by Hugh Jones
This must be something which comes close to matching the disgrace inflicted on the Navy at Chatham by the Dutch.
- Bring in “carbon trading” – giving a large number of jobs to flatbottoms.
- Consequently give the Scunthorpe steel works free to Tata who takes them to India
- Our carbon dioxide output is reduced! Large unemployment at Scunthorpe and region
- Sell our shipyards off lock stock and barrel at give away prices
- Buy ships from abroad
- Have large numbers of unemployed youth look forward to lifetime of uselessness.
Another milestone on our road to the third world destiny.
All we need now are pygmy women crews to “man” them – particularly if we save money by having minature ships – which would be much more environmentally friendly of course to say nothing about being cheaper – then we could have some more flatbottoms with the money we “save”.
Discover more from The Libertarian Alliance
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“Buy ships from abroad”
Even that would be better than:
a) Having fewer than 20 surface warships
b) Buying 2 aircraft carriers, but not having enough money for any aircraft to fly from said carriers
c) Sharing these carriers with a foreign navy – the French navy!
I should think Nelson is spinning in his grave.
I don’t have a problem with buying military hardware from abroad. We buy our nukes from abroad, after all. I do have a problem with a country that apparently can’t afford to operate its planned aircraft carriers giving money to Indians who don’t even want it.
I still don’t see the justification for saying we can’t afford the aircraft carriers anyway. As a proportion of spending, they’re rather trivial.
“I do have a problem with a country that apparently can’t afford to operate its planned aircraft carriers giving money to Indians who don’t even want it”
I’m not saying we shouldn’t have the carriers – but they’re fairly useless without aircraft. And I agree about buying hardware from abroad – who cares where it comes from provided it works properly when needed?
As regards aid to India, it’s been said before that it’s rather odd giving aid to a nuclear armed country. Obviously, they have as much right as anyone else to defend themselves, but surely you should “cut your cloth…”, etc.
Back to aircraft carriers, I think we should be buying 4, and the aircraft to fly from them, plus the support/escort ships required. With only 2, the chances of both being out of commission at the same time is unacceptably high. With 4, you’ve at least a fighting chance of 1 being available all the time.
Amen. I am literally dumbfounded every day by government stupidity and horrified at its growth rate. So what if we get in a war and they won’t sell us parts to fix our warships? What if they refuse to accept worthless dollars in exchange for goods? These kinds of questions are so obvious it is hard to imagine any government official not asking them. Yet this is just one more example of government insanity.
So what if we get in a war and they won’t sell us parts to fix our warships?
If we ever get in a war where the Yanks are on the other side, we are entirely fucked anyway.
Simplest thing to do would have been to buy four Nimitz class carriers off the shelf, instead of about two decades designing and re-designing our own second-rate ones, then not being able to afford them anyway. Yes, I’m in favour of four too. Not just for the “out of action” problem highlighted by P Robinson, but also because if you’ve only got two, you’re seriously damaged if the enemy sink one, even if it’s a lucky shot they can’t likely repeat. And if you’ve only got one, you’ll always be too scared to send it into theatre, in case it gets sunk.
But ah, who cares? We’ve been deliberately managed into decline. There’s probably no going back at this late stage.
“Not just for the “out of action” problem highlighted by P Robinson, but also because if you’ve only got two, you’re seriously damaged if the enemy sink one, even if it’s a lucky shot they can’t likely repeat. And if you’ve only got one, you’ll always be too scared to send it into theatre, in case it gets sunk.”
Correct – in fact a far more important consideration given what warships are actually for.
I’d also expand the Sumbarine arm massively. Then, whoever the enemy is will also have issues about deploying his own expensive warships. If Britain is too full of clueless chavs now to be able to man sumbarines effectively, I’m sure we could hire enough Chinese from Hong Kong, who have always in my experience been far brighter and more intellectually-engaged than your average human. I teach two at present and they are sharp young people.
“I’d also expand the Sumbarine arm massively”
So would I. However, back to aircraft carriers – http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/9117367/Navy-aircraft-carrier-plans-hit-by-further-delays.html
I think we’ll be lucky if we end up with 1 usable carrier (with some aeroplanes) by about 2030.