4 ms·

The British military have the same problems. It's disgusting how a prestigious military force has been reduced to a pitiful size reliant on contractors to inst

The British military have the same problems. It's disgusting how a prestigious military force has been reduced to a pitiful size reliant on contractors to install airconditioning units, weekend warriors who fly in and out on short tours and vehicles that have had "extended life" programs instead of making new ones. Meanwhile the Russians and Chinese have been building next generation ground, air and sea units. The UK have two aircraft carriers which were designed in the early 2000s. Sure we have our own innovative equipment but as the article says, they are operated and maintained by civilian technicians. Are the technicians going to fly in to a warzone or if push comes to shove pickup a M4/SA80/G36/FAL/Famas and fight when the Russians come rolling through the Fulda gap.

varjag 7y ago
> The UK have two aircraft carriers which were designed in the early 2000s. That's sparkling new for an aircraft carrier tho, and it's two more seaworthy carriers than Russia has.
- Semiapies 7y ago
  All the yammering about "reduced to a pitiful size" aside, the world's navies are basically the USN, the RN, and everyone else sitting in the Honorable Mentions section.
paganel 7y ago
> M4/SA80/G36/FAL/Famas and fight when the Russians come rolling through the Fulda gap. Not to be a downer, but judging by the most recent European land war (the one in Ukraine) just picking up a "M4/SA80/G36/FAL/Famas" won't do that much in terms of stopping the enemy, you need kick-ass artillery and a kick-ass air-force, otherwise you're just sending those men into a meat grinder. That, of course, if we don't engage in a nuclear war, in which case the discussion is totally different.
- captainredbeard 7y ago
  Combined arms existed in the 1980s.
  - paganel 7y ago
    Yeah, I know that, just wanted to point out that war between two comparable armies hasn’t changed that much between the 1980s and now, hell, hasn’t changed that much since WW2 and now (even though now I have the slight impression that tanks are not as well seen as during WW2, though I might be wrong on that). OP was suggesting going into battle War of Crimea-style, which would be a recipe for pointless slaughter.
pjc50 7y ago
The fundamental problem is that it's not actually required to work because it's not a defensive war, it's an overseas adventure. If you want to see the most amazing military innovation on zero budget, it's being done in Syrian garages or on the streets of Hong Kong. If they fail, the innovators themselves are in physical danger. The lesson of the Iraq war was that it's possible to throw a trillion dollars into an overseas disaster and all the comfortable profiteers back home remain fine. Why should they change without a gun pointed at them? (There was definitely a phase of WW2, the first year or so, where all the inadequate British kit got replaced at urgent speed) > Are the technicians going to fly in to a warzone or if push comes to shove pickup a M4/SA80/G36/FAL/Famas and fight when the Russians come rolling through the Fulda gap At the rate things are going, the technicians will simply be bought out by the Russians.
- captainredbeard 7y ago
  > At the rate things are going, the technicians will simply be bought out by the Russians. s/Russians/Chinese (FTFY)
onepointsixC 7y ago
Your comment doesn't seem very grounded. Those two British aircraft carriers were designed in the 2000s and are substantially more powerful than the brand new Chinese one which is a copy of the Russian one that was designed in the 80's. They operate F35's on them which are more modern and advanced than anything in the Russian or Chinese inventories. The closest Russian equivalent, the SU-57 was rejected by the Indian Air force for poor performance and the Chinese one doesn't have good domestic engines. The UK's has been investing in modernizing it's forces even under the budgetary constraints it works with.
- mothsonasloth 7y ago
  I was being dramatic but my point still stands. Business and Military don't mix in a warzone
arethuza 7y ago
Its almost a 1000km from the Fulda Gap to the Western border of NATO - so if the Russians did invade through Belarus/Ukraine there would be a problem a bit before they got to the middle of Germany. And anyway, the North German Plain was just as likely an assault route for the Warsaw Pact forces as through the Fulda Gap.
- konstmonst 7y ago
  The Russians already invaded Ukraine and tried to subvert Belarus. As a Russian expat I am pretty sure they wont invade NATO because every high ranking Russian official has Millions/Billions of dollars in Cayman Islands and a vast portfolio of real estate in the west. Most of their children also live in the west. Also if they invade, then no one will buy their oil and gas and they will go bust as Soviet Union did before and they understand this fact very well. Russia Government as of now is not an Empire like the Soviet Union, but is an organized crime group and should be treated as such.
chrisseaton 7y ago
> weekend warriors who fly in and out on short tours Have you got some sort of problem with reservists? > Are the technicians going to fly in to a warzone Yes? They flew into Afghanistan all the time to fix equipment.

varjag 7y ago

> The UK have two aircraft carriers which were designed in the early 2000s. That's sparkling new for an aircraft carrier tho, and it's two more seaworthy carriers than Russia has.

