Why do Brits get so excited by war? They love coming to South Africa to visit the battlefields in Isandlwana, Rorke's Drift and Spioenkop. Its fukken macabre. So proud of shooting thousands of men armed with spears and the odd musket. One day in the future there'll be a busloads of redfaced Ruperts and Nigels visiting drone strike sites in Afghanistan.Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Mon Aug 16, 2021 11:12 amOh good, you're here.FalseBayFC wrote: ↑Mon Aug 16, 2021 11:11 amYou don't think the coalition forces actions in Afghanistan constituted extreme violence?Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Mon Aug 16, 2021 11:08 am Plugged this on the Book thread a while back but worth mentioning again how good I thought Afgantsy was as a history of the Russian war. Always struck me that a lot of the Muhajideen old hands who also fought for the Taliban had far more respect for the Soviets than they did for the Americans. Of course there's an element of 'in my day' as well as men of extreme violence respecting the same, but an interesting observation nonetheless.
Afghanistan: that turned out well
- FalseBayFC
- Posts: 3554
- Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2020 3:19 pm
- Paddington Bear
- Posts: 5962
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:29 pm
- Location: Hertfordshire
Think Elwood needs to let go here. A few airstrikes from carriers a thousand miles away doesn't change the fact that the Afghan government has surrendered. Also doesn't change that half the jets are American because we don't fund our military properly.
Old men forget: yet all shall be forgot, But he'll remember with advantages, What feats he did that day
- Margin__Walker
- Posts: 2744
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 5:47 am
The frustrating thing is that he'll probably be absolutely fine and will get home safe insufferably smug with a cracking yarn. The Taliban are on cloud 9 here with this capitulation going better than they probably hoped. I doubt they are going to cause much friction by targeting foreign nationals just now. The Americans are fucking off, but they still have a foothold right now and could still launch punitive strikes if US or allied nationals start dying. Leave it a week or two and they can do what they want.Paddington Bear wrote: ↑Mon Aug 16, 2021 10:40 am All fun and games until the Paras have to go into the shit to get him out.
On a related not I watched a video the other day telling the story of an ambush in which a British soldier won an MC in Basra in 2004. The whole thing was basically caused by them having to rescue a Kiwi backpacker being held by a dodgy police unit.
- Paddington Bear
- Posts: 5962
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 3:29 pm
- Location: Hertfordshire
I assume the Chinese will pay fairly well for access to all the abandoned US hardware?
Old men forget: yet all shall be forgot, But he'll remember with advantages, What feats he did that day
- tabascoboy
- Posts: 6474
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:22 am
- Location: 曇りの街
Trump - as usual - not slow to try and make capital from it
but 4 months ago...“It is time for Joe Biden to resign in disgrace for what he has allowed to happen to Afghanistan,” Mr Trump said in the statement, in which he also sought to resurrect claims over the legitimacy of the 2020 election.
Leaving aside wether Pakistanis would allow overflights in transport terms the carrier has a small compliment of Merlin helicopters that would not have the range to fly into landlocked Afghanistan. Besides which the UK has enough heavy airlift (C17s, A400s and Voyagers) to get people out as it is.
It’s the constant problem of UK defence procurement. We want our equipment to be as good as anyone else’s but that means we lack quantity. Better minds than mine have decided that for example 6 Type 45s are better than say 10 slightly less capable ships but however good they are they can only be in one place at a time. Don’t tell anyone but I’ve read that only one 45 is in service at the moment.
The six Type 45s was pure Treasury cost cutting - the Navy wanted 12. What's particularly grating is that these savings were in part to fund the expensive Afghan deployment the fruits of which are crumbling to dust before us.
With Naval ships the general rule of thumb is the 2/3rds will be routinely unavailable - either in deep refit, crew leave or working up...so six ships equals 2 normally available. Get a mechanical problem like HMS Diamond just has and that's one destroyer....again this is why the Navy wanted 12.
With Naval ships the general rule of thumb is the 2/3rds will be routinely unavailable - either in deep refit, crew leave or working up...so six ships equals 2 normally available. Get a mechanical problem like HMS Diamond just has and that's one destroyer....again this is why the Navy wanted 12.
“To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what the sea-going status is of each of the six Type 45 Destroyers; and which of those ships are (a) operationally available, (b) undergoing maintenance and/or a refit and (c) temporarily unavailable due to propulsion problems.”
Jeremy Quin, Minister of State for the Ministry of Defence, responded:
“HMS DEFENDER is currently deployed as part of the Carrier Strike Group (CSG21) while
HMS DIAMOND has experienced some technical issues and has detached from CSG21 for maintenance, inspection and defect rectification.
