What is Britain's real power level?

page: 2
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 13 2013 @ 01:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Korg Trinity
 


Britain has no moral authority since PM Blair ordered troops into Iraq. As a consequence of that action, hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians died. And today British families visit the graves of their young men and wonder what the hell they died for.

I don't think that's really up for debate, tbh.

As to historic French defeats against the English, Germans, Spaniards ... what would you have me do about that ? Attend this forum on bended knee and grovel before thee ? Go feck yourself, I choose never to stoop.




posted on Oct, 13 2013 @ 01:53 PM
link   

LeBombDiggity
what would you have me do about that ?


Have a good laugh about it.



posted on Oct, 13 2013 @ 01:58 PM
link   
reply to post by MALBOSIA
 


Only the Maltese pound is "worth more", you know, if currencies had real value I mean.



posted on Oct, 13 2013 @ 02:57 PM
link   
I did a quick skim through the thread since it was posted early this morning. So far I have seen no mention to 'Corporation of London.'


The Geater London Authority


The corporation is unique among UK local authorities for its continuous legal existence over many centuries, and for having the power to alter its own constitution, which is done by an Act of Common Council.[8]




The corporation claims to be the world's oldest continuously elected local government body. Both businesses and residents of the City, or "Square Mile", are entitled to vote in elections, and in addition to its functions as the local authority – analogous to those undertaken by the boroughs that administer the rest of London – it takes responsibility for supporting the financial services industry and representing its interests.[2] The corporation's structure includes the Lord Mayor, the Court of Aldermen, the Court of Common Council and the Freemen and Livery of the City.




Author and journalist Nicholas Shaxson argues that, in return for raising loans and finance for the British government, the City "has extracted privileges and freedoms from rules and laws to which the rest of Britain must submit" that have left the corporation "different from any other local authority". He argues that the assistance provided to the institutions based in its jurisdiction, many of which help their rich clients with offshore tax arrangements, mean that the corporation is "a tax haven in its own right".[24] Writing in The Guardian, George Monbiot argued that the corporation's power "helps to explain why regulation of the banks is scarcely better than it was before the crash, why there are no effective curbs on executive pay and bonuses and why successive governments fail to act against the UK's dependent tax havens" and suggested that its privileges could not withstand proper "public scrutiny".[25]


In an age that is ruled almost solely by legal writings that no common individual could possibly understand, it would be surprising to me if the answer of "Who" wields the most power is actually a government of a nation. It would be more likely that institutions with "legal rights" granted by nations are in fact the true rulers.



posted on Oct, 13 2013 @ 03:44 PM
link   
reply to post by FreeMason
 


Britains power level would blow up Vegetas scouter lol.

But seriously, I believe it is way more powerful and influencing than it lets on. It wants you to think its this little island made of biscuits swimming in an ocean of tea, where everyone still says m'dear and takes off their top hat in respect, and our lovely sweet innocent Queeny and her cheeky Princes float about on horses in clouds protecting us with rays of royalty and justice.

In fact it is the most efficient military state known to man, effectively dominating at least like 500% of its land size at any given moment throughout its history, while maintaining itself as the centre of finance and banking. It's politicians infiltrated much of the western world over the last two centuries and it IS the HQ of operations for the western globalist movement, NOT AMERICA. America is Britains most loyal and mentally unstable child, given the seemingly unlimited bankroll and collection of toys to go around and do the dirty work.

Perhaps this wasn't the intention of Americas birth, but it is its purpose now - and it will fall before England. Do people not wonder how such a small island has held power and wealth for so long? This goes beyond simple economics, politics and human dynamics. It goes beyond military might and intelligence. It is to do with families/royalty and their bloodlines, the corporate and business elite and the people who established these states of ruler ship at the turn of the 18th century. In fact for all we know this has been going on for longer, we can see the tactic of 'start a rebellion and place your guy in control after' happening constantly for the last 100 years so there's no reason to suspect it hasn't been happening heavily further back in time as well.

Look how powerful the pound is. Look at Britains power over the EU and its refusal of the currency. Look at the fact it pretty much exports nothing now yet remains a leading world power, where as America is sweating its bollocks off and still spiralling towards disaster. America's been used as the credit card to purchase the military required to extend this plan of globalism. This is a real plan, not a conspiracy, it is just human nature to these people. China and Russia need us, we are team players. We don't export because we make a killing from cheap Chinese electronics which we sell off for crazy profits here - likewise China makes a killing off exporting to us. It's all jus a game and Britains a huge player, but its not evident through numbers and stats. Once again I believe the power lies higher up in the elite upper class/their grip across the world and their connection to the world banks.

