![]() | ![]() |
|
Welcome to the HEXUS.community discussion forums forums. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! |
|
|||||||
| Question Time like the BBC current affairs TV program, a place to discuss current affairs, topical events and world matters |
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools |
|
|
#2 (permalink) |
|
Back in England boo
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Sheffield, England
Posts: 1,419
Thanks: 20
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
|
Yeah, I hope this gets sorted quickly, otherwise we could have a mess on our hands.
![]() To get an avatar requires you make 500 sensible posts.....yet still people ask so why do I even bother having this here! |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 (permalink) |
|
Will work for beer...
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Preston, Lancs
Posts: 5,597
Thanks: 100
Thanked 88 Times in 63 Posts
|
It's a fairly obvious attempt to put pressure on the UK to distract attention from the reports that Iranian agents are paying Iraqi militants to attack British troops. Of course it's also a casus belli; invasion of Iraqi waters, unlawful use of force against our personnel etc. Yes, it has the potential to turn very nasty.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 (permalink) |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Lonetrek
Posts: 5,009
Thanks: 140
Thanked 69 Times in 55 Posts
|
If they were taken from Iraqi waters like it says, it could quite easily be classed as an act of war. If any are harmed it definitely would be.
Not smart on Iran's part as an attack on allied soldiers would give those itching to attack Iran all the excuse they need. Regardless, I hope they all get home safe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 (permalink) |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,683
Thanks: 1
Thanked 7 Times in 4 Posts
|
although thankfully we've acted with restraint part of me wishes that we had responded with more force - things like this should not be tolerated - however the situation is very delicate
just glad its happened to us and not the Americans - by now the bombs would be dropping ![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 (permalink) |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Lonetrek
Posts: 5,009
Thanks: 140
Thanked 69 Times in 55 Posts
|
Originally Posted by YorkieBen
Yeah I have to say there's a big part of me that would like to see every British warship in the area open up with everything it has. We could level your entire country, don't play stupid games with us kind of statement, but of course then my mind gets dragged back to the real world.
Where such an action would be childish and most likely descend into another long drawn out war and send world oil prices sky rocketing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 (permalink) |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,683
Thanks: 1
Thanked 7 Times in 4 Posts
|
Well 'vinci is mothballed and would take months to work up, Ocean is in a refit, Ark Royal is taking ocean's place as a commando carrier (i.e. no harriers) - lusty (illustrious
) is the only aircraft carrier active - however we have bugger all harriers available as they are all in afganistan.Plus the Govt got rid of the Sea Harrier a couple of years ago so we have no harriers with air to air radar anymore... If we sailed a carrier task force into the Persian Gulf without US support it would be in big trouble. But its okay, we don't need to spend money on a decent navy - I would blame the MoD but as the Treasury decide force levels (not the MoD - Des Browne admitted this in Parliament when he admitted that the Govt's Strategic Defence review has no effect on defence procurement) we dont have anything to look forward to with Gordon being in power. ![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 (permalink) |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,683
Thanks: 1
Thanked 7 Times in 4 Posts
|
Originally Posted by chuckskull
its partly childish, its just that our response with this always seems rather too skewed to diplomacy rather than mixing in the threat of force - it gives the impression that we won't do anything which is dangerous, such an imnpression was given to Argentina in 1982 (a big shock they got)
![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 (permalink) |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,801
Thanks: 248
Thanked 177 Times in 156 Posts
|
Originally Posted by YorkieBen
Ocean in refit already>????? Bloody hell
She was commissioned in 1997 and i was on he first Sea trial ![]() Ark Royal had nearly 4 years in Pompey for her last refit. |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 (permalink) |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Lonetrek
Posts: 5,009
Thanks: 140
Thanked 69 Times in 55 Posts
|
Modern military strategy doesn't really rely on traditional air superiority anymore as we can just have the fleet sitting 50miles off shore dropping missiles in. I few volleys of cruise missiles and most of the planes are destroyed on the ground and the rest, cant take off or land and have no ground radar support if they do manage it.
Plus America would find it very hard to say no if we asked for their support, and I suspect would be itching to have a go at Iran.
Last edited by chuckskull; 23-03-2007 at 02:13 PM. |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 (permalink) |
|
omg haxor
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Scotland
Posts: 803
Thanks: 10
Thanked 15 Times in 15 Posts
|
Originally Posted by Blitzen
not that i didnt belive you wanted to see what hms Ocean was
http://www.royal-navy.mod.uk/server/...0h001001005001 |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 (permalink) |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,683
Thanks: 1
Thanked 7 Times in 4 Posts
|
Originally Posted by chuckskull
Sorry Chuck but that is a bit off imo - for a start none of our ships carry land attack missiles, only our subs (plus we dont even have that many tomahawks available) and if we were sat 50 miles off the coast the Iranian's asnti ship missiles would be in range, and we would get blown out of the water by the iranian's aircraft. The idea that a cruise missile strike would knock out the majoprity of Iran's airforce in one go is wishful thinking. Tbh the Persian Gulf is the worst place for a carrier to be - it is too small. Air superiority is still a major part modern military thinking - why do you think the US Navy refuse to send a carrier into the gulf without guarantees of US air force cover?
Blitzen - afaik Ocean is going through a shorter refit, not a full blown think like Ark, although I may be wrong - she's been worked hard being the only one of her class and is built to a lesser standard than a standard warship (she only cost £150 million to build which in warship terms is piss all) ![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
#16 (permalink) |
|
Will work for beer...
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Preston, Lancs
Posts: 5,597
Thanks: 100
Thanked 88 Times in 63 Posts
|
Originally Posted by YorkieBen
That worried me a LOT when it happened, actually; and we won't have any organic air-to-air capability with the fleet until the new carriers with JSF come into service (JSF is intended as a strike aircraft, but has the following:
So it should be pretty capable. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Breadcrumb | ||||||
|
||||||
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|