41 replies to this topic

[Debbie_Does_Dallas]

Chairman_merpug, on 12 December 2018 - 08:52 AM, said:

Sadly, the armed forces of the UK are in a bit of a mess. The Army is losing recruits because of the insane decision to outsource recruitment to Crapita. The Navy has just sunk all its eggs into the basket of two massive diesel carriers, which can't operate independently because of the need for fuel and which are further crippled by the absence of an affordable plane to fly off them. The cost of these means a lot of critical support vessels are being pensioned off, reducing the effectiveness of rapid strike forces.

If Argentina decided to invade the Falklands today, the UK would be unable to do anything about it.

 

The UK has been unable to do anything about the Falklands for years, I agree our forces are not in good shape, but I think it's slowly being addressed. The carrier situation is a bit of an embarrassment at present, the fact of them sailing round the world without an air group...which defeats the object of it being called an aircraft carrier.....is pretty cringeworthy. But once the f35 is embarked they will become rather formidable. Quite why they were given diesel power rather than nuclear is beyond me though.

[RA1D_SCHNITZEL_]

It's a shame the Typhoon wasn't laid out to be fit for carrier operations. As it is based on the same basic concept as the Rafale this couldn't have been that difficult to do. Putting all the money on the F35 is a questionable move and it is yet to prove it is worth the money and delays. Also having two ACs does seem to be a bit overstretched. That's more than the USA have in relation to overall military spending and even the French (having roughly the same budget as the UK) sacked plans for a second Charles De Gaulle class carrier. 

[DumbApe]

The Eu isn't necessarily the issue IMO... but the European Commission is.  It should be there to enable the proper operation of the various agreements that underpin the Union, but that isn't what has been happening for the past 40 years.  I am all for closer co-operation on economic matters where there is a common market and interest and on wider political issues where there is consensus, but this not how things have panned out.  Instead, Some countries have become marginalised as they have reacted to a 'European Dream' of a small number of people in positions of influence in Brussels.  

 

The Commission is not intended to be democratic body, but a civil service for Europe.  Is that what we see. Emphatically not in my opinion.  Bloated and self invested doesn't even come close to describing it. It as it currently operates the principle reason for a lot of the issues facing many of the member states.  The 'dream' describes ever closer economic, security and social integration right across the membership. The Schengen agreement is fundamental unsound and places a burden on member states that act as points of entry to the EU to police immigration both legal and illegal. Millions have crossed these borders (many in fear for their lives as refugees), but the EU policies make managing this issue a mess with half of the states involved not upholding the agreements and costing each country billions. Where is the 'solution' from the commission? They have had 30 years to consider the problem, bring the member states together and develop policies that might be more effective at balancing the challenges that are presented. 

 

Many national governments are finding themselves at odds with the European dream, some for nationalist reasons, but many others because of the expense and poor value delivered.  

 

The whole Brexit saga is based on a failure of the commission to heed the views of the people of the UK and in other part of Europe. In addition, all attempts to reform the commission and by association, many of its policies have been undermined or rejected.  In Agriculture and Fisheries the system is simply unfair and unbalanced and delivers a subsidy for a very small group of countries.  These policies have been a bedrock of the commissions activity since the 80's.  Back then commitments were made to the UK to open up the services sector in the same way.  nearly 40 years later hardly any progress has been made ... 40 years!  

 

As I said I am for a good European Union, but it really does have to be seriously reformed to become fit for the 21st century.  However, turkeys don't vote for Christmas and as a result of the lack of reform a small group of pompous UK politicians managed to engineer an Brexit Vote that was won with lies and misinformation.  Those opposing Brexit during the referendum were also complicit as they were just arrogant and complacent.  

 

Around the world Democracy is under threat.  Research recently published showed that in the 70' & 80's around more than t0% of the worlds countries were recognisable as democracy.  Today that figure has fallen to just 45%.  There is also a case that can be argued that some of the biggest 'democracies' really aren't...  The US is a two party Billionaire Contest,  The UK is a constituitional nightmare with a featured political landscape that keeps seeing a form of gerrymandering through the changing of electoral boundaries, along with a completely distorted media controlled by a very select few.  The effect of Fake News and Election Tampering through Social media is being seen around the world - DEMOCRACY ITSELF IS UNDER THREAT! 

 

A while ago I looked at the voting figures for Brexit the oft used 52-48 percent numbers.  The majority was for leave of course, but the actual number of votes that generated this was 634,751 people.  That was the number that actually took the vote over 50%. This represents 1.23% of the Voting age population. If you take the distribution of voting across the UK and then overlay information on eduction there is really quite astonishing correlation.  Those with generally better eduction voted stay and those without much in the way of education voted leave. 