The grandest game of monopoly is being played on a board that lies on the backs of us.
edit on 13-10-2013 by DazDaKing because: (no reason given)
edit on 13-10-2013 by DazDaKing because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 13 2013 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Misterlondon
Another britain bashing thread?

Britain is one of the financial centers of the world and where the money is,the power is.. doesn't have as much clout as before but still does hold some power in the world stage..

Btw you have 737 thousand stars, what the help happened there?


Where did you get that this is a "bashing" thread? All it is is questions. I want answers, I like to think about Britain's power at times, I think the Victorians were awesome.

I agree that London is a financial center, arguably it is no longer THE financial center, but arguably it could be THE financial center of the world still. But I have always been intrigued by the idea that the Commonwealth is more controlled by Britain than is let on.

I saw somewhere an argument that the UN is controlled by the votes of the Commonwealth, which never vote against the UK, and they proceeded to give evidence that in the 50+years of the UN the Commonwealth has almost entirely voted for the UK's position.

Interesting argument.



posted on Oct, 13 2013 @ 03:53 PM
link   

justwokeup
It doesn't compare to 1914. At that time the UK was a superpower. After fighting to rescue Europe from Germany twice in a row, bankruptcy, loss of empire, loss of primary reserve currency privilege and loss of superpower status followed.

The USA picked up the baton and for the last 50 years has been the primary coercive empire on the planet (contested by the USSR until it fell over).

Our influence comes through our permanent seat on the UN security council and our nuclear deterrent.

Our defence lies on our membership of NATO. We need not rely on the commonwealth for defence as thats what NATO is for. Our influence on former colonies is negligible.

Our ability to project conventional forces globally is limited but will improve with the completion of the new carriers.


There is no such thing as a "Reserve Currency" privilege also called "Exorbitant Privilege" a Reserve Currency actually is costly and destructive to an economy.

www.mckinsey.com...

The US has weathered its Reserve Currency status about as long as the UK tried to do, but I think it is a show of power that the UK was able to orchestrate getting itself removed as a "Global Currency Reserve" which was killing the UK economy.

But let's assume NATO falls apart and France (of all places) threatens Britain militarily, but Germany and US and Japan take a neutral position?

Commonwealth?
edit on 13-10-2013 by FreeMason because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 13 2013 @ 03:56 PM
link   
From memory Britain is fourth in the world in the military spending charts JUST behind France and a long way behind China and the US of A,does this count as "real power"?



posted on Oct, 13 2013 @ 03:59 PM
link   

Imagewerx
From memory Britain is fourth in the world in the military spending charts JUST behind France and a long way behind China and the US of A,does this count as "real power"?


Thats still more powerfull than 99% of world

And its just behind Russia not france, france is the one just behind us.
edit on 13-10-2013 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 13 2013 @ 04:07 PM
link   
Mine was based on 2010 figures,good to see that 2012 figures still put us in 4th place.What do we spend it all on though when we've shut down a lot of the big RAF airfields?



posted on Oct, 13 2013 @ 04:07 PM
link   

crazyewok

Imagewerx
From memory Britain is fourth in the world in the military spending charts JUST behind France and a long way behind China and the US of A,does this count as "real power"?


Thats still more powerfull than 99% of world

And its just behind Russia not france, france is the one just behind us.
edit on 13-10-2013 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)


A lot of cost has to do with personnel. The US employs some 2 million in its defense spending, driving up costs, but how much more equipment and industry does the US have for all that expense? Not much more in ratio.

So does the UK have a far greater core, spending on essential technology and industry so if World War need be fought they could supply their commonwealth with the necessary weapon and training nucleus?



posted on Oct, 14 2013 @ 07:13 AM
link   

LeBombDiggity
reply to post by Korg Trinity
 


Britain has no moral authority since PM Blair ordered troops into Iraq. As a consequence of that action, hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians died. And today British families visit the graves of their young men and wonder what the hell they died for.

I don't think that's really up for debate, tbh.

As to historic French defeats against the English, Germans, Spaniards ... what would you have me do about that ? Attend this forum on bended knee and grovel before thee ? Go feck yourself, I choose never to stoop.


And you have the moral high ground to judge how moral an action was or was not...

If the killing of 100's of thousands of innocent people saved the lives of millions, would that be acceptable?

