Search found 1352 matches
- 16 Apr 2024, 16:22
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: Labour's likely defence policy
- Replies: 97
- Views: 992
Re: Labour's likely defence policy
Ok lets go with your view that the NHS is the best thing since sliced bread and can do no wrong and any issues it does have would magically disappear with a bit more cash. How much more money does it need? £5bn\year, £10bn\year, £100bn\year? I've said nothing of the sort. You clearly believe that t...
- 16 Apr 2024, 15:37
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: Labour's likely defence policy
- Replies: 97
- Views: 992
Re: Labour's likely defence policy
To social housing? To energy infrastructure? To policing?mrclark303 wrote: ↑16 Apr 2024, 14:44 And you don't seem to understand the difference an additional 7/8 billion would mean...
- 16 Apr 2024, 15:34
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: Labour's likely defence policy
- Replies: 97
- Views: 992
Re: Labour's likely defence policy
Oh dear, I'll take a wild guess that you work in the NHS in an administrative capacity, as viewing that slow motion car crash from inside out, is the only possible way you could consider it well run...... Nope, try again. You've in total denial if you think it's just dandy, I've claimed nothing of ...
- 16 Apr 2024, 15:27
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: Labour's likely defence policy
- Replies: 97
- Views: 992
Re: Labour's likely defence policy
I have but you clearly don't understand it. The link you posted shows the spending in 'real terms' i.e. inflation is accounted for. It confirms on average NHS spending has increased 3.6% a year after inflation. That's after economic inflation (as basket of goods), that's not the inflation that the ...
- 16 Apr 2024, 06:34
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: Labour's likely defence policy
- Replies: 97
- Views: 992
Re: Labour's likely defence policy
2.5% is a relitivly low level, it's only returning us to 2010 % levels. That makes zero sense. Relative to what? If in 2010 we paid 2.47% of GDPR, and less since, then that makes 2.5% relatively high. As high as 2000, too. 2.5% would make us 6th highest in NATO. So relative to what is 2.5% low? It'...
- 16 Apr 2024, 06:21
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: Labour's likely defence policy
- Replies: 97
- Views: 992
Re: Labour's likely defence policy
NHS funding had gone up by 50% since 2010! Err yeah, that's not surprising when you consider heslthcare inflation and population health. The NHS is poorly run, it's vast administrative arm is something akin to the Soviet Union, where different General hospitals have a small army of administrators, ...
- 16 Apr 2024, 06:13
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: Labour's likely defence policy
- Replies: 97
- Views: 992
Re: Labour's likely defence policy
"It's been stated time and time again." They haven't stated anything at all, it's all political hot air and absolutely zero substance.... I suppose all Starmer has to do is carry on waffling about vague this and vague that and hope most don't realise that Labour haven't god a bloody clue,...
- 16 Apr 2024, 06:10
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: Labour's likely defence policy
- Replies: 97
- Views: 992
Re: Labour's likely defence policy
NHS funding isn't in disarray it is higher than it has ever been, and that includes billions added by the Tories. Most cuts in government spending in the 14 years have been LAs, who are responsible for social care and the roads. That's such a false representation. The NHS is under increasing pressu...
- 15 Apr 2024, 22:08
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: Labour's likely defence policy
- Replies: 97
- Views: 992
Re: Labour's likely defence policy
14 years of Tory austerity and "there's a lot of money that could be moved around". Are you aware of the state of local authorities going bankrupt? The NHS is funding disarray? Schools falling apart? The state of the roads? The lack of big infrastructure projects? Tell me about about Labo...
- 15 Apr 2024, 22:07
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: Labour's likely defence policy
- Replies: 97
- Views: 992
Re: Labour's likely defence policy
NHS funding isn't in disarray it is higher than it has ever been, and that includes billions added by the Tories. Most cuts in government spending in the 14 years have been LAs, who are responsible for social care and the roads. That's such a false representation. The NHS is under increasing pressu...
- 15 Apr 2024, 20:33
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: Labour's likely defence policy
- Replies: 97
- Views: 992
Re: Labour's likely defence policy
Because the public accounts are FUBAR….. It’s not that simple. HMG has little fiscal headroom because it is choosing not to reallocate funding to different priority areas. UK GDP is now more than £2.2Trillion. Government spending equates to around 45% of that figure. That’s a lot of money that coul...
- 15 Apr 2024, 19:34
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: Labour's likely defence policy
- Replies: 97
- Views: 992
Re: Labour's likely defence policy
LMAO. So the Tory fiscal policy is to lose the election by making unfunded promises they can't afford, so that Labour then have to make cuts, which in 5 years might influence an election. That's your joke, right? Really pleased I gave you a laugh but it’s no joke. Why would a policy to increase def...
