Navy aircraft carrier will be sold after three years - and never carry jets
209 replies, posted
[QUOTE=bravehat;25513016]Who says I'm for rampant militarism?
Teach me to be a self righteous asshole with a superiority complex who is convinced he knows exactly how the future will go.
And dude at the end of the day you seem to have one crucial thing I posted
WE HAVE DIFFERING OPINIONS, WE WILL NEVER BE CONVINCED EITHER WAY [B]SO WE SHOULD DROP THIS NOW[/B]![/QUOTE]
you never said this. You just said we have differing opinions.
Well I thought it kinda went without saying dude, what with you being a smart individual and all that lark.
[QUOTE=bravehat;25512691]
I'm just saying it's a bit retarded having the paratroopers untrained in their own skill.
[/QUOTE]
Yeah, tell me about it lol. Another idea they had was to cut the amount down to about 200 lads from around 2000. Utter shit.
As for the likelihood of you getting shipped, it depends on what battalion you join. 2 just got sent and wont be back for 1 year maybe 2.. 3 might make a return, but 1 is always out there (SFSG attachment)
Have you applied yet?
Nah I'm still considering it, have been for the best part of two years but I'm still weighing everything up, and before I even attempted to get in I'd want to do a good 6 months of training and the like to get myself relatively comfortable with anything physical they can throw at me.
I wouldn't really mind getting shipped out to be honest, if I die I die and that's all there is to it, now getting caught in an I.E.D blast or getting shot, now that would suck but that's why you get paid for occupational hazards :v:
Honestly the worst part would be shaving off my beard, I would constantly feel naked without it :smithicide:
from strongest naval power in the world to this, England has fallen so far
[QUOTE=Joazzz;25496651]Why the feckkery can't we develope something for [I]ourselves[/I] for once?[/QUOTE]
Because even Roll Royce is not made in Germany and just assembled in England.
[QUOTE=OrionChronicles;25514709]from strongest naval power in the world to this, England has fallen so far[/QUOTE]
What does having a massive navy sitting around do for you?
[QUOTE=Warhol;25517081]What does having a massive navy sitting around do for you?[/QUOTE]
You mean aside from act as an offensive/defensive weapon in times in war and act as deterrent when at peace?
Unless you think we won Trafalgar by throwing rocks at the enemy ships.
[QUOTE=David29;25517686]You mean aside from act as an offensive/defensive weapon in times in war and act as deterrent when at peace?
Unless you think we won Trafalgar by throwing rocks at the enemy ships.[/QUOTE]
He doesn't understand some things, don't worry
While I do agree that military defense shouldn't be a HUGE percent of the budget, Warhol is completely wrong in this case. By not having a strong military, you're taking a serious risk in case you ever get attacked. And before you say "hurr hurr who would invade england", it CAN happen. That kind of "Oh, of course we're safe! Nobody would ever attack us" has caused a LOT of countries to get invaded. Although it super-duper-unlikely, wars between massive western nations can still occur, even today.
EDIT: The benefit of having a strong, standing navy is higher than the cost
[QUOTE=BobIsAwesome;25517774]While I do agree that military defense shouldn't be a HUGE percent of the budget, Warhol is completely wrong in this case. By not having a strong military, you're taking a serious risk in case you ever get attacked. And before you say "hurr hurr who would invade england", it CAN happen. That kind of "Oh, of course we're safe! Nobody would ever attack us" has caused a LOT of countries to get invaded. Although it super-duper-unlikely, wars between massive western nations can still occur, even today.[/QUOTE]
And a strong military can protect your citizens and stuff, in the long run it's a lot better to have than to not
[QUOTE=Tac Error;25496124]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]
I dont blame them. From a 1 person view it is a retarded idea, but think about how many guns they have to make. They would hire a gigantic amount of workers
[editline]19th October 2010[/editline]
[QUOTE=OrionChronicles;25514709]from strongest naval power in the world to this, England has fallen so far[/QUOTE]
weren't Brits passed by Americans long ago? Besides Naval war is getting replaced with airforce, the only new ships they make are for carrying the airplanes, Navy isnt as much as a bargaining tool as it was long ago. The taliban are almost impervious(if that isnt correct please ignore) to ships because they are inland
Of course they were, they're still a very powerful country but they aren't as they once were back before the USA came to be, they used to be the best of the best Navy wise
[QUOTE=toaster468;25517832]Besides Naval war is getting replaced with airforce, the only new ships they make are for carrying the airplanes[/quote]
Nope. Surface warfare ships are still in wide use and today, carrier aviation is useful for projecting sea power onto land.