 

You can do the same with incomes, houses and health ... the mapping matches almost as well across all these. 

 

I think the whole Brexit Vote fiasco was based on a lie that Europe was to blame for the problems of many who may feel they have lost out in British society.  However, what is also interesting is that if you map EU funded projects a greater proportion exist in these areas.

 

I said earlier that Turkeys don't vote for Christmas, but on reflection, in some parts of the UK they do!

[Debbie_Does_Dallas]

RA1D_SCHNITZEL_, on 12 December 2018 - 11:36 AM, said:

It's a shame the Typhoon wasn't laid out to be fit for carrier operations. As it is based on the same basic concept as the Rafale this couldn't have been that difficult to do. Putting all the money on the F35 is a questionable move and it is yet to prove it is worth the money and delays. Also having two ACs does seem to be a bit overstretched. That's more than the USA have in relation to overall military spending and even the French (having roughly the same budget as the UK) sacked plans for a second Charles De Gaulle class carrier. 

 

The UK stubbornly sticks with its ski jump design carriers. I would have thought it cheaper and equally effective to have flat decked ships with catapult systems fitted. Surely typhoons are cheaper than an F35... and they're already in operational service.

[RA1D_SCHNITZEL_]

harrier_77, on 12 December 2018 - 01:04 PM, said:

 

The UK stubbornly sticks with its ski jump design carriers. I would have thought it cheaper and equally effective to have flat decked ships with catapult systems fitted. Surely typhoons are cheaper than an F35... and they're already in operational service.

 

True. I guess when the Typhoon was developed the UK didn't yet plan for larger aircraft carriers than Invincible class so there was no need to include a Navy variant of the Typhoon like the French did with the Rafale M. No idea why they stick with the ski jump carriers, they might have just bought some F/A-18 E/Fs or - god beware - some French Rafales if they didn't.

 

@dumbape: brilliant post, though I think the commission is just one part of the problem. The treaty of rome being the constitutional basis is another one (it has way too many specifics for a constitution) and the parliament being composed out of national parties that then - undemocratically - form factions is another major issue. However, with all the problems the EU has, returning to national states with bilateral treaties is simply not an option. It would not solve a single major problem Europe has but form countless other ones. Also the Veto system is a desaster, especially with all the newer European states that are shielding each others anti-democratic politics.

[DumbApe]

RA1D_SCHNITZEL_, on 12 December 2018 - 02:27 PM, said:

 

True. I guess when the Typhoon was developed the UK didn't yet plan for larger aircraft carriers than Invincible class so there was no need to include a Navy variant of the Typhoon like the French did with the Rafale M. No idea why they stick with the ski jump carriers, they might have just bought some F/A-18 E/Fs or - god beware - some French Rafales if they didn't.

 

@dumbape: brilliant post, though I think the commission is just one part of the problem. The treaty of rome being the constitutional basis is another one (it has way too many specifics for a constitution) and the parliament being composed out of national parties that then - undemocratically - form factions is another major issue. However, with all the problems the EU has, returning to national states with bilateral treaties is simply not an option. It would not solve a single major problem Europe has but form countless other ones. Also the Veto system is a desaster, especially with all the newer European states that are shielding each others anti-democratic politics.

 

The ski jump is a useful trick that doesn't cost much and avoids the use of the steam catapult and latterly the rather fussy Electromagnetic one the US has been developing.  Despite what the films show the catapult isn't a completely reliable mechanism IF it fails nothing can be launched.  With the Ski jump you can even if you're almost dead in the water (albeit it with  lighter loadout).  Another advantage is that place can carry more ordnance/fuel and there is less stress on the airframe.  The ski jump might not be so dramatic, but it is an effective engineering solution.

 

Although, the US in the only navy to really make nuclear power work for their larger ships/subs and from political reasons I think the UK could have chosen this option, but the much more variable development costs could have been a big concern.       

[Mjr_Eazy]

As I predicted to Mrs_Eazy and the little Eazys (I'm the Big Eazy) this am, like we stubbornly cling on to ski jump carriers, May still clings on to office, like a winnit, once stuck on, hard to remove...

 

I reckon the winnit got her own lackeys to raise the vote of no confidence as with all the MP's on her payroll she knew she'd won, it's an attempt to shut down those who don't agree with her newspeak on the non-deal

 

[sixty_three]

DumbApe, on 12 December 2018 - 08:28 PM, said:

Although, the US in the only navy to really make nuclear power work for their larger ships/subs and from political reasons I think the UK could have chosen this option, but the much more variable development costs could have been a big concern.       