Morality is not in question here... the OP was wrong to assume that power is isolated within a single country in a post modern era.

In the case of Iraq the consensus was agreed by the coalition as to what the correct action should be. My personal feelings about the morality of it have nothing to do with that.

Korg.



posted on Oct, 14 2013 @ 07:15 AM
link   

JakiusFogg
reply to post by MALBOSIA
 


Only the Maltese pound is "worth more", you know, if currencies had real value I mean.


Wouldn't that melt in the hand??

Oh excuse me I misread.... I thought you said Maltesers pound lol : )))


Nom Nom Korg... Nom Nom..

oppse I just ate my pay packet lol



posted on Oct, 14 2013 @ 07:51 AM
link   
reply to post by FreeMason
 


Britain's power level is a matter of some question. There are several factors which need to be quantified, before Britain's power can be measured against that of other nations. For a start, what is the strength of our government?

With a weakened military (which I will return to later, to examine in more depth), an unpopular government which is under the thrall of EU legislation, and without the power to remove people from its territory without answering to some external review process, I think it is fairly reasonable to say that in terms of the way its government has behaved over successive parliaments, our government is currently the weakest it has been for generations. There have been countless examples of this. The cuts culture has bought our nation very low indeed, as did the idiocy that came before, and the rigidity that came before that. My nation has been loosing power in this regard, since well before I was born, and has never regained any ground, but has instead taken a backslide.

The next thing to address would be our financial status. Britain's credit rating has suffered a proper kicking over the last ten years, as a result of the banking collapse, property boom and bust, governmental idiocy in terms of regulatory weaknesses having their inevitable effect, which most everyone who was paying attention knew were happening and did bugger all to prevent (in the case of those with "the power"). So our financial status is not as strong as it once was either. That said, we are still a major financial hub, the trade link between Europe and the US, and as a nation with a rich cultural past, we attract a significant amount of tourism from the US and the Asian continent. So in summary on the money front, things have been better, but could be a damned sight worse. That, of course, says nothing of what the man in the street here experiences, where money is concerned. For the average citizen, things have not been easy, and are set to get more difficult, with energy prices set to soar a further eight percent during this winter.

Another thing to consider, is what portion of goods consumed and purchased in the UK, actually came from it, and to be absolutely frank, the gap between what we import from, and what we export to the EU is growing at an alarming rate. The gap is wider than six percent at the moment as far as I am aware, and that is not really a sustainable situation. So in terms of trade with our fellow members of the EU, we are not in a strong position. Also, we only produce something like forty percent of our own food, which is bloody ridiculous if you ask me. Britain is home to some of the tastiest, and most tender animal products for a thousand miles in any direction, has access to some of the most wonderful fish stocks, and has arable land which goes totally under appreciated. Making proper use of our farmers, properly supporting them in their work, preventing big business from crushing independent farmers, and forcing big companies here in the UK to use raw materials from this country in the production of food for its own people, would go a long way to sorting this problem out. Unfortunately, that is not likely under any form of free market economic model, and so our position will remain weak.

On the matter of our military strength, it has to be said that our armed forces are being pushed and pulled in many directions, and none of them appear to be conducive to effective capability of our nation to withstand significant assault. We have to have French navy ships looking after our territory now, because the nuts got cut off our navy to the point where all we can really do is send nuclear attack subs, or two not quite finished air craft carriers, which incidentally came in fantastically over budget for no reason that makes any damned sense what so ever. On the ground capability is falling as well, and budgets for all the branches of the military are being reduced. Honestly, I am pretty appalled at that, especially in light of all the things we have asked the men and women of the armed services to do, as a nation, in the last twenty years. Our lads and lasses in uniform deserve better treatment than they have had from our governments over that period, treatment which sees our military might at a pretty low ebb.

Intelligence however, is a strong suit of the British government, and this is reflected in the amount of scrutiny we can apply as a nation to data which passes through GCHQ's Orwellian bowels. Yes, the system which caused so much upset is probably one of the things which keeps Britain in the big leagues, and of course, I hate the hell out of the thing. Personally speaking, I have a problem with the idea that because I do not want to be blown up on a Friday, I should have to sacrifice my privacy by Thursday. The only problem bigger than that, would be the ones I have with the people who would GLADLY sacrifice their own privacy, AND mine for the security offered by such systems, and of course the jackbooted scum who came up with the plans for this monster in the first place.

