Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
britain resigns as world power??? ............. Have we fu*k !!!
We have the best intelligence network in the world, we have the most highly trained special forces regiment in the world in the sas and are quite possibly the richest country in Europe (certainly the richest city in London )
Now military wise on the ground we simply don't have the numbers as we would like but that's down to geography the worlds other super powers usa,China,Russia for example are much much bigger countries than us
And I'm am very proud of have the U.S. And the president as our biggest allies and like to think we are there's also
In short we are a small country but a great one
Quote:
Originally Posted by AuburnAL
I think you've about nailed it. Britain is still a powerful country. It is the second most powerful in Europe after Russia, and the only European nation that could go toe to toe with a full Russian onslaught and not get blasted to bits in a manner of days. That said the world has changed so that the larger population nations actually have their act together, and that combined with domestic spending choices has limited the UK's ability to project power. All that said the UK still likely has the largest reserve of soft power in the world, and if it were to push for some sort of federal union with the major nations of the Commonwealth I think at least some would join up under British leadership which would even the playing field vis a vis the larger population nations.
Not quite. Britain's military will soon resemble the size of the New York police department, so going "toe to toe with Russia" is a little far fetched. Most of Britain's intelligence comes from the US, and its special forces are no more "highly trained" than that of other dominant powers. Britain struggled to hold towns in southern Iraq and were under constant (controversial) criticism from US forces.
I would agree that it is a small but "great" country though, for sure.
I think you've about nailed it. Britain is still a powerful country. It is the second most powerful in Europe after Russia, and the only European nation that could go toe to toe with a full Russian onslaught and not get blasted to bits in a manner of days. That said the world has changed so that the larger population nations actually have their act together, and that combined with domestic spending choices has limited the UK's ability to project power. All that said the UK still likely has the largest reserve of soft power in the world, and if it were to push for some sort of federal union with the major nations of the Commonwealth I think at least some would join up under British leadership which would even the playing field vis a vis the larger population nations.
Hi Al I think that's a bit optimistic about going toe to toe with the Russians ( but appreciate the words tho mate ) but I do think intelligence wise we could prepare better than most could, I do agree with the federal union between nations and could see a Brit hi up
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mag3.14
Not quite. Britain's military will soon resemble the size of the New York police department, so going "toe to toe with Russia" is a little far fetched. Most of Britain's intelligence comes from the US, and its special forces are no more "highly trained" than that of other dominant powers. Britain struggled to hold towns in southern Iraq and were under constant (controversial) criticism from US forces.
I would agree that it is a small but "great" country though, for sure.
Hi mag
Right as said before the U.S. Are our biggest ally and I'd like to think we are there's so naturally the 2 will work together when Intel is concerned, the sas have always had the reputation as the best even in other countries ( I think some of delta forces training was based on the sas ) personally I think the Mossad of Israel are up there as well
As for Iran I can comment but in Afghanistan yes we did get some criticism of the U.S. For on the ground warfare which I said earlier and I'll tell you why.......... After 9/11 and the U.S. And the UK went to Afghanistan being the nation we are we offered to take control of the Helmand province, now that area was the biggest and main area of Al quaida and the Taliban and on the ground we struggled as for the foregone reasons
But intelligence and special forces we are very much up there and along with the U.S. Might that's what won the war
we might still have a lot of "influence" in politics, but as a country we cant put up much of a fight, our troops have been reduced in numbers to 81,700, the US army by comparison is some 500,000, and our police force has been reduced nationally to 136,000 that is the same as the population of Exeter and this to "police" a population of 65 million? the Devon and Cornwall force is said to going to reduce the numbers by another 200(local stations have already been cut in half of the number of officers they used to have) this is due to "budget cuts", the NHS is in crisis and we haven't got enough housing stock.
we might still have a lot of "influence" in politics, but as a country we cant put up much of a fight, our troops have been reduced in numbers to 81,700, the US army by comparison is some 500,000, and our police force has been reduced nationally to 136,000 that is the same as the population of Exeter and this to "police" a population of 65 million? the Devon and Cornwall force is said to going to reduce the numbers by another 200(local stations have already been cut in half of the number of officers they used to have) this is due to "budget cuts", the NHS is in crisis and we haven't got enough housing stock.
Are you sure?
According to the management of Defense website, you have 101,300 for the army, 35,430 for the navy, and 40,090 for the air force.
Global fire power still ranks the UK @ #5 in the world for over all military strength. I'd say that ain't too bad.
According to the management of Defense website, you have 101,300 for the army, 35,430 for the navy, and 40,090 for the air force.
Global fire power still ranks the UK @ #5 in the world for over all military strength. I'd say that ain't too bad.
I don't have the numbers for the navy or RAF just the army, in 1978 we had 162,000, in 2010 it had been reduced to 102,000 and by 2020 it was supposed to be reduced to 82,00 but it was announced on 29th July 2015 that it had been accomplished 5 years early---the govt seemed quite proud of this- and the figure of all army troops was now 81,700.
Part of the UK's problem is like that of most other European countries, as espoused by Chancellor Merkel, our modern day Iron Lady.
Quote:
If Mrs Merkel’s vision is pragmatic, so too is her plan for implementing it. It can be boiled down to three statistics, a few charts and some facts on an A4 sheet of paper. The three figures are 7%, 25% and 50%. Mrs Merkel never tires of saying that Europe has 7% of the world’s population, 25% of its GDP and 50% of its social spending. If the region is to prosper in competition with emerging countries, it cannot continue to be so generous.
Britain and France aside, most European countries fail to meet their Nato defense spending targets of 2% of GDP.
If that 7% of the global population is the beneficiary of 50% of global social spending, that's means they get on average 14 times what the rest of the world in including US, Japan etc receive. It's little wonder that there are claims in Europe of inabilty to afford military and other expenditures.
By contrast US spends between 3.5 and 4.5 % of GDP on defense, and accounts for 75% of NATO budget. Russia typically spends 4.5%+ of GDP on defense.
These are choices that individual countries make, and all have consequences.
For this reason Americans quickly tire of European complaints of US arrogance in matters military, (that's not to say some EU complaints are unjustified), and most Americans would prefer that their tax dollars were being spent at home, rather than propping up that 7% of the world's population that is in receipt of 50% of the world's social spending.
Robert Kagan wrote a great essay/short book on this subject titled: Of Paradise and Power.
EU lives in paradise while US wields the power.
For this reason Americans quickly tire of European complaints of US arrogance in matters military, (that's not to say some EU complaints are unjustified), and most Americans would prefer that their tax dollars were being spent at home, rather than propping up that 7% of the world's population that is in receipt of 50% of the world's social spending.
Robert Kagan wrote a great essay/short book on this subject titled: Of Paradise and Power.
EU lives in paradise while US wields the power.
Perhaps if this de facto Banana republic stopped "propping up" Europe by destabilizing its Eastern fringes, the Middle East and North Africa with needless wars and diplomatic meddling, those complaints about US incompetence/arrogance would cease.
Beyond the gauzy political rubric, I'm sure many Europeans would be overjoyed at the prospect of the US cutting back rather than increasing its military spending and curtailing its disastrous expeditions abroad. [Cue: the usual "you'll be sorry/you need us/it's either us or the Chinese" rhetoric.]
Last edited by Not the Maginot Line; 08-22-2015 at 04:09 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
