tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8162816964941896969.post4370423044760459468..comments2024-03-23T08:00:26.020+00:00Comments on THE MONARCHIST: Follow the FleetUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8162816964941896969.post-48734060166250540822010-01-23T02:34:20.354+00:002010-01-23T02:34:20.354+00:00Carriers are absolutely necessary to carry both ai...Carriers are absolutely necessary to carry both aircraft and troops to where they are needed. The Falklands proved that, and the insurgent wars continue to do so. What worries me more is that we continue to deplete our Navy, wholly forgetting that in any European war we absolutely rely on the sea lanes to supply us. Without Naval power we will have to capitulate within days. We are sitting too smugly thinking that the USA or our European allies will look after us, they never have before, (it took a lot of convincing to get the US in the last time), and so we should not rely it.John Scott Harrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11507250604632578039noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8162816964941896969.post-77290938913484755442009-11-18T14:35:10.055+00:002009-11-18T14:35:10.055+00:00I'll have to agree with Wells. The Blair-Brown...I'll have to agree with Wells. The Blair-Brown years have seen a massive expansion in the size of government. How many diversity officers could be dispensed with? There is plenty of fat in Whitehall, to say nothing of the welfare state.Kiplinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04838567321326673782noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8162816964941896969.post-71106551730797845552009-11-18T08:26:35.317+00:002009-11-18T08:26:35.317+00:00As much a many people do like to attach the label ...As much a many people do like to attach the label of "yesterdays" technology to aircraft carriers, the fact of the matter is that without them, expeditionary warfare in any meaningful way is not possible.<br /><br />As perverse at it may sound, the UK could not have sustained her initial effort in land-locked Afghanistan without her current carriers. Have no doubt, the future of warfare is actually a return to what we now call "expeditionary" warfare, which soldiers of Victoria's empire in the North West Frontier, would immediately recognise. It was actually the mode of industrialised warfare between WW1 and the fall of the Berlin war which was out of kilter.<br /><br />Without aircraft carriers a nation is reduced to the tier of second-ranked powers, as it looses the ability to undertake independant action. And if you actually need two platforms to have one available for operations,selling one is a false economy of the worst sort. They may as well do with out both.<br /><br />However the real question for the UK cabinet is - do they want to remain a first world power, with the ability to project power independantly, or do they see the UK as merely an adjucnt to the USA?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8162816964941896969.post-18592261303420334822009-11-18T07:44:59.740+00:002009-11-18T07:44:59.740+00:00I shouldn't worry about the carriers, they are...I shouldn't worry about the carriers, they are the battleships of the modern era. Verging on obsolete but still the symbol of naval supremacy.Lord Besthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08505734600505832039noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8162816964941896969.post-43860849222040808332009-11-18T07:28:29.461+00:002009-11-18T07:28:29.461+00:00Indeed, I think Beaverbrook has nailed that point ...Indeed, I think Beaverbrook has nailed that point on the head. In order to afford your welfare state, you need money, and right now, you've got nothing left.<br /><br />Frankly, I'm not surprised they're taking it from defence, one of those legitimate points of government expenditure that virtually everyone can agree on (except the pacifists, even though their philosophy is only pracicable due to the dying and killing of others on their behalf). It's easy to appear as an appeaser and go on arms reduction than to cut the welfare and actually give people an incentive to work for their own welfare.<br /><br />I regret to say, your Parliament is dominated by Chamberlains, and your Churchills are left marginalised and ignored in the wilderness.<br /><br />Still, there's hope. You just need a political bayonet (with some guts behind it!).Professor Lhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00659779116600213901noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8162816964941896969.post-58784419755923984612009-11-18T04:27:00.866+00:002009-11-18T04:27:00.866+00:00Britain still punches her weight, but she has fisc...Britain still punches her weight, but she has fiscally wrecked herself, and every department in Whitehall has no doubt been asked to draw blood from a stone to repair it. I can well imagine every UK government office is now looking for an aircraft carrier worth of savings to lend solvency to the country.Beaverbrookhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06957034620891207177noreply@blogger.com