But there is one more measure I would like to apply to my nations strength. I believe that one of the most important indicators of power in a nation, is how much power each individual in that nation has, over the direction of his own destiny. It is foolish and dangerous to believe that with determination and will alone, any significant thing can ever be achieved. It is a lie, and a toxic one at that. The reality is that many people of my age group, are looking into a future in which they will not be able to afford to retire, let alone progress their lives very much, unless they happen to be STAGGERINGLY lucky, to avoid both the problems which government place before them, and the trap of low incomes. Placing a foot upon the rental ladder is now as hard for many, as placing their foot upon the PURCHASING ladder was twenty years ago. This is directly linked to the difference between earnings and cost of living having become greater over the last few years, without any significant remedy being either formulated or enacted. Personally I believe that it would be a good idea for the government to make the minimum wage, track half a percentage point higher than inflation, to prevent people ever going hungry despite doing a hard days work, which does indeed happen at the moment.

In summary then, my nation talks a good game at the moment, and has all the makings and materials to be right up there with the biggest dogs in the yard, despite its tiny land mass. However, unless this place is managed properly in future, it isnt going to work out that way, and it certainly is not working out right now. I would say we are the weakest we have been for generations, and have an awful lot of work to do to put it right. Personally I would start with finishing what Guy Fawkes began, and installing some actual human beings in government, rather than the bunch of pre-programmed manikins we currently have.



posted on Oct, 24 2013 @ 05:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Korg Trinity
 


funny
2nd



posted on Oct, 24 2013 @ 05:40 PM
link   
Send missiles to attack the UK and expect multiple ones sent back in retaliation, that's what we have to defend ourselves. Plus, the best Armed forces in the world. We may be small, but we can fight.
Ask Hitler, he thought it pointless to attack Britain because he thought we would be a walkover, he was so wrong.



posted on Oct, 24 2013 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by scotsdavy1
 


Actually, Hitler did not want to fight England because he knew what we were capable of when pressed. He should have trusted his gut, and wound in his little neck.



posted on Oct, 24 2013 @ 05:53 PM
link   
reply to post by TrueBrit
 


Very true, found this :




AUGUST 8th On this day in history in 1940, began the Battle of Britain. The Battle of Britain was a conflict in the air lasting 84 days, between the Royal Air Force and the German air force, the Luftwaffe. The Second World War had begun on 3rd September 1939, when Britain and France declared war on Germany. France had quickly fallen to the German army, and German troops were poised on the other side of the English Channel, ready for an invasion. Before the Germans could invade, they needed to gain air superiority. In 1940, they launched an ambitious plan to knock out all British airfields. In June 1940, the Luftwaffe launched several raids on British ports as a softening up exercise. Although these attacks caused some considerable damage, the R A F had the advantage of radar, which alerted them to when and where attacks were taking place. On 8th August 1940, the main attack began. In the first week of the battle, the Luftwaffe launched about 1,500 attacks per day, aimed at airfields and radar stations, but the rate of attacks diminished as the Luftwaffe continued to lose aircraft to the R A F’s superior Spitfire, a single-seater fighting aircraft designed to take out enemy bombers. By late August, the Luftwaffe had lost 600 aircraft compared with a British loss of 260. In September, the British retaliated by carrying out a bombing raid on Berlin, which so infuriated the German High Command, that they turned their attention to the bombing of London, Coventry and Liverpool. By October 1940, the R A F had shot down 1,700 German aircraft and the German resources were too weak for them to continue. The enemy had been repelled and the Battle of Britain was won. The threatened invasion was prevented although this did not prevent the Luftwaffe from carrying out a series of bombing raids in the winter of 1940-1941, known as the Blitz, the German word for lightning. Winston Churchill, speaking of the RAF pilots who engaged in the battle, said ‘Never in the history of human conflict, was so much owed to so few by so many’. The RAF pilots of 1940, thereafter became known as ‘The Few’.



posted on Oct, 24 2013 @ 06:12 PM
link   
reply to post by scotsdavy1
 


There's that, it's true.

But what I am referring to is the fact that Hitler knew our nations history, militarily and socially. He was starkly aware that our history in battle was one of the most storied and successful in Europe, our Empire, as much of a misbegotten, and terrible thing as it was, possessed one of the largest portions of the planet ever taken by one society.

He knew that he would be cutting his own throat, while falling on his sword to fight the British, no matter how weak we appeared at the time. He hoped to avoid it, and failed, because for all the press to the contrary, he was not as tactically gifted as certain portrayals made him out to be.





new topics
top topics
 
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join