A new trial forum for political discussions. Largely unmoderated, so whilst discussing politics is fine, personal abuse isn't. So please keep it civil.
As with other forums the posts to do not reflect the view of the FLYER team.
  • 1
  • 89
  • 90
  • 91
  • 92
  • 93
  • 207
User avatar
By kanga
#1911859
eltonioni wrote:.. invading Iraq on a flimsy (ie completely invented) pretext,..


again, trying to avoid the 'no politics' rule, I refer Forumites to Chilcott (and, for further bedtime reading, Butler and Hutton) :?
User avatar
By OCB
#1911912
kanga wrote:That retired Russian Colonel on flagship Russian TV programme: BBC Moscow correspondent (fluent Russian speaker) gist and assessment

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61484222


…yeah, that’ll be the muppet I mentioned earlier….

…clearly he didn’t get to say what he did without Kremlin backing.

The technical level analysis says RF “is f8ckwd”.

That’s not something I thought I’d ever see, but se facts are se facts.
User avatar
By eltonioni
#1911967
kanga wrote:
eltonioni wrote:.. invading Iraq on a flimsy (ie completely invented) pretext,..


again, trying to avoid the 'no politics' rule, I refer Forumites to Chilcott (and, for further bedtime reading, Butler and Hutton) :?

Another interesting and less political / bureaucratic read is "The Bomb In My Garden" which does give some credence to the flimsy pretext, but it still doesn't make the pretext any less flimsy or invented. I don't think this is politics so much as history.

On topic, it was fun to see UKR troops on the Russian border the other day. Being a highly experienced armchair general I was fascinated to gen up on modern artillery munitions that NATO has access to and have been pondering on whether UKR will get access to the same stuff to accelerate their victory if they can lob shells at RUS troops and hardware while staying out of range of return fire.

Who knew that there are shells that can do this from +60km away! (Obviously loads of you do but it blew my mind!)

User avatar
By Rob P
#1911979
There's some analysis that suggest the war will solidify into a high tech version of WW1 with both sides dug into static positions lobbing shells at each other.

Fascinating to see also how impotent manned ground attack aircraft have become. With its entire airforce (minus a good few losses) available, Russia has not been able to establish any meaningful air superiority.

Rob P
By A4 Pacific
#1911990
Fascinating to see also how impotent manned ground attack aircraft have become. With its entire airforce (minus a good few losses) available, Russia has not been able to establish any meaningful air superiority.


Probably best to bear in mind Russia launched an over ambitious war, with sub standard technology, incompetent leadership, naive tactics, poor morale of scared and murderous thugs, and with political intervention of battlefield decisions from the very highest level. The West tends not to wage war in that way

It’s the superiority and unrestricted supply of western weaponry, along with the sharing of high quality real time intel gathering that has condemned Russia’s air force to a ‘stand off’ roll. Any ‘lessons learned’ in this war need to be very carefully considered, as they may not translate well into future conflicts.

It is Russia’s largely ageing nuclear weaponry that allow it to push it’s weight around, and absolutely not the quality of it’s conventional forces.
Rjk983 liked this
User avatar
By PeteSpencer
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1911994
I see tha CND has re surfaced and is planning a ‘large demonstration’ outside the gates of RAF Lakenheath this coming Saturday in protest against the alleged plan to store nuclear weapons at the base once again .
They (the weapons) were removed 18 years ago apparently following ‘local protests’ .

I wonder what sections of the current rag tag rent-a-mob brigades will turn up in anticipation of a good ruck and super glue-fest.

I hope the protesters are treated firmly but fairly with the usual stringent security steps taken by the base commander . :wink:
Last edited by PeteSpencer on Thu May 19, 2022 10:27 am, edited 1 time in total.
By Cessna571
#1911997
PeteSpencer wrote:I see tha CND has re surfaced and is planning a ‘large demonstration’ outside the gates of RAF Lakenheath this coming Saturday in protest against the alleged plan to store nuclear weapons at the base once again .
They were removed 18 years ago apparently following ‘local protests’ .

I wonder what sections of the current rag tag rent-a-mob brigades will turn up in anticipation of a good ruck and super glue-fest.

