pjhydroCan we leave this stupid debate please, neither of you will get the other to see your point of view. NOR does it have anything to do with CVF.
The only thing that needs to be said is that no one here believes the funds for CVF (or the rest of our defence budget) should be cut and given to the poor Africans.
Sorry dad!
pjhydroIf 5 billions could fix Africa for real, it could be done tomorrow. Not by UK alone, obviously. Everyone would have to put a penny into it all the same, from french to dutch to chinese (the new, real slavers, since they are getting their hands on the contracts to exploit mostly all of the natural resources of Africa). The truth is that, between corruption, wars, enemy tribes and everything else, there’s no way in hell you can fix that.
Oh I agree mostly. It can be fixed, I worked in East Africa, i’ve seen things work (and a lot fail) its a long road but can be done, but you are not wrong really.
And anyway, again, it is not UK’s fault. It’s everyone’s fault, starting from african people itself, beware.
The UK has its own interests to care about. I can certainly agree on spending more on Africa and less on India, of course. Greatest supporter of such a move.
But please, let’s not be extremists in drawin an evil Uk, or a Uk that, while it is deciding if it can still be a strong nation in the world or a backstage country, must at the same time save the world.
Never said it was all our fault, agreed again. Never said we were evil, just that we need to realise that ONE of the root causes of Africa is what this country did. My main “enemy of reason” in Africa is all those Catholic priests running around creating a slavery of religion and helping the spread of HIV/AIDs. They would be my first target, the lies they spread I spent a long time counter teaching, drove me insane (did you know sex with a virgin would cure you? No me neither.)
Uk could shoulder more of the “save the world” effort if it was the leading world’s superpower. It is not, unfortunately. And it must care very carefully about its own well being first of all.
Oh absolutlely, but we can do more and we ourselves would benefit froma fit healthy stable Africa.
The QEs will do no harm to Africa. Probably, in their long life, they’ll have chances to do a lot of good instead.
Definately 100% agreed! I want QEs built and used in all their roles and absolutley they will be perfect for humanitarian intervention.
See we actually agreed in the end! š maybe we aren’t so different.
pjhydroFirstly Blacks werent the only slaves shiped abroad whites particuarly the Irish were shipped under the euphenism indentured workers –
Absolutely! and we’ve been paying the price of that for years.
secondly when the uk left africa it laft some very rich well structured nations see Sierra Leone that they now live in poverty is nothing to do with the slave trade (and incidently when are the vikings, phonecians corsairs etc apologising to me) The situation they are in now is (mostly) the result of massive corruption.
We left Africa- exactly! Did we teach them good governance? Did we show them how WE ran it? No we up and left and left people who had never governed themselves to it, what did we think would happen???
If you want to debate that the drawing of colonial borders without regard to peoples and cultures has fuelled many civil wars and is also a factor on poverty, well it will be a short debate on that im in agreemaent
Fair enough, we agree!
National curriculum – this managed to teach me that whites were the only people to take slaves (not true) and only africans were slaves (again what about the caribean)
(it also taught me that in ww1 the officers were safe behind the lines and sent the men to die which is why enlisted dead outnumber the officers 10 -1
realism has taught me that as enlisted men outnumber officera about 30-1 in infantry regiments that officer casualties were inordinatly high)sadly our education tends to teach what is politicaly acceptable as opposed to the truth.
Sadly you were badly taught by bad and lazy teachers. I’m afraid my profession is full of them, I would guess you were taught WW1 by watching Blackadder and Slavery by watching Roots?? BTW the Caribbean slaves are the African ones….
back to the slave trade – that was the way of the world then yes african backs may have built the UK but British backs built rome. so while i do not condone the slave trade i will not condemn it.
I think it needs condemning really, whoever does it! Even at the time there were many in Britain that were uncomfortable with it, especially in the 18th Century.
What I will condemn is the despicable and inhuman manner in which slaves were treated and transported during this period – That even by those standards was awful. Sadly Black people were thought to be subhuman and by dehumanising them they became less valuable than livestock – more tragically this isnt the English behavour at that time but human nature in general.
