Armed forces and Defence Review

Lord Soley

I think the Government is flying on a wing and a prayer with their determination not to re visit the Strategic Defence Review. It was carried out soon after the Government took office and it was done with indecent haste but the retrenchment of the western powers, the financial problems and the instability in the Midle East  suggests we need an urgent review. Frankly Europe has to face up to its military responsibilities. It is not just Libya on the doorstep of Europe but just recall that in the crisis in the Balkans where ethnic cleansing on a grand scale was only stopped by military intervention the bulk of the air operations were carried out by the USA. Europe was only able to provide less than 20% of the  aircraft involved.

France and the UK have taken a lead in libya but in a very uncertain and unstable world we cannot pretend that Europe is able to deal with a crisis on its borders. Hence my question to the Minister : http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201011/ldhansrd/text/110628-0001.htm#11062854000523

15 comments for “Armed forces and Defence Review

  1. Twm O'r Nant
    29/06/2011 at 12:13 pm

    but in a very uncertain and unstable world we cannot pretend that Europe is able to deal with a crisis on its borders.

    Is the Med a border?

    France and UK are the two main players in the
    oil business in Libya. Hence their involvement.

  2. MilesJSD
    milesjsd
    29/06/2011 at 5:04 pm

    A world-wide Method III* Alliance is the answer;
    not just to secure an adequate Mutual-Defence Force;
    but to secure strategicly Longest-term peacetime infra- and inter-structures for the Alliance’s Common-Lifesupports and Common-Purse.
    ===============
    * short paraphrase from the introduction to the Cooperative Method III type workshop provided internationally by Shoshana Faire of the Australian Conflict Resolution Network:
    (“)Any-one not willing to participate in the Cooperative problem-solving methodology will simply be left out, to go through the grinding-wheels of Adversary Justice, or of the win-lose “blood-letting solutions” of outright armed conflict or Major Warfare(“).

    So this “Method II World-wide Alliance” would need to enroll the great majority of Countries into its Union, and certainly every super-power, wouldn’t you think ?

    Well, we already have a United Nations Force … which has some demonstrable capability for both peace-making (“military-warfare”) and peace-keeping & building (“peaceful political, economic and social development”)…
    doesn’t it ?

    But would such a UN Force be both sufficient and willing, to take to the battlefield if Britain is threatened and attacked ?

    Clearly, Britain (and many other Countries) need a very much stronger, and thus more affordable, Alliance; the strategy of which must surely be based upon a sustain-worthy, very long-term Peace-Strategy.

    1703W290611.JSDM.

  3. MilesJSD
    milesjsd
    29/06/2011 at 5:24 pm

    Quick correction in my above, please:

    “Method II World-wide Alliance” should of course be “Method III …”.

    (Method II is whereby the “under-class” tend to win a certain kind of Problem-Conflict e.g. where on a Saturday afternoon the child briefly pokes head into parents’ room and calls out “Saturday afternoon, I’m off to the Park to play ball with my friends”.

    Method I is where the “bosses” tend to win a different kind of conflict e.g. a week-night in the same home as in Method II above, the parent suddenly announces “10 p.m. children – off to bed now”.
    ————-
    Method III is where there is an “empty round table” for the in-depth exploration and resolving of any sort of family (or workplace, or inter-national) conflict, to which each party comes “empty-handed” and with no “competitive” advantage, each prepared to find their own individually- essential-need, and then to cooperatively make a Plan whereby each such essential need will be equally met.)
    =============
    1724W29.jsdm

  4. ladytizzy
    29/06/2011 at 10:31 pm

    From a financial pov can someone provide the figures for what the UK can expect to pay towards NATO and the UN this (or last) year, and what the UK can expect to claw back from the same? Ditto for the RN efforts with sea piracy.

  5. maude elwes
    30/06/2011 at 3:48 pm

    Reading through this short opening post on the duties of Europe, to what I believe Lord Soley is addressing, and that is Europe and the ‘military union’ of the entire 27 states within it.

    First and foremost Europe has to decide what it is and where it is going. Where its borders are in real terms.

    The union is in financial fall out. The tax payers of that union are stretched beyond belief trying to support the ill thought out policies adopted when it was thought we would have unfathomable resources.

    Now, we are to be faced with more decisions on military expenditure, after the profligacy of so many unnecessary wars we were either duped into supporting or were conned into it by half wit leaders. Now as they saying goes, the s–t is finally hitting the fan. What a surprise.

    The first duty any government has is to the people of the country that it governs. So, who does Europe govern? Does anyone really know? Where are our boundaries? Who are we directly responsible to defend?

    Look at what is happening in Greece. The way things are going we could very soon see civil war in that once peaceful country. And that is directly as a result of idiotic European policies of idealism with regard to every manner of social intervention. And of course, financial corruption. Greece, and how many other European countries, were able to gain acceptance to the union with false accounting and fake pretense at financial stability?

    This is where you have to begin. Redefine what Europe is and set out to defend it.

    You cannot expect the European people to fund a unthinking military strategy that truly never existed. We never hear a straight story. Where is the danger? Who are we already fighting and why?