I hope the protesters are treated firmly but fairly with the usual stringent security steps taken by the base commander . :wink:


I think this would be better in the “when is a crime not a crime” thread.

The base commander will have to be careful he is not arrested by the police if he takes any action, the police have already issued a statement saying they will be there in force to protect the protestors.
User avatar
By MikeB
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1911999
OCB wrote:
kanga wrote:That retired Russian Colonel on flagship Russian TV programme: BBC Moscow correspondent (fluent Russian speaker) gist and assessment

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61484222


…yeah, that’ll be the muppet I mentioned earlier….

…clearly he didn’t get to say what he did without Kremlin backing.

The technical level analysis says RF “is f8ckwd”.

That’s not something I thought I’d ever see, but se facts are se facts.


Said retired Russian Colonel has again appeared on Russian TV now airing a complete reversal of his previous comments. He appears to have had a "pep talk" from the FSB :roll:
johnm liked this
By Bill McCarthy
#1912001
I’ve said in the past that our aircraft carriers should carry long range UAVs on board - they are cheaper, stealthy, and you could cram ten times as many into the hangars - pilots operating them inboard from the U.K.
As soon as high tech weapons are “gifted” they become obsolete should the enemy capture them and copy/develop counter measures.
johnm liked this
By A4 Pacific
#1912013
As soon as high tech weapons are “gifted” they become obsolete should the enemy capture them and copy/develop counter measures.


High tech weapons do not have to be captured to be copied or countered! Precisely why technology never stands still. :thumright:
User avatar
By Rob P
#1912018
PeteSpencer wrote:I see tha CND has re surfaced and is planning a ‘large demonstration’ outside the gates of RAF Lakenheath this coming Saturday in protest against the alleged plan to store nuclear weapons at the base once again


I did ask on a local website how Ukraine's unilateral scrapping of nuclear weapons has worked out for them.

To be fair, the locals here (by and large) couldn't give a monkey's what USAFE keeps on the base. Most are very pro the polite and well-behaved visiting forces.

Then we haven't had an Ann Sacoolas incident.

Rob P
User avatar
By Flyin'Dutch'
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1912041
The current situation makes it clear that nukes don't make the world a safer place.

If there would have been none the Russians would have had a more severe kicking from NATO, the more recent generosity towards the Ukraine no doubt based on 'the West's' assessment that their nuclear stuff is as reliable as a Chinese tyre on one of the Russians' APCs in a Ukrainian forest.

The only credible nuclear Russian threat is the blowing up one of the Ukraine's nuclear power stations.

And the French and Brits having their own 'independent' deterrent?

Laughable. No British or French politician would launch until Uncle Sam gives the nod, and theirs are already overhead.

Neither the Brits, nor the French are, on their own are forces to be reckoned with. Safety in numbers. The Swedes and Finns have learned that recently.

The only club that has the numbers, technology and dosh to go it alone is the US. We don't know about the Chinese, the Russians are in the 5th Saturday division we now know.
User avatar
By eltonioni
#1912051
Flyin'Dutch' wrote:The current situation makes it clear that nukes don't make the world a safer place.


They sure as heck would have made Ukraine a safer place.

I don't think that you've thought this one through FD.
By riverrock
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1912053
Flyin'Dutch' wrote:The current situation makes it clear that nukes don't make the world a safer place.

But they make us safer - as Russia wouldn't attack a nuclear state.
Flyin'Dutch' wrote:If there would have been none the Russians would have had a more severe kicking from NATO
that would still have ended up with us at war with Russia - which we currently aren't.
Flyin'Dutch' wrote:Laughable. No British or French politician would launch until Uncle Sam gives the nod, and theirs are already overhead.
We have engaged in other places without Sam's approval.
I struggle to see a situation where we would use nuclear weapons without NATO / Uncle Sam but then, I didn't see Russia's invasion coming either.

Neither the Brits, nor the French are, on their own are forces to be reckoned with. Safety in numbers. The Swedes and Finns have learned that recently.
This is why we have NATO and the thread of nuclear weapons is a force multiplier.
kanga liked this
  • 1
  • 89
  • 90
  • 91
  • 92
  • 93
  • 207