Tony Blair is a demonstrable ****

[Danllan]

And didn’t left winger Brown do well, remind me how many elections did he win or have Labour won ever since?
If Blair was so bad he would have not won three clear elections.

As has already been stated by @linga, and I guess as all the Tory haters on here will confirm, an awful depends not on how good a government people think a party will provide, but on how much less awful it will be than the other lot.

I believe it to be true of most if not all nations. I believe the average attention span to detail, has been greatly shortened by the “tweet” world we live in today.
I further believe, that two major powers in particular. USA and UK, have become particularly targeted by Russia, in a very successful attempt to date, to undermine their electoral systems. Why USA and UK in particular? Well we all know why USA, as it’s the great military power. Why UK? Because it is seen as the second military power in NATO. Perhaps in real numbers and hardware, France is now ahead of UK, militarily???
I also believe the thrash / tabloid media world, long before social media, got a foothold in UK, unlike most other countries. It too managed to capture the hearts and minds of the plebs, in a manner which seriously lowered their willingness and eventually ability, to read beyond dog whistle headlines, back page footie and page three titty!!

Fair enough, but don't be losing sight of who's pulling the EU's strings from the East as we write.

French capability... worked with them while I was serving, army that is, their airborne troops (mostly FL) were very good, the run of the mill not up to our standards at all; I've friends still serving - and who are now pretty senior - who recently confirmed the same still applies.

I have no personal expertise in the fields of its air force and navy, but have discussed them with people who have opinions I respect; the air force lacks the heavy lift necessary for sustained projection and some fighters are a bit arbitrary, but their best kit and pilots are good.

Their navy... they've wasted unnecessary time and effort on their carrier, two or three conventional ones would have made more sense. Some of their sub's are fine, others not. They have made a good choice in using corvettes, on the same basis as carriers - better use of money. Quality of training... my chums put them a fair bit behind the Germans and Dutch, probably in the top ten, but only just.

 

[Muck Spreader]

As has already been stated by @linga, and I guess as all the Tory haters on here will confirm, an awful depends not on how good a government people think a party will provide, but on how much less awful it will be than the other lot.


Fair enough, but don't be losing sight of who's pulling the EU's strings from the East as we write.

French capability... worked with them while I was serving, army that is, their airborne troops (mostly FL) were very good, the run of the mill not up to our standards at all; I've friends still serving - and who are now pretty senior - who recently confirmed the same still applies.

I have no personal expertise in the fields of its air force and navy, but have discussed them with people who have opinions I respect; the air force lacks the heavy lift necessary for sustained projection and some fighters are a bit arbitrary, but their best kit and pilots are good.

Their navy... they've wasted unnecessary time and effort on their carrier, two or three conventional ones would have made more sense. Some of their sub's are fine, others not. They have made a good choice in using corvettes, on the same basis as carriers - better use of money. Quality of training... my chums put them a fair bit behind the Germans and Dutch, probably in the top ten, but only just.

There is only one country in the world that really counts when it comes to capability.

 

[Danllan]

There is only one country in the world that really counts when it comes to capability.

View attachment 1008227

Yep, but that wasn't the point at issue.

However, since you raise it... it does tend to make your Presidents' posturing regarding 'EUropean' defence becoming more self reliant look even more daft than would otherwise be the case... it's possible, of course, but would need the Europeans to more than double their defence spending - which we all know isn't going to happen any time soon.

 

[Muck Spreader]

Yep, but that wasn't the point at issue.

However, since you raise it... it does tend to make your Presidents' posturing regarding 'EUropean' defence becoming more self reliant look even more daft than would otherwise be the case... it's possible, of course, but would need the Europeans to more than double their defence spending - which we all know isn't going to happen any time soon.

Can Europe rely on the US in the future? Despite Trump's statements to the contrary, I would still suggest 'yes'. But as the US has been late arriving at the last two world wars, I would guess that political wrangling would also see them late arriving at a third.

But in reality we are probably already waging the wars of the future right now though cyberspace, with disinformation, hacking and paralysing key infrastructure, disrupting global markets, etc. And for the likes of Russia, it's waging war on the cheap, to the point that they could be making money out of it as well. With a country paralysed and it's population demoralised, you don't need an army to take it over.

 

[bankrupt]

we are probably already waging the wars of the future right now though cyberspace, with disinformation, hacking and paralysing key infrastructure, disrupting global markets, etc.

Probably?

 

[Ashtree]

Can Europe rely on the US in the future? Despite Trump's statements to the contrary, I would still suggest 'yes'. But as the US has been late arriving at the last two world wars, I would guess that political wrangling would also see them late arriving at a third.