 

Hmmm... HMS Conqueror is the only nuclear-powered sub ever to have sunk another ship (General Belgrano). The RN has been successfully operating nuclear submarines since HMS Dreadnought was commissioned in 1963. I think c. 30 have been commissioned since that time.  In contrast, the 4 conventionally powered subs built for the RN in this timeframe were not a success (the Upholder class) and were later sold to the Canadians.

 

[Chairman_merpug]

Mjr_Eazy, on 13 December 2018 - 02:13 AM, said:

As I predicted to Mrs_Eazy and the little Eazys (I'm the Big Eazy) this am, like we stubbornly cling on to ski jump carriers, May still clings on to office, like a winnit, once stuck on, hard to remove...

 

I reckon the winnit got her own lackeys to raise the vote of no confidence as with all the MP's on her payroll she knew she'd won, it's an attempt to shut down those who don't agree with her newspeak on the non-deal

 

So the democratic process within the Tory party should be ignored, even though it gave her a higher percentage in favour of remaining in post than the Brexit vote did for leaving the EU? Just a tad hypocritical. 

Whichever way you cut it, Brexit is a car crash. There is no mythical Rees Mogg land of £sd and Empire where England still holds any strings at all. The Americans saw to that at the end of WW2. Nobody cares. 

[RA1D_SCHNITZEL_]

The question is do you think there is ANYBODY who is going to make a (significantly) better deal?

 

Btw "mythical Rees Mogg land" ... Loving it.  I imagine an incredibly stiff and boring Hogwarts. 

[Debbie_Does_Dallas]

Chairman_merpug, on 13 December 2018 - 09:37 AM, said:

So the democratic process within the Tory party should be ignored, even though it gave her a higher percentage in favour of remaining in post than the Brexit vote did for leaving the EU? Just a tad hypocritical. 

Whichever way you cut it, Brexit is a car crash. There is no mythical Rees Mogg land of £sd and Empire where England still holds any strings at all. The Americans saw to that at the end of WW2. Nobody cares. 

 

Rees-mogg imo should be locked up in the tower for treason. The man is a disgusting deplorable weasel. Whatever people's opinion of Theresa May is, she deserves to be respected for at the very least having the kahunas to take the job on and stand up to these backstabbing appalling insects within her own party. Let's once again ask the question who is out there that could do a better job?... simple answer is no one.

And there seems to be one person who has walked away from this fiasco without a bad word being aimed in his direction...the main perpetrator of this whole sorry mess... I'm looking right at you Mr David Cameron.... the worst pm we have ever elected!

[Chairman_merpug]

harrier_77, on 13 December 2018 - 10:36 AM, said:

 

Rees-mogg imo should be locked up in the tower for treason. The man is a disgusting deplorable weasel. Whatever people's opinion of Theresa May is, she deserves to be respected for at the very least having the kahunas to take the job on and stand up to these backstabbing appalling insects within her own party. Let's once again ask the question who is out there that could do a better job?... simple answer is no one.

And there seems to be one person who has walked away from this fiasco without a bad word being aimed in his direction...the main perpetrator of this whole sorry mess... I'm looking right at you Mr David Cameron.... the worst pm we have ever elected!

On a point of order; we don't elect a PM. We elect MPs and the party with the majority in the House of Commons chooses the PM from amongst its ranks. The UK does not have a presidential system. 

[Debbie_Does_Dallas]

Chairman_merpug, on 13 December 2018 - 04:11 PM, said:

On a point of order; we don't elect a PM. We elect MPs and the party with the majority in the House of Commons chooses the PM from amongst its ranks. The UK does not have a presidential system. 

 

What are you trying to imply chairman?. Do you think I don't understand how the parliamentary system works in this country? When I say WE elected, I mean as a democratic procedure.... but somehow I think you know that's what I meant...

[RA1D_SCHNITZEL_]

Chairman_merpug, on 13 December 2018 - 04:11 PM, said:

On a point of order; we don't elect a PM. We elect MPs and the party with the majority in the House of Commons chooses the PM from amongst its ranks. The UK does not have a presidential system. 

 

But the parties announce who they will put up as PM before the elections so while technically you dont elect the PM de facto you do. Same as the Germans or actually even the Americans.

 

A different example would be Switzerland, where the executive power (not a single person but a council of 7, the Bundesrat) is elected by the two chambers of parliament when one of the 7 decides to resign. This is usually not coincidental with the general election so as a voter you dont really have a say on who is going to be voted as a Bundesrat. However, as the 7 are composed out of the 4 major parties according to their size it isnt a huge problem and parliement often elects people who are good administrators and not populist leaders, which imho is a good thing for an executive function. Once elected they need to be reelected every 4 years after the general parliamentary elections but usually this is not contested and the Bundesräte leave when they choose to. One of he few exemptions was some ten years ago when the billionaire populist leader of our own rightwing party became Bundesrat. Unlike expected upon his election he continued to act as a total moron and as a inter-council opposition instead of a productive teammember so he was replaced against his will after 4 years and has continued to spit out his hate and destructive referendums eversince. Anyway, offtopic but quite a unique system.

