Britain and our allies - what is actually going on?
Discussion
The news stories of the last few days seem to have changed from Trump berating a supposedly feeble and politically embattled Starmer, to the disappointment in all the Gulf states (and Cyprus) that Britain has ‘let them down’ and an unusual warmongering spirit that has suddenly descended upon France and Germany.
I must admit to being a little bemused by all of this…
I can’t imagine that any of the Gulf states would have been particularly supportive of the attack on Iran, and I imagine they are incandescent that they are themselves now under attack from Iran. But I have no idea what their expectation of Britain was? It seems that the RAF are already actively and successfully involved in air defence, as they have been in previous incursions. What more is wanted? Why are there supposedly diplomatic issues?
As for France, I read this morning from a normally reliable source (that seems to have descended into fantasy) that Macron has squadrons of nuclear armed aircraft in readiness. Really? What would be their purpose? What else are France doing that makes Macron suddenly Trump’s best friend? I suspect no more than Britain. As for Germany, I doubt they are actually physically involved at all.
Where is all this bulls
t coming from? It takes a lot to make me actually feel sorry for Starmer…
I must admit to being a little bemused by all of this…
I can’t imagine that any of the Gulf states would have been particularly supportive of the attack on Iran, and I imagine they are incandescent that they are themselves now under attack from Iran. But I have no idea what their expectation of Britain was? It seems that the RAF are already actively and successfully involved in air defence, as they have been in previous incursions. What more is wanted? Why are there supposedly diplomatic issues?
As for France, I read this morning from a normally reliable source (that seems to have descended into fantasy) that Macron has squadrons of nuclear armed aircraft in readiness. Really? What would be their purpose? What else are France doing that makes Macron suddenly Trump’s best friend? I suspect no more than Britain. As for Germany, I doubt they are actually physically involved at all.
Where is all this bulls
t coming from? It takes a lot to make me actually feel sorry for Starmer…Foss62 said:
I can t imagine that any of the Gulf states would have been particularly supportive of the attack on Iran
Why not? Iran are 60% Persian rather than Arab and are behind a large percentage of the violence in the region. Pretty much everyone in the region hates them and is threatened by them.BikeBikeBIke said:
Foss62 said:
I can t imagine that any of the Gulf states would have been particularly supportive of the attack on Iran
Why not? Iran are 60% Persian rather than Arab and are behind a large percentage of the violence in the region. Pretty much everyone in the region hates them and is threatened by them.I can’t imagine that any diplomats from Gulf countries have been lobbying Israel or the US or Britain with a view to bringing on the current situation.
I think everyone with an ounce of common sense can see that Iran was a boil that needed lancing, containment wasn't working and they were increasingly acting the dhead outside of messing about with uranium and they were a central plank in Russian and Chinese dheaded-ness as well.
What the Middle East sees is Starmer prioritising his sectarian voters over their concerns and our wider interests.
head outside of messing about with uranium and they were a central plank in Russian and Chinese dheaded-ness as well.What the Middle East sees is Starmer prioritising his sectarian voters over their concerns and our wider interests.
Not that obvious what the Cypriots want in concrete terms. Publicly they said they wanted the UK to share more information and to do "more". Share what information with whom? And do "more" what? Sounds more like general sour grapes about the base's existence.
European response has been a bit of a st show. It was an opportunity for a coordinated response from all us middle-ranking powers, whereas Spain and Germany took diametrically opposed positions on importance of legality and von der Leyen said "regime change? Yeah, OK."
Anyway, we're way off on the sidelines of this mess, so I doubt that much of what is said about the UK right now will be remembered within a few weeks.
If Iran's regime survives in some form (likely) and they are still capable of chucking the odd bomb at the neighbours (fairly likely) and they are capable of organising terrorist attacks on the neighbours (very likely), then the neighbours are going to be monumentally pissed off with Israel and the US as they'll have delivered a significant reduction in the neighbours' domestic security, and a refugee and humanitarian crisis on their doorstep. They might start asking the UK for help. They aren't going to be calling us names.