But in reality we are probably already waging the wars of the future right now though cyberspace, with disinformation, hacking and paralysing key infrastructure, disrupting global markets, etc. And for the likes of Russia, it's waging war on the cheap, to the point that they could be making money out of it as well. With a country paralysed and it's population demoralised, you don't need an army to take it over.

I doubt more and more by the day, that America can rely on itself, never mind Europe rely on it.
I suggest that it’s entirely possible, that the next presidential election, could spiral out of all control, if Trump or his runner isn’t declared the winner. Democracy in America is in a critical condition….

 

[le bon paysan]

It also proved that some people who are on the losing side of a referendum will never accept a democratic decision!

Is it democratic if the decision is based on lies?

 

[BrianV]

Is it democratic if the decision is based on lies?

Which lies did you have in mind?

 

[robs1]

Is it democratic if the decision is based on lies?

Would be the lies about instant recession, no eu army etc etc ?

 

[Danllan]

Can Europe rely on the US in the future? Despite Trump's statements to the contrary, I would still suggest 'yes'. But as the US has been late arriving at the last two world wars, I would guess that political wrangling would also see them late arriving at a third.

But in reality we are probably already waging the wars of the future right now though cyberspace, with disinformation, hacking and paralysing key infrastructure, disrupting global markets, etc. And for the likes of Russia, it's waging war on the cheap, to the point that they could be making money out of it as well. With a country paralysed and it's population demoralised, you don't need an army to take it over.

The US is, constitutionally and in other ways, a very strong nation; if you've spent any time there you'll know how deeply patriotic the great majority of its people are. I also think that it won't return to isolationism in any foreseeable future, and so will remain as the best hope of perpetuating democracy. It certainly has had a poor show in Presidents Trump and Biden, but the beauty of democracy is that they are just temporary.

I doubt more and more by the day, that America can rely on itself, never mind Europe rely on it.
I suggest that it’s entirely possible, that the next presidential election, could spiral out of all control, if Trump or his runner isn’t declared the winner. Democracy in America is in a critical condition….

No. Provided wokeness from the left and Christian fundamentalism from the right don't spread any further, it'll be fine.

 

[ollie989898]

The USA and UK have just done a nuclear submarine deal with Australia. This is no coincidence and it is also quite remarkable because the USA has never ever even suggested sharing such technology with anyone else besides the UK. It is obvious that the USA is gearing up it's allies to retain it's global grip in diplomatic, military and economic terms. No surprises the Chinese are pished about the deal but probably not as much as the French whose conventional boats will no longer be needed.

Far from the USA becoming isolationist, I think they are doing the opposite. Particularly in terms of making moves against China and Russia and I suspect they will keep their global deployments as they are because it aids them where terrorism is concerned.

 

[Muck Spreader]

The USA and UK have just done a nuclear submarine deal with Australia. This is no coincidence and it is also quite remarkable because the USA has never ever even suggested sharing such technology with anyone else besides the UK. It is obvious that the USA is gearing up it's allies to retain it's global grip in diplomatic, military and economic terms. No surprises the Chinese are pished about the deal but probably not as much as the French whose conventional boats will no longer be needed.

Far from the USA becoming isolationist, I think they are doing the opposite. Particularly in terms of making moves against China and Russia and I suspect they will keep their global deployments as they are because it aids them where terrorism is concerned.

I think the thing that p!ssed off the French, was they spent 3 or 4 years redesigning their Nuclear powered sub to diesel-electric. Only to be told out of the blue the Australians actually wanted a Nuclear fleet instead.

 

[Danllan]

I think the thing that p!ssed off the French, was they spent 3 or 4 years redesigning their Nuclear powered sub to diesel-electric. Only to be told out of the blue the Australians actually wanted a Nuclear fleet instead.

It wasn't out of the blue because they weren't performing as promised.

 

[Muck Spreader]

It wasn't out of the blue because they weren't performing as promised.

As suggested by Morrison in order to get out of a deal made by Turnbull. The Submarines were due to be delivered by 2030. But any nuclear ones will be unlikely before 2045, unless a deal is done with the US for some refurbished s/h ones.

 

[Henarar]

 

[Danllan]

As suggested by Morrison in order to get out of a deal made by Turnbull. The Submarines were due to be delivered by 2030. But any nuclear ones will be unlikely before 2045, unless a deal is done with the US for some refurbished s/h ones.

Doesn't matter what the new agreement is, the old one wasn't being kept to.