Interestingly the title of Simon Schama’s chapter in History of Britain on this is called “The Wrong Empire” that it was a very un-english thing, that after pursuing an empire of commerce we got diverted into another route that involved slavery, we endded up with the wrong empire.
As for aid India does not need our aid – time they spent money on welfare rather than weapons.
I agree to a point but India needs a massive armed forces in order to keep stability and peace. It has a huge number of militant groups within its borders, it has two nations either side of it who have fought major wars with it and is prone to natural disasters. India is caught between a rock and hard place really.
Africa – Now in case you have the wrong idea I would like to find work with an aid agency in Africa – but I dont think another penny should be sent to africa (except to NGO).
You see I am the other way round, I have seen first hand the damage NGOs do in Africa. terrible abuses of power, particularly the religious NGOs and my loathing for the US Peace Corps knows few boundaries. NGOs are the bane of Africa and are now causing far more problems than they claim to solve. Government to Government is definately the way ahead, tied to improvements in governance and anti-corruption measures.
Every penny given to an african Government is a penny wasted corruption means little if any gets where its needed, and I have come to the conclusion that our aid money is only prolonging the agony and that radical action is required.
You see I agree with you 100%. You will not hear a dispute of that from here. I would like to see the NGOs out for the most part and then aid held in government hands (ours) and only handed over in return for good governance. After a few beers I can give you more radical solutions….maybe another time.
pjhydroMan, get it over with already.
If you want to cry and claim that it is your fault for all the problems of the world, do it, but don’t call in the rest of the nation and of the taxpayers.
And avoid being offensive. etc etc…….
Liger we come from different worlds with very different views, I think we see the events of the world through different sides of the prism. I’ve worked in Africa and India and it gives you a lot to chew on. I am a huge supporter of a strong British Military but I have also seen what the price of a couple of Typhoons could do in some the poorest nations on earth. This all resulted from someone saying what a stupid idea helping to pay for African education is, I disagreed, what we could achieve in terms of stability, peace and joint prosperity (once Africans have buying power we have a whole new market to work in) is so jaw droppingly simple and most of cheap that for me its a no brainer, a few million quid now or war in the future, wars that our soldiers will have to fight and die in at some point. Seems to me it would be good money well spent and a case of good defence planning. Lets build those QEs though in case it still goes **** and i’m wrong eh?
pjhydroThat doesn’t make you wet at all. Foreign aid is a perfectly valid tool for conflict prevention. It’s your Guardianista guilt trip that makes you wet.
Actually the Guardian has a very mixed stance on slavery guilt and is generally against an apology, as am I. What would an apology mean? It is meaningless. The crime is so great that an aplogy uttered hundreds of years after the event would be hollow. Does it mean we should not deal with the long term results of countries actions though….?
I refuse to be held responsible for anything some relative of mine did 60 years ago. I feel the same contempt for the British who bang on about the second world war.
You personally, no, us collectively as a country that benefited from the trade to such a huge degree and still essentially does, yes. Aplopgy no, helping, yes. I am interested in conflict prevention here, a stable, richer, fed Africa is good for stability and good for our industry…think markets opportunities!
pjhydroAnyway Back to the CVF….
pjhydroNothing worse than a wet flagellating Brit.
Pardon? Sorry does actually understanding the world, having the facts to hand and realising that aid can actually constitute as defence budget in that it prevents conflicts and the need for UK soldiers to die make me wet? What if we had given the aid that is now flooding (at the requst of the Army) into Afghanistan years ago, decades ago. We wouldn’t have more then 300 dead UK servicemen in Hellmand and seen the UK defence budget destroyed, the UK military overstretched tot he point of breaking, cancellations in projects, massive cuts etc etc etc
Maybe we could get a few Germans to fund our schools? Hell maybe the Danes should be funding our health service!
What on earth has that got to do with the price of bacon?
Anyway, we just allow right wing religious nutters and readers of the Daily Mail to set up crazy academies where they can teach creationism and pseudo-science (wouldn’t happen in Germany).
pjhydro– 130 Fighters to be ordered is not “peanuts”
– The dozens of quite advanced frigates and destroyers they are building are not “peanuts”
– The SSBN’s they are constructing are not “peanuts”
– The Aircraft carriers they are constructing are not “peanuts”Enough said.
sigh. I said, and I quote “They have a huge army because they pay their soldiers peanuts” The average Indian Soldier is paid just over Ā£100 a year. If we paid our soldiers that we could have over a 150 soldiers for the starting wage of a private currently.
ENOUGH SAID.:rolleyes:
Would you rather they faced millitant groups, china and Pakistan with sticks and rocks? Or is an unstable India desirable?
pjhydroBritain did nothing that the rest of the world did not do.
He did it too miss!
Slavery was common practice in Africa before than it was in the rest of the world. Most african slaves were regularly bought from other african tribes who enslaved its own people as a daily work.
It was like that when I got here!
While slavery is not nice, your vision of the “evil empire” is seriously flawed. When africa was powerful, it came in Europe seeking slaves. The saracen pirats didn’t do that? The arabs did not do that?
How many europeans have been killed, slaughtered, and sold as slaves?
They did it first miss!
It was common practice of an age now gone. The old Britain wasn’t evil. Not more evil than anyone else. So, our regret should be commesurate to this simple truth. The rest is bleeding heart stuff.
Well you can’t blame me miss, i’m not apologising it happened ages ago and they should be like sooo over it by now, god, its like sooo old….
International aid must be used strategically. And UK, Europe, are not responsible of the state of Africa more than Africa itself is. If Africa had been developing before colonialism began, there would have been no colonialism, simple as that.
Well it was their fault, i mean look at them….their different, if they had been more like us miss we wouldn’t have done it.
If Europe was building empires with rifles and unitary nations and Africa was fighting with rocks and spears and in tribes, it means they were already underdeveloped well before colonialism began.
See miss, I mean they were asking for it really.
Proof is the beating that Italy took in more than an occasion trying to build its own empire in Africa attacking the Negus, who had a not-so-underdeveloped army.
And then they had the cheek to fight back miss, they hit us so we kept hittin’ em back.
Or you really believe that, had it been the other way around, with Africa strong and Europe weak, they wouldn’t have colonized us…?
Well if we hadn’t done it miss they would have started and then my mum…..
Come on is this the best argument against “slavery guilt” you have?
What if I change the word slavery to “Holocaust” in all your phrases and African to Jew? is that more or less acceptable?
pjhydroSorry old boy, but I really don’t care if their relatives live in poverty in the Caribbean. I didn’t cause it, and it’s nothing to do with me. I live in Britain, and I want British taxpayers’ money to be spent defending Britain, not wasted on some futile attempt to assuage the neo-colonial guilt of the Guardian reading classes.
You would be willing to stand and look at a Black Britain and say that? You would look someone who is in the UK because their family were seized in Africa and taken to the other side of the world, (by some of your relatives) made to work for nothing but a blooded back and you could stand there and say “nothing to do with MY country”.
Why NEO-colonial guilt? Neo-colonial is a term bounded about by those who believe we should not be taking part in military intervention in Africa, it does not refer to original flavour colonialism. Also colonial is the wrong term to use when talking about slavery. Colonialism is a term that mainly refers to the penultimate phase of empire, late 19th century until the 1940s (after which we get collapse and abandonment, lets stop being so sanctimonious as to call it āgiving them independenceā) Slavery occurred in the earlier phases of empire when the emphasis was on trade and commerce rather than outright domination and rule.
As for the ‘Granuiad’ it is one of the reasons we gave up slavery, it is also one of the key protagonists in the fight to end child labour in the UK, extend workers rights, give you the right to a union and the right to protest. While there is a lot wrong with it, it is also a very British institution and one I am frankly very proud of.
If Britain is not the world’s policeman, it certainly isn’t the world’s daddy either. India has got larger armed forces than Britain, and we are giving them aid? Come off it!
Yes we gave India almost a Billion in aid last year. Ever been to India? We give them aid because it is poor, very poor. They have a huge army because they pay their soldiers peanuts and they need one otherwise their country would be defenceless and at the mercy of a dozen militant groups and the situation would be worse. To give you an idea of the reality GDP per capita in the UK is around 35,000 dollars India is about 1000. That isnāt just a huge disparity it is a monumental gulf and again partly due to two centuries of asset stripping by the UK.
