This had me spitting tacks on the train yesterday:

"HALF of the Royal Navy is to be “mothballed” as it bears the brunt of cuts imposed after a series of expensive procurement projects and the hidden costs of the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq. Six destroyers and frigates and two other vessels are expected to be put into reduced readiness, known as mothballing, to achieve urgent savings of more than £250m. It can take up to 18 months to bring mothballed ships back into service.

The armed forces have been told to save more than £250m this year, and £1 billion by April 2008, amid a “rebalancing” of the Ministry of Defence’s (MoD’s) spending plans, defence sources disclosed.
The MoD will also cancel the last two of the eight Type-45 destroyers the navy was supposed to get. The navy was promised the government would provide these in exchange for cutting 15 major ships in 2004, sources said."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...524444,00.html

That's a sad commentary on the UK Navy.

Don't they have to keep so many Surface Ships ready for the NATO commitment?

Originally Posted by Gator

Don't they have to keep so many Surface Ships ready for the NATO commitment?

Well, standing Nato commitments probably require half a dozen ships including a minesweeper in the Baltic, a frigate/destroyer and nuclear submarine in the North Atlantic (and a similar number of ships in port).

I must admit, I'd have much more respect for these types of announcements if they put in which commitments would be scaled back, "...and this means that if you're in the Middle East, Falkland Islands or Indian Ocean, you're on your own, dude".

In recent war with Hizb'allah, those guys missiled an Israeli gunboats. The Taliban repaired and flew Soviet fighters when they took Afghanistan for the first time. Let's not forget the USS Cole. The idea that we are dealing with a global movement whose only capability is getting kids to blow themselves up in Tel Aviv supermarkets (and that therefore we dont need much of a Navy) is way off the mark.

Um....sorry for frothing at the mouth, but this announcement has had me bouncing off the walls.

I was more than a little dismayed when I found out that England was cutting back to only SLBM's for her Nuclear Deterrent. In todays World there may come a time when England may wish she had a few Tac Nukes laying around.
We sure as hell do not lend or lease such things, as a matter of fact the US supplies England her Trident II Missile Systems, but we make England build the Warheads, because they are not allowed to see ours, let alone buy them.

hmm.. maybe they can outsourse their Navy to another country... China perhaps

Well Major, last I heard China was having her own troubles trying to get her SSBN to work right, and England does not seem to have the same problem.

Plus the Chinese take an entire Aircraft Carrier and turn the damn thing into an amusement park.

so they could lease the ships from England... their troubles would be over.


oh, and I am not really serious about that comment. I would rather watch them stumble over producing their own navy.

Originally Posted by Team Infidel

so they [China] could lease the ships from England... their troubles would be over.

I think the phrase is, "not helping".

Why is it that our allies are reducing their militaries when our enemies our building theirs up.

Iran
Red China
North Korea
Russia (Still can't trust them)
Venezuela (Cuba Part II)

Are all buidling up their military forces. Red China wants a blue water navy. Iran wants everything, North Korea wants South Korea, Russia wants to be a Superpower again, and Venezuela wants to be a major power in South America.

Yes, Terrorist themselves are a major danger too.

Originally Posted by Kirruth

Well, standing Nato commitments probably require half a dozen ships including a minesweeper in the Baltic, a frigate/destroyer and nuclear submarine in the North Atlantic (and a similar number of ships in port).

I must admit, I'd have much more respect for these types of announcements if they put in which commitments would be scaled back, "...and this means that if you're in the Middle East, Falkland Islands or Indian Ocean, you're on your own, dude".

In recent war with Hizb'allah, those guys missiled an Israeli gunboats. The Taliban repaired and flew Soviet fighters when they took Afghanistan for the first time. Let's not forget the USS Cole. The idea that we are dealing with a global movement whose only capability is getting kids to blow themselves up in Tel Aviv supermarkets (and that therefore we dont need much of a Navy) is way off the mark.

Um....sorry for frothing at the mouth, but this announcement has had me bouncing off the walls.

Hit the nail straight on it's head. Our Islamic Terrorist enemies themselves also have some military power of themselves that they want to build and increase.

Teddy said it best. "Speak softly and carry a big stick."

That is what England, America, and the rest of NATO and NATO's Allies need.