If by some miracle Iran transforms into a middle Eastern version of Belgium, then Israel and the US will be hailed as strategic geniuses, and no one is going to be talking about the sidelined Europeans. Everyone will be busily blowing smoke up Trump's bot bot.
European response has been a bit of a s
t show. It was an opportunity for a coordinated response from all us middle-ranking powers, whereas Spain and Germany took diametrically opposed positions on importance of legality and von der Leyen said "regime change? Yeah, OK."Anyway, we're way off on the sidelines of this mess, so I doubt that much of what is said about the UK right now will be remembered within a few weeks.
If Iran's regime survives in some form (likely) and they are still capable of chucking the odd bomb at the neighbours (fairly likely) and they are capable of organising terrorist attacks on the neighbours (very likely), then the neighbours are going to be monumentally pissed off with Israel and the US as they'll have delivered a significant reduction in the neighbours' domestic security, and a refugee and humanitarian crisis on their doorstep. They might start asking the UK for help. They aren't going to be calling us names.
If by some miracle Iran transforms into a middle Eastern version of Belgium, then Israel and the US will be hailed as strategic geniuses, and no one is going to be talking about the sidelined Europeans. Everyone will be busily blowing smoke up Trump's bot bot.
Foss62 said:
BikeBikeBIke said:
Foss62 said:
I can t imagine that any of the Gulf states would have been particularly supportive of the attack on Iran
Why not? Iran are 60% Persian rather than Arab and are behind a large percentage of the violence in the region. Pretty much everyone in the region hates them and is threatened by them.In the same way that South Korea would have "wanted a full scale war with the timing and operational details controlled fully by the Israelis and the US" to stop NK getting nukes, and it's a real shame that didn't happen.
And in this context most of the world has the same interests as the locals.
If America and Israel are willing to fight your wars for you you'd grasp that will both hands.
ATG said:
Not that obvious what the Cypriots want in concrete terms. Publicly they said they wanted the UK to share more information and to do "more". Share what information with whom? And do "more" what? Sounds more like general sour grapes about the base's existence.
Cyprus is a holiday resort what they want is for that to continue, having drones and missiles being lobbed at an air base that UK seems unable to defend is a bit of a fly in that tourism ointment. Watching what appears to be our only available warship falling to proceed from its UK base is hardly reassuring either (has it actually got past the break water?) at least the Greeks and the French can deploy some capability to cover our embarrassment.
paulrockliffe said:
I think everyone with an ounce of common sense can see that Iran was a boil that needed lancing, containment wasn't working and they were increasingly acting the dhead outside of messing about with uranium and they were a central plank in Russian and Chinese dheaded-ness as well.
What the Middle East sees is Starmer prioritising his sectarian voters over their concerns and our wider interests.
I don't disagree with the first paragraph, but am not convinced (although always hopeful) that that the lancing will be achieved, by what seems like a bit of a sketchy plan beyond the initial massive assault. head outside of messing about with uranium and they were a central plank in Russian and Chinese dheaded-ness as well.What the Middle East sees is Starmer prioritising his sectarian voters over their concerns and our wider interests.
Is Starmer prioritising sectarian voters? I would tend to think that the large expat Iranian community would support the attack, and the Muslim voters in UK are largely Sunni, so unlikely to be particularly interested in protecting the Iranian regime.
Foss62 said:
I don't disagree with the first paragraph, but am not convinced (although always hopeful) that that the lancing will be achieved, by what seems like a bit of a sketchy plan beyond the initial massive assault.
What should they have done instead that you would be convinced by?Wills2 said:
ATG said:
Not that obvious what the Cypriots want in concrete terms. Publicly they said they wanted the UK to share more information and to do "more". Share what information with whom? And do "more" what? Sounds more like general sour grapes about the base's existence.
Cyprus is a holiday resort what they want is for that to continue, having drones and missiles being lobbed at an air base that UK seems unable to defend is a bit of a fly in that tourism ointment. Watching what appears to be our only available warship falling to proceed from its UK base is hardly reassuring either (has it actually got past the break water?) at least the Greeks and the French can deploy some capability to cover our embarrassment.
BikeBikeBIke said:
Foss62 said:
I don't disagree with the first paragraph, but am not convinced (although always hopeful) that that the lancing will be achieved, by what seems like a bit of a sketchy plan beyond the initial massive assault.
What should they have done instead that you would be convinced by?I would like to be proven wrong but I suspect this will end with an agreement between a 'victorious' Trump and the current (much weakened) regime. The Israelis will have done well, because that regime will no longer effectively fund Hezbollah (as part of that agreement). Nuclear activities will be suspended for a bit, but there will still be a belligerent Iran, that will still oppress it's people, and will gradually start ramping things up again. See Iraq after the first Gulf war....
Foss62 said:
I must admit to being a little bemused by all of this
As for France, I read this morning from a normally reliable source (that seems to have descended into fantasy) that Macron has squadrons of nuclear armed aircraft in readiness. Really? What would be their purpose?
Actually yes, France has around 250 Rafale fighters that can fire nuclear tipped missiles As for France, I read this morning from a normally reliable source (that seems to have descended into fantasy) that Macron has squadrons of nuclear armed aircraft in readiness. Really? What would be their purpose?
Their nuclear deterrent is split between the above fighters and their four SSBN's with long range nuclear missiles
We just have the four SSBN's. We used to have the V bomber fleet of nuclear bombers but we don't anymore. There are I believe plans to buy some F35's that can deliver a nuclear payload at some point in the future
Earthdweller said:
Actually yes, France has around 250 Rafale fighters that can fire nuclear tipped missiles
Their nuclear deterrent is split between the above fighters and their four SSBN's with long range nuclear missiles
We just have the four SSBN's. We used to have the V bomber fleet of nuclear bombers but we don't anymore. There are I believe plans to buy some F35's that can deliver a nuclear payload at some point in the future
france do not have 250 rafale's in active service..... they have a 'target' of 225 or something in goodness knows how many years and they are running an even larger budget deficit than the UK so getting there might be..... a bit tricky. Their nuclear deterrent is split between the above fighters and their four SSBN's with long range nuclear missiles
We just have the four SSBN's. We used to have the V bomber fleet of nuclear bombers but we don't anymore. There are I believe plans to buy some F35's that can deliver a nuclear payload at some point in the future
Earthdweller said:
Actually yes, France has around 250 Rafale fighters that can fire nuclear tipped missiles
Their nuclear deterrent is split between the above fighters and their four SSBN's with long range nuclear missiles
We just have the four SSBN's. We used to have the V bomber fleet of nuclear bombers but we don't anymore. There are I believe plans to buy some F35's that can deliver a nuclear payload at some point in the future
Thing is despite all the playing around that people do with nuclear capable aircraft, with stuff like SNOWCAT and the rest, the SSBN is the much more effective Sword of Damocles strategic deterrent. Given the consequences of using any weapon of this type you may as well just have the big, flexible, long range hard to stop version. Their nuclear deterrent is split between the above fighters and their four SSBN's with long range nuclear missiles
We just have the four SSBN's. We used to have the V bomber fleet of nuclear bombers but we don't anymore. There are I believe plans to buy some F35's that can deliver a nuclear payload at some point in the future
Bombers and fighter bombers are for the tactical stuff you'd end up dropping too close to home and while it's a good toy to flash around realistically it doesn't have huge amounts of use.