[geomal]

Tijgerhaai_XIV, on 10 December 2018 - 11:55 PM, said:

Less than 50% of the British population voted for Brexit, and a tiny majority of those that did vote. Brexit is not democratic.

I'm not resident so no one asked me, but leaving the EU is the stupidest thing I've ever come across. And I've read nearly all Canny's posts.

 

How did this happened? A referendum is in theory the only direct democratic mean that is allowed in an in theory democratic world. And UK is at least in theory a country that a referendum will be recognized by the whole world w/o objections or countermeasures like in other EU cases. I understand that the majority of the population that didn't vote is simply indifferent of whether UK stays or leaves EU. But that is in fact a type of voting against EU anyway. 

On the other hand Wikipedia shows this as the official referendum results:

United Kingdom European Union membership referendum, 2016 
National resultChoiceVotes%

Leave the European Union 17,410,742 51.89%

Remain a member of the European Union 16,141,241 48.11%

Valid votes 33,551,983 99.92%

Invalid or blank votes 25,359 0.08%

Total votes 33,577,342 100.00%

Registered voters and turnout 46,500,001 72.21%

Voting age population and turnout 51,356,768 65.38%

Source: Electoral Commission

 

[Tijgerhaai_XIV]

The vote should have had quorate conditions, the import and non-reversibility if the question should have meant only a clear majority should have counted. Imho, of course.

And a non-vote is more a vote for the status quo than a radical change with no negotiated details, and that is not an opinion at all.

And finally, 17.4 kk is substantially less than half of 51.4, the point I was trying to make.

But my apologies for discussing politics on such forum, it is hardly the point. And that is not g even inviting the fact that some apparently think national pride is something that is unique to Britain

[Mjr_Eazy]

Chairman_merpug, on 13 December 2018 - 09:37 AM, said:

So the democratic process within the Tory party should be ignored, even though it gave her a higher percentage in favour of remaining in post than the Brexit vote did for leaving the EU? Just a tad hypocritical. 

Whichever way you cut it, Brexit is a car crash. There is no mythical Rees Mogg land of £sd and Empire where England still holds any strings at all. The Americans saw to that at the end of WW2. Nobody cares. 

 

Nah, I’m not saying it can be ignored, it is what it is, just suspicous of the motivation for it and who actually triggered it, either way she won...

I’m not advocating the Little Englander vision u describe, I’ve no issue with free movement and common market just the rest of the Federal States of Europe they want to create.  I also don’t belive the FUD being spread about a no deal and actually think a no deal exit is better than the current deal and of course staying in is now better than the other 2 options.  Strange how having a remoaner in charge means we’ve ended up in this state.  I fully expect Parliment to reject the deal and a new referendum to be held in Jan/Feb and it will swing the other way as either most people have just got sick of it or b think it’s better to stay in than take the May deal.

At least it’s making for interesting times for my eldest doing her Politics A level

[sixty_three]

Regarding Brexit, the ultimate problem is that whilst a majority of those who voted in the referendum chose leave, there was no determination made by that vote about what that should, or should not include.  For instance, did it mean that the UK should or should not leave EURATOM? Apparently to some MP's, including Davis and May, it did.  But I doubt that few voters even knew what membership of that organisation entailed, let alone have a view on whether leaving it was sensible or not.

 

The next referendum needs to give voters a very clear choice between all the options available to them.  It also needs to allow people to state their preferences.  And it should be legally binding - i.e. the result will be honoured by the House of Commons.

 

If they did that I suspect that the current May option would narrowly defeat remain.  Leaving on WTO terms would come third.  

 

Edited by sixty_three, 14 December 2018 - 07:30 AM.

[geomal]

National pride? hmmm. very problematic notion for countries in Europe. 80 million dead of WWII demonstrate beyond any doubt why this is a very anachronistic attitude to see things. 

Edited by geomal, 14 December 2018 - 05:06 PM.

[Fugit555]

the whole thing is a complete mess and the worrying part is that Nigel F**wit got what he long argued for, whilst still retaining his Brussels kick backs. The Government is a shambles, what with none of them able to agree on whether Brexit is hard or soft, when the real debate should be whether the UK wants to remain being bullied, hold another referendum or just walk away. At this rate the Uk will degenerate towards the politics of the US and next thing wham - Katie "Jordan" Price is the new PM!