Turn on thread page Beta

UK defense chief could restructure entire army over ‘state threat' watch

    • Community Assistant
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Now say what you will about RT as a source [personally i dont mind it although you do have to be able to sift through the bias] but this is an interesting article for several reasons; not least of all it highlights just how dead the dream of the 90's is. We've gone from an era of near conflict with Russia/USSR to being relatively friendly i.e. the 90's/early 2000's and indeed before 2012 under Obamas quaintly named reset 'overload' but now it seems despite all the other threats in this deeply unfriendly world we are talking ourselves into another needless confrontation.
    Our main gripe with the USSR, aside from their land grabbing, was that they were the ideological enemy of us however now Russia is a capitalist state, for better or worse, they have actively aided the western alliance for years in Afghanistan and Iraq [to varying degrees] yet for some reason our dear leaders insist on starting a fight where one need not exist.
    I also feel obliged to point out that the usual arguments of it being illiberal, totalitarian etc. arent really the best in this instance seeing as our other allies are orders of magnitude worse in every regard.
    Instead of talking up war with a country that could literally wipe us off the map we could at least try a cold peace with them imo.



    Terrorists have taken lives on the streets of London and blown up children’s concerts in Manchester – but Britain’s chief of defense thinks the UK should focus on other “threats.”
    The governmental obsession with Russia took a new, giant leap this week when the hapless head of Britain’s three military arms outlined what he – as a former businessman – has decided is the biggest threat to UK security.
    Naturally, it’s Russia.
    The same Russia which has seen bombings and attacks on public transport by the same enemy Britain is facing.
    Williamson’s declaration could spark a significant shift in security policy which will focus on the Kremlin over proven killers.

    The secretary put Moscow in the same boat as Pyongyang, North Korea – equating unfounded fears over Russia with a nation which has genuinely threatened, almost weekly, to unleash nuclear war.
    “We would highlight state-based threats as the top priority and . . . the speed with which they are escalating. But within a hair[‘s breadth] it is followed by the terrorism threat,” he told the Defence Select Committee. “We have probably all got to look at how we have got to invest more to deal with this threat that we have not had to deal with for the last 25 years.”
    Mark Francois, a Conservative member of the select committee and a former defence minister, spotted the staggering change and questioned Williamson on his willingness to change the focus of the military. He said the move puts the forces at readiness for war.
    “Yes it does,” Williamson replied.

    The cabinet chief said Britain had been “caught napping” and insisted state-on-state conflict is something the military must invest in.
    The latest pang of paranoia from Williamson, who was catapulted into limelight from the shadows of the chief whip’s office, follows on from ramblings on Russia in January, when he bizarrely claimed it would take out deep-sea communications cables.
    Apparently viewing Moscow as a self-mutilating monster, Williamson decided the order would be given to cut Britain’s electricity interconnectors to Europe, damaging international relations irrevocably.
    Now, as part of a defense review, former potter Williamson is focusing hard on state-led threat. But he has at least backed up his notions.
    Due to the Russians’ presence in the Mediterranean region and the Kremlin’s “increased assertiveness,” it is time Britain gets stronger, he said.
    This comes just a week after Britain ordered ships to pass the disputed South China Sea, much closer to the Chinese coast than the white cliffs of Dover. In a move which naturally caused international tensions.


    The government appears to be bringing back the Rule Britannia mentality, but God forbid another nation should bolster its own international security arrangements. That, according to Williamson, is almost an outright declaration of war.
    Williamson has been playing soldier since he took the office with zero military knowledge and is starting to turn things around.
    “But then you are seeing new nations that are starting to play a greater role in the world, such as China. You are seeing the challenges that we face in terms of North Korea,” he told the committee.
    “If you do not respond to these threats you are leaving our country a lot less safe than it should be.”
    Interestingly there is another nation doing exactly the same. The USA.
    Washington has been directly threatened by North Korea and has listed state tensions as being a priority – naturally.
    Williamson’s hawkish rhetoric comes coincidently at a time when the military must plug an estimated £30 billion (US$41.7 billion) funding gap.
    There are currently plans to scrap marines, warships and postpone war tech projects to save the cash – although the Ministry of Defence (MoD) isn’t exactly admitting it.
    An internal defense review, born from outraged calls for one from the Whitehall-wide review of security capability, will consider the future shape and size of the navy, army, air force and Joint Forces Command. Most of whose manpower is dropping to record lows.






