Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

S10 - Retaliative action against Daesh watch

    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    "The attacks will focus on the 4 main Daesh controlled cities and the surrounding area; Kobani, Hasakah, Deir ez-Zor, and Raqqa"

    There are innocents and children living in those cities, so the pacifists would freak out. But more importantly, there would be way too much collateral.

    The only thing that I can say is that I'd rather see boots on the ground and a more detailed plan, involving more than just the RAF.
    It will be a boots on the ground operation, not just the RAF.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JoeL1994)
    It will be a boots on the ground operation, not just the RAF.
    I was just saying that the most detail was needed, stationing ground troops in Iraq isn't really the same as utilising them.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    And then we have a whole load of people all around the world pissed off at us for nuking a load of kids, remove one problem by creating 12 more
    I don't care. And for the record until Daesh started killing our people i would of said keep out of it and leave Russia to destroy them ( they are doing a great job)
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheHelpfulMan)
    I don't care. And for the record until Daesh started killing our people i would of said keep out of it and leave Russia to destroy them ( they are doing a great job)
    My point was that by using your proposed means of defeating daesh, you'd end up risking british lives even more.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Aph You have stated you do not know a lot about defence equipment so I have put it in pictures to make it easier for you, and others who do not know the vehicles. This statement cannot work because Britain does not have the military capability to launch an invasion; the equipment is on order, is being designed, or is not being ordered. To add to the picture below, there are 254 tanks, and 444 tracked personnel carriers from the 1980s which are now being left for ruin in storage, or sold, but if they were used, their slow speed, and inefficient fuel consumption, and limited transport capability make them unsuitable for full-scale invasions. Your departmental review did not address the big concerns facing the military, creating a situation where the government is demanding he impossible from the military.

    The source for the numbers is a military review from August 2015, the report shows the inability of Britain to have boots on the ground after leaving lots of equipment behind in Afghanistan.

    Mastiff vehicle: 39 vehicles in inventory.


    Warthog, and Viking: 11 in inventory

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    Aph You have stated you do not know a lot about defence equipment so I have put it in pictures to make it easier for you, and others who do not know the vehicles. This statement cannot work because Britain does not have the military capability to launch an invasion; the equipment is on order, is being designed, or is not being ordered. To add to the picture below, there are 254 tanks, and 444 tracked personnel carriers from the 1980s which are now being left for ruin in storage, or sold, but if they were used, their slow speed, and inefficient fuel consumption, and limited transport capability make them unsuitable for full-scale invasions. Your departmental review did not address the big concerns facing the military, creating a situation where the government is demanding he impossible from the military.

    Mastiff vehicle: 39 vehicles in inventory.


