• Navy aircraft carrier will be sold after three years - and never carry jets
    209 replies, posted
[QUOTE=MaverickIB;25495963]The US might buy it. Our military gratuitously spends money, and I'm sure we wouldn't mind getting an aircraft carrier without having to build it ourselves.[/QUOTE] The US Navy has no need for carriers like these when their current and upcoming fleet does the job well enough and is designed to their doctrine and specs. There's also the American tradition of rarely buying foreign military equipment. When the Beretta 92F pistol was selected as the M1911 replacement Congress or some other body had Beretta build a factory in the US so Americans would be the ones making American weapons.
[QUOTE=Bad)-(and;25495520]If the aircraft and soldiers based on the islands can't hold off an invading force (And let's face it, they can't. There's only a thousand or so). The [I]only[/I] thing that could possibly stop any attempt at a foreign force taking the islands is our submarine fleet. Specifically HMS Astute. I can proubly say I didn't vote for Cameron.[/QUOTE] So Britain is going to sell its one aircraft carrier and suddenly we get invaded? We haven't been officaly invaded since 1066. Who is going to attack us?
FP normal thread: OMG MY COUNTRY SPENDS TOO MUCH ON WAR WAH WAH this thread; OMG NOT ENOUGH IS SPENT ON WAR WAHWAH
[QUOTE=Tac Error;25496124]There's also the American tradition of rarely buying foreign military equipment.[/QUOTE] Yet corporations in Finland, namely Enics and Vaisala are involved in a 6000.000.000€ project developing missile chips for U.S military......oh shucks, I'm leaking classified information again, somebody stop me.
[QUOTE=Vasili;25496238]So Britain is going to sell its one aircraft carrier and suddenly we get invaded? We haven't been officaly invaded since 1066. Who is going to attack us?[/QUOTE] Mainland Britain hasn't been invaded since then. The Falklands were though. And it resulted in 258 British deaths and the loss of 5 ships, 10 fighters and 24 helicopters. Or does that not count?
:foxnews: Somalian pirates taking over island after island in the Indian ocean, furthermore there are whispers that the pirates took out a loan from China. More at eleven! :foxnews:
So, what will the money be spent on instead?
[QUOTE=Zestence;25496336]Yet corporations in Finland, namely Enics and Vaisala are involved in a 6000.000.000€ project developing missile chips for U.S military......oh shucks, I'm leaking classified information again, somebody stop me.[/QUOTE] R&D, yes, but there's always some Congressman who wants military contracts to be carried out by Americans only and the military industrial complex becomes messy once again.
[QUOTE=Zestence;25496336]Yet corporations in Finland, namely Enics and Vaisala are involved in a 6000.000.000€ project developing missile chips for U.S military......oh shucks, I'm leaking classified information again, somebody stop me.[/QUOTE] Why the feckkery can't we develope something for [I]ourselves[/I] for once?
Outsourcing.
Whenever I see insane headlines like this anymore I'm always expecting it to be some US gov. organization not making any sense or speculating, promptly followed by right wingers blaming Obama for it. Glad it's not the US this time, but sucks for the Brits.
[QUOTE=Sega Saturn;25496799]Whenever I see insane headlines like this anymore I'm always expecting it to be some US gov. organization not making any sense or speculating, promptly followed by right wingers blaming Obama for it. Glad it's not the US this time, but sucks for the Brits.[/QUOTE] Heh, it's funny, because when bush was in office, everything was his fault. Now the tables have turned and it's your turn to defend the jackass who weaseled his way into presidency.
[QUOTE=Bad)-(and;25496344]Mainland Britain hasn't been invaded since then. The Falklands were though. And it resulted in 258 British deaths and the loss of 5 ships, 10 fighters and 24 helicopters. Or does that not count?[/QUOTE] One aircraft carrier will risk the invasion of the Falklands? Oh no.
god bless america [highlight](User was banned for this post ("country trolling" - GunFox))[/highlight]
I want to buy it and make it into Rivet city. :v:
How much?
This is bullshit. While I support Cameron on the whole, this really is a dick move. [QUOTE=Vasili;25496238]So Britain is going to sell its one aircraft carrier and suddenly we get invaded? We haven't been officaly invaded since 1066. Who is going to attack us?[/QUOTE] That sort of attitude has led to the start of numerous wars.
-snip-
This is why I love being an American with our massive amounts of military spending that keeps us a world super power. [editline]18th October 2010[/editline] I am just fascinated with military technology I am not country bashing or whatever
Hell, with that you could fight a small country from sea with that..
