|
|
Post by Dan Dare on May 11, 2024 21:08:07 GMT
Well, we have lived under the American Aegis for the 80 odd years and it seems to have worked out well so far, with most of the bodybags going to the US rather than the rest of the Western powers. Plus the Yanks spend more than two and a half times as much on defence as the rest of Nato combined.
So if anyone wants to join the UK's battle line and pay and extra 10p on the income tax then go for it and tell the Yanks to go fly a kite,  It would be interesting to be a fly on the wall when you explain this to the the families of the 700 or so UK personnel who gave their lives in the cause of the post 9/11 War on Turr in the Middle East. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on May 11, 2024 21:09:19 GMT
The decision to buy those was taken long before 2016 and Brexit. That's true, although the decision on how many to buy is still to be made. Brexit wasn't the watershed for poor decisions in defence procurement, it just means the likelihood of getting out from the under the US got that much harder. There are of course other examples. Do you need to have them listed? Well if you could. You claimed that since 2016, the UK has purchased many of its weapons systems off the shelf from the US. If you want to give us a list then feel free. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on May 11, 2024 21:35:33 GMT
It's a bit late for any intensive googling but of the top of the head I could mention the P9 Poseidon and the E9 Wedgetail, plus follow-on orders for the Chinook, the C17, the Beechcraft Texan and various UAVs. Also various missiles of different types.
As far as land forces are concerned, there is the MLRS, various armoured vehicles of the Cougar and related family, the Oshkosh range of transporters, and the upgraded fleet of Apache helicopters.
As far as naval forces are concerned the major US commitment is of course the Trident replacement as well as future F35 investments insofar as they go. The much-vaunted SSN-AUKUS nuclear submarines, success to the Astute class, will be largely dependent on US technology transfers and manufacturing support.
The larger point though isn't so much that the UK has nailed its colours to the US mast in terms of future defence procurement, but rather that it has burnt its European bridges in that respect.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on May 11, 2024 21:52:54 GMT
Well the Poseidon and Apache deal was agreed before Brexit mainly due to the failure of the Nimrod AEW program which led us to buy the Boeing Sentry and then the follow on Poseidon. .
Sorry but I'm not seeing the leap to buying US since 2016 - we always did buy US equipment. Perhaps you think we should have persevered with the Belfast rather than C130?
In fact it is noticeable that european cooperation has produced the successor to the C130, the A400M - an aircraft that is deeply flawed and fails to match the military requirements of the role.
|
|
|
|
Post by borchester on May 11, 2024 22:11:40 GMT
Well, we have lived under the American Aegis for the 80 odd years and it seems to have worked out well so far, with most of the bodybags going to the US rather than the rest of the Western powers. Plus the Yanks spend more than two and a half times as much on defence as the rest of Nato combined.
So if anyone wants to join the UK's battle line and pay and extra 10p on the income tax then go for it and tell the Yanks to go fly a kite, It would be interesting to be a fly on the wall when you explain this to the the families of the 700 or so UK personnel who gave their lives in the cause of the post 9/11 War on Turr in the Middle East. That works out at about 30 a year, or less than those killed when they empty the pubs in Catterick Garrison. And is a long way off the 15,000 American servicemen and women who have been killed since 2001
|
|
