Army ‘to be cut by 20,000’ if No 10 plan is approved

No.

Until it does.

Without the requisite equipment, because it will “never deploy on a serious level after the follies of TELIC and HERRICK.”

If a country wants to be a member of an expensive club it need to be able to pay dues. It’s not cheap to be rich.
We have capabilities that punch well above our military strength, SF, RN and RAF for starters.
 
We have capabilities that punch well above our military strength, SF, RN and RAF for starters.
Respectfully, I disagree.

Firstly, none of those are green army, the largest manpower burden of the forces.

Secondly, I disagree that the Navy or Air Force or Special Forces actually punch above strength. Maybe you could explain what strength they have and what they deliver above that to quantify the statement rather than it being a hollow quote?

Thirdly, with regard to SF, my experience has been more is only delivered when the US helps, significantly.

Lastly, the hollow quote of punching above one’s weight suggests to me one of two things, either one’s own force is routinely under-resourced or too little is expected of it for what it is supposed to do and so overachievement is equally routine
 
Respectfully, I disagree.

Firstly, none of those are green army, the largest manpower burden of the forces.

Secondly, I disagree that the Navy or Air Force or Special Forces actually punch above strength. Maybe you could explain what strength they have and what they deliver above that to quantify the statement rather than it being a hollow quote?

Thirdly, with regard to SF, my experience has been more is only delivered when the US helps, significantly.

Lastly, the hollow quote of punching above one’s weight suggests to me one of two things, either one’s own force is routinely under-resourced or too little is expected of it for what it is supposed to do and so overachievement is equally routine
Who does the USA ask when they need a Air Defence destroyer to protect their carriers in the gulf, when they don’t have available assets?

Which Navy has a true fifth generation strike, not padded out by 40 year old airframes?

The deployment of SF with the USSF is and has been common practice ever since delta came over in the 70’s.

The Army is reeping what it sowed over the last 20 years, gutting the defence budget to prop up its unbalanced force, if you think the SF cant deploy with the USA, try imagining the Army going anywhere with out it.

Keep the Rifles, Gurkhas and 16AA, bin the rest and re invest in armour, heavy fires, logs and GBAD.
 
Who does the USA ask when they need a Air Defence destroyer to protect their carriers in the gulf, when they don’t have available assets?

Which Navy has a true fifth generation strike, not padded out by 40 year old airframes?

The deployment of SF with the USSF is and has been common practice ever since delta came over in the 70’s.

The Army is reeping what it sowed over the last 20 years, gutting the defence budget to prop up its unbalanced force, if you think the SF cant deploy with the USA, try imagining the Army going anywhere with out it.

Keep the Rifles, Gurkhas and 16AA, bin the rest and re invest in armour, heavy fires, logs and GBAD.
Again, respectfully, those are not answers to the questions I posed.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
Respectfully, I disagree.

Firstly, none of those are green army, the largest manpower burden of the forces.

Secondly, I disagree that the Navy or Air Force or Special Forces actually punch above strength. Maybe you could explain what strength they have and what they deliver above that to quantify the statement rather than it being a hollow quote?

Thirdly, with regard to SF, my experience has been more is only delivered when the US helps, significantly.

Lastly, the hollow quote of punching above one’s weight suggests to me one of two things, either one’s own force is routinely under-resourced or too little is expected of it for what it is supposed to do and so overachievement is equally routine
...and you don't have that SF without the feedstock which delivers it - the green army. Not unless you recruit direct from civvy street, which we don't yet do for full-timers.
 
I have worked with a few country’s airborne soldiers. I may be culturally biased but I’d rather fight alongside a 16 AA Bde soldier. I’d also rather fight alongside an actual 82nd AA Bde soldier whose brigade had actually had the ability to drop them.
 
Last edited:

Cynical

LE
Book Reviewer
We have capabilities that punch well above our military strength
Quite what this sound-bite ever meant is one of the mysteries of modern defence discussions.

Punching above one's weight in a boxing bout is fine. But it's just one punch. To succeed a boxer has to be able to deliver consistently, take hits and keep going.

So while SF may be excellent, they can't win a war by themselves.

