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.
Originally posted by stumason
Ooooh, DW..tempting a flaming there.. hehe... The Rafale isn't that bad! I would imagine it would be shot down in a second...
If you Scots insist on being independant, then you'll be on your own. Personally, I think whichever way they should be allowed to bomb Glasgow. It might help the area The RAF should join in!
Originally posted by Strangerous
Hmm French attack at the weekend - RAF pilots recalled from their house parties, polo matches etc just in time to see the French 3rd wave disappearing over the horizon - yes I think they could, unless the French AF value 'le weekend' as highly as the RAF.
You know the joke about the RAF not liking to fly on Wednesdays as it buggers up 2 weekends?
Originally posted by fritz
It is the Chancellor, Gordon Brown who forced that total dickhead Mike Jackson to swing the Treasury axe against the MOD.
a. Tony Blair and his puppets in business and poilitics have, led this once great country, down the path to military mediocraty and political hatred;
b. Tony Blair has, by openly supporting and by going to war with that very nice Mr Bush
What I object to most strongly, is the vast sums of money this government is intending to spend on a weapon system that hopefully will never be used.
In my opinion, we should rearm with nuclear capable cruise missiles. At £100,000 a shot, they are much cheaper than ICBMs
You're right - and Bliar wants such a person to be the next Prime Minister!!!!!!!!!
You are right, as our military expenditures are the lowest (as a percentage of our GDP) since 1930.
Wrong. He was right to invade Iraq. Saddam Hussein has started two wars against other countries. One against Iran, which costed the lives of 1 million people. The second against Kuwait - he killed 10 thousand Kuwaiti citizens. He also launched missiles against 2 other countries (SA and Israel) and slaughtered 300,000 of his own citizens.
Wrong, it will surely be used, because even if we don't use it voluntarily, we will be forced to do so after NK, Russia, Pakistan or Iran attacks us.
Yes, they are indeed cheap, but allow me to inform you that we do not have any ICBMs, just SLBMs and bombers.
Originally posted by stumason
Do not worry. Cameron will win in 2009.
we spend more money than we have done since during the Cold War figures.
Kuwait - He got the green light from the US ambassador
The last two points happened during the GW1, so are mute. The reasons he launched missiles were strategic and we would (and have) done the same in the past.
Ok.... Someone is a little paranoid... Apart from Russia, no one has the capability to attack us.
Thats being a little pedantic. A Trident is quite capable of going from one continent to another, ergo, it is Intercontinental. The fact it is launched from a Sub is a rather mute point.
This is irrelevant, the relevant number is the expenditure AS A PERCENTAGE OF GDP. By that measure our expenditure is smaller (2.1% of GDP at present), and you need to realise that Blair has been CUTTING military spending - the Army has been reduced by 8,000 people (although it currently numbers WAY too few soldiers), the Navy (my service) by 10,000 and the Air Force by 16,000. Oh well, if you don't believe me - a former sailor - read this:
But not from us.
The Israelis were drilling oil from Iraq?
posted by stumason
Kuwait - He got the green light from the US ambassador before he invaded. There were good reasons for the invasion, namely that Juwait was once part of Iraq and the Kuwaitis were slant drilling into Iraqi Oil Fields and were ignoring his requests to stop.
I'm not a paranoid, but a realist. Iran and France already have missiles capable of reaching us.
I know that, you don't have to lecture me. However, all the militaries of the world use strict terms, and they refer only to land-based ICBMs as intercontinental ballistic missiles. Our SLBMs are sub-launched, so a sub can, but doesn't have to, sail close to the enemy's territory to nuke him.
Originally posted by stumason
But then, doesn't the treasury do this regardless who is "in charge"?
They got double crossed by the Yanks in GW1.
Er, no. Re read what I posted
The last two points happened during the GW1, so are mute. The reasons he launched missiles were strategic and we would (and have) done the same in the past.
Iran does not.
You were the one lecturing, chap. I was pointing out there is no need to be pedantic. To the layman, a missile is a missile. Whilst you, I and others may now the difference between an SLBM and an ICBM, others may not or care not to make the distinction, as it is rather academic in a discussion like this.
REALLY? Are you sure of your facts?
Because Stu M and I disagree with you.
Originally posted by AntiBliarPolitician
Did the Conservatives EVER cut military expenditures during a war? Remember, we are now fighting a war against AQ in Iraq and Afghanistan, and we must be ready to fight the Argentines again (as they still claim the Falklands - they promised not to attack, but they can tell those stories to Brown, not me).
Originally posted by AntiBliarPolitician
They got double crossed by the Yanks in GW1.
And us, too. We were the only country, apart from America and France, to send more than just a few soldiers to the ME.
Originally posted by AntiBliarPolitician
Er, no. Re read what I posted:
Will be dealt with later.
Originally posted by AntiBliarPolitician
Iran does not.
Wrong. Linky: www.globalsecurity.org...
Not that I'd be afraid to sail to the ME again just like I did 15 years ago when Iran didn't have S-6 missiles.
Originally posted by AntiBliarPolitician
The reason for why you disagree is simple - he never joined the military.
Originally posted by AntiBliarPolitician
Don't know about you. I was there 15 years ago, though I was a sailor at that time. I knew that Saddam Hussein mustn't be allowed to launch missiles at anyone he wishes.
Originally posted by AntiBliarPolitician
Regarding WMDs - did you know how did he kill 5000 Kurds? With poison gas. No, he didn't order a firing squad to shoot them, he gassed them.
Originally posted by stumason
The Conservatives only had 1 "proper" war and that was seriously compromised by defence cuts prior to the Falklands. They were even thhinking of selling off two of the Inviceable Class to Australia or somewhere and having only 1 ASW "carrier" for the Navy.
If you like, I can go into great detail how the Conservatives almost cost is the Falklands. It was only due to the bravery of the men and women that we won at all.
Originally posted by AntiBliarPolitician
There were actually huge contingents from dozens of countries, but hey
I'll say it again, just to be clear. IRAN DOES NOT HAVE ICBM'S.
If you look at your won link, the only two that could threaten us are the S-5 and S-6.
So, because I never joined
The missiles launched at Israel were a strategic attempt to bring them into the war AFTER the war started.
Yeah, with gas we sold them.
Young man, read the messages I write carefully. I asked you if the Conservatives ever cut our defence budget DURING a war, not PRIOR to war. The Conservatives never did, and after the war began, they mobilised a fleet of 100 ships, and after the war ended, they built an airforce base on one of the islands. Right now, we are fighting a war against AQ and must be ready to fight the Argentines, and yet now, DURING a war, the Labour Party is weakening our military.
And they are the missiles I was talking about, and Iran DOES have them. Even European FMs know that (and try to make Iran give up its missiles and nukes), only you don't
I didn't say that. You are free to say how do you think. You are not, however, entitled to claim you know better than someone who joined the Navy before you were born and fought a war against Saddam. And as I said, if you don't believe me, read the relevant websites.
Yes, and therefore you have now confirmed that SADDAM was the provoker who unjustifiably attacked Israel.
Wrong, it was France and Germany who sold him WMDs. Which is why they didn't want to allow America to attack Iraq.