Semiapies 7y ago
All the yammering about "reduced to a pitiful size" aside, the world's navies are basically the USN, the RN, and everyone else sitting in the Honorable Mentions section.

paganel 7y ago

> M4/SA80/G36/FAL/Famas and fight when the Russians come rolling through the Fulda gap. Not to be a downer, but judging by the most recent European land war (the one in Ukraine) just picking up a "M4/SA80/G36/FAL/Famas" won't do that much in terms of stopping the enemy, you need kick-ass artillery and a kick-ass air-force, otherwise you're just sending those men into a meat grinder. That, of course, if we don't engage in a nuclear war, in which case the discussion is totally different.

captainredbeard 7y ago
Combined arms existed in the 1980s.
- paganel 7y ago
  Yeah, I know that, just wanted to point out that war between two comparable armies hasn’t changed that much between the 1980s and now, hell, hasn’t changed that much since WW2 and now (even though now I have the slight impression that tanks are not as well seen as during WW2, though I might be wrong on that). OP was suggesting going into battle War of Crimea-style, which would be a recipe for pointless slaughter.

pjc50 7y ago

The fundamental problem is that it's not actually required to work because it's not a defensive war, it's an overseas adventure. If you want to see the most amazing military innovation on zero budget, it's being done in Syrian garages or on the streets of Hong Kong. If they fail, the innovators themselves are in physical danger. The lesson of the Iraq war was that it's possible to throw a trillion dollars into an overseas disaster and all the comfortable profiteers back home remain fine. Why should they change without a gun pointed at them? (There was definitely a phase of WW2, the first year or so, where all the inadequate British kit got replaced at urgent speed) > Are the technicians going to fly in to a warzone or if push comes to shove pickup a M4/SA80/G36/FAL/Famas and fight when the Russians come rolling through the Fulda gap At the rate things are going, the technicians will simply be bought out by the Russians.

captainredbeard 7y ago
> At the rate things are going, the technicians will simply be bought out by the Russians. s/Russians/Chinese (FTFY)

onepointsixC 7y ago

Your comment doesn't seem very grounded. Those two British aircraft carriers were designed in the 2000s and are substantially more powerful than the brand new Chinese one which is a copy of the Russian one that was designed in the 80's. They operate F35's on them which are more modern and advanced than anything in the Russian or Chinese inventories. The closest Russian equivalent, the SU-57 was rejected by the Indian Air force for poor performance and the Chinese one doesn't have good domestic engines. The UK's has been investing in modernizing it's forces even under the budgetary constraints it works with.

mothsonasloth 7y ago
I was being dramatic but my point still stands. Business and Military don't mix in a warzone

arethuza 7y ago

Its almost a 1000km from the Fulda Gap to the Western border of NATO - so if the Russians did invade through Belarus/Ukraine there would be a problem a bit before they got to the middle of Germany. And anyway, the North German Plain was just as likely an assault route for the Warsaw Pact forces as through the Fulda Gap.

konstmonst 7y ago
The Russians already invaded Ukraine and tried to subvert Belarus. As a Russian expat I am pretty sure they wont invade NATO because every high ranking Russian official has Millions/Billions of dollars in Cayman Islands and a vast portfolio of real estate in the west. Most of their children also live in the west. Also if they invade, then no one will buy their oil and gas and they will go bust as Soviet Union did before and they understand this fact very well. Russia Government as of now is not an Empire like the Soviet Union, but is an organized crime group and should be treated as such.

chrisseaton 7y ago

> weekend warriors who fly in and out on short tours Have you got some sort of problem with reservists? > Are the technicians going to fly in to a warzone Yes? They flew into Afghanistan all the time to fix equipment.