    https://www.rt.com/uk/419533-russia-war-britain-army/
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    UK-Russia relations have been frosty ever since one dude named Litvinenko died on British soil of suspected radioactive poisoning...
    I don't think they will improve even if Corbyn gets into power, Russia is so far away from the left of politics atm
    • Community Assistant
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by shawn_o1)
    UK-Russia relations have been frosty ever since one dude named Litvinenko died on British soil of suspected radioactive poisoning...
    I don't think they will improve even if Corbyn gets into power, Russia is so far away from the left of politics atm
    Mmm that wasnt the best move the Russian's have ever made. But not so much suspected as proven to be from Polonium.

    No i believe he would encounter the same trouble trump has that of government inertia - that is even if he wanted to. As you said Russia isnt especially left wing. Although with that being said I wouldnt call it right wing either - its a weird blending of the both but is more nationalistic than anything.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Napp)
    Now say what you will about RT as a source [personally i dont mind it although you do have to be able to sift through the bias] but this is an interesting article for several reasons; not least of all it highlights just how dead the dream of the 90's is. We've gone from an era of near conflict with Russia/USSR to being relatively friendly i.e. the 90's/early 2000's and indeed before 2012 under Obamas quaintly named reset 'overload' but now it seems despite all the other threats in this deeply unfriendly world we are talking ourselves into another needless confrontation.
    Our main gripe with the USSR, aside from their land grabbing, was that they were the ideological enemy of us however now Russia is a capitalist state, for better or worse, they have actively aided the western alliance for years in Afghanistan and Iraq [to varying degrees] yet for some reason our dear leaders insist on starting a fight where one need not exist.
    I also feel obliged to point out that the usual arguments of it being illiberal, totalitarian etc. arent really the best in this instance seeing as our other allies are orders of magnitude worse in every regard.
    Instead of talking up war with a country that could literally wipe us off the map we could at least try a cold peace with them imo.

    https://www.rt.com/uk/419533-russia-war-britain-army/
    Williamson is correct (i rather like him i must admit, he's said a number of other things i also agree with).

    Although we should try to avoid escalating to conflict i do believe that Russia and ISIS like groups are currently our largest threats. Especially threats to our interests rather than ourselves.
    • Community Assistant
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    Williamson is correct (i rather like him i must admit, he's said a number of other things i also agree with).

    Although we should try to avoid escalating to conflict i do believe that Russia and ISIS like groups are currently our largest threats. Especially threats to our interests rather than ourselves.
    I would personally posit that if these bone idle ministers decided to put country before party they might find we have more in common with the Russians than they think. After all their so called 'energy weapon' can be used for good as well as ill - a case in point would be Belarus whom receive preferential rates on their gas. Instead Europe lead by the Hawks in Westminster, Vilnius, Warsaw and Tallinn seem intent on sacrificing European peace and economic prosperity [i refer specifically to buying American LPG here]. Its a pity in my view is all.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Russia is being ruled by relics of the Cold War, Putin and much of the Kremlin used to be KGB Intelligence Officers, he doesn’t really want peace with the West he seeks to destabilise and minimise it’s influence at every opportunity although he is isn’t suicidal and doesn’t want an all out war either.
    • Community Assistant
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by Shabalala)
    Russia is being ruled by relics of the Cold War, Putin and much of the Kremlin used to be KGB Intelligence Officers, he doesn’t really want peace with the West he seeks to destabilise and minimise it’s influence at every opportunity although he is isn’t suicidal and doesn’t want an all out war either.
    Might I ask what makes you think that?
    I mean with regards to ideology they're a capitalist country - *** - kleptocracy
    For Syria it can be argued this is not so much an attack on the west as a signal russia needs to be respected for its interests and role in the world (something I personally don't find too outrageous)
    With Ukraine though I must say I do sympathise with Russia - whether people like it or not Ukraine was/is an integral factor in Russian security planning and due to NATO/eu **** ups this was infringed upon (thing russia staging a coup in Mexico or Belgium) at any rate whilst their actions might be objectionable I find it hard to fault them without being labelled a hypocrite.
    If any country is guilty of Cold War-esque behaviour it is America with its toppling of regimes to try and bend to its will, which ironically enough has backfired completely. The only winner in the Middle East has been Iran and Russia and with china now in a position to tell America to **** off it seems to me Pax Americana is well on the way out
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Napp)
    I would personally posit that if these bone idle ministers decided to put country before party they might find we have more in common with the Russians than they think. After all their so called 'energy weapon' can be used for good as well as ill - a case in point would be Belarus whom receive preferential rates on their gas. Instead Europe lead by the Hawks in Westminster, Vilnius, Warsaw and Tallinn seem intent on sacrificing European peace and economic prosperity [i refer specifically to buying American LPG here]. Its a pity in my view is all.
    Although i see your point our interests here are too opposed for such an approach. Although minor effort to involve Russia in Europe was made pre-Putin the Russia of today wants its own customs union with the surrounding states which means preferential treatment for Russia and not Europe from them short of a large all encompassing deal (not possible while we share a border and both seek at least economic if not territorial expansion).