[quote]Navy isnt as much as a bargaining tool as it was long ago. The taliban are almost impervious(if that isnt correct please ignore) to ships because they are inland[/QUOTE]
Not much of a bargaining tool? Heard of Alfred Mahan's concept of sea power? If some third world country did things that America don't want them to do then you can be sure the US Navy will send over a carrier battle group and perhaps an amphibious squadron as a show of force.
Imagine playing Paintball/Airsoft in that that would be amazing.
[QUOTE=Aznsniper911;25518854]Imagine playing Paintball/Airsoft in that that would be amazing.[/QUOTE]I can see it now... :rolleyes:
Notice it's Scotland based airbases getting the worst deal. The Tories never did like us.
[QUOTE=David29;25517686]You mean aside from act as an offensive/defensive weapon in times in war and act as deterrent when at peace?
Unless you think we won Trafalgar by throwing rocks at the enemy ships.[/QUOTE]
uhhhhhhhhhh, the battle almost 200 years ago?
who poses a threat to the UK?
[QUOTE=David29;25517686]You mean aside from act as an offensive/defensive weapon in times in war and act as deterrent when at peace?
Unless you think we won Trafalgar by throwing rocks at the enemy ships.[/QUOTE]
uhhhhhhhhhh, the battle almost 200 years ago?
who poses a threat to the UK?
[editline]20th October 2010[/editline]
[QUOTE=Tetracycline;25517709]He doesn't understand some things, don't worry[/QUOTE]
And you're a childish and homophobic shit poster, i think you should leave
[editline]20th October 2010[/editline]
[QUOTE=BobIsAwesome;25517774]While I do agree that military defense shouldn't be a HUGE percent of the budget, Warhol is completely wrong in this case. By not having a strong military, you're taking a serious risk in case you ever get attacked. And before you say "hurr hurr who would invade england", it CAN happen. That kind of "Oh, of course we're safe! Nobody would ever attack us" has caused a LOT of countries to get invaded. Although it super-duper-unlikely, wars between massive western nations can still occur, even today.
EDIT: The benefit of having a strong, standing navy is higher than the cost[/QUOTE]
Not really, the cost sucks the country dry and poses a threat.
This is 2010, not 1800. War isn't going to hit a 1st world country for absolutely no fucking reason.
[QUOTE=Warhol;25521386]uhhhhhhhhhh, the battle almost 200 years ago?[/quote]
That is completely irrelevant to my point.
[QUOTE=Warhol;25521386]who poses a threat to the UK?[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Warhol;25521386]This is 2010, not 1800. War isn't going to hit a 1st world country for absolutely no fucking reason.[/QUOTE]
You're thick as the Earths mantle if you don't understand that things can change very quickly and things can move very rapidly, even in today's world. Pearl Harbour, the Korean War, the Falklands War - in each case things went from relative calm to war. You're equally as thick if you don't realise how long it takes to build new ships - it takes years, not days or months. If we completely reduced our navy down to a minuscule size and then we went to war with some country with at least a moderate navy, we would be screwed.
But I forgot you can see into the fucking future, can't you?
[QUOTE=Warhol;25521386]uhhhhhhhhhh, the battle almost 200 years ago?
who poses a threat to the UK?
[editline]20th October 2010[/editline]
And you're a childish and homophobic shit poster, i think you should leave
[editline]20th October 2010[/editline]
Not really, the cost sucks the country dry and poses a threat.
This is 2010, not 1800. War isn't going to hit a 1st world country for absolutely no fucking reason.[/QUOTE]
Russia's skirmish with Georgia proves otherwise.
War will always exist as long as human nature is flawed, so it's never leaving us, best to prepare for it to deter attacks and save lives than to not have it and have a nation slaughtered.
What an outrage, we're spending less on killing and more on people!?
