Poo tin... Put@in...
Comments
-
why not as in "please can i have some reasons why not?" or "yeah, great idea, why not?"rick_chasey said:
Why not?Stevo_666 said:
So do you reckon this EU army idea touted around by the likes of Macron is a good plan?MattFalle said:seriously?
because every individual procurement purchase, exercise, operation, unit manouvre, recruitment process, job contract, HR policy, law, etc, etc would have to be approved and stadadised by every NATO nation.
every PAM, course, lesson would have to be changed. every tactic.
GB military law is governed by GB law - you now want Eddie from 2PARA to be tried under some NATO law for a punch up in MooMoos nightclub?
every weapon, uniform, boot, vehicle would have to be replaced.
france don't want troops in Northern Ireland, GB don't want troops in Reunion island.
Holland can't really be bothered going to to have a scrap with Argentina down in the Falklands.
NATO is a collective force of individual countries. each individual country takes responsibility for its own military.
not really the best idea..The camera down the willy isn't anything like as bad as it sounds.
0 -
Would an EU army desalinate the situation with Russia though?2
-
😀😀😀focuszing723 said:Would an EU army desalinate the situation with Russia though?
.The camera down the willy isn't anything like as bad as it sounds.
0 -
Given you were recently outed as something of a Walter Mitty I'll believe the people I know in the MoD.MattFalle said:
errrr. no.shirley_basso said:The UK is a nuclear power. That is a projection of power.
As a member of the G7, that is a projection of power.
Even the BBC World Service is a projection of power.
the UK's nuclear programme is pretty shocking. So let's rule that out.
G7 - not really if everyone laughs at you.
World Service? not really. bet Sky Sports has more followers.
just grasping straws.0 -
Could have done in which case apologies.imposter2.0 said:
I think you're confusing 'projection' with 'influence'. Either that, or I missed the bit where BBC World Service employees got into a firefight with the Taliban in Helmand....shirley_basso said:The UK is a nuclear power. That is a projection of power.
As a member of the G7, that is a projection of power.
Even the BBC World Service is a projection of power.1 -
You tell me. I was asking the question.rick_chasey said:
Why not?Stevo_666 said:
So do you reckon this EU army idea touted around by the likes of Macron is a good plan?MattFalle said:seriously?
because every individual procurement purchase, exercise, operation, unit manouvre, recruitment process, job contract, HR policy, law, etc, etc would have to be approved and stadadised by every NATO nation.
every PAM, course, lesson would have to be changed. every tactic.
GB military law is governed by GB law - you now want Eddie from 2PARA to be tried under some NATO law for a punch up in MooMoos nightclub?
every weapon, uniform, boot, vehicle would have to be replaced.
france don't want troops in Northern Ireland, GB don't want troops in Reunion island.
Holland can't really be bothered going to to have a scrap with Argentina down in the Falklands.
NATO is a collective force of individual countries. each individual country takes responsibility for its own military.
not really the best idea."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
It would be pulled in so many directions it would never move.rick_chasey said:
Why not?Stevo_666 said:
So do you reckon this EU army idea touted around by the likes of Macron is a good plan?MattFalle said:seriously?
because every individual procurement purchase, exercise, operation, unit manouvre, recruitment process, job contract, HR policy, law, etc, etc would have to be approved and stadadised by every NATO nation.
every PAM, course, lesson would have to be changed. every tactic.
GB military law is governed by GB law - you now want Eddie from 2PARA to be tried under some NATO law for a punch up in MooMoos nightclub?
every weapon, uniform, boot, vehicle would have to be replaced.
france don't want troops in Northern Ireland, GB don't want troops in Reunion island.
Holland can't really be bothered going to to have a scrap with Argentina down in the Falklands.
NATO is a collective force of individual countries. each individual country takes responsibility for its own military.
not really the best idea.0 -
More bad news for Russia
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/01/himars-what-are-the-advanced-rockets-us-is-sending-ukraine?
At roughly 80km it generally puts Himars out of range of Russia’s own artillery, while placing the Russian batteries at risk.0 -
The Himars and the M270 MLRS (both pretty much the same but one has wheels while the other has tracks) have the nicknames 'Grid Square Removal System' and 'The 70 kilometre sniper rifle'. They are very, very effective. Russia has nothing like it. The UF need lots of them though - not enough are being sent out.shirley_basso said:More bad news for Russia
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/01/himars-what-are-the-advanced-rockets-us-is-sending-ukraine?
At roughly 80km it generally puts Himars out of range of Russia’s own artillery, while placing the Russian batteries at risk.
Short bit on the UK supplied MLRS in the news last week - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-619886150 -
The UF hit a Russian ammo dump today - the result...
0 -
Who would be its Supreme Commander?0
-
i would like to think some Greek dude, because they generally don't care and are quite cool..
The camera down the willy isn't anything like as bad as it sounds.