    A war on terror. What does that mean? Terror starts in Northern Island. And the world is a potential terror zone, as can already be seen from the spread of one uprising to another.

    If Europe is to unite whole heartedly in order to protect its interests from outside, you have to first rationalize outside. And where that outside begins and therefore, where our financial responsibility ends.

    The European people cannot support the entire world as consecutive governments have to naively presumed it could. You will impoverish us all if you continue with this childish notion. And then we will have no way of protecting ourselves or the borders we believe we have secure.

  6. Twm O'r Nant
    01/07/2011 at 3:41 pm

    Perhaps the Strategic Defence review is not revisited because the Uk government believes that it is well sorted by yet another international power, SHAPE and Nato.

    There are things about the organization of those two organizations that neither the British public nor any other public will ever
    know.

    The worldwide distribution of globalist troops and its armaments always seem to be magically organized to me!

    It went drastically wrong at Srebrenica for which the Dutch are currently trying to salve their consciences with the recent abduction of Radavan Karadzic from his own country.

    The murderous soldier, who did the killing, some personally, and who was even more recently charged, will be humanely dealt with.

    The fact remains that Karadzic has as much time to prepare his case as he thinks he needs.

    Carefully done and with no obstruction as to the TV footage/metrage/digital records
    which has convicted a number of high crime/misdemeanour defendants recently, he should not find it too difficult to acquit himself.

    He is dealing with history.

  7. Twm O'r Nant
    02/07/2011 at 10:25 am

    The use of Nato troops in Afghanistan and/or Iraq,was either low profile and/or soon changed to Eu troops or nation state/country troops ie UK/Dutch/US.

    The fact that the North Atlantic treaty had very little or nothing to do with either Afgh or Iraq has done little to discourage NATO from assuming new roles in a globalist world.

    The use of EU troops designated as such will surely always be very carefull apportioned on account of the very different historical and nation state interests of the leading states of it.

    Perhaps a Strategic review is needed to obtain a better understanding of all these new and different human tensions in the world today!

  8. Tom
    02/07/2011 at 10:27 am

    The use of Nato troops in Afghanistan and/or Iraq,was either low profile and/or soon changed to Eu troops or nation state/country troops ie UK/Dutch/US.

    The fact that the North Atlantic treaty had very little or nothing to do with either Afgh or Iraq has done little to discourage NATO from assuming new roles in a globalist world.

    The use of EU troops designated as such will surely always be very carefull apportioned on account of the very different historical and nation state interests of the leading states of it.

    Perhaps a Strategic review is needed to obtain a better understanding of all these new and different human tensions in the world today!

  9. Gareth Howell
    03/07/2011 at 12:23 pm

    Both Assad of Syria and Qhaddafi claim that the
    revolutions in their countries are inspired by
    Al Qaeda, and their dedication to the “Restoration of the Laws of the Caliphs” throughout the world.

    This really seems very contradictory, since a
    Permanent president, and a 30year dictator
    could hardly be more ‘Caliphatic’ or kingly themselves.

    It is interesting to note that the Caliphates
    did enjoy a semblance of democracy,under the Ottoman/Osmans, but very far from the way in which we know it today.

    The slumbering Giant at the moment is Turkey, with Greece in financial turmoil and Arab countries in Turmoil too.

    Fortunately Turkey is part of NATO, and would only ever act in conjunction with that International Organastion.

  10. Twm
    03/07/2011 at 12:25 pm

    Both Assad of Syria and Qhaddafi claim that the
    revolutions in their countries are inspired by
    Al Qaeda, and their dedication to the “Restoration of the Laws of the Caliphs” throughout the world.

    This really seems very contradictory, since a
    Permanent president, and a 30year dictator
    could hardly be more ‘Caliphatic’ or kingly themselves.

    It is interesting to note that the Caliphates
    did enjoy a semblance of democracy,under the Ottoman/Osmans, but very far from the way in which we know it today.

    The slumbering Giant at the moment is Turkey, with Greece in financial turmoil and Arab countries in Turmoil too.

    Fortunately Turkey is part of NATO, and would only ever act in conjunction with that International Organastion.

  11. Twm
    03/07/2011 at 12:38 pm

    http://www.nato.int/shape/about/background2.htm

    Perhaps Miles JSd would like to some reading before he prattles on again, on a subject about which he apparently only has warped imagination, and no knowledge at all.

  12. Lord Soley
    Lord Soley
    05/07/2011 at 9:16 pm

    Some interesting comments here but I have deleted the repetitive ones and the slightly abusive interchanges – DON’T DO IT!!

    Maude. Take a long view of history and look at the evolving world relationships. The West is in relative decline. Not absolute decline but relative because so many other nations are coming up. The EU borders are still porous and events in Libya inevitably produce refugees. There will be other cases like this. The question is can the EU co-operate to provide a defence system that protects Europe without having a complete union. I think the answer is ‘yes’ and it is necessary. Whether the EU becomes a complete union remains to be seen and probably won’t happen before I am pushing up daisies!!