HMS DARING and HMS DUNCAN are currently undergoing planned deep maintenance.
HMS DAUNTLESS, the first of the Type 45 Destroyers to undergo a Power Improvement Project upgrade, is expected to return to sea for trials this year.
HMS DRAGON is undergoing a period of planned maintenance in advance of further operational commitments.”
- Torquemada 1420
- Posts: 11156
- Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2020 8:22 am
- Location: Hut 8
"𝑻𝒉𝒆 𝑻𝒂𝒍𝒊𝒃𝒂𝒏 𝒂𝒓𝒆 𝒏𝒐𝒕 𝒈𝒖𝒂𝒓𝒂𝒏𝒕𝒆𝒆𝒅 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒌𝒊𝒏𝒅 𝒐𝒇 𝒗𝒊𝒄𝒕𝒐𝒓𝒚 𝒕𝒉𝒂𝒕 𝒚𝒐𝒖 𝒔𝒐𝒎𝒆𝒕𝒊𝒎𝒆𝒔 𝒓𝒆𝒂𝒅 𝒂𝒃𝒐𝒖𝒕."
[/Boris Johnson. 1 month ago.]
Evidently a giant of thinking in international politics.
[/Boris Johnson. 1 month ago.]
Evidently a giant of thinking in international politics.
Ta, I’d never have thought unavailability would be as high as 2/3. As it happens I assume Dauntless is just up the road from me at Cammell Laird. Tbh and I realise it was a Treasury decision but what the hell is the point of spending billions to have two at sea at any time?tc27 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 16, 2021 1:03 pm The six Type 45s was pure Treasury cost cutting - the Navy wanted 12. What's particularly grating is that these savings were in part to fund the expensive Afghan deployment the fruits of which are crumbling to dust before us.
With Naval ships the general rule of thumb is the 2/3rds will be routinely unavailable - either in deep refit, crew leave or working up...so six ships equals 2 normally available. Get a mechanical problem like HMS Diamond just has and that's one destroyer....again this is why the Navy wanted 12.
“To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what the sea-going status is of each of the six Type 45 Destroyers; and which of those ships are (a) operationally available, (b) undergoing maintenance and/or a refit and (c) temporarily unavailable due to propulsion problems.”
Jeremy Quin, Minister of State for the Ministry of Defence, responded:
“HMS DEFENDER is currently deployed as part of the Carrier Strike Group (CSG21) while
HMS DIAMOND has experienced some technical issues and has detached from CSG21 for maintenance, inspection and defect rectification.
HMS DARING and HMS DUNCAN are currently undergoing planned deep maintenance.
HMS DAUNTLESS, the first of the Type 45 Destroyers to undergo a Power Improvement Project upgrade, is expected to return to sea for trials this year.
HMS DRAGON is undergoing a period of planned maintenance in advance of further operational commitments.”
Must be tough mate. Whilst I hate to see the situation unfold, part of me is glad that our troops will no longer suffer when the Afghans themselves seem so unwilling to fight for their own freedoms.
Your fellow Saffers keep defending you but I’m not sure why
All the money you made will never buy back your soul
- stunt_cunt
- Posts: 210
- Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2020 9:21 pm
- Location: Wild West
You'd have to think it's past time for launching some rescue mission to get these interpreters and former staff of different armies out the place.
The chaos of the initial hours of the Taliban waltzing in unimpeded will soon be overcast by an organised Taliban simply ring fencing the airports with roadblocks to see who's trying to get out. I'd assume that's probably happening right now.
The chaos of the initial hours of the Taliban waltzing in unimpeded will soon be overcast by an organised Taliban simply ring fencing the airports with roadblocks to see who's trying to get out. I'd assume that's probably happening right now.
- FalseBayFC
- Posts: 3554
- Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2020 3:19 pm
Doesn’t this demonstrate the ridiculous nature of the decision to build new aircraft carriers when a more modern fighting force would have flexible vessels capable of accommodating VTOL fighters, helicopter transports, amphibious assault vessels etc? I have no expertise in this but I’ve previously been told by people who know a bit more than me that carriers are now just about projection of power rather than successful military actions. Which in our case is a projection of power we no longer have.GogLais wrote: ↑Mon Aug 16, 2021 12:38 pmIt’s the constant problem of UK defence procurement. We want our equipment to be as good as anyone else’s but that means we lack quantity. Better minds than mine have decided that for example 6 Type 45s are better than say 10 slightly less capable ships but however good they are they can only be in one place at a time. Don’t tell anyone but I’ve read that only one 45 is in service at the moment.
