ianstone
06-14-2010, 04:06 PM
No Votes in Defence?
http://sl.sky.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/1/12/817533f5-acc9-4adc-8cb5-a5625535dfe9.Small.jpg (http://blogs.news.sky.com/profile/Geoff%20Meade)
Geoff Meade (http://blogs.news.sky.com/profile/Geoff%20Meade) April 14, 2010 1:26 PM
The long-held notion that there are no votes in defence will challenged this time by a new lobby group fighting for military issues to loom large on the doorstep. Formed since the last election, the UK National Defence Association fielded former heads of the Royal Navy and the RAF to launch its campaign at London’s Naval and Military Club.
Sir Michael Graydon, ex-Chief of the Air Staff said any business as under funded as defence would quickly be in the hands of the Receiver.
He worried about the “parlous state” of the military and warned politicians against disregarding the forces’ influence on the poll.
http://news.sky.com/sky-news/content/StaticFile/jpg/2009/Dec/Week2/15495741.jpg
They Vote Too
“No votes in defence?” He questioned. “What about the veterans of the last 60 years? What about the 300,000 defence-related jobs? Ask them if they want to become a third world power.”
http://news.sky.com/sky-news/content/StaticFile/jpg/2008/Jul/Week1/15021620.jpg
Jobs at Risk if Carriers Axed
Sir Jonathon Band, who retired last year as First Sea Lord, warned that the incoming administration’s Strategic Defence Review would determine Britain’s role in the world for the next 30 years.
“Are there votes in defence,” he asked. “There certainly are if you get it wrong.”
http://news.sky.com/sky-news/content/StaticFile/jpg/2005/Nov/Week1/1347906.jpg
He forecast that with defence funding really tight “at best”, Britain may have to accept smaller, more agile forces.
Maritime strength remained key, particularly if vulnerable energy supplies were to be safeguarded.
They were joined by Tony Edwards, the MoD’s former head of defence exports. He argued that whilst spending on health and education had doubled, the military budget had halved in real terms over the same period. The share of national wealth devoted to the forces was at its lowest for more than 70 years, leaving Britain in danger of sliding into the second division of military powers, between France and Belgium.
“We don’t want more Treasury-driven cuts masquerading as a defence review,” he insisted.
Posted by: Caratacus10AD (http://blogs.news.sky.com/profile/Caratacus10AD) on April 26, 2010 11:33 PM
The thought that Britain can afford to operate two medium sized aircraft carriers with all the required accompaniments of aircraft purchases, fleet escorts,logistical vessels and tankers ships etc, is just plain daft! These surface ships were dreamt up when Tony Blair thought he could stand shoulder-to-shoulder with George W.Bush as part of the coalition of the willing...Now I`m not knocking T.B for his breadth of vision, but times and finances dictate otherwise!
Also Trident is another area open to review in my opinion, would not more attack submarines (maybe armed with a nuclear capability in the form of cruise missiles) be of better power projection purposes for the UK?
The Royal Airforce, again does Eurofighter fit the bill when looking at its costs? Are there not cheaper and nearly as capable American and European alternatives? Would the Army Air-corp not be a better investment per pound spent considering the theatres we fight within?
Posted by: bizzyliz11 (http://blogs.news.sky.com/profile/bizzyliz11) on April 18, 2010 11:24 AM
it is outrageous that labour continue to used our gallant service personell for their"politican grandstanding" they should be deeply ashamed of themselves.a row of nodding. Heros led by a row of nodding donkeys
Posted by: stepee (http://blogs.news.sky.com/profile/stepee) on April 15, 2010 2:34 PM
Dane Geld was the name used for the bribe paid in gold to the Danes (Vikings) to stop them attacking us. This bribery failed and the threat was only delt with by military means coupled with the absorbsion of the Danes who settled here.
I use it as a metaphor for the bribery used now to secure votes and silence (internal) and in the vain attempt to secure cooperation and passivity externally.
: JuniorHumper (http://blogs.news.sky.com/profile/JuniorHumper) on April 14, 2010 10:47 PM
There is only one thing most people care about when it comes to voting at a General Election: how they think it is going to affect the money in their pocket.
Posted by: JuniorHumper (http://blogs.news.sky.com/profile/JuniorHumper) on April 14, 2010 10:43 PM
What the hell has "dane geld" got to do with anything, Stepee?
Posted by: stepee (http://blogs.news.sky.com/profile/stepee) on April 14, 2010 10:38 PM
Yes there are votes in defence and there should be.
Its arguably the only thing the government should be doing with our tax money (along with the provision of health care)!
I have based my own decision on the manifesto pledges and past performance of the parties on this issue. I know that all of their records are lamentable but nevertheless One of the main parties is at least pledging to retain the Two new aircraft carriers, a nuclear deterrent and an air force with Two types of fast jets in its fleet.
If cuts are to be made they should not be made in either the existing or planned armed forces, nor in the provision of health care. Cut all other internal and external "dane geld" before cutting these.
