Is Britain too weak?

Has Britain allowed itself to become a target for Iranian mischief by weakening its military? In 1979 our president, Jimmy Carter, was also taken advantage of by Iran. What is your opinion?

[ASWnut101]

A very possible idea. I think so.

[Yahoshua]

Militarily no, but I do see that that England (and the U.S.) are both falling prey to the multi-culti line of thought and are falling into a "blame the victim" routine. So it seems the same is being played out here that the sailors are being blamed for being taken prisoner, but people are too afraid to stand up for themselves or their countrymen. A sad state of affairs.

Originally Posted by Yahoshua

Militarily no, but I do see that that England (and the U.S.) are both falling prey to the multi-culti line of thought and are falling into a "blame the victim" routine. So it seems the same is being played out here that the sailors are being blamed for being taken prisoner, but people are too afraid to stand up for themselves or their countrymen. A sad state of affairs.

'Blame the victim' is very much in play. Thank you for your input Yahoshua

[Oberon]

One of the main problems the British Government has is short-sightedness. Ever since the Berlin wall come down, we've convinced ourselves that the world is suddenly a much safer place and we don't need large standing armies, or a powerful Navy or Air force, if we can cut corners by sending our troops to places with inadequate provisions, well they can improvise, and so what if our fleet air arm hasn't got any adequate Anti-air fighters, we're not fighting the Cold War anymore, we don't need them.

And then we suddenly find ourselves out-manuevered by an enemy we'd thought below us, and suddenly we're running to catch up, having cut our forces too small and spreading them out too wide.

Originally Posted by Oberon

One of the main problems the British Government has is short-sightedness. Ever since the Berlin wall come down, we've convinced ourselves that the world is suddenly a much safer place and we don't need large standing armies, or a powerful Navy or Air force, if we can cut corners by sending our troops to places with inadequate provisions, well they can improvise, and so what if our fleet air arm hasn't got any adequate Anti-air fighters, we're not fighting the Cold War anymore, we don't need them.

And then we suddenly find ourselves out-manuevered by an enemy we'd thought below us, and suddenly we're running to catch up, having cut our forces too small and spreading them out too wide.

So are you saying that Britain has allowed itself to become weak?

Perhaps I should have made this a poll.

[Penelope_Grey]

Not allowed ourselves to become weak. I don't see our participation in multiple wars under the Prime Ministership of Tony Blair a show of strength. I see it as a sign of inadeuquacy and poor judgement. He is making us try to punch above our weight so to speak. For us to maintain a large military is not really feasable anymore.

The key thing though I think, is like my brother always says; is to never underestimate your opponent, its not what you have its how you use it too, America underestimated the Vietnamese and their capabilities and got an arse kicking as a result of their war in Vietnam. The same thing has happened to us, Iran was clearly underestimated and as a result those 15 sailors are now hostages. When will they be released? Will they be released? All these questons, and nobody seems to be answering them.

[JSLTIGER]

Originally Posted by Penelope_Grey

Not allowed ourselves to become weak. I don't see our participation in multiple wars under the Prime Ministership of Tony Blair a show of strength. I see it as a sign of inadeuquacy and poor judgement. He is making us try to punch above our weight so to speak. For us to maintain a large military is not really feasable anymore.

The key thing though I think, is like my brother always says; is to never underestimate your opponent, its not what you have its how you use it too, America underestimated the Vietnamese and their capabilities and got an arse kicking as a result of their war in Vietnam. The same thing has happened to us, Iran was clearly underestimated and as a result those 15 sailors are now hostages. When will they be released? Will they be released? All these questons, and nobody seems to be answering them.

In terms of war, the fundamental problem lies not in the underestimation of the enemy, nor in allowing oneself to become weak. Instead, the problem that both the UK and the US face is one that has been facing modern warfare since its inception. The question, of course, is at what point is victory achieved? The answer? There are only two ways to win a war. The first is to make your enemy surrender in its entirety so that they will acquiesce. The second way is far messier and completely unacceptable in today's society: Genocide. The problem with the current conflict around the world is that the enemy is unwilling to surrender (evidenced by their continued resistance), and we are unwilling to commit genocide (not that I'm advocating we should pursue this course of action, either). Thus, we are stuck in this bloody stand-off that will last until one side gives in.

As for the current Iranian/British sailors situation, this is pure and simple exploitation of the British position, as Iran knows that the British can no longer project a significant amount of force with the force cuts, and that the US is too busy dealing with Iraq to really get involved in invading Iran. Sure, we on this end of the pond can posture and b***h and demand all we want, but in the end, we will not invade so long as Iraq remains a problem.

[PeriscopeDepth]

No. Britain is perfectly capable of teaching Iran a lesson in the same manner as we did during the late 1980s (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Praying_Mantis), and should IMO but that's for another thread. It would require a much more concentrated effort than it did for the US, but the UK has a much smaller (but still very well trained and equipped military). It is a matter of willpower.

PD

Originally Posted by PeriscopeDepth

No. Britain is perfectly capable of teaching Iran a lesson in the same manner as we did during the late 1980s (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Praying_Mantis), and should IMO but that's for another thread. It would require a much more concentrated effort than it did for the US, but the UK has a much smaller (but still very well trained and equipped military). It is a matter of willpower.

PD

Political will. Do expect Britain (the people) to become sufficiently tired/disgusted/offended with the situation as it refers to the Iranian holding British citizens hostage and making political statements.

[Kapitan_Phillips]

I believe British national identity is in decline, and we aren't as proud as we once were. You see, in a past society where emphasis wasnt placed so much on ethnic diversity and "adjusting to fit others", we'd have swept them Iranians up with the broom of utter disgust by now. Yet instead we're left shaking our fists and muttering.

Originally Posted by Kapitan_Phillips

I believe British national identity is in decline, and we aren't as proud as we once were. You see, in a past society where emphasis wasnt placed so much on ethnic diversity and "adjusting to fit others", we'd have swept them Iranians up with the broom of utter disgust by now. Yet instead we're left shaking our fists and muttering.

Argentina is watching. The Falklans will be next.

[ASWnut101]

You forgot the "d"

[gnirtS]

Originally Posted by waste gate

Has Britain allowed itself to become a target for Iranian mischief by weakening its military? In 1979 our president, Jimmy Carter, was also taken advantage of by Iran. What is your opinion?

No, Britain (or more accurately its weak excuse for a leader, Blair) has made itself a target by blindly following america into its wars. If Blair showed any spine or backbone and just said no the place would be far less of a target both home and abroad.

Yes the UKs military is very weak these days to the extent it could not start and certainly not win a war against even a minor nation with its dated air force, dated and downsized navy and massively overstretched army but it wouldn't be a problem if its leaders stood up to others and just did whats right for the country not what someone asks for a favour.

If the Falklands were invaded today, there'd be no way to reclaim them (and i doubt blair would want to or have the balls to try either). Ancient dated aircraft on a pathetic excuse for a carrier that isn't even capable of providing its own fleet defence screen yet alone offensive action.

Kidnapping the Iranians in Iraq most probably directly triggered this latest incident.

[Yahoshua]

Originally Posted by Penelope_Grey

.....America underestimated the Vietnamese and their capabilities and got an arse kicking as a result of their war in Vietnam...

The U.S. didn't lose Vietnam from a military standpoint until the NVA broke the Paris Peace Accords in 1974. Up until that time the U.S. Military won every combat engagement in the war.

Then the politicians sold out our troops and dragged them out of South Vietnam after having tied them down to sentry duty instead of hurting the NVA where they would've felt it most.

We abandoned South Vietnam and left them to their demise when the NVA invaded the south and captured Saigon, massacreing fleeing ARVN troops and civilians alike along the "column of tears." Underestimation was not the cause of loss in the war, beauracracy (sp?) and an incompetent ARVN leadership was.