Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
United Kingdom Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Interesting UK Specific Defence Websites
jimbo55    1/26/2008 6:56:17 PM
Besides this discussion forum of course, there are some useful and interesting sites out there for UK specific information, resources and discussion etc http://www.defenceoftherealm.com http://www.arrse.co.uk http://www.armedforces.co.uk http://www.forcesreunited.org.uk/forum/default.asp http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk Have been reading strategypage for ages but this is my first post. Thought you might be interested as there doesnt seem to be a UK specific topic in the links section of strategypage so hope I am not breaking any forum rules!
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4
paul1970       2/5/2008 4:36:46 AM

Education needs to realise that not everyone needs to go to University, and that companies probably would fund on-the-job training if the government didn't take their profits via tax.  
Some money should be spent on teaching the correct English spelling of words.
 
not everyone will.... and a lot of those who do will still end up in low level jobs..

but companies will not train with their own money it is more profitable to outsource abroad... so the only way you can compete with that is government "aid".
 
Quote    Reply

paul1970       2/5/2008 4:39:08 AM




Armchair Private


I?m also a believer in the softer side of government spending, and I also have difficulty with regard to raising the defence budget. For example I?ve never signed PerfectGeneral?s petitions, although I respect his views and fully understand where he is coming from.




The reality is that the military cannot really deal with the threat that the UK faces these days (which is basically a small number of young Muslim men who live in this country). I would argue that the Iraq and Afghanistan interventions have been failures and they have not increased our security.


What threat do these guys possibly pose to the UK? A few dead each year? So far they've managed 50 odd in the  last few years, which, whilst admitting that I may be sounding a bit heartless, is 1/60th of the amount of people that die each year on our roads. Do we need a war on terror or a war on road deaths then? 1,000 young men each year kill themselves according to the beeb today. Shall we have a global war against depression? Any objective measure says that road deaths and suicide are far more terrible threats to the UK than terrorism. Or is it just because Terrorism sells newspapers, and suicides don't that we worry so much about it?


Iraq and Afghanistan are far from being a 'how to' guide but I'm with Mao on both. It's too soon to tell whether they are mission failures. Look at other countries the Americans have invaded, Japan, Germany, spring to mind. Theirs still hope.


I?m sorry if that offends people, and I?m mindful of the sacrifices that individual soldiers make, but that doesn?t alter the point. I do not see what other threats will face us this century, and the fact is that the military just isn?t that important. There is far more to life than big aircraft carriers! The other things you could bear in mind is that we are still the worlds? third or fourth biggest defence spender ? with a far higher proportion of GDP going to it than say Italy, Belgium, Germany or the Netherlands.


Italy and Belgium are as close to failed states as western european nations currently get. The Germans and the Dutch moan to the high hills about US hegemon, but are happy to sit under america's strategic umbrella. Think that umbrella will be here for ever? Think again. Just read the posts of the Americans on this site.

Also, what would success cost? Helmand alone needs a division plus (4 Brigades maybe) of British troops to hold ground against the Taleban and that is just one province! To pacify the whole country we would need an army and the costs to achieve that are too high and not worth it.  


Afghanistan is an optional war. I certainly wouldn't advocate building your military around it.

With regard to health, the number of older people is rapidly increasing, and the government had to invest huge sums in the NHS (which basically looks after older people) to keep it viable. Although the NHS isn?t perfect, this investment has worked; average life expectancy has increased by one year for each of the past ten years.


Firstly, that stat has more to do with central heating and a wider diet than anything else, and secondly even if it were the case what makes you assume that an insurance system couldn't be cheaper and more effective?

As for education we have to increase the number of people with qualifications in order to compete with the Chinese and Indians, who are sending vast numbers of people to college. This is of enormous priority ? low skilled people cannot compete because other people in foreign countries can do the same job for one-tenth of the salary. If we want to maintain a high standard of living, we MUST up-skill children and the workforce.


Yes. But the really valuable skills, those that add real, tangible value, like the sciences, computing, maths, pharmacy, engineering, etc are dying on the vine. Currently we are churning out literally millions of students with humanities degrees and debts of £20,000+ All of them taught to unthinkingly accept that internat
 
Quote    Reply

interestedamateur       2/5/2008 2:08:22 PM




Armchair Private


I?m also a believer in the softer side of government spending, and I also have difficulty with regard to raising the defence budget. For example I?ve never signed PerfectGeneral?s petitions, although I respect his views and fully understand where he is coming from.




The reality is that the military cannot really deal with the threat that the UK faces these days (which is basically a small number of young Muslim men who live in this country). I would argue that the Iraq and Afghanistan interventions have been failures and they have not increased our security.


What threat do these guys possibly pose to the UK? A few dead each year? So far they've managed 50 odd in the  last few years, which, whilst admitting that I may be sounding a bit heartless, is 1/60th of the amount of people that die each year on our roads. Do we need a war on terror or a war on road deaths then? 1,000 young men each year kill themselves according to the beeb today. Shall we have a global war against depression? Any objective measure says that road deaths and suicide are far more terrible threats to the UK than terrorism. Or is it just because Terrorism sells newspapers, and suicides don't that we worry so much about it?


Iraq and Afghanistan are far from being a 'how to' guide but I'm with Mao on both. It's too soon to tell whether they are mission failures. Look at other countries the Americans have invaded, Japan, Germany, spring to mind. Theirs still hope.