Cuting the corruption in the House of commons and house of lords will save a small fortune. Do the same in local government and your on a winner. We have thousands of civil servants who do little of nothing of value. The message is put your own house in order first then you will get more support from the masses.
http://sl.sky.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/1/12/817533f5-acc9-4adc-8cb5-a5625535dfe9.Small.jpg (http://blogs.news.sky.com/profile/Geoff%20Meade)
Geoff Meade (http://blogs.news.sky.com/profile/Geoff%20Meade) April 14, 2010 1:26 PM
The long-held notion that there are no votes in defence will challenged this time by a new lobby group fighting for military issues to loom large on the doorstep. Formed since the last election, the UK National Defence Association fielded former heads of the Royal Navy and the RAF to launch its campaign at London’s Naval and Military Club.
Sir Michael Graydon, ex-Chief of the Air Staff said any business as under funded as defence would quickly be in the hands of the Receiver.
He worried about the “parlous state” of the military and warned politicians against disregarding the forces’ influence on the poll.
http://news.sky.com/sky-news/content/StaticFile/jpg/2009/Dec/Week2/15495741.jpg
They Vote Too
“No votes in defence?” He questioned. “What about the veterans of the last 60 years? What about the 300,000 defence-related jobs? Ask them if they want to become a third world power.”
http://news.sky.com/sky-news/content/StaticFile/jpg/2008/Jul/Week1/15021620.jpg
Jobs at Risk if Carriers Axed
Sir Jonathon Band, who retired last year as First Sea Lord, warned that the incoming administration’s Strategic Defence Review would determine Britain’s role in the world for the next 30 years.
“Are there votes in defence,” he asked. “There certainly are if you get it wrong.”
http://news.sky.com/sky-news/content/StaticFile/jpg/2005/Nov/Week1/1347906.jpg
He forecast that with defence funding really tight “at best”, Britain may have to accept smaller, more agile forces.
Maritime strength remained key, particularly if vulnerable energy supplies were to be safeguarded.
They were joined by Tony Edwards, the MoD’s former head of defence exports. He argued that whilst spending on health and education had doubled, the military budget had halved in real terms over the same period. The share of national wealth devoted to the forces was at its lowest for more than 70 years, leaving Britain in danger of sliding into the second division of military powers, between France and Belgium.
“We don’t want more Treasury-driven cuts masquerading as a defence review,” he insisted.
Posted by: Caratacus10AD (http://blogs.news.sky.com/profile/Caratacus10AD) on April 26, 2010 11:33 PM
The thought that Britain can afford to operate two medium sized aircraft carriers with all the required accompaniments of aircraft purchases, fleet escorts,logistical vessels and tankers ships etc, is just plain daft! These surface ships were dreamt up when Tony Blair thought he could stand shoulder-to-shoulder with George W.Bush as part of the coalition of the willing...Now I`m not knocking T.B for his breadth of vision, but times and finances dictate otherwise!
Also Trident is another area open to review in my opinion, would not more attack submarines (maybe armed with a nuclear capability in the form of cruise missiles) be of better power projection purposes for the UK?
The Royal Airforce, again does Eurofighter fit the bill when looking at its costs? Are there not cheaper and nearly as capable American and European alternatives? Would the Army Air-corp not be a better investment per pound spent considering the theatres we fight within?
Posted by: bizzyliz11 (http://blogs.news.sky.com/profile/bizzyliz11) on April 18, 2010 11:24 AM
it is outrageous that labour continue to used our gallant service personell for their"politican grandstanding" they should be deeply ashamed of themselves.a row of nodding. Heros led by a row of nodding donkeys
Posted by: stepee (http://blogs.news.sky.com/profile/stepee) on April 15, 2010 2:34 PM
Dane Geld was the name used for the bribe paid in gold to the Danes (Vikings) to stop them attacking us. This bribery failed and the threat was only delt with by military means coupled with the absorbsion of the Danes who settled here.
I use it as a metaphor for the bribery used now to secure votes and silence (internal) and in the vain attempt to secure cooperation and passivity externally.
: JuniorHumper (http://blogs.news.sky.com/profile/JuniorHumper) on April 14, 2010 10:47 PM
There is only one thing most people care about when it comes to voting at a General Election: how they think it is going to affect the money in their pocket.
Posted by: JuniorHumper (http://blogs.news.sky.com/profile/JuniorHumper) on April 14, 2010 10:43 PM
What the hell has "dane geld" got to do with anything, Stepee?
Posted by: stepee (http://blogs.news.sky.com/profile/stepee) on April 14, 2010 10:38 PM
Yes there are votes in defence and there should be.
Its arguably the only thing the government should be doing with our tax money (along with the provision of health care)!
I have based my own decision on the manifesto pledges and past performance of the parties on this issue. I know that all of their records are lamentable but nevertheless One of the main parties is at least pledging to retain the Two new aircraft carriers, a nuclear deterrent and an air force with Two types of fast jets in its fleet.
If cuts are to be made they should not be made in either the existing or planned armed forces, nor in the provision of health care. Cut all other internal and external "dane geld" before cutting these.
Cuting the corruption in the House of commons and house of lords will save a small fortune. Do the same in local government and your on a winner. We have thousands of civil servants who do little of nothing of value. The message is put your own house in order first then you will get more support from the masses.