Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. Other Discussions
  3. The Back Room
  4. Britain not doing enough to fight international terrorism

Britain not doing enough to fight international terrorism

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Back Room
question
22 Posts 8 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • L Lost User

    So will either of you be going to the showroom with money in your pocket? :rolleyes:

    Visit http://www.notreadytogiveup.com/[^] and do something special today.

    R Offline
    R Offline
    Ryan Roberts
    wrote on last edited by
    #12

    No point ;P Bloody authorities don't allow private fast jet ownership in the UK, spoilsports.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • L Lost User

      What you fail to understand is that pumping millions in to this project gave employment to thousands of MOD employees. Would you rather see it go to the US? It is imperative that the UK has its own military industry and it is better that it is allied with the rest of Europe than the US. Why? Because it is impossible for a UK firm to win a US military contract in return.

      Truth is the subjection of reality to an individuals perception

      M Offline
      M Offline
      Matthew Faithfull
      wrote on last edited by
      #13

      fat_boy wrote:

      Why? Because it is impossible for a UK firm to win a US military contract in return.

      BAE being the exception that proves the rules with the JSF I assume?

      Nothing is exactly what it seems but everything with seems can be unpicked.

      L 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • L Lost User

        What you fail to understand is that pumping millions in to this project gave employment to thousands of MOD employees. Would you rather see it go to the US? It is imperative that the UK has its own military industry and it is better that it is allied with the rest of Europe than the US. Why? Because it is impossible for a UK firm to win a US military contract in return.

        Truth is the subjection of reality to an individuals perception

        R Offline
        R Offline
        Ryan Roberts
        wrote on last edited by
        #14

        fat_boy wrote:

        It is imperative that the UK has its own military industry and it is better that it is allied with the rest of Europe

        Why? their equipment is generally inferior and more expensive. Not to mention being wrapped up with a project that threatens our sovereignty. Of course there are multiple considerations in military spending, including preserving a native defence industry, but pork barrel shouldn't be the main one..

        fat_boy wrote:

        Why? Because it is impossible for a UK firm to win a US military contract in return.

        You are talking bollocks, we do plenty of defence subcontracting with the US. Complete major projects like a fighter jet, no.

        L J K 3 Replies Last reply
        0
        • M Matthew Faithfull

          fat_boy wrote:

          Why? Because it is impossible for a UK firm to win a US military contract in return.

          BAE being the exception that proves the rules with the JSF I assume?

          Nothing is exactly what it seems but everything with seems can be unpicked.

          L Offline
          L Offline
          Lost User
          wrote on last edited by
          #15

          BAE bought a US company as a front. Its the only way of tendering there.

          Truth is the subjection of reality to an individuals perception

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • R Ryan Roberts

            fat_boy wrote:

            It is imperative that the UK has its own military industry and it is better that it is allied with the rest of Europe

            Why? their equipment is generally inferior and more expensive. Not to mention being wrapped up with a project that threatens our sovereignty. Of course there are multiple considerations in military spending, including preserving a native defence industry, but pork barrel shouldn't be the main one..

            fat_boy wrote:

            Why? Because it is impossible for a UK firm to win a US military contract in return.

            You are talking bollocks, we do plenty of defence subcontracting with the US. Complete major projects like a fighter jet, no.

            L Offline
            L Offline
            Lost User
            wrote on last edited by
            #16

            Ryan Roberts wrote:

            Why? their equipment is generally inferior

            That is generalisation that I know to be applicable to certain items. The SA80 is kack, true, but alot isnt. I hapen to know that UK SONER is the best in the world.

            Ryan Roberts wrote:

            expensive

            But its money spent in the UK, so its not a problem.

            Ryan Roberts wrote:

            You are talking bollocks

            Only if firms but out a US company as aparnter/front. Else the US defence business is a closed game.

            Truth is the subjection of reality to an individuals perception

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • R Ryan Roberts

              fat_boy wrote:

              It is imperative that the UK has its own military industry and it is better that it is allied with the rest of Europe

              Why? their equipment is generally inferior and more expensive. Not to mention being wrapped up with a project that threatens our sovereignty. Of course there are multiple considerations in military spending, including preserving a native defence industry, but pork barrel shouldn't be the main one..

              fat_boy wrote:

              Why? Because it is impossible for a UK firm to win a US military contract in return.

              You are talking bollocks, we do plenty of defence subcontracting with the US. Complete major projects like a fighter jet, no.

              J Offline
              J Offline
              jhwurmbach
              wrote on last edited by
              #17

              Ryan Roberts wrote:

              we do plenty of defence subcontracting with the US.

              But it is carefully seen to that *any* knowledge stays in the US. That is only slightly more so with the US than, say, with the UK or France. Defence is a delicate subject in every country, packed with liability-type people left over from the cold war.


              Let's think the unthinkable, let's do the undoable, let's prepare to grapple with the ineffable itself, and see if we may not eff it after all.
              Douglas Adams, "Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency"

              M 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • J jhwurmbach

                Ryan Roberts wrote:

                we do plenty of defence subcontracting with the US.

                But it is carefully seen to that *any* knowledge stays in the US. That is only slightly more so with the US than, say, with the UK or France. Defence is a delicate subject in every country, packed with liability-type people left over from the cold war.


                Let's think the unthinkable, let's do the undoable, let's prepare to grapple with the ineffable itself, and see if we may not eff it after all.
                Douglas Adams, "Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency"

                M Offline
                M Offline
                Matthew Faithfull
                wrote on last edited by
                #18

                In the UK the biggest policy skew on the whole thing is nothing is allowed to go ahead unless it fosters reliance on some other EU member country, either through joint ventures or black box sub contracting. The British army went into Kosovo with 5 rounds of ammunition per man because the Belgians, who disagreed with the intervention, failed to supply us JIT with ammunition. We apparently can't even make bullets anymore or more likely signed an exclusive supply contract when we bought Belgian guns or some such nonsense. Polititians who put lives at risk with this sort of insanity should be used for target practice.

                Nothing is exactly what it seems but everything with seems can be unpicked.

                J 2 Replies Last reply
                0
                • M Matthew Faithfull

                  In the UK the biggest policy skew on the whole thing is nothing is allowed to go ahead unless it fosters reliance on some other EU member country, either through joint ventures or black box sub contracting. The British army went into Kosovo with 5 rounds of ammunition per man because the Belgians, who disagreed with the intervention, failed to supply us JIT with ammunition. We apparently can't even make bullets anymore or more likely signed an exclusive supply contract when we bought Belgian guns or some such nonsense. Polititians who put lives at risk with this sort of insanity should be used for target practice.

                  Nothing is exactly what it seems but everything with seems can be unpicked.

                  J Offline
                  J Offline
                  jhwurmbach
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #19

                  Matthew Faithfull wrote:

                  We apparently can't even make bullets anymore or more likely signed an exclusive supply contract when we bought Belgian guns or some such nonsense.

                  Actually, that must have been an omission on the part of UK supplies. And you choose the Belgian gun because it is pretty good, wheras the British one is presumed to be crappy.

                  Matthew Faithfull wrote:

                  Polititians who put lives at risk with this sort of insanity should be used for target practice.

                  Thats the way wars are fought. The politicians could simply stop attacking other countries just out of being the poodle of an aggressor state.


                  Let's think the unthinkable, let's do the undoable, let's prepare to grapple with the ineffable itself, and see if we may not eff it after all.
                  Douglas Adams, "Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency"

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • M Matthew Faithfull

                    In the UK the biggest policy skew on the whole thing is nothing is allowed to go ahead unless it fosters reliance on some other EU member country, either through joint ventures or black box sub contracting. The British army went into Kosovo with 5 rounds of ammunition per man because the Belgians, who disagreed with the intervention, failed to supply us JIT with ammunition. We apparently can't even make bullets anymore or more likely signed an exclusive supply contract when we bought Belgian guns or some such nonsense. Polititians who put lives at risk with this sort of insanity should be used for target practice.

                    Nothing is exactly what it seems but everything with seems can be unpicked.

                    J Offline
                    J Offline
                    jhwurmbach
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #20

                    Matthew Faithfull wrote:

                    We apparently can't even make bullets anymore or more likely signed an exclusive supply contract when we bought Belgian guns or some such nonsense.

                    Actually, that must have been an omission on the part of UK supplies. And you choose the Belgian gun because it is pretty good, wheras the British one is presumed to be crappy.

                    Matthew Faithfull wrote:

                    Polititians who put lives at risk with this sort of insanity should be used for target practice.

                    Thats the way wars are fought. The politicians could simply stop attacking other countries just out of being the poodle of an agressor state.


                    Let's think the unthinkable, let's do the undoable, let's prepare to grapple with the ineffable itself, and see if we may not eff it after all.
                    Douglas Adams, "Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency"

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • R Ryan Roberts

                      fat_boy wrote:

                      It is imperative that the UK has its own military industry and it is better that it is allied with the rest of Europe

                      Why? their equipment is generally inferior and more expensive. Not to mention being wrapped up with a project that threatens our sovereignty. Of course there are multiple considerations in military spending, including preserving a native defence industry, but pork barrel shouldn't be the main one..

                      fat_boy wrote:

                      Why? Because it is impossible for a UK firm to win a US military contract in return.

                      You are talking bollocks, we do plenty of defence subcontracting with the US. Complete major projects like a fighter jet, no.

                      K Offline
                      K Offline
                      KaRl
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #21

                      Ryan Roberts wrote:

                      their equipment is generally inferior and more expensive

                      :laugh:

                      Ryan Roberts wrote:

                      Not to mention being wrapped up with a project that threatens our sovereignty.

                      UK sovereignty? :laugh: :laugh: Even your atomic deterrence in in the hands of the US.


                      Capitalism is the exploitation of man by man. Syndicalism is the opposite. Fold with us! ¤ flickr

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • G GuyThiebaut

                        Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah has accused Britain of not doing enough to fight international terrorism. He's got a good point. Hang on a minute though... where did those 911 hijackers come from again? :doh:

                        You always pass failure on the way to success.
                        P Offline
                        P Offline
                        peterchen
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #22

                        Out of Osamas arse?


                        We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
                        My first real C# project | Linkify!|FoldWithUs! | sighist

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        Reply
                        • Reply as topic
                        Log in to reply
                        • Oldest to Newest
                        • Newest to Oldest
                        • Most Votes


                        • Login

                        • Don't have an account? Register

                        • Login or register to search.
                        • First post
                          Last post
                        0
                        • Categories
                        • Recent
                        • Tags
                        • Popular
                        • World
                        • Users
                        • Groups