News: 1605857951

All of the above announcements were made in the context of a prime ministerial update on the nation’s Integrated Review of foreign, defence, security, and development policy. The full review will be delivered in early 2021.

I find it odd how a figure of billions can be decided upon before the review is completed.

Upvoted for the title alone.

(the comment was good as well)

Thanks for pointing that out. My Friday morning brain had "auto-corrected" the phrase. Is it beer o'clock yet?

@Dan 55

The military need money spending on them as their kit is getting a bit old and worn. Apparently a large portion of our tanks need replacement but every time they try the requirements keep changing and nothing gets delivered at great cost.

The aircraft carriers being a similar issue which were designed for catapults but then would cost a vastly inflated price above cost to retrofit some catapults and buy cheaper aircraft (not the vertical take off).

Getting the requirements together first would probably save the taxpayer vast sums.

We seem to have several already - at least one at Westminster, judging by the randomness of recent covid management diktats.

But seriously, given the currently abysmal quality of code I have serious reservations about applying it to surrogate thinking - particularly where the results matter. We need to improve the real thing, rather than replacing it with demonstrably less versatile and probably less reliable machinery.

The MOD is still allowed to get away with woolly thinking and 'investments' in big chunks of metal that are not in keeping with the reality of Britain's diminished role as an ex imperial power.

Britain's diminished role as a nuclear power, a permanent member of the UN Security Council, a provider of support when natural disasters strike, a political and military ally to the US, a member of NATO and a keeper of international promises.

You may not like the role that the UK plays on the world stage and it's certainly not as dominant as the late 19th century but the UK has a very strong international reputation and a recognised military capability.

If you want an example of why we need a strong military consider Hong Kong. We can't send troops in there to protect its citizens against Chinese oppression but we can project force into the South China Sea to protect the interests of other countries there, and we must protect ourselves against Chinese retaliation for upsetting them through our diplomatic work in both locations, along with any military involvement in support of (e.g.) India, Malaysia or Taiwan.

Project force? With what exactly, our aircraft carrier and its air wing and support ships?

Compared to the aggressor in that area, we are nothing, a fly in their ointment and nothing else. In that geo, they have all the advantages, including economics.

"keeper of international promises" - err, no, we _were_ viewed that way but BoJo and Chums have just burned that one. And don't think the incoming US administration hasn't noticed that. So you can also cross off "ally to the US".

So we can correct your second para. to "the UK _had_ a very strong international reputation".

Now, let's consider the "recognised military capability". Ah yes, we are recognised as the only country dumb enough to buy two new aircraft carriers and completely forget to buy any planes for them. Oh, except maybe one type that hasn't finished development yet, we won't be able to afford and relies on being a strong US ally. Oh, whoops! About that...

Ah yes, we are recognised as the only country dumb enough to buy two new aircraft carriers and completely forget to buy any planes for them. Oh, except maybe one type that hasn't finished development yet, we won't be able to afford and relies on being a strong US ally.

I would certainly agree that the indecent haste with which the UK's VTOL / STOL capability was ditched was a huge blunder that I could not understand at the time and still don't. Having said that would be Harrier still be a viable concept 10 years on from that decision? I doubt if the actual aircraft would have been, although I would like to be wrong about that.

Trying to regain some of the capability doesn't seem to be too bad a plan, although I share your concerns about the F35 and everything that it entails.

We could have installed catapults on it and then bought any of a very wide variety of existing planes and/or planes in development (including the much cheaper F35C). But, we messed up the contract (as usual) so that when we asked BAE to install them they were able to quote an eye watering large number. So we decided not to. And now we are stuck with an aircraft carrier that can only fly one specific type of aircraft that isn't in mass production yet. So the US has had to kindly lend us some (for now, at least - see above) so that it is a bit more that just a massive sitting duck as it sails around. Of course there were some conditions attached that that loan ...

” Interfering with a mobile phone to prevent a terrorist from being able to communicate with their contacts”

As someone who is well aware of the doublespeak the west is capable of, I have to wonder what they consider a “terrorist”. Anybody with a memory will remember how the definition of what constitutes an “enemy combatant” changed, during those hedonistic years of false flags and invading countries for oil.

People have reported experiences of being gang stalked, I’ve had a look into these things and while they appear barmy, there is probably some truth to their claims. We live in a hyper connected world with all manner of tools to fuck with people.

As someone who is well aware of the doublespeak the west is capable of...

Are you suggesting that doublespeak is a uniquely western phenomenon? I sincerely hope not, but at the moment - and writing as a "westerner" - I suspect that your loyalties might lie elsewhere.

Apparently all of this new cyber technology stuff (5 photogenic warriors in a darkened room with dark net shopping site images as screensavers) and space command (vinyl Union jack sticker for the side of a US rocket) is going to be world beating! World beating! just like our world beating test and trace etc etc. I guess if your world view stops about 5 inches in front of your nose, blowing your nose is world beating.

The prime minister recently said the defence budget was getting an increase to and I quote “have influence”

You know what buddy, that’s exactly how a lot of black youths probably feel when they carry knives around in public, to have influence.

Muppets

I hope the allegedly fiscally minded conservatives will make the first rocket launched from Scotland is also the first one to land in Scotland as well.

Only a fool would design an expendable rocket system now.

I hope the allegedly fiscally minded conservatives will make the first rocket launched from Scotland is also the first one to land in Scotland as well.

On Bute House, nose first?

Downvotes likely...

" the UK’s first satellite launched from a UK rocket "

The UK's satellite [1]Prospero was launched from a UK Black Arrow rocket in 1971. It is still in orbit. The UK government had already announced the cancellation of the project before the launch.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prospero_(satellite)

Yeah well, that's par for the course for UK engineering since WW2, ingloriously snatching defeat from the jaws of certain victory...