And are there two g’s in Bugger Off?
- FalseBayFC
- Posts: 3554
- Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2020 3:19 pm
That wasn’t me, you giant bowl of breakfast cereal.
You;re pretty close to describing the capabilities of the QE class (barring the amhpib assault craft, but that type of operation requires a very specialist vessel that a carrier air wing would help protect). The QE class are more akin to the US Wasp class of carriers (technically Helicopter Landing Docks) than the (much larger) Nimitz/Ford nuclear classBiffer wrote: ↑Mon Aug 16, 2021 6:57 pmDoesn’t this demonstrate the ridiculous nature of the decision to build new aircraft carriers when a more modern fighting force would have flexible vessels capable of accommodating VTOL fighters, helicopter transports, amphibious assault vessels etc? I have no expertise in this but I’ve previously been told by people who know a bit more than me that carriers are now just about projection of power rather than successful military actions. Which in our case is a projection of power we no longer have.GogLais wrote: ↑Mon Aug 16, 2021 12:38 pmIt’s the constant problem of UK defence procurement. We want our equipment to be as good as anyone else’s but that means we lack quantity. Better minds than mine have decided that for example 6 Type 45s are better than say 10 slightly less capable ships but however good they are they can only be in one place at a time. Don’t tell anyone but I’ve read that only one 45 is in service at the moment.
- FalseBayFC
- Posts: 3554
- Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2020 3:19 pm
Sorry I didn't understand your "Nuke them from orbit" meme. You seem to have a massive hard-on for war machinery so I thought you may have been serious rather than ironic.
-
- Posts: 516
- Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2020 5:00 pm
^^^ FFS !!!tabascoboy wrote: ↑Mon Aug 16, 2021 11:54 am Trump - as usual - not slow to try and make capital from it
but 4 months ago...“It is time for Joe Biden to resign in disgrace for what he has allowed to happen to Afghanistan,” Mr Trump said in the statement, in which he also sought to resurrect claims over the legitimacy of the 2020 election.
Trump's withdrawal was to be undertaken with a firm agreement in advance and with the Taliban left in no doubt as to what the military consequences would be should they renege.
Their clumped advances of recent weeks would have provided easy targets as against the difficulty of ferreting out a solitary with a 303 hidden in a crevice on a mountaintop.
An analogy is with Nixon's withdrawal from Vietnam.
The North Vietnamese knew for sure that if they violated the Paris Peace Accord and advanced on Saigon, then they would be obliterated by air strikes.
But Watergate removed both Nixon and his pledge to South Vietnam, and in consequence it wasn't VC armed with crossbows who took Saigon but columns of armored NV tanks and vehicles that would otherwise have been sitting ducks.
Biden is due to speak. Will he too try and deflect the human catastrophe onto Trump?
1. It literally has those abilities.esn’t this demonstrate the ridiculous nature of the decision to build new aircraft carriers when a more modern fighting force would have flexible vessels capable of accommodating VTOL fighters, helicopter transports, amphibious assault vessels etc? I have no expertise in this but I’ve previously been told by people who know a bit more than me that carriers are now just about projection of power rather than successful military actions. Which in our case is a projection of power we no longer have.
2. Kabul is outside the range of most VTOL aircraft and helicopters from the Indian Ocean
3. ..and even if it wasn't Pakistan is kinda in the way of and any maritime airlift
4. The UK has more than enough strategic airlift to get people out.
5. Whilst the carrier is a mobile asset it travels at about 30mph and is in the Pacific.
convoluted wrote: ↑Mon Aug 16, 2021 7:49 pm^^^ FFS !!!tabascoboy wrote: ↑Mon Aug 16, 2021 11:54 am Trump - as usual - not slow to try and make capital from it
but 4 months ago...“It is time for Joe Biden to resign in disgrace for what he has allowed to happen to Afghanistan,” Mr Trump said in the statement, in which he also sought to resurrect claims over the legitimacy of the 2020 election.
Trump's withdrawal was to be undertaken with a firm agreement in advance and with the Taliban left in no doubt as to what the military consequences would be should they renege.
Their clumped advances of recent weeks would have provided easy targets as against the difficulty of ferreting out a solitary with a 303 hidden in a crevice on a mountaintop.
An analogy is with Nixon's withdrawal from Vietnam.
The North Vietnamese knew for sure that if they violated the Paris Peace Accord and advanced on Saigon, then they would be obliterated by air strikes.
