The Labour Government

[BobKowalski]

Is it not a valid question to ask where the 0.5% of GDP is going to come from? That's £17bn in today's money. Given the current environment where we've only seen tax increases and benefit cuts, surely people have a right to ask?

Not only do we not know how that extra money is being funded but we also don't know what it will be used for. Would you like us to order more F-35's from the Trump administration? Obviously there is Chagos too, something the public largely disagrees with and the cost of which will apparently sit within the defence budget.

There are no new commitments to existing programmes such as Eurofighter where the other European nations are investing heavily in upgrades and new aircraft. The RAF will be butchered over the next 5 years as older Typhoon aircraft are retired for scrap or offered at zero cost to places like Turkey. None of this is even mentioned.

It seems to me that this is nothing more than a careful marketing piece to appear strong but as ever the devil is in the detail and that's what's really important. I'm not interested in what the Tories did, Labour are in government and to be strong on defence they have to deliver on defence but this pushes the 'delivered' stuff to at least 5 years time. Everything else is pretty much the same or worse.

The public largely disagree with Chagos decision? What are they disagreeing over? Securing the use of a strategic military base for the next 100 years?

 

[Alvin-blue-qhd]

The era of arm race has arrived! All countries around the world should increase military budgets!

 

[metalblue]

It's impossible for Labour, forever attacked from all angles no matter what choices they make. suppose that's politics nowadays, shame - no one wants what's best for their country anymore.

This might come as a shock to you but what you think is best isn’t always going to be what others think is best.

It’s called opinions … and like arseholes everyone has one.

 

[The perfect fumble]

The era of arm race has arrived! All countries around the world should increase military budgets!

It's not an arms race.

The naval arms race with Germany before the 1st World War was an arms race, this is defence spending in the face of an increased military threat, it's more akin to the run up to the 2nd World War.

 

[Cassandra]

The era of arm race has arrived! All countries around the world should increase military budgets!

Sadly it is true that the state of the World would require us to spend more money on being able to kill more people and less on making life better for people.

 

[Alvin-blue-qhd]

Sadly it is true that the state of the World would require us to spend more money on being able to kill more people and less on making life better for people.

大争之世！

 

[metalblue]

even if it were to be a "marketing piece" you cannot ignore the fact that under the last lot it would have been lauded to the heavens no questions asked by our press

Putting political leanings to one side there is a fundamental question here which is do we think we need to prepare for war or not.

If the answer is yes then neither 2.5% nor 3% is sufficient- we need to be spending 5% now, increasing equipment and manpower so we are ready for a prolonged battle in 4 to 5 years - keep ourselves in the fight long enough to mobilise. If we don’t think we need to prepare for war then keep the defence % the same, spend the extra money elsewhere.

As usual we’ve landed in no mans land but we can draw comfort from our history that, as a nation we like to stick our heads in the sand when it comes to war and not go looking for trouble, but once the shooting starts we tend to be pretty good at getting our shit together.

 

[Vic]

Some not all, this obsession with the right wing press needs to calm down a tad, there were questions asked regularly by the press/media on the last lot.

Yeah, sure...

War footing as Sunak ramps up defence spending

Prime Minister says £75 billion in new funding will ‘show our enemies that we are resolute and determined’

www.telegraph.co.uk

How £75 billion defence spending pledge will fire up Britain's forces

The Army, the Royal Navy and the Royal Air Force will share the desperately needed cash, meaning the services no longer have to cut capabilities.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[Vic]

The public largely disagree with Chagos decision? What are they disagreeing over? Securing the use of a strategic military base for the next 100 years?

Disagreeing with what the colonialist papers they read say they should disagree with.

 

[Johnny Mars Bar]

They can’t bloody win with some people.

Up defence spending and its “warfare over welfare”.

Don’t up defence spending and they’re a bunch of hand wringing lefties.

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

They can’t bloody win with some people.

Up defence spending and its “warfare over welfare”.

Don’t up defence spending and they’re a bunch of hand wringing lefties.

