Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

reddog

Britain Has To Buy Cruise Missles Before Attacking Isil/isis/is

Recommended Posts

Heard a good phrase on HPC the other day "Britain is a nation of luxury cars filled with a fiver's worth of petrol"

Is this the military equivalent?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2771386/Britain-buys-20-Tomahawk-missiles-ready-strike-IS-1million-bombs-fired-submarines-programmed-turn-corners.html

Seems a bit mind blowing they haven't got 20 spare cruise missiles! I guess they did use quite a few in Libya a few years ago (funny you don't here too much about that place in the news, must have turn out really well for them!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It does seem we (UK) are flashers with empty trousers!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seeing as one of Her Majesty's Tomahawk Equipped Submarines is already lurking in the gulf presumably with the missiles already on board this is probably the usual tripe trotted out by the Mail.

To be honest a Tomahawk is no better than a 500Ib bomb in this campaign. Tomahawks only real advantage is where your air crew are in imminent danger of being lost in the attempt to deliver the weapon payload.

IS have little to present in the way of an air threat. Aircraft can do the job without the grandstanding of using expensive submarine launched missiles.

The UK often buys 'blocks' of these weapons from the US. They form an important part of our Royal Navy strategic weapons systems.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomahawk_(missile)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish I was a General! I would like to bomb people and their wives and pets and children, and only have to answer to God, in whom I disbelieve! But first, there's always some negotiation you could do! But you don't need to vote for MrPin, do you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish I was a General! I would like to bomb people and their wives and pets and children, and only have to answer to God, in whom I disbelieve! But first, there's always some negotiation you could do! But you don't need to vote for MrPin, do you?

Just think if you lived in the 1930's You could have ignored the Nazi's and what they did to the jews as well.

I don't like one little bit either but sometimes you just have to do the least worst thing..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seeing as one of Her Majesty's Tomahawk Equipped Submarines is already lurking in the gulf presumably with the missiles already on board this is probably the usual tripe trotted out by the Mail.

To be honest a Tomahawk is no better than a 500Ib bomb in this campaign. Tomahawks only real advantage is where your air crew are in imminent danger of being lost in the attempt to deliver the weapon payload.

IS have little to present in the way of an air threat. Aircraft can do the job without the grandstanding of using expensive submarine launched missiles.

The UK often buys 'blocks' of these weapons from the US. They form an important part of our Royal Navy strategic weapons systems.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomahawk_(missile)

Anything that highlights the ludicrous costs of our foreign ventures is ok by me. Would not mind if others with broader shoulders got involved...Germany for one. Meanwhile we have have a 44 billion pound defense budget that gets us little international advantage other than grief....is actually almost half the pension budget.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anything that highlights the ludicrous costs of our foreign ventures is ok by me. Would not mind if others with broader shoulders got involved...Germany for one. Meanwhile we have have a 44 billion pound defense budget that gets us little international advantage other than grief....is actually almost half the pension budget.

I would need to read further to see if the rules have been changed but Germany are very restricted in what they can do with their troops abroad.

This is a result of their treaty obligations following on from WW2 arranged by the allied powers.**

They can not for example act in any offensive (attacking or combat troops) capability, their forces are strictly defensive and are trained as such. They do get involved though from time to time and did send a few Nuclear and Biological warfare decontamination units (these are not cheap by any stretch of the imagination) to Iraq/Kuwait for GW1 the perfectly legal operation to kick Saddam out of Kuwait and the illegal GW2 where Bush and Blair had a huge hard on for war.....

**All something to do with a little chap with a a moustache and his hobby of invading neighbouring countries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

War is a racket.

These sort of campaigns with no serious discernible war aims or long term strategic planning are the worst of all

It is just a mechanism for funneling tax payers money in perpetuity to large corporations.

Anyone who thinks the UKs 6 Tornado bombers are going to make IS/ISIS/ISIL or whatever they call themselves jack it in and take up macrame needs their heads examined.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great, France and the UK, with f**ked up economies, have to fork out a million per missile whilst Germany sits it out.

that was always the plan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

War is a racket.

These sort of campaigns with no serious discernible war aims or long term strategic planning are the worst of all

It is just a mechanism for funneling tax payers money in perpetuity to large corporations.

Anyone who thinks the UKs 6 Tornado bombers are going to make IS/ISIS/ISIL or whatever they call themselves jack it in and take up macrame needs their heads examined.

we've got a few more than 6!!

..and they STILL pack a punch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would need to read further to see if the rules have been changed but Germany are very restricted in what they can do with their troops abroad.

This is a result of their treaty obligations following on from WW2 arranged by the allied powers.**

They can not for example act in any offensive (attacking or combat troops) capability, their forces are strictly defensive and are trained as such. They do get involved though from time to time and did send a few Nuclear and Biological warfare decontamination units (these are not cheap by any stretch of the imagination) to Iraq/Kuwait for GW1 the perfectly legal operation to kick Saddam out of Kuwait and the illegal GW2 where Bush and Blair had a huge hard on for war.....

**All something to do with a little chap with a a moustache and his hobby of invading neighbouring countries.

depends what you call offensive doesn't it.

goading other people/nations to attack your enemies on your behalf should also be considered offensive.

as for bush and blair..who do they work for??

bush..aka scherf is german.

blair is irish(republican)..educated at fettes, edinburg, but his son ewan holds irish passport...he's irish.

now not all irish are cut from the same cloth, there are some(like my grandad), who voulenteered for the british army when nazism was marching thrugh europe...also should add that he was also born in the south and also roman catholic...just to rub salt into the wounds.

there were others(like de valera), that made his life hell after the war when he went back home..and then a few years later he came over here.

blair is in the "de valera" camp.

no friend of mine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great, France and the UK, with f**ked up economies, have to fork out a million per missile whilst Germany sits it out.

Nobody is forcing us or France, it's the bozos in Westminster who voluntarily decided to waste some more of our tax money (I wonder what the kickbacks are for them...).

Blame the MPs, not Germany.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody is forcing us or France, it's the bozos in Westminster who voluntarily decided to waste some more of our tax money (I wonder what the kickbacks are for them...).

Blame the MPs, not Germany.

hold on a minute, as members of NATO they are OBLIGED to pitch in and help a fellow nato country that is under attack.

at the very least they should be putting trade embargo on the likes of iran(if they aren't willing to chip in militarily, they should pull their weight commercially), but they aren't..companies like siemens have quite a big stake in some of their nuclear projects.

...also giving dolphin subs to isreal,but I suspect germany is trying to hedge it's bets and play one off against the other.

there's plenty of evidence showing demographic warfare s under way.

the hardline islamists use IED's, marxists(and the counter-reformation) use IUD's.

if they are not willing to pitch in, then maybe we need some better club rules for nato..and some(like turkey which will turn hostile), should be removed from the umbrella of protection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody is forcing us or France, it's the bozos in Westminster who voluntarily decided to waste some more of our tax money (I wonder what the kickbacks are for them...).

Blame the MPs, not Germany.

Directorships in BAE Systems, Ratheon ect....

NATO obligations only kick in if a member state is directly attacked. There is supposed to be some benchmark where 2% of GDP per annum is spent on defence but only us and the US take any notice of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

we've got a few more than 6!!

..and they STILL pack a punch.

I am afraid 6 is all the RAF have committed so far to this conflict regardless of the number sitting on the runway in the UK. Our commitment currently is one aircraft less than the 7 F16 the Danes are sending. As one journalist has already pointed out the RAF actually deployed more aircraft for Bournemouth airday than they are sending to this conflict. To me it looks like a largely symbolic gesture to support US policy. I don't think the Yanks are that impressed with our military 'punch'. In fact our armed services have been more of a hinderance than a help to them recently.

Anyway the only way to ensure the destruction of ISIS etc from the air is to carpet bomb the area from Baghdad to Damascus and the Turkish border killing everything that moves not pissing about with laser guided missiles trying to target insurgents on motor bikes. That policy would require the use of serious heavy bombers like the B52. Of course, no western politician has the guts to support that policy even though it would probably be the one way to use air power to drive home the consequences of taking on the west to the Islamic nut jobs who are so keen to join the Iraqi insurgency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed, as the IS fighters are spread out, and intermingled with the local civilian population, it is pretty hard to see how a great deal of damage will be done without also killing a lot of civilians.

pissing about with laser guided missiles trying to target insurgents on motor bikes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More importantly, even if a concerted war effort does manage to push IS into submission, then the most likely outcome will be the formation of a new extremist group to take over the power vacuum; and then you're back to square one.

In this sort of tribal/sectarian environment only strong dictatorships, or a strong occupancy, are likely to be able to prevent descent into civil war and inhibit formation of militant groups. Neither of these options are politically acceptable to outsiders, hence any intervention from outside is likely to make the problem worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More importantly, even if a concerted war effort does manage to push IS into submission, then the most likely outcome will be the formation of a new extremist group to take over the power vacuum; and then you're back to square one.

In this sort of tribal/sectarian environment only strong dictatorships, or a strong occupancy, are likely to be able to prevent descent into civil war and inhibit formation of militant groups. Neither of these options are politically acceptable to outsiders, hence any intervention from outside is likely to make the problem worse.

Doctor Chump! I'm your patient, and my bum hurts! :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not agree with WAR!

This isn't war, it's dropping bombs on brown people who believe in a different sky fairy to the sky fairy the UK (doesn't) believes in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This isn't war, it's dropping bombs on brown people who believe in a different sky fairy to the sky fairy the UK (doesn't) believes in.

That's great then.! I can dress up as a Bishop again, and drive around King's Cross at 04:00 hours!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More importantly, even if a concerted war effort does manage to push IS into submission, then the most likely outcome will be the formation of a new extremist group to take over the power vacuum; and then you're back to square one.

In this sort of tribal/sectarian environment only strong dictatorships, or a strong occupancy, are likely to be able to prevent descent into civil war and inhibit formation of militant groups. Neither of these options are politically acceptable to outsiders, hence any intervention from outside is likely to make the problem worse.

My sentiments exactly.

When Bush and Blair allied to topple Saddam in GW2 they broke the Iraqi state and destabilised the whole region.Since then there have been a number of Sunni insurgencies against the Shia dominated state the US created in Iraq. ISIS is just the latest manifestation of that process made more dangerous because it has dragged Syria into the mix thanks to the way the west mishandled the Arab spring. The idea that we can bomb this broken political structure back into some coherent form is laughable. To be honest the best outcome would be for the US and is allies to recognise that some sort of functioning Sunni state needs to be carved out of the rebel areas Syria and Iraq but to ensure that the people running it are not Islamic fanatics. Unfortunately that would mean admitting that the best governmental solution would be Sunni strong man along the lines of Saddam Mark 2 to keep the beards in order and that most of the pretexts for GW2 were wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   203 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.