But Watergate removed both Nixon and his pledge to South Vietnam, and in consequence it wasn't VC armed with crossbows who took Saigon but columns of armored NV tanks and vehicles that would otherwise have been sitting ducks.
Biden is due to speak. Will he too try and deflect the human catastrophe onto Trump?
All the money you made will never buy back your soul
So Bidens angle - he’s saying it was Ghanis fault. Ghani said the Afghans would fight. They did not. Why should US fight for something the Afghans aren’t willing to fight for, a civil war.
Last edited by Ymx on Mon Aug 16, 2021 8:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Biden is pulling no punches in criticising the Afghans, to paraphrase "if they were not willing to fight for their country then Americans should not be expected to do so on their behalf".
He's talked of the US pivoting away from using military power to using diplomacy and economics with human rights at the centre of foreign policy.
He's talked of the US pivoting away from using military power to using diplomacy and economics with human rights at the centre of foreign policy.
-
- Posts: 516
- Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2020 5:00 pm
Good grief.
CNN actually made an immediate and perfect summation: "Biden said 'the buck stops with me' but his entire talk was fingerpointing at others" (maybe not word for word).
CNN actually made an immediate and perfect summation: "Biden said 'the buck stops with me' but his entire talk was fingerpointing at others" (maybe not word for word).
The Drump lover has decided to post on another thread apart from US Politics!convoluted wrote: ↑Mon Aug 16, 2021 7:49 pm^^^ FFS !!!tabascoboy wrote: ↑Mon Aug 16, 2021 11:54 am Trump - as usual - not slow to try and make capital from it
but 4 months ago...“It is time for Joe Biden to resign in disgrace for what he has allowed to happen to Afghanistan,” Mr Trump said in the statement, in which he also sought to resurrect claims over the legitimacy of the 2020 election.
Trump's withdrawal was to be undertaken with a firm agreement in advance and with the Taliban left in no doubt as to what the military consequences would be should they renege.
Their clumped advances of recent weeks would have provided easy targets as against the difficulty of ferreting out a solitary with a 303 hidden in a crevice on a mountaintop.
An analogy is with Nixon's withdrawal from Vietnam.
The North Vietnamese knew for sure that if they violated the Paris Peace Accord and advanced on Saigon, then they would be obliterated by air strikes.
But Watergate removed both Nixon and his pledge to South Vietnam, and in consequence it wasn't VC armed with crossbows who took Saigon but columns of armored NV tanks and vehicles that would otherwise have been sitting ducks.
Biden is due to speak. Will he too try and deflect the human catastrophe onto Trump?
Ah, but wait, someone has said bigly bad things about the orange shitgibbon..
Now they're deleting pages praising his Taliban deals..
https://www.rawstory.com/amp/trump-afgh ... ssion=true
-
- Posts: 516
- Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2020 5:00 pm
Yep, this is the norm for your crowd: mock because you are unable to provide a rational counter-argument.Slick wrote: ↑Mon Aug 16, 2021 7:56 pmconvoluted wrote: ↑Mon Aug 16, 2021 7:49 pm^^^ FFS !!!tabascoboy wrote: ↑Mon Aug 16, 2021 11:54 am Trump - as usual - not slow to try and make capital from it
but 4 months ago...
Trump's withdrawal was to be undertaken with a firm agreement in advance and with the Taliban left in no doubt as to what the military consequences would be should they renege.
Their clumped advances of recent weeks would have provided easy targets as against the difficulty of ferreting out a solitary with a 303 hidden in a crevice on a mountaintop.
An analogy is with Nixon's withdrawal from Vietnam.
The North Vietnamese knew for sure that if they violated the Paris Peace Accord and advanced on Saigon, then they would be obliterated by air strikes.
But Watergate removed both Nixon and his pledge to South Vietnam, and in consequence it wasn't VC armed with crossbows who took Saigon but columns of armored NV tanks and vehicles that would otherwise have been sitting ducks.
Biden is due to speak. Will he too try and deflect the human catastrophe onto Trump?
You seem blissfully unaware that it comes across as nothing more than a white flag surrender.
I thought he was entirely fair, he owned the decision to withdraw but pointed out the context surrounding it - the Afghans are hapless and there is nothing you can do for people if they aren't willing to do it for themselves. He said a third decade in Afghanistan was unpalatable and he did not want to pass this problem onto another President.convoluted wrote: ↑Mon Aug 16, 2021 8:24 pm Good grief.
CNN actually made an immediate and perfect summation: "Biden said 'the buck stops with me' but his entire talk was fingerpointing at others" (maybe not word for word).