The economics of Counter terrorism

#1
BBC news report this morning that following Browns speech yesterday in which he stresses that the Afghan / Pakistan border is the "crucible" of terrorism and the biggest threat to the UK, Lady Kinnock speaks in the house of Lords informing that Foreign Office counter terrorist budgets in Pakistan have been cut back.

Hmmmmmm.
 
F

fozzy

Guest
#3
spurtle said:
BBC news report this morning that following Browns speech yesterday in which he stresses that the Afghan / Pakistan border is the "crucible" of terrorism and the biggest threat to the UK, Lady Kinnock speaks in the house of Lords informing that Foreign Office counter terrorist budgets in Pakistan have been cut back.

Hmmmmmm.
Not been a good week for McRuin.

First he was rightly fingered for cutting the helicopter budget.
And now this.

Another palace coup in the offing before the Spring?
 
#4
Thanks for the subject title - Now I can't get 'Cyclops has only got one ball' set to a popular refrain mimicing a ditty over some b@stard Austrian type that ran Germany prior to BAOR roaring round my head!!! :twisted:
 
#5
FFS " Spittin Image" was never this stupid
 
#6
StickyToffeePudding said:
Thanks for the subject title - Now I can't get 'Cyclops has only got one ball' set to a popular refrain mimicing a ditty over some b@stard Austrian type that ran Germany prior to BAOR roaring round my head!!! :twisted:
For all I know - what with all those alleged medical issues.............. :bball:
 
#7
tropper66 said:
FFS " Spittin Image" was never this stupid
Don't need spitting image this lot do it for real
 
#8
As yet another example of the law of 'unintended consequences', the weakness of the pound, (now 'quantatively eased') has resulted in serious cash cutbacks to those departments that need foreign currency to operate, and fund CT ops, bribe nasty people, etc.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8471608.stm

Alas, when even the slime of the earth don't want to be bribed in Sterling, and prefer a harder currency. Something like potatoes, for instance.
 
#9
It is not a "cut" as such (yet....) but a decision not to increase the level of funding to keep the local spending levels flat if the pound devalues against the local currency.

If the Treasury had kept the blanket Overseas Price Mechanism arrangements in place we would have had to cough up more and more and more in all that Foreign Aid we p1ss away as the pound took a pasting.

But for cases like this you do need a such mechanism and it must be said a single coherent plan that does not quickly degenerate to a rather pathetic inter departmental turf and funding war.
 
#10
Spitting image was great, but this lot are just a feckin shower of shite, you couldn't make it up. If the spitting image team had tried to broadcast half the faux pas this lot have done, they'd have been laughed out the studio as no one could believe they could be this incompetant. I'm stunned but not suprised, it's political suicide at it's greatest. Roll on may, it can't come quick enough.
 
#11
spurtle said:
StickyToffeePudding said:
Thanks for the subject title - Now I can't get 'Cyclops has only got one ball' set to a popular refrain mimicing a ditty over some b@stard Austrian type that ran Germany prior to BAOR roaring round my head!!! :twisted:
For all I know - what with all those alleged medical issues.............. :bball:
And there's me thinking Sarah's glow of dissatisfaction was due to her impending move of residence within 6 months rather than the lack of sexual satifaction from her hubby! After all, what lady enjoys swallowing only one b0ll0ck's worth of man fat! 8O
 
#12
In a recent interview one of the writers of " Spittin Image " said that if they had written scripts as loony as the actions of the Prime Minister's recent ranntings no one would have found funny as it would have been too unbelievable.

EG yeserterdays lunacy

BMW,Honda,and Toyota are British firms

RBS lending the money for the purchase of Cadburys

it just go's on and on
 
#13
Blogg said:
It is not a "cut" as such (yet....) but a decision not to increase the level of funding to keep the local spending levels flat if the pound devalues against the local currency.

If the Treasury had kept the blanket Overseas Price Mechanism arrangements in place we would have had to cough up more and more and more in all that Foreign Aid we p1ss away as the pound took a pasting.

But for cases like this you do need a such mechanism and it must be said a single coherent plan that does not quickly degenerate to a rather pathetic inter departmental turf and funding war.
Surely it is still a cut in real terms if the local spending levels fail to remain flat.

As a side issue, inter departmental turf wars over funding is nothing new with this government headed up by our glorious leader. It de-stabilises any opposition aimed directly at him and his underlings and makes those who are facing the cuts look foolish through their squabbling. Been going on for years.
 
#14
Urgent Question being asked in the House of Commons now on the BBC Parliment Channel, about this
 
#15
spurtle said:
Blogg said:
It is not a "cut" as such (yet....) but a decision not to increase the level of funding to keep the local spending levels flat if the pound devalues against the local currency.

If the Treasury had kept the blanket Overseas Price Mechanism arrangements in place we would have had to cough up more and more and more in all that Foreign Aid we p1ss away as the pound took a pasting.

But for cases like this you do need a such mechanism and it must be said a single coherent plan that does not quickly degenerate to a rather pathetic inter departmental turf and funding war.
Surely it is still a cut in real terms if the local spending levels fail to remain flat.

As a side issue, inter departmental turf wars over funding is nothing new with this government headed up by our glorious leader. It de-stabilises any opposition aimed directly at him and his underlings and makes those who are facing the cuts look foolish through their squabbling. Been going on for years.
My bold - agreed, however pissing off the FCO and the military in this instance may not be one of McRuin's better moments.
 
#16
Blogg said:
It is not a "cut" as such (yet....) but a decision not to increase the level of funding to keep the local spending levels flat if the pound devalues against the local currency.

If the Treasury had kept the blanket Overseas Price Mechanism arrangements in place we would have had to cough up more and more and more in all that Foreign Aid we p1ss away as the pound took a pasting.

But for cases like this you do need a such mechanism and it must be said a single coherent plan that does not quickly degenerate to a rather pathetic inter departmental turf and funding war.
You ARE Sir Humphrey, and I claim my £5!
 
#17
Two observations:

Firstly, the FCO is supposed to be the cream of the civil service. And they got out-negotiated by Treasury. Oops.

Secondly, contrast the outcry over inadequate funding for the FCO with the muted outcry, in comparison, on the potential implication of further defence cuts on UK defence.
 

Alsacien

MIA
Moderator
#18
HectortheInspector said:
As yet another example of the law of 'unintended consequences', the weakness of the pound, (now 'quantatively eased') has resulted in serious cash cutbacks to those departments that need foreign currency to operate, and fund CT ops, bribe nasty people, etc.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8471608.stm

Alas, when even the slime of the earth don't want to be bribed in Sterling, and prefer a harder currency. Something like potatoes, for instance.
Its just a cop out.
The pound is up 5% in the last weeks, I predict another 10-15% when Dave gets the job in spring.

I need to buy a new car in Euroland with lots of worthless quids, so am eagerly watching....
 
#19
P2000 said:
Two observations:

Firstly, the FCO is supposed to be the cream of the civil service. And they got out-negotiated by Treasury. Oops.

Secondly, contrast the outcry over inadequate funding for the FCO with the muted outcry, in comparison, on the potential implication of further defence cuts on UK defence.
Cream? You mean rich, dense, fatty, and floats to the top? (Not that I'm envious, mind). Being out-negotiated by Treasury ain't difficult nowadays. The Brownite structure is simple. Department says what it wants to do. Treasury tells department what it's going to have. Then Department limps away to lick its wounds. No comebacks, unless you have the photos of the Chancellor in flagrente with the goat and the Moscow State Circus.

(PM me for copies of the above)

Seriously, 'diplomatic' money is like 'public health' money. It's not sexy, but properly done it's very, very cost effective.
After all, you can spend a fortune trying to cure a typhoid epidemic year on year. Or you can spend a bit more this year, and put in a decent drainage system.

Diplomacy is much the same. If you have the ability to bribe or browbeat the opposition into doing what you want, you might not need to go 'kinetic' and all the green kit can stay at home. And what's the best and cheapest option there, then?
As Clausewitz said:
"War is a mere continuation of politics by other means,"
Let's fund the politics, so that we don't have to use the 'other means' when we don't need to.
 
#20
DavetheApe said:
Blogg said:
It is not a "cut" as such (yet....) but a decision not to increase the level of funding to keep the local spending levels flat if the pound devalues against the local currency.

If the Treasury had kept the blanket Overseas Price Mechanism arrangements in place we would have had to cough up more and more and more in all that Foreign Aid we p1ss away as the pound took a pasting.

But for cases like this you do need a such mechanism and it must be said a single coherent plan that does not quickly degenerate to a rather pathetic inter departmental turf and funding war.
You ARE Sir Humphrey, and I claim my £5!
You may very well think that. But I could not possibly agree.

However was said person around he would remind you that:

"The Foreign Office never expect the Cabinet to agree with any of their policies. That is why they never explain them. All they require is that the Cabinet acquiesce in their decisions after they have been taken."

"The Foreign Office are not spineless. It takes a great deal of strength to do nothing all the time."

"The Foreign Office aren't there to do things. They're there to explain why things can't be done."

"People have said a lot of unpleasant things about the Foreign Office, but no one has ever accused them of patriotism."
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top