Which would you ratherā¦a tiny proportion of our wealth to help solve education, AIDs, poverty etc in Africa OR British and European soldiers having to fight in peacekeeping ops in order to restore order in an unstable, desperate and starving Africa. I would assume you are against British soldiers being killed for the cause of Africa? Defence money can sometimes mean not just buying arms, we can attain the aims of UK defence in many different ways.
You want to stop immigration to the UK I am sure (inference I know, but probably a good one?) then raising the living standards of poorer countries is the best way to do it. You want the UK economy to grow, then raising living standards in one of the worlds largest barely tapped markets would help massively.
As a matter of record, slavery did not make Britain rich.
As a matter of record it did. Can I point you in the direction of Simon Schamaās a History Of Britain and his fantastic book on the trade Rough Crossings. Also for a more economic out look there is Slavery, Atlantic trade and the British economy, 1660-1800 by Ken Morgan.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/abolition/building_britain_gallery.shtml might be a good starter for you.
It made some British people rich, and made the ports of Bristol and Liverpool rich,
So you are ok with that? It made the country as a whole rich Iām afraid.
but the main impact of slavery on most British people was to rot our teeth with cheap sugar.
Thats so nearly racist as to be insulting. āIt was so terrible, we took thousands from their native homes and all we got was a tooth rotā Never visit London or any major UK city and say that aloud, please!
The industrial revolution made Britain rich, that’s what set Britain apart from states such as France, Spain and Portugal which all had large colonial holdings built on the slave trade.
Look at the sources above and I can pass many others your way, Iām afraid it has been accepted historical fact (for years) that the UK economy like much of the west was built on a bed rock of slavery, its in the national curriculum and taught to year 8s, its on the A-level syllabus, its taught at university.
You are correct in stating that the Industrial revolution set us apart BUT did you ever stop for one moment to ask how did we afford the industrial revolution? Where did the capital to fund it all come from? Iām afraid it comes from Britainās Holocaust, the Slave trade.
pjhydroI think the road we are on is the end of the Commando Helicopter Force as it stands. My thinking was as follows-
All merlins to Navy. 12 HC3 airframes moved to the ASaC role. Remaining 14-16 airframes left form a Navy utility sqn, at a pinch two small sqns. RAF purchase of 22 Chinooks brings Chinook fleet to 70 aircraft. Bulk of helicopter transport deployed on any op (land or sea) will be chinook.
I’m not thinking of it as a “conspiracy” just the route the MOD has fallen down after bing egged on by the media to buy those Chinooks.
pjhydroI’m afraid I can’t agree with this bleeding heart stuff. The Royal Navy actually ended the slave trade two hundred years ago, and these states have been independent for fifty years. They are not the responsibility of the British state and the British taxpayer. If any private citizens wish to make charitable donations to African education then good for them, it’s their decision how to use their own money.
“Bleeding heart stuff” such an easy term to throw out there and means nothing other than ignorance of history and the ignorance of the social structure of the UK. I dare you to go into the centre of say Brixton, lewisham, Battersea and stand with a sign on your chest that says “Africa is not MY problem….” Perhaps on your back you could add a line like “I don’t care that your relatives live in poverty in the Caribbean”
So the Royal Navy’s support and defence of the slave trade in the previous 200 years is over looked then? We just concentrate on the dramatic U-turn as it suits our conscience to do so? I’m afraid the story of this tiny rain soaked island that appears to have not much going for it is dramatically changed by Empire and most importantly slavery. Where do you think we got most of the money from? How do you think a poor medieval state that was scraping around in the mud in the 15th Century, barely having an impact on world history, suddenly became the richest most powerful state on earth? I’m afraid (and it is a very bitter pill to swallow) its because we used our navy and merchant navy to seize resources and in particular people from Africa. We took these people, moved them to where we could use them and then worked them for all their worth and raked in the money.