The European use cases always seemed to be built around extreme suppression of the rampaging Soviet horde and if you're at the point of dropping tactical nukes to do that you're already f
ked. I had some interesting conversations around the topic with people who flew this stuff (Germans using Tornado) and while it was interesting I'm not sure anyone actually believed it was practical. The only people who'd seriously think about using aircraft delivery as a possibility are the ones without ICBMs and whose main goal is throwing the things at their immediate neighbours.
I suspect the French mostly do it to show they can and without using American gear.
JoshSm said:
Thing is despite all the playing around that people do with nuclear capable aircraft, with stuff like SNOWCAT and the rest, the SSBN is the much more effective Sword of Damocles strategic deterrent. Given the consequences of using any weapon of this type you may as well just have the big, flexible, long range hard to stop version.
Bombers and fighter bombers are for the tactical stuff you'd end up dropping too close to home and while it's a good toy to flash around realistically it doesn't have huge amounts of use.
The European use cases always seemed to be built around extreme suppression of the rampaging Soviet horde and if you're at the point of dropping tactical nukes to do that you're already fked. I had some interesting conversations around the topic with people who flew this stuff (Germans using Tornado) and while it was interesting I'm not sure anyone actually believed it was practical.
The only people who'd seriously think about using aircraft delivery as a possibility are the ones without ICBMs and whose main goal is throwing the things at their immediate neighbours.
I suspect the French mostly do it to show they can and without using American gear.
dickwaving. nothing gets a politician hard like standing beside a large phallic missile pretending to be a serious badass. Bombers and fighter bombers are for the tactical stuff you'd end up dropping too close to home and while it's a good toy to flash around realistically it doesn't have huge amounts of use.
The European use cases always seemed to be built around extreme suppression of the rampaging Soviet horde and if you're at the point of dropping tactical nukes to do that you're already f
ked. I had some interesting conversations around the topic with people who flew this stuff (Germans using Tornado) and while it was interesting I'm not sure anyone actually believed it was practical. The only people who'd seriously think about using aircraft delivery as a possibility are the ones without ICBMs and whose main goal is throwing the things at their immediate neighbours.
I suspect the French mostly do it to show they can and without using American gear.
isaldiri said:
Earthdweller said:
Actually yes, France has around 250 Rafale fighters that can fire nuclear tipped missiles
Their nuclear deterrent is split between the above fighters and their four SSBN's with long range nuclear missiles
We just have the four SSBN's. We used to have the V bomber fleet of nuclear bombers but we don't anymore. There are I believe plans to buy some F35's that can deliver a nuclear payload at some point in the future
france do not have 250 rafale's in active service..... they have a 'target' of 225 or something in goodness knows how many years and they are running an even larger budget deficit than the UK so getting there might be..... a bit tricky. Their nuclear deterrent is split between the above fighters and their four SSBN's with long range nuclear missiles
We just have the four SSBN's. We used to have the V bomber fleet of nuclear bombers but we don't anymore. There are I believe plans to buy some F35's that can deliver a nuclear payload at some point in the future
Earthdweller said:
isaldiri said:
Earthdweller said:
Actually yes, France has around 250 Rafale fighters that can fire nuclear tipped missiles
Their nuclear deterrent is split between the above fighters and their four SSBN's with long range nuclear missiles
We just have the four SSBN's. We used to have the V bomber fleet of nuclear bombers but we don't anymore. There are I believe plans to buy some F35's that can deliver a nuclear payload at some point in the future
france do not have 250 rafale's in active service..... they have a 'target' of 225 or something in goodness knows how many years and they are running an even larger budget deficit than the UK so getting there might be..... a bit tricky. Their nuclear deterrent is split between the above fighters and their four SSBN's with long range nuclear missiles
We just have the four SSBN's. We used to have the V bomber fleet of nuclear bombers but we don't anymore. There are I believe plans to buy some F35's that can deliver a nuclear payload at some point in the future
i said they have a target of getting to 225 in goodness knows how many years. they don't have much more than 150 currently it seems. that isn't 'around 250-ish. that you claim they have.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff