Brexit

[antonio66]

re. spend more and be aggressive on the world stage. I kinda agree and disagree George. We should be more aggressive, unfortunately we do not have that type of politician anymore. As for increasing our defense budget, who are we going to war with? As long as we have nuclear weapons and are able to get them to a target do we need anymore. This is not to say we don't need well trained troops by the way.

[zebbo]

Aye, true enough, it's not like we're ever likely to see anything like WW1/WW2 ever again thank goodness. We need the nuclear deterrent and a core, well trained and well equipped force. I honestly don't know what we'd do nowadays if we were required to fight as not many of this generation seem to have much spine for any sort of conflict. Today's British Bulldog wants to roll over and have it's belly rubbed!

[kimangelis]

Aggressive on the world stage. Against whom exactly? Surely we have moved further-on in 70 years than gun-boat diplomacy? I agree we need a professional armed service, particularly the army as they meet face-to-face (relatively).

We really should take a leaf out of France's book here. They don't mess about listening-to various factions before intervention... They go in there, separate out the warring factions, stop the conflict... then start dialogue. If the French had been in charge of the UN in Serbia/Kosovo, the slaughter would not have happened. We just spent ages discussing minor points of law whilst thousands were murdered.

Europe is not a bad place, but I agree with Richard in that it all went wrong. Originally we had the Common Market, and ended-up with a Federal States of Europe with a Brussels-based gravy train of Bureaucracy that ignored core values like equality and economic balance in the search for their own ends.

[zebbo]

Europe is not a bad place, but I agree with Richard in that it all went wrong. Originally we had the Common Market, and ended-up with a Federal States of Europe with a Brussels-based gravy train of Bureaucracy that ignored core values like equality and economic balance in the search for their own ends.

Spot on.

[George Hincapie]

Aye, true enough, it's not like we're ever likely to see anything like WW1/WW2 ever again thank goodness. We need the nuclear deterrent and a core, well trained and well equipped force. I honestly don't know what we'd do nowadays if we were required to fight as not many of this generation seem to have much spine for any sort of conflict. Today's British Bulldog wants to roll over and have it's belly rubbed!

That's what the UK thought after WW1. Successive liberal Governments ran down our Armed Forces, so by the start of WW2 we were completely fucked. US President, John Fitzgerald Kennedy wrote about precisely this for his doctoral thesis (I have a copy), and the parallels with the modern day are startling.

We should ALWAYS have a well staffed, robust and well equipped military at all times. It's a false economy to run it down. Better to have it and not need it, than need it and not have it.

[George Hincapie]

Aggressive on the world stage. Against whom exactly? Surely we have moved further-on in 70 years than gun-boat diplomacy?

Against anyone that threatens our interests. And I am not suggesting 'gung ho' tactics; more like a steel fist inside a velvet glove.

[Bongobongo]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DNPi8ZUXUAA9PWP.jpg:large

[CN211276]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DNPi8ZUXUAA9PWP.jpg:large

[joe]

That's what the UK thought after WW1. Successive liberal Governments ran down our Armed Forces, so by the start of WW2 we were completely fucked.

Actually, post-WWI we had mainly Conservative governments. The reason the armed forces were run down was that the UK was essentially bankrupt; we owed billions to the US and although the Germans in turn owed us billions in reparations, there was no realistic chance of them repaying us.

[Alfi]

But they could show some thanks now by taking the lead in giving the UK what we want in terms of Brexit, as it's in German'y trade/economy interests too!

Alfi.