    (Original post by Napp)
    Might I ask what makes you think that?
    I mean with regards to ideology they're a capitalist country - *** - kleptocracy
    For Syria it can be argued this is not so much an attack on the west as a signal russia needs to be respected for its interests and role in the world (something I personally don't find too outrageous)
    With Ukraine though I must say I do sympathise with Russia - whether people like it or not Ukraine was/is an integral factor in Russian security planning and due to NATO/eu **** ups this was infringed upon (thing russia staging a coup in Mexico or Belgium) at any rate whilst their actions might be objectionable I find it hard to fault them without being labelled a hypocrite.
    If any country is guilty of Cold War-esque behaviour it is America with its toppling of regimes to try and bend to its will, which ironically enough has backfired completely. The only winner in the Middle East has been Iran and Russia and with china now in a position to tell America to **** off it seems to me Pax Americana is well on the way out
    With regards to Syria and Ukraine i won't debate the right and wrong because we won't agree but your position is naive.

    Whether or not you agree with Russian action in Syria and Ukraine it is a sad fact of life that for now, both are against our interests. We don't want Russia getting a foothold in the Middle East and we don't want the expansion of free trade and democratic accountability limited, hence we want Ukraine in the European market and not Russia's.
    • Community Assistant
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    [QUOTE=Rakas21;76273478]Although i see your point our interests here are too opposed for such an approach. Although minor effort to involve Russia in Europe was made pre-Putin the Russia of today wants its own customs union with the surrounding states which means preferential treatment for Russia and not Europe from them short of a large all encompassing deal (not possible while we share a border and both seek at least economic if not territorial expansion).


    With regards to Syria and Ukraine i won't debate the right and wrong because we won't agree but your position is naive.
    Is it indeed :rolleyes:
    Whether or not you agree with Russian action in Syria and Ukraine it is a sad fact of life that for now, both are against our interests. We don't want Russia getting a foothold in the Middle East and we don't want the expansion of free trade and democratic accountability limited, hence we want Ukraine in the European market and not Russia's.
    So you want an undemocratic, unaccountable and frankly backwards country to try and join Europe simply because you can thus give the finger to the Russians? Thats not puerile at all :rolleyes:
    Alas it boils down quite simply really, the Russians have reasserted themselves as the de facto guarantor in the middle east now and it is fairly irrelevant what the British want from them as we dont have a say on the matter. No peace deal is going to be made anywhere without them and that goes for in Europe to now. As an example the Israelis seem to be shifting their attention to Moscow and not Washington, in 2017 alone Bibi met with Putin far more than he did with the Americans.

    Like it or not people with your nativist policies have not angered the Russians to such a point that they have lashed out and alas it is dubious it can be wound back now - suffice it to say all your ideas have accomplished is strengthening the sino-russian partnership and empowering every tin pot dictator across the world.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
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, 2018
The home of Results and Clearing

1,053

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
Do you want your parents to be with you when you collect your A-level results?
Useful resources

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.