Its a problem of our creation, a stable Africa is a peaceful africa and therefore (and I am not suggesting we hand over CVF money) helping to repay the centuries of damage we inflicted has to be a role of the UK and other western governments.
pjhydroDoes the UK need to embark the JSF onboard carriers? Do we need such a hi-tec jet afloat?
Yes. I am assuming you would like us to continue winning wars and for our pilots to return home….?
I cannot see the need to have such a potent jet embarked aboard our carriers.
So you want us to operate any old tut? I assume you are intending we have a useable Navy in the next couple of decades? (that would be the point by the way)
Yes we do need a multi-purpose jet embarked onboard the carriers, one that can carry out offensive, defensive and reece roles.
…and that would be an F35B….
If the UK does have to embark in large scale offensive operations far from its shores then its safe to say that it will be in a coalition operation that has a lot of momentum before forces engage, such as the first Gulf War, where jets deployed into theatre many months before offensive operations began. In the future I can see the same thing happening if UK forces were called to deploy and defend an allied Nation (South Korea being one example that springs to mind).
Its safe to say? You know that for an absolute fact? The UK never ever fights alone? Wars take moths of build up? What if the Americans don’t come out to play?…its happened before….and why should the UK not contribute a cutting edge war winning carrier airgroup? Or are we allowed to turn up with second rate kit and expect everyone else to do the proper fighting?
With this in mind would our interest be better served with a lower tech approach to our future Naval Fighter needs. An upgraded and navalised Hawk 200 springs to mind.
Why? why? why? why? Why are people in this country obbsessed with making the UK armed forces “look cute”. Its almost as if we have such an absurd compulsive desire to be the under-dog that we feel having the best kit is some how an unfair advantage and un-british. Why on earth would we build a 65,000 tonne carrier and arm it with Hawks? Why not use them for the whole RAF? because they would be pointless, the RAF uses the Hawk for training and then puts its frontline pilots in Typhoon and Tornado because that is how you win wars. Sending Hawks to fight from a carrier would be a huge waste of time, money and lives.
Can people just except that it is OK for the UK to but the best equipment and it is not underhanded or unsporting to field a weapon that is overwhelmingly superior to our potential foes.
Navalised Hawk 200 indeed, production line closed down over a decade ago as it is which should tell you something…
pjhydroHow will this be a challenge to the hundreds or thousands of 5th generation allied aircraft?
Why does it have to be?
pjhydroLook, i totally agree with you and your facts, you know. For one, i’m very fond of the capabilities of the RN ships, and know these as well as you can know them without being in service on the ships.
But, there are problems too. The fleet would be far more sure with Sea Harriers with AMRAAMs still covering it from above.
The numbers of available ships has drastically gone down, and the SSN force is going to get awfully small.And at the moment, the fleet is in an historical low about readiness for a “true” war: Daring is still in trial and pretty much unarmed.
Just 5 old Type 42 are left in line, and as many as 3 have had their Sea Dart system removed as cost saving measure.
Invincible goes out definitively this year… (hopefully not scrapped but changed in a museum, it would be a crime dismantling Her)
This leaves the fleet actually vulnerable at the trial of truth: there’s not much available for proper air defence right now.
The Type 22 may be retired earlier than planned to save money, and we’ll know this from the SDR. Seriously, it would be the easier cut to save some from the navy’s budget, and they may be tempted to go this way.
Phalanx is definitely NOT on every ship… not even on Daring, yet.Numbers aren’t all, but they matter.
How many Type 42 would be able to sail south for a crisis now…? 2, perhaps 3 at the most.
They could give good cover, but JUST in a certain area.Problems do exist. But i’m sorry if i got the wrong concept out, i know the navy has far better kit than it had back then. And i’m the happier about it. Pretty much every service does… But numbers are a major issue.
Argies have less planes, but the RN has less ships too. That is a worry.
There isn’t going to be a second Falklands war. We are not about to fight Iran (the Israelis, Saudis and the US will beat us to that one), we are certainly not going to fight the Chinese or the Soviets, sorry Russians, anytime this side of hell freezing over so I would suggest we don’t have to sweat, “there will be no war tomorrow” to paraphrase…
Sign In