0 -
Hypothetically, any such 'supreme commander' would likely be a term-limited or rotational appointment - much like the setup in NATO...HilaryAmin said:Who would be its Supreme Commander?
0 -
I'm sure Macron would like to be."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0
-
Fair play to the US - it’s not even their continent.
France however…0 -
Does put some context into RC's comments that really, the US is the world's only true military superpower.0
-
eh?shirley_basso said:Does put some context into RC's comments that really, the US is the world's only true military superpower.
RC's comments?
its bleedin' obvious and has been since 1943.
RC ain't no geopolitical genius for pointing out the bleeding obvious.....The camera down the willy isn't anything like as bad as it sounds.
0 -
Page 15.focuszing723 said:
Hang on, wasn't Trumps point that the EU should step up to the plate and pay their fair share towards NATO (a higher percentage of their GBP)?0 -
Oh, and don't forget China in terms of a rapidly growing superpower.0
-
Basically, with these strong superpowers it's a difficult situation to desalinate.2
-
If only Musk could revolutionise desalination. The world would be a better place and your life would be complete.focuszing723 said:Basically, with these strong superpowers it's a difficult situation to desalinate.
0 -
TheBigBean said:
If only Musk could revolutionise desalination. The world would be a better place and your life would be complete.focuszing723 said:Basically, with these strong superpowers it's a difficult situation to desalinate
Last month, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk announced that the company's colossal Mars-bound rocket should be "ready to fly" in July, after the company won Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) approval following the release of a much-delayed environmental review.https://interestingengineering.com/spacex-mars-raptor-engine-setup
After the FAA approval announcement, Musk wrote, "for the first time ever, there is a rocket capable of establishing permanent bases on the moon and Mars". The finalized Starship rocket is expected to revolutionize spaceflight by driving down the cost of successive launches due to the fact that it's fully reusable — SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket reuses its first stage boosters, while second stages burn up on reentry.
I'm just glad he's back on twitter. Luckily Big Heavy isn't akin to an Airfix kit.
0 -
So it looks like the UF are using the Defence in Depth tactic in Luhansk and Donbas:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defence_in_depth
The media seems to be far too focused on the East at the moment. Meanwhile in the South the UF claim to now be at ‘sniper distance’ (their snipers not Ivan’s) from Kherson.0 -
thegreatdivide said:
So it looks like the UF are using the Defence in Depth tactic in Luhansk and Donbas:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defence_in_depth
The media seems to be far too focused on the East at the moment. Meanwhile in the South the UF claim to now be at ‘sniper distance’ (their snipers not Ivan’s) from Kherson.
I guess the media like the 'drama' of the battles for individual towns & the like, as it's easier to quantify and visualise.0 -
It's not so good for the remaining residents...briantrumpet said:thegreatdivide said:So it looks like the UF are using the Defence in Depth tactic in Luhansk and Donbas:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defence_in_depth
The media seems to be far too focused on the East at the moment. Meanwhile in the South the UF claim to now be at ‘sniper distance’ (their snipers not Ivan’s) from Kherson.
I guess the media like the 'drama' of the battles for individual towns & the like, as it's easier to quantify and visualise.0 -
.rick_chasey said:
It's not so good for the remaining residents...briantrumpet said:thegreatdivide said:So it looks like the UF are using the Defence in Depth tactic in Luhansk and Donbas:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defence_in_depth
The media seems to be far too focused on the East at the moment. Meanwhile in the South the UF claim to now be at ‘sniper distance’ (their snipers not Ivan’s) from Kherson.
I guess the media like the 'drama' of the battles for individual towns & the like, as it's easier to quantify and visualise.
Rather obviously not, but I suspect that they would rather lose the battle and win the war, if possible.0 -
-
The UF are also very successfully pummelling the Russian rear supply lines and depots (no doubt located thanks to intel from locals) using the MLRS systems and very long range artillery. At some point Ivan's elastic will snap again - as it did in the North. They might have lots of dumb artillery shells, but they have a lot less manpower to hold any ground taken. They definitely don't have enough if/when the UF try and retake Kherson.0
-
rick_chasey said:
Before or after they're sent to Siberia/shot etc
Newsflash: sh!t happens in war. I suspect that you'd find that the Ukainian population, as a whole, will see the bigger picture, and will bear the heavy burdens one way or another. There's no easy solution, and many more people are going to die in horrific circumstances.0 -
I think the UF is also realistic about their limitations - their supply lines are also not very elastic and they don't have the resources for a material offensive.thegreatdivide said:The UF are also very successfully pummelling the Russian rear supply lines and depots (no doubt located thanks to intel from locals) using the MLRS systems and very long range artillery. At some point Ivan's elastic will snap again - as it did in the North. They might have lots of dumb artillery shells, but they have a lot less manpower to hold any ground taken. They definitely don't have enough if/when the UF try and retake Kherson.
Presumably the tactic is to defend-in-depth and play for strategic time to build up resources to be able to launch full scale offensives themselves?0