    Lady Tizzy. I can’t give you a precise answer but nations that provide troops to the UN get about £500 per soldier per month reimbursment. The UN also gives reimbursment for equipment.
    The individual NATO nations often underwrite the cost of providing forces and I think this will be the case for Libya. Some equipment is paid for by NATO so our airborne early warning and control aircraft (AWACS) costs are repaid.
    Ultimately these operations do tend to rely on the great powers who are of course the richer ones.

    • MilesJSD
      milesjsd
      06/07/2011 at 4:47 pm

      Thank you, Lord Soley.
      D’accord.

      A propos our “evolution”, I see from Science-on-Science that a newly-demonstrated major function of sleep & dreaming is to allow our somatopsychic experiences and problems encountered by our neo-cortex during waking-time to be re-run by our hippocampus, sequentially as those events happened but ‘fast-forwarded’, ‘clipped’, and sort of ‘creatively-exaggerated’ or ‘apparently-encoded’, as dreams the purpose of which can be nothing less than ‘cooperative learning’.

      May seem ‘off-topic’, but to my mind may such not prove to be vitally helpful to those responsible for our Civilisational-Development as well as our various levels of Evolution ?

      After all, the Soviets trained some soldiers to be able to fight sustainedly upon only two-hours per night in bed (alone);
      their ‘secret’ being that the most major and essential cycle of sleep is the first, of one-and-a half-hours (each cycle begins with a ‘hypogogic’ (going down into sleep) dream and ends with a pre-hypnopompic dream –
      so the soldiers were awakened after one-and-half-hours but were additionally required to lie reasonably still in bed, with upper eyelids lowered, for most of the next half hour, to ‘assimilate’ their dreaming, and importantly to note any possibly objectifiable creative or warning content;

      then and only then did the bugler sound ‘Reveille’ (“hands off Clocks, pull on socks” to older British soldiers).
      And no doubt even the “Enemy’s” brains might become better able to “image” such heaven-hereafter-paradises as Lord Soley’s “pushing up daisies” ?
      ———–
      I suggest the above ‘sub-topic’ be viewed as “Development versus Evolution” and be C/F for further “Merging”.

      1647 W06

    • maude elwes
      07/07/2011 at 2:47 pm

      @Lord Soley:

      The West is in relative decline because production has been moved to areas of the globe where exploitative labour is legal and natural resources easily obtained.

      The West decided to make this move regardless of the devastating effect it would have on our population and culture. And the reason? Greed. (Watch The Corporation, suggested on another thread, or read the book)

      Of course, with the political will, this trend can be, and should be, reversed. But, with the money it makes so many of the individuals involved, will they be likely to go with the best interests of our country instead? I have my doubts. Billionaire status has a nice ring to it and if cleverly moved around, is a virtual tax free business.

      Your words on refugees are uncomfortable reading. Your acceptance of it as inevitable is most of all unsettling. Had our leaders had this attitude on Hitler and the Nazi’s, we would have lay down at the start off, and without doubt, now, all the Jews, homosexuals, disabled, gypsies, and so on, of Europe, would be no more. Not the way to go is it?

      Yet, here you are telling us to accept unregulated and ill conceived legions of dependants, via mass immigration into Europe, as a matter of fact because it is the way of ‘globalisation’ and we can do nothing better. Even though the result, without doubt, means that the cultural make up and change to our society will be unacceptable to the majority of the nation. If you look at your thoughts head on, they could be construed as a betrayal of us all and therefore treasonous.

      You write of the fact that we must expect other cases akin to the Libyan refugee invasion, with even more immigrants to Europe as a result. Where are these situations likely to originate? Have you got in mind the next strike our government will take? I ask you this, is it really sensible to throw coal on a burning house? Won’t that reduce the asset to ashes? Look at Greece and if the pundits are to be believed, Spain, Ireland and Portugal will follow.

      Would you have accepted as inevitable millions of Germans as citizens when it was clear Hitler intended our demise, via his people as armies?

      In order to safeguard our borders, Europe has to become a complete union with one military agenda. Defence of the borders, not attacks outside those borders, as we presently have.

      You should be spending the tax payers billions in our own defence and the improvement of the lifestyle of our Western society, not on ruinous efforts elsewhere.

  13. maude elwes
    12/07/2011 at 1:14 pm

    This morning we hear Gaddafi is in talks to bring this Western assault on his country to an end.

    What a colossal waste of tax payers money. And more importantly, a revolting loss of human life.

    This outcome could have been achieved without an unnecessary use of war machines.

    http://english.libya.tv/2011/07/11/france-states-that-the-revolutionaries-must-talk-to-gaddafis-government/

    NATO: An organization that is run by the USA for the USA. Europe should separate from it and defend its own interests.

    http://buchanan.org/blog/pjb-nato-expansion-unnecessary-and-provocative-273

    Does Europe really need 480 plus nuclear weapons on its territory? And whether you like the thought or not, we are Europe.

    http://www.nukestrat.com/us/afn/nato.htm

Comments are closed.