I would argue that the place to investigate is the weakest link,. be it weaponry, training, resolve or logistics. Because that is the one that will fail first, and it it fails before the opposition the war is lost.

As regards future wars, we have a battle group in the Baltics, one in Mali and the RN shaping up for confronting (CDS's new part of deterrence policy) China. It's a tad early to anticipate world peace.
 
Quite what this sound-bite ever meant is one of the mysteries of modern defence discussions.

Punching above one's weight in a boxing bout is fine. But it's just one punch. To succeed a boxer has to be able to deliver consistently, take hits and keep going.

So while SF may be excellent, they can't win a war by themselves.

I would argue that the place to investigate is the weakest link,. be it weaponry, training, resolve or logistics. Because that is the one that will fail first, and it it fails before the opposition the war is lost.

As regards future wars, we have a battle group in the Baltics, one in Mali and the RN shaping up for confronting (CDS's new part of deterrence policy) China. It's a tad early to anticipate world peace.
We have a battle group in the Baltic’s without credible heavy fires, the armour there is no way theatre entry level of protection, Mali it’s not a “true battle group” it’s a light reconnaissance force, with not a lot else.
CSG is the result of a lot of pain for the RN, to some extent the RAF.

How much has been wasted on evaluating armoured upgrades? How much is CR2 LEP costing, Warrior upgrades, AS90 upgrades?
 

Cynical

LE
Book Reviewer
How much has been wasted on evaluating armoured upgrades? How much is CR2 LEP costing, Warrior upgrades, AS90 upgrades?
It's pretty clear that CR2 and WR upgrades will come in at £1Bn to £2bn. AS90 probably a bit less, if we go that way (and I suspect the tube v rocket debate has some laps to go).

Much as you may dislike it, it remains the case that full on war requires heavy armour - and so does a lot of COIN. The British were one of the few fighting nations not to deploy MBT to Afghanistan.

Of course indirect fire is a fundamental part of full on war, and some of the heavier end of COIN but, like FGA, it comes with the cost of collateral damage being much higher than it would be with direct fire.

Ajax may survive .50 - so what? Active protection won't defeat KE and it's a bloody big vehicle to be stealthy in.

i think we share the concern that light/strike brigades are economically and politically attractive but lack the inherent ability to operate for protracted periods without substantial additional firepower and logistics. Boxer is a vast (and much needed) improvement on 4 ton TCV, but it's not a game changer. Nothing ever is.
 

FEASG

LE
There’s always the press and media vote, when service personnel come home in boxes, Ajax by all accounts is very good, put a turret on all of them, buy 300 more bin warrior job done, or bin Ajax and warrior buy 500 more Boxer? or we could reduce the light infantry, increase the standing of the RA for heavy fires and have the logs to support it.
Until you try to fit a section in the back and it all becomes a bit " We wanted Blackhawk, but got Wild Cat.
 
Until you try to fit a section in the back and it all becomes a bit " We wanted Blackhawk, but got Wild Cat.

Well both fit the same amount of dismounts.
 

FEASG

LE
It's pretty clear that CR2 and WR upgrades will come in at £1Bn to £2bn. AS90 probably a bit less, if we go that way (and I suspect the tube v rocket debate has some laps to go).

Much as you may dislike it, it remains the case that full on war requires heavy armour - and so does a lot of COIN. The British were one of the few fighting nations not to deploy MBT to Afghanistan.

Of course indirect fire is a fundamental part of full on war, and some of the heavier end of COIN but, like FGA, it comes with the cost of collateral damage being much higher than it would be with direct fire.

Ajax may survive .50 - so what? Active protection won't defeat KE and it's a bloody big vehicle to be stealthy in.

i think we share the concern that light/strike brigades are economically and politically attractive but lack the inherent ability to operate for protracted periods without substantial additional firepower and logistics. Boxer is a vast (and much needed) improvement on 4 ton TCV, but it's not a game changer. Nothing ever is.

The game changer is that the Government have decided that they'll commit any asset other than heavy armour, the latter being a game that they have wished to get out of for years.
 

Latest Threads

Top