| Welcome to The Arab League, one of the longest established Dundee United Football forums, with many members from the old ArabFC forum. New members are always welcomed, so to join the debate, just sign up - registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join The Arab League! If you're already a member please log in: |
| Defence Cuts | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Oct 20 2010, 08:32 AM (3,658 Views) | |
| Conan the Destroyer | Oct 20 2010, 08:32 AM Post #1 |
![]()
I prefer it when we're pish
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I love to see warplanes axed and RAF bases closed. I do feel sympathy for the thousands of punters for whom the game is up, but they are merely cloud underneath an extremely silver lining. If it were up to me I'd shut the f*cking lot of them with immediate effect. Maybe keep one plane and a couple of helicopters to help with search and rescue. Funnily, I haven't heard this opinion from a single politician, commentator or even vox-pop covering this universally accepted bad news story. |
![]() |
|
| Setenza | Oct 20 2010, 09:24 AM Post #2 |
|
Knitting with only one needle
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I'm sure it'll be tough for the communities, but they can't use that as a reason not to cut, or they could have the worst run place around or be obelete, but it can't be shut as it'd be too negative for the area. |
![]() |
|
| Cobardon | Oct 20 2010, 09:53 AM Post #3 |
|
Uncle Smurf
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Is it worth it: a new winter coat for the wife and a bicycle on the boy's birthday? No, of course it isn't, you're quite right Conan. In an era where climate change is likely to cost our economy billions we should be throwing resources and manpower at combatting it and making sure we are food self-sufficient as a country, but the will would need to be there and it isn't of course, because most people don't think there's even a problem. We could be diving for pearls... |
![]() |
|
| Setenza | Oct 20 2010, 10:09 AM Post #4 |
|
Knitting with only one needle
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I would have thought the opposite. If we're going to be expecting rough weather ahead, then getting food from as many sources as possible would seem more sensible. We don't want a extreme summer to disrupt all our local food supply and then be screwed as we don't have any good importing. |
![]() |
|
| Conan the Destroyer | Oct 20 2010, 10:24 AM Post #5 |
![]()
I prefer it when we're pish
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You're right! Let's keep these planes and invade France! |
![]() |
|
| Setenza | Oct 20 2010, 10:35 AM Post #6 |
|
Knitting with only one needle
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Like you need planes to invade France. We can have the best of both worlds. Scrap the milatry, and still win a war with them, steal their grapes and onions, and we're sorted. |
![]() |
|
| Cobardon | Oct 20 2010, 11:58 AM Post #7 |
|
Uncle Smurf
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Oh, and when the oil runs out...? |
![]() |
|
| Setenza | Oct 20 2010, 12:03 PM Post #8 |
|
Knitting with only one needle
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
For what? |
![]() |
|
| Naebody | Oct 20 2010, 12:31 PM Post #9 |
|
Twat
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I've often wondered what would happen if we didn't have a military. Costa Rica, famously, doesn't have one, and Panama wound down its army 20 years ago. Both countries have been more stable since, relatively speaking, and the moves certainly helped stabilise South America. However, it should be remembered that in both cases, the demilitarisation was aimed at neutralising a junta after civil war. It's difficult to argue that Britain's risk of military revolution outstrips the risk to sovereignty. Brazil perhaps sets the better example. It retains a military but keeps spending relatively low and has refused to go nuclear, preferring diplomacy to antagonism. Brazil (the world's eighth-largest economy and its #9 oil producer, mind) spends about $59 per citizen per year on defence, compared with a worldwide average of $311. Britain (the world's sixth-largest economy and #20 oil producer) and spends $530. But how does this spend compare with our enemies? Well, North Korea spends $235 per capita on defence, assuming you want to believe their data. Iran's on $59, Syria's $51 and Libya's $250. As for the rising powers, China says it spends $50 per capita, while India's spend is only $13 each. In conclusion, based on the worldwide averages, the UK government appears to have a rather inflated view of your worth as citizens. |
![]() |
|
| Conan the Destroyer | Oct 20 2010, 01:29 PM Post #10 |
![]()
I prefer it when we're pish
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I can imagine what would happen without a military. More than likely nothing bad at all. Yes, it's not impossible that some big baddie would come and try and invade us and the world would stand back and do nothing, but I'm prepared to gamble for peace. Who's with me? |
![]() |
|
| whatsthatonyourback | Oct 20 2010, 01:46 PM Post #11 |
|
Waldo Jeffers
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I think for these figures to make sense they need to be expressed as a proportion of average wages or GNP per head of population. $59 per head in Iran may be more than the UK $per head if the average Iranian earns $100 per month. |
![]() |
|
| Naebody | Oct 20 2010, 01:54 PM Post #12 |
|
Twat
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Whether you're Iran or Britain, the cost of a missile from BAE Systems is the same in dollar terms. And the number of people it can kill is the same. Of course Iran is spending a larger proportion of GDP on its military, but each dollar defends a proportionately larger number of people. Why should it matter what those people earn? The equation is deliberately simple: How much does it cost to protect one person's life and liberty? If you're British, it's bloody expensive. If you're Brazillian, it's not. |
![]() |
|
| whatsthatonyourback | Oct 20 2010, 03:29 PM Post #13 |
|
Waldo Jeffers
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The equation you're presenting may be deliberately simple. I'm just not sure it's the right equation to use, whatever the cost of a BAE Systems missile. If a country with $100m GNP spends $50m on defence while another country with the same population and $1,000m GNP spends $100m on defence, the latter may be spending more in absolute terms, but clearly the first is spending more relative to the wealth of that country, and defence would therefore seem much more important to it. I'd say that is a much more meaningful and useful way of looking at it. If you look at it with your equation, rich countries will always have a higher "cost to protect one person's life and liberty". But then, the cost of most things is higher for people in rich countries. But they're rich, they can afford it. |
![]() |
|
| Clarkie | Oct 20 2010, 04:38 PM Post #14 |
|
Mac an t-stronaich
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Most of the expense in the MOD budget is wages so maybe we should outsource our defence to a country with cheaper wages like India. Then if we get attacked we can phone up a call centre in Bangalore and they will send the Rajput Rifles round to help us out. |
![]() |
|
| Conan the Destroyer | Oct 20 2010, 04:58 PM Post #15 |
![]()
I prefer it when we're pish
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Ignoring the slightly Daily Mail sentiments of this message, that can't be true. How much does a squaddie cost? £15k a year or something? And how much does a jet fighter or an aircraft carrier or a nuclear missile cost? |
![]() |
|
|
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Off Topic · Next Topic » |






![]](http://z5.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)




4:36 PM Jul 13