[QUOTE=Coffee;25494562]They should make everyone in the world pay £1 for a raffle ticket and whoever wins gets to keep the ship as a house.[/QUOTE] I like this idea... They make a 100% Profit, and you get to be the only sole person to own an Aircraft carrier
[QUOTE=Kalibos;25496106]Wait, what? Do you mean they're just doing away with the paratrooper branch altogether?[/QUOTE] No they said they're cutting the parachute training, not the branch. On the mission they'll just push the paratroopers and assume everything went to plan.
[QUOTE=David29;25498116] That sort of attitude has led to the start of numerous wars.[/QUOTE] See reference; WW1 and WW2. Thanks.
This reminds me of, after WW2, the US just piled up all their planes and vehicles and hardware into big heaps and burned them, because it was cheaper and easier than bringing them home :(
[QUOTE=Ridge;25503135]This reminds me of, after WW2, the US just piled up all their planes and vehicles and hardware into big heaps and burned them, because it was cheaper and easier than bringing them home :([/QUOTE] That was because after the Axis were defeated, the US military no longer had a need to field massive amounts of manpower and equipment. That and the general perception at the time that nuclear weapons would be the one-stop-shop for future conventional wars. Here the cuts are happening due to new government policy on "future threats" ([i]"the only thing we'll be fighting are militias and insurgents, not trained national armies"[/i] kind of thing) at the cost of jeopardizing the UK's power projection capabilities.
Britain is going to end up like my country. We sold our tanks for APC's, then those got stolen by pirates, we sent a whopping two fighter jets to Afganistan which killed a whopping 3 insurgents, and a C130 for supplies that drove in a ditch on take off. Oh and we also are planning to cut our entire army in half AGAIN (fourth time now). We used to have subs but those are kinda sunken now, and useless hunks of metal for expensive parties. Belgium, ho! Our asses are about as wide open as they can get, come rape us please!
[QUOTE=bravehat;25494416]This is fucking retarded, at the rate the cuts look to be going if anything fucking happens anywhere in the world we need to get involved in, or worse in our own fucking borders, then we're fucking stuck with our digits firmly inserted in our fucking rectums. Seriously, two R.A.F bases in Scotland, Kinloss and Lossiemouth could be down the pisser by the end of this which means our air superiority capabilities of our own airspace is spread extremely thin, thanks to luechers being on the chopping block as well. There's been talk of cutting parachute training for the paratroopers as well which just fucking defies logic and will have a big effect on army morale and public relations. Shit's got all fucked up real fast.[/QUOTE] Since when do we need to get involved in anything.
[QUOTE=Zestence;25495953]Yeah, I'm sure you'll feel the same way when you've spent 6 months unemployed and they're about to cut you off. I have been unemployed for about a year and I have been offered only one job thus far, and it was a two month gig delivering newspapers at 4 AM every morning. Getting a job is not as easy as you may think, when there are no jobs, there are no jobs. The office cannot "hassle" you week by week if there's nothing available.[/QUOTE] Increase defence manufacture and become like the swiss, they produce millions of weapons, aircraft and the like for the worlds nations, they make a tidy sum out of it, and if we built warships we'd be sorted cause glasgow is still amongst the best at ship building, that's where a fair few of the navies frigates were being built. I got to watch the launch of HMS Diamond :v: That thing was fucking monstrous. [editline]19th October 2010[/editline] [QUOTE=markg06;25504623]Since when do we need to get involved in anything.[/QUOTE] The typhoons stationed up here intercepted a few russian aircraft a little while back, kinda demonstrates the fact that we need to be able to police our own airspace. [editline]19th October 2010[/editline] [QUOTE=Tac Error;25503983]That was because after the Axis were defeated, the US military no longer had a need to field massive amounts of manpower and equipment. That and the general perception at the time that nuclear weapons would be the one-stop-shop for future conventional wars. Here the cuts are happening due to new government policy on "future threats" ([i]"the only thing we'll be fighting are militias and insurgents, not trained national armies"[/i] kind of thing) at the cost of jeopardizing the UK's power projection capabilities.[/QUOTE] And jeopardising our ability to fight any substantial conventional war against a modern foe, at the rate we're going we're assuming every future war is gonna be against some pissed off middle eastern farmer who's been doped up to his eyeballs and gave a rifle.
[QUOTE=Vasili;25502151]See reference; WW1 and WW2. Thanks.[/QUOTE] What the hell are you talking about? Thanks.
[QUOTE=Snuffy;25496418]So, what will the money be spent on instead?[/QUOTE] [img]http://noisepunk.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/weed.jpg[/img]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.