Not enough to go round

Not enough to go round

What’s happening in the Gulf is both exceeding dangerous, and in terms of a Brexit government’s request for European Union’s military help quite amusing. Britain was set up by Trump’s Govt and then let down when asked for military help, but the military reason we need to ask for help is that the UK only has 19 surface ships and one of the reasons for this dramatic reduction is the decision to build the two aircraft carriers and four ICBM carrying submarines. I have written about the Aircraft Carriers and the Missile subs before. The former are the results of New Labour’s pork barrel politics and the subs are also useless and will be more so in the future. … …

Cod Wars 4.0

Cod Wars 4.0

While writing Labour’s new Red Lines, I looked at Common Market 2.0 which promises to exit the Common Fisheries Policy. How can we do that? The British quotas were sold and bought by other EU member entities. Who’s going to compensate the current quota holders? Are we to return to the Cod Wars because the EU is not Iceland and the French by themselves now have more surface warships than the Royal Navy. …

Vulnerable

This popped up in one of my news feeds, it’s at the Daily Mail online site, but interesting and informed. Hastings argues that the two new ‘Fleet’ carriers planned for the Royal Navy, although unfinished are already obsolete.

He argues that they are very expensive and their strike power could be replaced with cruise missiles and drones which require considerably cheaper launch platforms. It is proposed that we buy US F35 warplanes to fly off them which are so expensive, that the numbers to be purchased have been reduced twice. The F35 is multi-role which means that it has an air defence capability but missiles (if you have enough) are good for fleet defence. Hastings also states, that the Navy now only has 17 surface warships all of which would all be needed to defend the carriers at sea which would be very vulnerable to the modern surface to surface anti-ship missiles.

He argues for their cancellation or mothballing, but while the decisions were taken under a Labour Government, the Tories have had seven years to do something about it and inherited responsibility with the publication of the 2010 Strategic Defence Review. …

First Strike & Secrecy

I can’t believe that a refusal to countenance a nuclear first strike is seen as a sign of weakness. I have written several times over the last two years about the dangerous imbalance in the Tory defence strategies. Weak conventional arms means that nuclear annihilation is more likely not less. A military that can only throw nuclear bricks will have to do so. The ballistic missile fleet is a deterrent not an asset. It’s use would mean it’s failed.

One thing I had not considered though is whether the submarines can stay hidden for their 20 year expected life time. This article in Open Democracy quotes the Tory Chair of the Commons Defence select committee who questions whether the current submarines’ technology will be able to keep up with the growing surveillance technology. They supplement this by  citing numerous ex-Defence Secretary’s opposition and add in Colin Powell for good measure. …

Paper Tiger

The Tories announce their commitments on defence; they announce that they’ll build a new seaborne strategic nuclear deterrent; while failing to fund enough soldiers, weapons, war planes and surface warships to defend us against the next threat. The Tories have put us in the position where we have a Navy with aircraft carriers without planes FFS, and will rent the ‘planes from the French if we need them; and they’re not the enemy 😉  Today’s subs don’t deter Russia, ISIS nor the Argentine Government in the 1980’s. It’s possible of course that a ICBM in the hands of Fallon would deter someone, but probably not; he’s a joke.

trident-holyloch

 …