ARmy Rumour SErvice

Originally Posted by ineedacigg

who really listens to anyone?, whether it is the UK ,US, China,Russia..ect.. or the other member's,

singling out the UK isn't going to help your argument either, every country has its own agenda.

My argument is that the UK is not being listened to and whether we have, or lose, nuclear capability will make no difference at all to that situation.

You and the other poster seem to think differently.

Originally Posted by ineedacigg

Do you think the world listens to the US because of there nuclear weapons? or the fact they could bomb the shit out of any country with conventional weapons without the need for anything more?,

The proof is out there!!!!

But nice that you've come around to my way of thinking.

Originally Posted by ineedacigg

UK hasn't the manpower or money to be on the same scale as the other members so keeping/replacing the trident is the only hand they have left...keep it or move aside...simples.

So now you're back to stating the 'need' for Trident (replacement) but offer nothing to explain why except to suggest the UK might win a game of cards because of it...

How exactly does Trident (replacement) give (or strengthen) the UK a 'hand'? Can you give any examples of when nuclear capability has assisted the UK's foreign policy efforts? Did it discourage the Argies, the Iraqis, the Libyans, the Malayans, PIRA, ... ANYBODY???

Originally Posted by 2505blah

Well since we are now arguing about capitalization let me just say that I am learning German and their habits towards big-letters is doing my nut right in.

Capitalisation!

More misunderstanding about Trident.

1. Its use is solely determined by our Prime Minister, we do not have to ask anyone else. The CO of the boat actually on patrol has a letter in his safe telling him what to do if the PM is u/s. Nobody except the PM knows what is in that letter.

2. It is nothing to do with 'place at the top table'. It is solely to deter a nuclear attack on the United Kingdom.

3. It has no relevance to non-nuclear shenanigans anywhere.

Think we may be going off-topic Russian ships in the Mediterranean. It seems that members are more interested in scoring points off each other rather than seeing the possible implications of the present position.

Only a few weeks ago a Russian owned, Curaçao registered freighter “Alaed” was caught off the west coast of Scotland on a voyage to deliver attack helicopters to the Syrian regime – only to have its insurance revoked by a UK company for carrying embargoed goods. Needless to say it slunk back to a Russian port, Murmansk, to effect a change of Port of Registry - something that normally takes around six weeks, it happened to two days!!! Now it has set sail again, earlier this morning its course was 180º at 12.6 knots about 40 nautical miles off the Norwegian coast, not far behind a Russian military flotilla heading for Tartus yet its initial destination is Baltiysk – where the helicopters are refurbished!!!! Then its next port of call will be Vladivostok – very strange – the present course and speed do not make any sense unless the real intention is to deliver helicopters to Syria government. The thought here is that these voyages are inextricably linked, the military flotilla’s real mission is to guarantee the delivery of the refurbished attack helicopters and to prevent anyone interfering with the Alaed or its cargo in the event of a blockade.

Source of shipping information: AIS Live, IHS Fairplay, Lloyds of London

Originally Posted by seaweed

[UK] Trident.

1. Its use is solely determined by our Prime Minister, we do not have to ask anyone else. The CO of the boat actually on patrol has a letter in his safe telling him what to do if the PM is u/s. Nobody except the PM knows what is in that letter.

2. It is nothing to do with 'place at the top table'. It is solely to deter a nuclear attack on the United Kingdom.

3. It has no relevance to non-nuclear shenanigans anywhere.

Precisely.

Originally Posted by Scavenger

Russia has had a serious presence in the Med for over six months now, because of the natural gas deposits being explored around Cyprus. It includes the carrier Admiral Kuznetsov, so they mean business. Russia is best buddies with the Republic of Cyprus. President Christofias is the first and only communist leader in Europe, he went to university in Russia, and his wife is Russian. Russia has long supported Cyprus financially, and theyhave just asked Moscow for a further 5billion Euros.

They're there as a show of strength to keep Turkey in check.

This 'serious' Russian presence would have at best a life exoectancy of 30 minutes if the Yanks cut up rough. Maybe an hour vs the Turks.
The Russians may pose and posture a bit, but they are very much the bloke at the orgy who needs a viagra pill and hasn't any.

Originally Posted by Emsav

Think we may be going off-topic Russian ships in the Mediterranean. It seems that members are more interested in scoring points off each other rather than seeing the possible implications of the present position.

Only a few weeks ago a Russian owned, Curaçao registered freighter “Alaed” was caught off the west coast of Scotland on a voyage to deliver attack helicopters to the Syrian regime – only to have its insurance revoked by a UK company for carrying embargoed goods. Needless to say it slunk back to a Russian port, Murmansk, to effect a change of Port of Registry - something that normally takes around six weeks, it happened to two days!!! Now it has set sail again, earlier this morning its course was 180º at 12.6 knots about 40 nautical miles off the Norwegian coast, not far behind a Russian military flotilla heading for Tartus yet its initial destination is Baltiysk – where the helicopters are refurbished!!!! Then its next port of call will be Vladivostok – very strange – the present course and speed do not make any sense unless the real intention is to deliver helicopters to Syria government. The thought here is that these voyages are inextricably linked, the military flotilla’s real mission is to guarantee the delivery of the refurbished attack helicopters and to prevent anyone interfering with the Alaed or its cargo in the event of a blockade.

Source of shipping information: AIS Live, IHS Fairplay, Lloyds of London

Why don't the Russians simply airlift the helos in to Syria, if that's their intention? They've got plently of big transports.

Also, who detected this freighter, and how? Wasn't Nimrods.

Originally Posted by sunnoficarus

The Russians may pose and posture a bit, but they are very much the bloke at the orgy who needs a viagra pill and hasn't any.

Probably explains why Russian women are so easy...