Very true. Personally I'm yet to be convinced that a country (Russia) that is struggling to edge its way across its immediate and much smaller neighbour presents a credible threat to the rest of us. However, if moving to a war footing gets our economy growing (arms being our largest viable export industry) then I'm all for it - if someone can explain where the money is coming from to do it.

 

[hilts]

It's not an arms race.

The naval arms race with Germany before the 1st World War was an arms race, this is defence spending in the face of an increased military threat, it's more akin to the run up to the 2nd World War.

Phew:-)

 

[BobKowalski]

Phew:-)

To be honest, I wasn’t that reassured either…

 

[BrianW]

The thing is, no one wants to pay more tax. Do they?

They either want 'other people' to pay more tax or massive cuts to things that won't touch them.

There is no sense of social solidarity in this country. Least of all from those who claim to be 'patriots'. It's all 'Fuck anyone who isn't me or very like me.'

 

[hilts]

The thing is, no one wants to pay more tax. Do they?

They either want 'other people' to pay more tax or massive cuts to things that won't touch them.

There is no sense of social solidarity in this country. Least of all from those who claim to be 'patriots'. It's all 'Fuck anyone who isn't me or very like me.'

There is also the mistrust that money is spent wisely. I mean we have one of the biggest economies in the world but don't appear to very good at using it very well.

 

[mackenzie]

The thing is, no one wants to pay more tax. Do they?

They either want 'other people' to pay more tax or massive cuts to things that won't touch them.

There is no sense of social solidarity in this country. Least of all from those who claim to be 'patriots'. It's all 'Fuck anyone who isn't me or very like me.'

Can be applied across the board to be honest.

 

[west didsblue]

Very true. Personally I'm yet to be convinced that a country (Russia) that is struggling to edge its way across its immediate and much smaller neighbour presents a credible threat to the rest of us. However, if moving to a war footing gets our economy growing (arms being our largest viable export industry) then I'm all for it - if someone can explain where the money is coming from to do it.

They’ve already deployed biological weapons in the UK and are staging regular cyber attacks. I could actually be responding to a Russian bot for all I know who’s trying to downplay the threat:-)

 

[mosssideblue]

Putting political leanings to one side there is a fundamental question here which is do we think we need to prepare for war or not.

If the answer is yes then neither 2.5% nor 3% is sufficient- we need to be spending 5% now, increasing equipment and manpower so we are ready for a prolonged battle in 4 to 5 years - keep ourselves in the fight long enough to mobilise. If we don’t think we need to prepare for war then keep the defence % the same, spend the extra money elsewhere.

As usual we’ve landed in no mans land but we can draw comfort from our history that, as a nation we like to stick our heads in the sand when it comes to war and not go looking for trouble, but once the shooting starts we tend to be pretty good at getting our shit together.

I think the big problem Governments have faced over the last few years is not only convincing people to sign up for military service, but retention.

I can say that they have for years, thrown huge tax free financial incentives to retain submariners, and the top risk on MoDs Dreadnought risk register is crewing the platforms.

If this situation is common elsewhere in the Navy and other forces, then the country has a huge problem which might force their hand in bringing back a type of national service.

 

[mosssideblue]

Very true. Personally I'm yet to be convinced that a country (Russia) that is struggling to edge its way across its immediate and much smaller neighbour presents a credible threat to the rest of us. However, if moving to a war footing gets our economy growing (arms being our largest viable export industry) then I'm all for it - if someone can explain where the money is coming from to do it.

Agree, Russia in isolation would be unwise to take on a NATO country, but should they be backed up by another rogue state then, who knows

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

They’ve already deployed biological weapons in the UK and are staging regular cyber attacks. I could actually be responding to a Russian bot for all I know who’s trying to downplay the threat:-)

True, but I regard those things as terrorism. Although I absolutely agree they are a threat I don't think that threat will be countered by the large scale conventional forces we seem to be committing to. In fairness the sdsr is an overall picture of the way ahead and I suppose the service chiefs will determine the details in terms of capability.