- 15 Apr 2024, 18:57
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: Labour's likely defence policy
- Replies: 97
- Views: 992
Re: Labour's likely defence policy
That makes zero sense. Relative to what? If in 2010 we paid 2.47% of GDPR, and less since, then that makes 2.5% relatively high.mrclark303 wrote: ↑15 Apr 2024, 17:54 2.5% is a relitivly low level, it's only returning us to 2010 % levels.
As high as 2000, too.
2.5% would make us 6th highest in NATO.
So relative to what is 2.5% low?
- 15 Apr 2024, 18:36
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: Labour's likely defence policy
- Replies: 97
- Views: 992
Re: Labour's likely defence policy
Because they can't fund it…. They don’t need to fund it long term, they just need to make it policy at the next fiscal event which will be just before the election. If the first thing a new Labour administration has to do is cut defence spending from 3% of GDP to 2.2% of GDP it will be a disastrous...
- 15 Apr 2024, 13:22
- Forum: General Discussion
- Topic: Labour's likely defence policy
- Replies: 97
- Views: 992
Re: Labour's likely defence policy
They refuse to commit to the relitivly low level of 2.5% on defence. How is a 25% increase, and more than most other NATO nations, a relatively low level? The part I can’t understand is why the Conservatives aren’t raising defence spending at the eleventh hour to set up a fiscal straitjacket for La...
- 14 Apr 2024, 19:16
- Forum: British Army
- Topic: Boxer / Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV)
- Replies: 2809
- Views: 739977
- 09 Apr 2024, 19:55
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: River Class (OPV) (RN)
- Replies: 5492
- Views: 1551346
Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)
If any additional armaments shall be considered, it shall better be "optional". In other words, keep the hull system itself simple enough to handle fishery protection and EEZ patrol. No, managing a fleet within a fleet is stupid. If we have a ship go technical at the last moment we've sho...
- 09 Apr 2024, 15:37
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: River Class (OPV) (RN)
- Replies: 5492
- Views: 1551346
Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)
If any additional armaments shall be considered, it shall better be "optional". In other words, keep the hull system itself simple enough to handle fishery protection and EEZ patrol. No, managing a fleet within a fleet is stupid. If we have a ship go technical at the last moment we've sho...
- 08 Apr 2024, 16:22
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: River Class (OPV) (RN)
- Replies: 5492
- Views: 1551346
Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)
I'm not suggesting massive changes to the River Class. An airbust capable cannon and lightweight missile system is sufficient.
- 07 Apr 2024, 18:53
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: River Class (OPV) (RN)
- Replies: 5492
- Views: 1551346
Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)
Given the reduction in platforms, I would argue a UK based OPV class that can act as a USV/UUV mothership is not a low priority luxury it’s essential. For what purpose? To do what the B1 Rivers to right now - EEZ patrolling, anti terrorism, anti drug trafficking and supporting littoral operations. ...
- 07 Apr 2024, 11:54
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: River Class (OPV) (RN)
- Replies: 5492
- Views: 1551346
- 07 Apr 2024, 06:49
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: River Class (OPV) (RN)
- Replies: 5492
- Views: 1551346
Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)
But the POM neither has the sensors or the armament (or the magazine) to be any improvement or even comparable to the RB2. It's lightly armed coastguard ship.Markam wrote: ↑07 Apr 2024, 06:02 Something like the French POM (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrouilleur_Outre-mer) would be great value for money @£31m a ship.
- 06 Apr 2024, 18:07
- Forum: Royal Navy
- Topic: River Class (OPV) (RN)
- Replies: 5492
- Views: 1551346
Re: River Class (OPV) (RN)
https://www.twitter.com/hms_spey/status/1776030294887497983?s=46&t=uxMT95H5Nr9jAEmCklKdgA Nice video. I can understand those who post on improving the lethality and sensors of the B2, but thankfully the debate about turning them into some sort of 21st century Panzerschiff has died down of late....
- 28 Mar 2024, 07:10
- Forum: UK Defence & Aerospace Industry
- Topic: Airlander Airship
- Replies: 73
- Views: 9594
Re: Airlander Airship
- 27 Mar 2024, 15:11
- Forum: Royal Air Force
- Topic: Airbus A400M Atlas (RAF)
- Replies: 394
- Views: 158359
Re: Airbus A400M Atlas (RAF)
Agreed. But clearly there's issues with "boots on beaches" that US Military have been trying to address.Tempest414 wrote: ↑27 Mar 2024, 14:22 Even better still take a Bay class from Cyprus with 2 x Mexeflote and a LCU drop thousands of tons right on the beech and make a real difference