ARmy Rumour SErvice

To be honest if we are silly enough to take on China then I wouldn't expect the UK to bail us out. It would appear the UKs armed forces are stretched enough as it is.

Originally Posted by History_Man

Shit - it's arrived and it's called the Coalition Government: Cameron, Clegg and Osborne cannot look at anything without comprehensively fucking it up

North Pole - one for the Danes and Norgies I'm afraid

Baltics - a problem for Germany, Sweden, Finland and Poland

Poland - a probem for Germany and Poland

Turkey - a problem for Turkey

Southern Med seaboard (North African littoral) - a problem for UK as France, Italy and Spain will send the illigals through to a country where they get free everything.(Greece is out of the equation)- No as the Greeks will be flooding into the UK as well.

Africa - I quite fancy a holiday in Nigeria, all those dusky maidens, 419 scams, etc.

Iraq, Iran, China, India, water wars - too far away and anyway, we've got a drought of our own (allegedly)

The RN will be required to protect our coastline and our Overseas Territories and that's it (who would want to fight awar with Slovakia?)

Fixed that for you

Originally Posted by Gobbly wobbly

The real threat from China is not its military power but its economic might. There is no need for China to attack Australia, it could cripple the Australian economy overnight by not buying coal. The Aussie economy is heavily dependent on flogging natural resources to China. If the Chinese stop buying from them they join the rest of the world in economic crisis. You just might see a change of tune with regard to All things Chinese at that point.

India is an up and coming superpower. You just might find that America's shift to the east may be supported by the Indians. They could credibly counter the Chinese threat as they seem to have the necessary population to counter the Chinese hoards if we bung them some high level military tech.

China I think cannot afford not to buy Austrailian coal as 2/3's of its power comes from coal power stations, not given that China has the worlds biggest coal reserves and its cheap (UK buy the shitty stuff for example).

Even given that fact if China does "blackmail" Auzzy what message will that send to the world?

China now needs the World as much as we need them. I think I could manage for a year or so without a 1 Pound tee shirt,plastic toys and forgo my new iPhone 5, we all do that and China is in free fall.

India as reported this year has a massive Military but is not capable of a combat role on all its fronts. Even their Chiefs of Staff said so.

They have also just reported a growth rate of only 5.3 % in the first quater (which is half asw as expected) and with a 27% drop against the green back they are feeling the Global pinch just as much.

Originally Posted by History_Man

Bud, you know that I'm not a Little Englander, far from it; but the strategic picture in Whitehall is one of trading cash for time and distance i.e. it costs lots of cash to mainatin a credible and effective defence capability, cash that we don't have at the moment (and may never have again), but sitting where we do in North West Europe we can trade in space i.e. physical distance from any likely crisis and time i.e. crudely, time to get here and also, strategically, time to re-arm as the economy improves (ahem). If others won't do the business, then in the broadest sense it is not our problem, although I don't think that the situation is too far gone (yet). Re. Putin, he's got enough troubles at home and there s no appetite in Russia's newly resurgent middle class for more wars on Russia's borders; also the (Muslim) natives are getting increasingly restive. No reason for Judge K to leave - where you are is a long way from anywhere.

I do understand that you would reject the term Little Englander and fully concur with your rejection given your circumstances, somewhat misaligned as they are...

However, I just do not support the thesis that others are prepared to do the business in defending their own interests. Hence, I empathise with the American.s for their strategic re-orientation of their forces to face their greatest threat.

In a move to re-orientate this thread, it will leave the North Atlantic and several other bits of Europe without a credible defence . Discuss.

Originally Posted by Honky Tonk Donk

By the sounds of it, you would be happy for the UK to knock heads with China simply because of outdated sentimental links to Australia and NZ? Personally I consider such beliefs to be dangerously misguided. It’s these false notions of loyalty that could well see us getting dragged into an unnecessary conflict with a country we should be making vast sums of money off instead.

Personally I don’t think we morally owe Australia, NZ or indeed anyone in the Far East anything and I doubt they would seriously suggest otherwise.

I would disagree, as someone involved in languages, our shared cultures are an incredible source of energy, mutual understanding and a fundamental reason to work with each other and protect each when the time comes.

The thread is about the North Atlantic becoming bereft of USN, as a tangent, in a global economy Brit Mil can not, obviously, contain itself to the North Atlantic, and therefore, I can envisage Brit Mil becoming engaged in support of Australia or New Zealand.

We have a debt to history, and to suggest making money off Commonwealth countries is beyond the pale.

Originally Posted by Kromeriz

I do understand that you would reject the term Little Englander and fully concur with your rejection given your circumstances, somewhat misaligned as they are...

However, I just do not support the thesis that others are prepared to do the business in defending their own interests. Hence, I empathise with the American.s for their strategic re-orientation of their forces to face their greatest threat.

In a move to re-orientate this thread, it will leave the North Atlantic and several other bits of Europe without a credible defence . Discuss.

The problem is this - if others cannot be bothered to defend their own interests, then we are no longer in a position to do it for them; the US has made the correct decison and reorientated its naval forces towards the prevailing threat; our European neighbours and allies are going to have to get their act together and if they don't want to, then there is no point coming running to either us or the US. The French will quickly regret electing Hollande - Sarkozy may have been a little weasel, but he had a strategic grasp of France's place in the world and it's pivotal role in European defence; Monsieur Flanby has a strategic grasp of Valerie Trierweiler's arrse. The EU can do significantly more, if it wants to, but the willingness and determination have to be there - wishbone is no substitute for backbone.

Originally Posted by History_Man

The problem is this - if others cannot be bothered to defend their own interests, then we are no longer in a position to do it for them; the US has made the correct decison and reorientated its naval forces towards the prevailing threat; our European neighbours and allies are going to have to get their act together and if they don't want to, then there is no point coming running to either us or the US. The French will quickly regret electing Hollande - Sarkozy may have been a little weasel, but he had a strategic grasp of France's place in the world and it's pivotal role in European defence; Monsieur Flanby has a strategic grasp of Valerie Trierweiler's arrse. The EU can do significantly more, if it wants to, but the willingness and determination have to be there - wishbone is no substitute for backbone.

Too true. However, what should happen should the Bear become more aggressive in response to worsening oil revenues?

How should Brit Mil with a dysfunctional RN protect Brit interests in the near abroad of the Middle East or the African Atlantic seaboard?

Originally Posted by Kromeriz

Too true. However, what should happen should the Bear become more aggressive in response to worsening oil revenues?

How should Brit Mil with a dysfunctional RN protect Brit interests in the near abroad of the Middle East of African seaboard?

Would the Russians realy attempt to take on the EU and NATO? I don't know - Putin is aggressive but has problems galore; I suppose that he could try and depose Lukaskenko and annex Belarus as some sort of peacekeeping operation to reign in an errant 'dictator', but it would alert both NATO and the EU as never before and would probably provide a convenient excuse for reversing the decline in Europe's military capabilities. We tried an East of Suez strategy in the 1960s and it didn't work - as Ugly so rightly said the RN needs to concentrate on the Atlantic Ocean (North and South) and, I would add, the Caribbean and Mediterranean Seas; also, it should have more firepower than Ugly believes necessary. I honestly think that after the successful conclusion of Op ELLAMY, the RN and RAFs fortunes are on the rise and it is the Army that will be heavily cut. Our only involvement onthe African seaboard will be Op Atalanta. The SoS has cut the Army by stealth and will do so again.