I?m sorry if that offends people, and I?m mindful of the sacrifices that individual soldiers make, but that doesn?t alter the point. I do not see what other threats will face us this century, and the fact is that the military just isn?t that important. There is far more to life than big aircraft carriers! The other things you could bear in mind is that we are still the worlds? third or fourth biggest defence spender ? with a far higher proportion of GDP going to it than say Italy, Belgium, Germany or the Netherlands.


Italy and Belgium are as close to failed states as western european nations currently get. The Germans and the Dutch moan to the high hills about US hegemon, but are happy to sit under america's strategic umbrella. Think that umbrella will be here for ever? Think again. Just read the posts of the Americans on this site.

Also, what would success cost? Helmand alone needs a division plus (4 Brigades maybe) of British troops to hold ground against the Taleban and that is just one province! To pacify the whole country we would need an army and the costs to achieve that are too high and not worth it.  


Afghanistan is an optional war. I certainly wouldn't advocate building your military around it.

With regard to health, the number of older people is rapidly increasing, and the government had to invest huge sums in the NHS (which basically looks after older people) to keep it viable. Although the NHS isn?t perfect, this investment has worked; average life expectancy has increased by one year for each of the past ten years.


Firstly, that stat has more to do with central heating and a wider diet than anything else, and secondly even if it were the case what makes you assume that an insurance system couldn't be cheaper and more effective?

As for education we have to increase the number of people with qualifications in order to compete with the Chinese and Indians, who are sending vast numbers of people to college. This is of enormous priority ? low skilled people cannot compete because other people in foreign countries can do the same job for one-tenth of the salary. If we want to maintain a high standard of living, we MUST up-skill children and the workforce.


Yes. But the really valuable skills, those that add real, tangible value, like the sciences, computing, maths, pharmacy, engineering, etc are dying on the vine. Currently we are churning out literally millions of students with humanities degrees and debts of £20,000+ All of them taught to unthinkingly accept that internat
 
Quote    Reply

interestedamateur       2/5/2008 2:16:51 PM




Armchair Private


I?m also a believer in the softer side of government spending, and I also have difficulty with regard to raising the defence budget. For example I?ve never signed PerfectGeneral?s petitions, although I respect his views and fully understand where he is coming from.




The reality is that the military cannot really deal with the threat that the UK faces these days (which is basically a small number of young Muslim men who live in this country). I would argue that the Iraq and Afghanistan interventions have been failures and they have not increased our security.


What threat do these guys possibly pose to the UK? A few dead each year? So far they've managed 50 odd in the  last few years, which, whilst admitting that I may be sounding a bit heartless, is 1/60th of the amount of people that die each year on our roads. Do we need a war on terror or a war on road deaths then? 1,000 young men each year kill themselves according to the beeb today. Shall we have a global war against depression? Any objective measure says that road deaths and suicide are far more terrible threats to the UK than terrorism. Or is it just because Terrorism sells newspapers, and suicides don't that we worry so much about it?


Iraq and Afghanistan are far from being a 'how to' guide but I'm with Mao on both. It's too soon to tell whether they are mission failures. Look at other countries the Americans have invaded, Japan, Germany, spring to mind. Theirs still hope.


I?m sorry if that offends people, and I?m mindful of the sacrifices that individual soldiers make, but that doesn?t alter the point. I do not see what other threats will face us this century, and the fact is that the military just isn?t that important. There is far more to life than big aircraft carriers! The other things you could bear in mind is that we are still the worlds? third or fourth biggest defence spender ? with a far higher proportion of GDP going to it than say Italy, Belgium, Germany or the Netherlands.


Italy and Belgium are as close to failed states as western european nations currently get. The Germans and the Dutch moan to the high hills about US hegemon, but are happy to sit under america's strategic umbrella. Think that umbrella will be here for ever? Think again. Just read the posts of the Americans on this site.

Also, what would success cost? Helmand alone needs a division plus (4 Brigades maybe) of British troops to hold ground against the Taleban and that is just one province! To pacify the whole country we would need an army and the costs to achieve that are too high and not worth it.  


Afghanistan is an optional war. I certainly wouldn't advocate building your military around it.

With regard to health, the number of older people is rapidly increasing, and the government had to invest huge sums in the NHS (which basically looks after older people) to keep it viable. Although the NHS isn?t perfect, this investment has worked; average life expectancy has increased by one year for each of the past ten years.


Firstly, that stat has more to do with central heating and a wider diet than anything else, and secondly even if it were the case what makes you assume that an insurance system couldn't be cheaper and more effective?

As for education we have to increase the number of people with qualifications in order to compete with the Chinese and Indians, who are sending vast numbers of people to college. This is of enormous priority ? low skilled people cannot compete because other people in foreign countries can do the same job for one-tenth of the salary. If we want to maintain a high standard of living, we MUST up-skill children and the workforce.


Yes. But the really valuable skills, those that add real, tangible value, like the sciences, computing, maths, pharmacy, engineering, etc are dying on the vine. Currently we are churning out literally millions of students with humanities degrees and debts of £20,000+ All of them taught to unthinkingly accept that internat
 
Quote    Reply

Armchair Private       2/12/2008 6:56:36 PM
Heh heh.

In the future if you ever see one "Armchair Doom" posting on other forums you'll know it's me.

 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics