Is Britain too weak?

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.

[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.

[Penelope_Grey]

Originally Posted by Yahoshua

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.

I was talking about the Viet Cong, not the north vietnamese forces. Sure, in a straight fight the north would have no hope against the US, but fact is US casualties were mounting, there didn't seem to be an end in sight, and the US did indeed abandon the south, but that was happening before the Paris peace accords, when combat duty was handed over to the south forces. Also public support was draining off and taxes were going up, so stands to reason that it didn't go well for the US. Vietnam is probably the best example of modern warfare and the problems therein.

Also I thought the Paris Peace Accords were signed in 1973, not 74

[STEED]

Since the downfall of Margret Thatcher this country has been undermined by forces working to an agenda, we have no democracy anymore in this country due to the fact the government of the day is doing what it wants and to hell with us. People in this country have forgotten that the government works for us not the other way around, time and time I tell people this but they will not get off there fat backsides as they say "what can you do?" wake up for a start if you can.

The whole country is sliding down hill letting PC Madness and the crap from the EU to rule us and the result of this, we are too soft on those who preach the hate message. We got these mad preachers getting away with it and when we do take action and lock them up what happens? These vile people bang on about there rights and get five star treatment.

The result of this impact on our military is clear as a crystal glass undermanned lack of equipment the list just goes on. The latest mess in the ME has resulted in the latest news the hostages could be prosecuted for spying. Many in my country have let this mess happen and it will not improve at all as long as they sit on there butts and hope it will all go away.

[greyrider]

Penelope_Grey posted

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

the united states military did not lose the war in viet nam, i was in the 82nd airborne division at the time, and the VC and NVA never beat me.

the NVA and Vc losed tet, thier best offensive, and they losed the battle, never to do it again. read the accounts of the marines at HUE, then tell me again if we were the losers.

they begged the US to stop the bombing in private, begged! and by the time we left, the VC was a shattered fighting force.

congress lost the war, ted kennedy losed the war, the democrats losed the war, the south viets were also beating the NVA and VC, after we left, until congress voted to cut off the funding for the south viet army, after that it was just a matter of time, because you know what, china and russia did not stop supporting the north.

i look at the whole democratic party as the party of treason, from east to west, north to south, even in the american civil war, the democrats wanted to sign a peace treaty with the south, and make the southern states an independent country.

i wonder, can you picture the united states of america with out virginia, the caroliners, georgia, texas, and the other southern states? i cant, but thats what the democrats were willing to do, and tried to do.

there;s a time for peace, and a time for war, its now a time for war, and you will fight it, or, if you don't, then you bring the war to your children, and they will have to fight it, because there parents were to afraid to fight.

do you love your kids? then you better help them and fight!
because if you dont, your kids will be enslaved by the stalin and hilter wannabe's
that are in the world today. just waiting for thier chance.

nothing has changed in the human spirit from the past, i hope you will remember that.

[Onkel Neal]

Originally Posted by greyrider

Penelope_Grey posted

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

the united states military did not lose the war in viet nam, i was in the 82nd airborne division at the time, and the VC and NVA never beat me.

the NVA and Vc losed tet, thier best offensive, and they losed the battle, never to do it again. read the accounts of the marines at HUE, then tell me again if we were the losers.

they begged the US to stop the bombing in private, begged! and by the time we left, the VC was a shattered fighting force.

congress lost the war, ted kennedy losed the war, the democrats losed the war, the south viets were also beating the NVA and VC, after we left, until congress voted to cut off the funding for the south viet army, after that it was just a matter of time, because you know what, china and russia did not stop supporting the north.

i look at the whole democratic party as the party of treason, from east to west, north to south, even in the american civil war, the democrats wanted to sign a peace treaty with the south, and make the southern states an independent country.

i wonder, can you picture the united states of america with out virginia, the caroliners, georgia, texas, and the other southern states? i cant, but thats what the democrats were willing to do, and tried to do.

there;s a time for peace, and a time for war, its now a time for war, and you will fight it, or, if you don't, then you bring the war to your children, and they will have to fight it, because there parents were to afraid to fight.

do you love your kids? then you better help them and fight!
because if you dont, your kids will be enslaved by the stalin and hilter wannabe's
that are in the world today. just waiting for thier chance.

nothing has changed in the human spirit from the past, i hope you will remember that.

Well said. It's easy for we who never saw combat to sit in our computer room and judge history. Vietnam was a series of combats in the Cold War, and we know who won that.

[1mPHUNit0]

No America not only underestimated
but was very stupid too...like nazi Barbarossa Operation

But...and there is always a but
some peoples was getting richer
then not all was stupids