[QUOTE=IStanI;25526772]What an outrage, we're spending less on killing and more on people!?[/QUOTE]
Well done for completely not understanding how the military and defence works. I'm guessing you're one of those people who believes the world can exist peacefully as long as armies didn't exist?
[QUOTE=bravehat;25525470]Russia's skirmish with Georgia proves otherwise.
War will always exist as long as human nature is flawed, so it's never leaving us, best to prepare for it to deter attacks and save lives than to not have it and have a nation slaughtered.[/QUOTE]
Russia had every right to protect Ossetia.
Except tha military build-up sucks the economy dry and usually ends in the nation fucking something up.
like Iraq
[editline]20th October 2010[/editline]
[QUOTE=David29;25527500]Well done for completely not understanding how the military and defence works. I'm guessing you're one of those people who believes the world can exist peacefully as long as armies didn't exist?[/QUOTE]
You have to be naive as fuck to think your country doesn't use that military for anything other for defence.
[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]
Didn't vote Tory or Lib Dems, and man, what a good idea that turned out to be. Didn't do much, but I feel good about myself, even whilst they shit all over the country.
(And Scotland will no doubt suffer, we always do when the Tories are in power)
[QUOTE=David29;25525374]That is completely irrelevant to my point.
You're thick as the Earths mantle if you don't understand that things can change very quickly and things can move very rapidly, even in today's world. Pearl Harbour, the Korean War, the Falklands War - in each case things went from relative calm to war. You're equally as thick if you don't realise how long it takes to build new ships - it takes years, not days or months. If we completely reduced our navy down to a minuscule size and then we went to war with some country with at least a moderate navy, we would be screwed.
But I forgot you can see into the fucking future, can't you?[/QUOTE]
Every single one of those events was a trigger of some sort of event. Even before hand, people knew they were dangerous.
You seem to fucking think it's perfectly ok to waste money on a massive military and NOT work on foreign policy.
You fucking militarists are like angsty teenagers who think you should kill anyone you don't like and claim it to be pre-emptive. Your stupid cowboy ideology LED to the rise of Hitler, Vietnam, 90% of modern dictators, the cold war, Iraq, Al Queda and pretty much most modern Islamic extremism.
[editline]20th October 2010[/editline]
So when your ideals stop slaughtering thousands of people, come back to me.
[QUOTE=Warhol;25527734]Every single one of those events was a trigger of some sort of event. Even before hand, people knew they were dangerous.
You seem to fucking think it's perfectly ok to waste money on a massive military and NOT work on foreign policy.
You fucking militarists are like angsty teenagers who think you should kill anyone you don't like and claim it to be pre-emptive. Your stupid cowboy ideology LED to the rise of Hitler, Vietnam, 90% of modern dictators, the cold war, Iraq, Al Queda and pretty much most modern Islamic extremism.
[editline]20th October 2010[/editline]
So when your ideals stop slaughtering thousands of people, come back to me.[/QUOTE]
Your arguments have just been downgraded from 'crap' to 'laughable'. Pearl Harbour was preceeded by promises from Japan at new attempts to build bridges and repair relations. So much for foreign policy. If things were that simple, Argentina would have sought political means to retake the Falklands. Also, don't confuse bad leadership for miliatarism - it's exactly this sort of thing that leads me to be you know sod all about what it even is.
But whatever, I can't be bothered wasting my time on you. You lost all credibility in my books when you claimed Sweden had no air force.
P.s. Don't assume to know what my ideals are you presumptuous dolt.
And the embargo had... nothing to do with it?
Name me one militaristic country that did not escalate into bad use.
[editline]20th October 2010[/editline]
You act like a fucked up 12 year old who wanks it to the military. IF you want to be a 'omg the military iz soooo cool' child, then be my guest. Don't talk about credibility until then.
[editline]20th October 2010[/editline]
Your posts are 99% "lol ur wrong " and 1% "military is so awesome!".
Non-American aircraft carriers STILL use ramps?
Why is it so hard to use a proper catapult?
I am really afraid of living in our country nowadays. The government is a loose fucking cannon when it comes to fixing the last governments shit-ups, ever since Thatcher. Argentina can go ahead and have the Falklands back because we don't have shit to defend it. That's just an example - I reckon we lack forces to defend even our own mainland. If somebody wanted to take this country it would be like taking Poland in 1939.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.