4 ms·

> swashbuckling leadership in support of Ukraine, overcommitting already threadbare armed forces, such that a US general commented today that the UK army is no

by _djo_ 4y ago

> swashbuckling leadership in support of Ukraine, overcommitting already threadbare armed forces, such that a US general commented today that the UK army is no longer a first class service as a result That's an inaccurate characterisation of the US general's reported comments, which were about long-term trends in British defence spending, procurement, and equipment types, as well as the lack of a plan to boost spending in light of the war in Ukraine, not about the non-frontline stuff it has sent to Ukraine. Warnings about the state and future trajectory of the UK armed forces have been coming from the US side for a number of years now.

_vbnz 4y ago
> Warnings about the state and future trajectory of the UK armed forces have been coming from the US side for a number of years now. And they can all be solved by buying American weapons... funny that.
- varjag 4y ago
  You're talking about the UK, the core of a former global empire with no shortage of arms manufacturing expertise.
- throwrqX 4y ago
  They can also be solved by developing their own industry. Not sure they want to spend the money on it though.
- selectodude 4y ago
  The UK has a very healthy domestic defense industry that makes most of its money selling to the Americans. I imagine BAE Systems would appreciate the local business.
- pessimizer 4y ago
  Selling arms to despots is one of the things that's actually going well in the UK.
throwrqX 4y ago
SkyNews reported from their "sources" that it is understood that: - The armed forces would run out of ammunition "in a few days" if called upon to fight - The UK lacks the ability to defend its skies against the level of missile and drone strikes that Ukraine is enduring - It would take five to 10 years for the army to be able to field a war-fighting division of some 25,000 to 30,000 troops backed by tanks, artillery and helicopters - Some 30% of UK forces on high readiness are reservists who are unable to mobilise within NATO timelines - "so we'd turn up under strength" - The majority of the army's fleet of armoured vehicles, including tanks, was built between 30 to 60 years ago and full replacements are not due for years Source: https://news.sky.com/story/us-general-warns-british-army-no-longer-top-level-fighting-force-defence-sources-reveal-12798365 https://news.sky.com/story/us-general-warns-british-army-no-... Some of those comments are perhaps a bit unfair but it's well known the weakness of European armies.
- makomk 4y ago
  That article seemed to me like a microcosm of what's wrong with UK journalism since Brexit. Every one of those issues is shared with Europe as a whole (or in the case of "the ability to defend its skies against the level of missile and drone strikes that Ukraine is enduring", basically every country on the planet as I understand it), but the article makes the UK look uniquely bad by using a completely different framing when talking about the UK's military vs other countries like France and Germany. For the UK they talk only about the current problems, whereas for other countries they focus only on the fact that those countries have annouced plans to improve their militaries whilst ignoring the current state of their militaries and the question of whether those plans are realistically going to work or actually happen. Germany's military in particular is in an awful state and they've kept on putting off the supposed funding increase it's meant to be getting. Like, the UK is arguably the main military power in Europe at this point and a major contributor to Ukraine not being outright annexed by Russia, but you wouldn't get that impression at all from the article.
  - mistermann 4y ago
    > That article seemed to me like a microcosm of what's wrong with UK journalism since Brexit. If you ask me, the source of the problem is deeper: it is within Western culture itself, and the cognitive style that comes out of it. Speaking inaccurately and untruthfully is not just acceptable, it is enforced. Doing otherwise is taboo.
gadders 4y ago
Man, if he doesn't like the UK army, wait until he looks at the rest of Europe...

by _djo_ 4y ago

_vbnz 4y ago

> Warnings about the state and future trajectory of the UK armed forces have been coming from the US side for a number of years now. And they can all be solved by buying American weapons... funny that.

varjag 4y ago
You're talking about the UK, the core of a former global empire with no shortage of arms manufacturing expertise.
throwrqX 4y ago
They can also be solved by developing their own industry. Not sure they want to spend the money on it though.
selectodude 4y ago
The UK has a very healthy domestic defense industry that makes most of its money selling to the Americans. I imagine BAE Systems would appreciate the local business.
pessimizer 4y ago
Selling arms to despots is one of the things that's actually going well in the UK.

throwrqX 4y ago

SkyNews reported from their "sources" that it is understood that: - The armed forces would run out of ammunition "in a few days" if called upon to fight - The UK lacks the ability to defend its skies against the level of missile and drone strikes that Ukraine is enduring - It would take five to 10 years for the army to be able to field a war-fighting division of some 25,000 to 30,000 troops backed by tanks, artillery and helicopters - Some 30% of UK forces on high readiness are reservists who are unable to mobilise within NATO timelines - "so we'd turn up under strength" - The majority of the army's fleet of armoured vehicles, including tanks, was built between 30 to 60 years ago and full replacements are not due for years Source: https://news.sky.com/story/us-general-warns-british-army-no-longer-top-level-fighting-force-defence-sources-reveal-12798365 https://news.sky.com/story/us-general-warns-british-army-no-... Some of those comments are perhaps a bit unfair but it's well known the weakness of European armies.

makomk 4y ago
That article seemed to me like a microcosm of what's wrong with UK journalism since Brexit. Every one of those issues is shared with Europe as a whole (or in the case of "the ability to defend its skies against the level of missile and drone strikes that Ukraine is enduring", basically every country on the planet as I understand it), but the article makes the UK look uniquely bad by using a completely different framing when talking about the UK's military vs other countries like France and Germany. For the UK they talk only about the current problems, whereas for other countries they focus only on the fact that those countries have annouced plans to improve their militaries whilst ignoring the current state of their militaries and the question of whether those plans are realistically going to work or actually happen. Germany's military in particular is in an awful state and they've kept on putting off the supposed funding increase it's meant to be getting. Like, the UK is arguably the main military power in Europe at this point and a major contributor to Ukraine not being outright annexed by Russia, but you wouldn't get that impression at all from the article.
- mistermann 4y ago
  > That article seemed to me like a microcosm of what's wrong with UK journalism since Brexit. If you ask me, the source of the problem is deeper: it is within Western culture itself, and the cognitive style that comes out of it. Speaking inaccurately and untruthfully is not just acceptable, it is enforced. Doing otherwise is taboo.

gadders 4y ago

Man, if he doesn't like the UK army, wait until he looks at the rest of Europe...