Originally posted by justin_barton3
upgrading the harriers
- Whilst I can see the benefits of cost sharing (which these days seems to basically mean the difference between a program happening at all instead
of not) I think it is a huge shame the UK went American on our V/STOL stuff.
Why successive people couldn't see the final point was never going to be a genuine 'partnership' and was always going to be about their eventually
buying up and ending up in complete control of the technology we developed is beyond me
(it's the standard way of dealing with a successful competitor, isn't it?).
I get really pissed off every time i read stuff about how britains army, navy and air force get constantly screwed by the government and then
the government exect the army, navy and airforce to be at a moments notice to go and fight more wars than ever.
- Well you can take that tack - something 'those of a certain persuasion' always do, no matter who is in government; it is never going to be
'enough' - or accept that military funding is a political decision because we live in a democracy.
The funny thing is that lurid tales of the failure(s) or inadequacies of the UK military are usually politically motivated and very slanted and that
the truth is very rarely anything like as bad as made out.
It's not perfection but it isn't quite as the Daily Mail or Telegraph make it out either.
How long is it before the head of the army, navy or airforce will turn round to the government and refuse to go to war because our troops
arent ready and dont have the equipment because the defence cuts our government thinks are okay have killed the millitary.
- Probably never, cos if they did they would almost certainly be sacked and replaced by those willing to do the job for the funding offered.
This is nothing new and these kind of rows have happened with every spending department of government since year dot in this country and just about
everywhere in fact.
Throw in the difference in view about the seriousness of the military 'need' at any particular time and there you have it.
You might want a 'Rolls Royce' military regardless of cost with every 'i' dotted and every 't' crossed and all possible 'belt and braces'
applied cos it means life and death for some.
That's fair enough as far as it goes - except 'we', the people, could not and would not afford it.
It's just the standard tension between the tax-payer and the revenue spender, the political and military; always has been always will be.
Pick a side.
But what it boils down to IMO is, irrespective of where you stand on this, that 'we', the people, control the military in this country - thank God -
and not the other way around, thank you very much.
[edit on 14-2-2006 by sminkeypinkey]