    Warthog, and Viking: 11 in inventory

    Wow, Is that seriously our most modern tank ?, Created in the 80's, technology has improved and we decide to remain stagnant
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheHelpfulMan)
    Wow, Is that seriously our most modern tank ?, Created in the 80's, technology has improved and we decide to remain stagnant
    That is Britain for you, there have been countless years of underinvestment in defence to give decent numbers of old vehicles, few modern vehicles, ships with missing weapons, more planes that cannot fly than fly, and helicopters being used for spares.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    That is Britain for you, there have been countless years of underinvestment in defence to give decent numbers of old vehicles, few modern vehicles, ships with missing weapons, more planes that cannot fly than fly, and helicopters being used for spares.
    Great Logic I applaud whoever thought that was a good idea.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheHelpfulMan)
    Great Logic I applaud whoever thought that was a good idea.
    It is not a lie, out of all of the Tornado aircraft Britain has, only eight are immediately available, and out of the Typhoons only 40 are immediately available. Britain is struggling to keep up its current operations in the Middle East, this plan to send more aircraft is not possible with the numbers available.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    It is not a lie, out of all of the Tornado aircraft Britain has, only eight are immediately available, and out of the Typhoons only 40 are immediately available. Britain is struggling to keep up its current operations in the Middle East, this plan to send more aircraft is not possible with the numbers available.
    I never said it was a lie, all i was doing was using sarcasm towards the utter stupidity of the decision making on this issue
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheHelpfulMan)
    I never said it was a lie, all i was doing was using sarcasm towards the utter stupidity of the decision making on this issue
    I thought that, I wanted to get the source out there to show people living in denial how bad the situation is.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by TheHelpfulMan)
    Wow, Is that seriously our most modern tank ?, Created in the 80's, technology has improved and we decide to remain stagnant
    What must be remembered is that most military technology had not advanced in a meaningful way since then, as such upgrades to the platform are generally far more economical. Most assault rifles today are merely small changes to designs from the 50s and 60s; the leopard 2 was designed in the 70s and as a base platform is very good , there are now at least 11 distinct variants of it, and that's before considering the chassis being used for bridge laying and the likes. Conventional military technology stagnated long ago.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    What must be remembered is that most military technology had not advanced in a meaningful way since then, as such upgrades to the platform are generally far more economical. Most assault rifles today are merely small changes to designs from the 50s and 60s; the leopard 2 was designed in the 70s and as a base platform is very good , there are now at least 11 distinct variants of it, and that's before considering the chassis being used for bridge laying and the likes. Conventional military technology stagnated long ago.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Stagnation is not inevitable, the investment has been made in other areas of the military to give a new generation of stealth fighters, the navy to produce better submarines, smart missiles, and other projects like lasers, and rail guns. If the investment was made in designing a new tank there would potentially be self-repairing materials, materials invisible to UV imaging, more powerful weapons, and general improvements in protection, fuel efficiency, manoeuvrability, top speed, and fire control systems.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    What must be remembered is that most military technology had not advanced in a meaningful way since then, as such upgrades to the platform are generally far more economical. Most assault rifles today are merely small changes to designs from the 50s and 60s; the leopard 2 was designed in the 70s and as a base platform is very good , there are now at least 11 distinct variants of it, and that's before considering the chassis being used for bridge laying and the likes. Conventional military technology stagnated long ago.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I'm not sure if I believe that. There probably is better models which have had specifications designed for, but are not public knowledge .
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    Stagnation is not inevitable, the investment has been made in other areas of the military to give a new generation of stealth fighters, the navy to produce better submarines, smart missiles, and other projects like lasers, and rail guns. If the investment was made in designing a new tank there would potentially be self-repairing materials, materials invisible to UV imaging, more powerful weapons, and general improvements in protection, fuel efficiency, manoeuvrability, top speed, and fire control systems.
    I would regard the new innovations to be in different areas, I would say most land tech has stagnated and will remain largely stagnant for some time with a massive revolution coming in the future , for instance when rail guns and the likes become practical for platforms other than fixed emplacements and warships. The innovation in the areas you listed are small and offering diminishing returns, hence why so much investment is going elsewhere now. Major military innovation comes in short sharp bursts.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    It is not a lie, out of all of the Tornado aircraft Britain has, only eight are immediately available, and out of the Typhoons only 40 are immediately available. Britain is struggling to keep up its current operations in the Middle East, this plan to send more aircraft is not possible with the numbers available.
    I remember hearing this. A shocking state of affairs.

    There is very little we can do as the Rt Hon MP Nigel Farage has stated. Considering the timeline between having operational carrier-capacity aircraft it might be better just to maintain current operations without further escalation. Alternatively we could use one of the best assets we have with greater intensity: The SAS- A terrorist's worst nightmare. However getting the SAS into hostile territory and getting them out requires decent-level equipment. We all know what happens when you send great men with faulty machine into a situation- you end up with another Bravo Two Zero.

    Best regards
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    This is in cessation.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    The Prime Minister (Saracen's Fez) has requested this SOI be sent to vote.
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: February 24, 2016
Poll
Are you going to a festival?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.