always fighting a battle somewhere on this planet or defending some region of our lost Empire. To do this we need more ships and the best money can buy, not half measures that are always proposed by the MOD.
If you want to put the Great back in Britain , lets get some serious weapons and stop being cheapskates with the military, then Nelson would be proud.The other alternative is to be like Switzerland and make cuckoo clocks instead of ships.


M6D

posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 02:33 AM
link   
We have got good weapons, as i stated in another post, we have a 5km recorded tank kill with a chally.



posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 07:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bulldog 52
I think my point is that Britain is one of the Countries in the world that is always fighting a battle somewhere on this planet or defending some region of our lost Empire.


- And?
Besides Iraq and Afghanistan (both of which are well within the forces' capacity and in any case are being looked at to wind down now) where are these hugely demanding deployments you think the armed forces can't cope with?

It might be different if you could point to a single serious and professional review (other than your tabloid sources) that was saying 'we' do not have forces sufficient to meet the actual or realistically projected 'need'.


To do this we need more ships and the best money can buy, not half measures that are always proposed by the MOD.


- Obviously you just don't want to address the new kit coming on stream soon then, huh?

......and I take it your term "half measure" is a complaint about the new enormous carriers or is it yet another bash at things like Typhoon?
F22's or nothing, huh?

Yeah, like we really need them.

(maybe you'd care to explain why some time, hmmm?)


If you want to put the Great back in Britain


- Jayzuss wept, you're even talking in ridiculous jingoistic empty tabloid slogans now.
(you're kidding right, are you trying to parody?)


lets get some serious weapons and stop being cheapskates with the military


- ......and, again, you just prefer to ignore what you have been told (all over this site at various times) about the amount of money spent on the armed forces too?


then Nelson would be proud.


- I suspect Nelson would look at the pointlessness of the totemistic armed force you appear to desire and weep for the people of Britain who would be the heavily taxed losers in this fantasy (not that the British people would ever be dumb enough to go along with this nonsense in the first place, thankfully).


The other alternative is to be like Switzerland and make cuckoo clocks instead of ships.


- No it isn't.
You can play the 'it's got to be one extreme - I'm giving you - or the other' game all you like but the alternative is clearly, and thankfully, what we have now.

Sensible spending meeting a sane plausible and realistic requirement.

The performance of the UK's forces is the final measure, and for all your complaint, that performance remains second to none with no sign of the 'sky falling in' complaints you or the 'newspapers' you prefer to quote happening anywhere at all.


[edit on 9-7-2005 by sminkeypinkey]



posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 07:40 PM
link   
Are you some sort of plant by the New Labour Government who tries to influence people like me that we have serious armed forces? You have to be joking £35 billion is peanuts in arms spending, I'm afraid if you were around in 1939 , id be speaking German.We have a tiny Army and Airforce and a minuscule Navy now. You have to be related to Neville Chamberlain i think.



posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 07:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bulldog 52
Are you some sort of plant by the New Labour Government who tries to influence people like me that we have serious armed forces?


- I suspect that no matter what the state of our armed forces was it'd be the 'Labour' bit that would bother you most.

Like I said, you're just using the forces (like your favourite 'newspapers') to try and score cheap little party political points.


You have to be joking £35 billion is peanuts in arms spending


- It's plenty sufficient by any sane and rational assessment of any credible potential threat......as has been demonstrated by a particularly thorough review which has only just concluded.


I'm afraid if you were around in 1939 , id be speaking German.We have a tiny Army and Airforce and a minuscule Navy now. You have to be related to Neville Chamberlain i think.


- What's up Bulldog, you've been debated into the ground every time you've tried to promote this tack and all you have now are slogans and rather risible lame name calling, rather like the other one who was here earlier.

Not once have you backed a single claim or made a concrete point. Not once have you countered the facts put before you.

Rhetoric, weak isolated rhetoric, that's all you have and it isn't even particularly original or effective at that.



posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 08:24 PM
link   
Ok id like to hear what others think about our armed forces not just you, do we have enough to keep fighting in the 21st century or not , I'm with the nots.



posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 09:08 PM
link   
I really did not want to post about this as I really am not an expert on the British armed forces but someone on here told me the British have only around 250-270K ground troops. If that is true then I say you guys need more if its not then never mind.




top topics



 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join