For the first time ever

MaizieD

^it's easier to claim benefits^

Why do you always have to get a little snidey hate comment in about working people, David?

I doubt they are on benefits from choice. I don't know if you'd noticed the dearth of ship building in the UK and the contraction of the navy by former governments for batshit crazy economic reasons? There isn't exactly an abundance of related jobs around...

So you think it's good that the able bodied should not enroll in the military.

Elegran

If it had sailed unprepared, lives could have been lost - and it could have been ineffective at doing what it was there for.

Plus, given the volatility of Trump's brainwaves, he could have changed his mind the next day and transferred all the fighting to Antarctica or the moon.

It takes six or more weeks to get a ship ready for action but by working long and hard they did it in less than that so good for them!

How was it possible for three other countries to send a ship to Cyprus very quickly?

If it had sailed unprepared, lives could have been lost - and it could have been ineffective at doing what it was there for.

Plus, given the volatility of Trump's brainwaves, he could have changed his mind the next day and transferred all the fighting to Antarctica or the moon.

ronib

Definitely someone failed to make the necessary arrangements to send the one ship we have to Cyprus. Own it.

I presume you must have experience of what is involved in preparing a ship for possible armed action in the middle of a war situation at a moment's notice?

it's easier to claim benefits

Why do you always have to get a little snidey hate comment in about working people, David?

I doubt they are on benefits from choice. I don't know if you'd noticed the dearth of ship building in the UK and the contraction of the navy by former governments for batshit crazy economic reasons? There isn't exactly an abundance of related jobs around...

prestbury, an obvious point is that if construction of aircraft carriers began in 2007, it wasn’t Blair who made that decision, because it takes years between decision and construction?

AGAA4

We once had a navy to be proud of. How sad.

100 yrs ago Britannia really did rule the world, but those days are long gone, delusions of grandeur have long gone, if an island nation cant defend itself it's pretty sad.
The descendants of men that built and manned the ships years ago are now in the dole queues, it's easier to claim benefits

Whitewavemark2

All roads lead back to Osbourne.

Goes back a lot longer than that with the pontification of the Blair government over many years. Construction of the Elizabeth class aircraft carriers started in 2007 and they still are white elephants which spend more time in dry dock than they do at sea.

Of the type 45 destroyers (6 in total) only two are available at short notice, HMS Duncan, currently parading around the North Sea and Irish Sea. This could not be sent to the Gulf because it does not like warm weather. And of course HMS Dragon which was in dock for a minor refit with contract staff on a 9 til 5 working day courtesy of a new contract signed by the Labour government last May.

The Type 45 destroyers have had many propulsion problems since the first one launched in 2006 resulting in extensive refurbishments with four still in dry dock. HMS Daring, the first one of this type has been in dock for 9 years. It did not take this long to build originally.

Definitely someone failed to make the necessary arrangements to send the one ship we have to Cyprus. Own it.

ronib

Well now we know that under Starmer, the first line of defence for Cyprus comes from Italy, France and Germany. Let’s not pretend.

When did Trump start his second term in office, and begin to demonstrate that his policies included risking WWIII and destabilising the world? A year ago, or not much more.

When did Trump (the leader of our "special ally") inform the UK that he planned to invade Iran and risk starting WW III ? Never.

How long has Starmer had to build, equip, man and prepare the number of ships, aircraft, supplies and crews that are needed to defend British interests ? When did he first have the authority to do all this? Less than eighteen months ago. Would that time have been long enough? Would he have had support for spending the amount of money from taxpayers that would have needed?

How long did Starmer's predecessors have to run down the countries defences during their terms in office to the point they are now at? To build or buy the ships, the planes, the software, the supplies, to recruit and maintain the manpower in each of the forces? Many years.

But of course, in the eyes of those whose memories are short, it must be all Starmer's fault.

We once had a navy to be proud of. How sad.

knspol

*Monica*. Absolutely agree re readiness of navy and ships. Highlights what a poor state our defences are in. For too long we have relied on the US to rush to our aid defence wise and this is no longer the case. As a country we must build up our armed forces and equipment.

Top Royal Navy personnel have been alarmed at the parlous state of the Royal Navy for years. The RN has been starved of cash.

Now everyone knows why they were worried.

All roads lead back to Osbourne.

Oreo

M0nica

Casdon

It would be much easier to have our war fleet ready for service immediately if we had more of them. Have you actually looked at the size of the UK fleet, and seen how many of the ships are in refit or not currently in service?

That is what is so appalling, whether the fault lies with the navy or the government, doesn't matter, either way it is a dereliction of duty and the failure of governments of all persuasions to look to our defences that have reduced this country to its knees where it is incapable of defending itself or anywhere else.

👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

whether the fault lies with the navy or the government, doesn't matter, either way it is a dereliction of duty

Of course the fault doesn't lie with the Royal Navy!

It is due to Government cuts, outsourcing much of the maintenance to private companies through Government contracts etc.

There is also a recruitment problem of course, and that is reflected in the Armed Forces in general.

Monica. Absolutely agree re readiness of navy and ships. Highlights what a poor state our defences are in. For too long we have relied on the US to rush to our aid defence wise and this is no longer the case. As a country we must build up our armed forces and equipment.

Casdon

It would be much easier to have our war fleet ready for service immediately if we had more of them. Have you actually looked at the size of the UK fleet, and seen how many of the ships are in refit or not currently in service?

I am made aware of this frequently chez nous.
This has been happening over the years but very rapidly since 2010.

Former Head of the Royal Navy, Admiral Lord West, said:
'The bottom line is the Navy's in a more parlous state than at any stage in the 60 years I've been on the active list'.

'It's too small, it's not been looked after properly, there's been insufficient (funds) spent on it, and I'm afraid it doesn't deliver what the nation needs.'

It is an embarrassment.

M0nica

Casdon

It would be much easier to have our war fleet ready for service immediately if we had more of them. Have you actually looked at the size of the UK fleet, and seen how many of the ships are in refit or not currently in service?

That is what is so appalling, whether the fault lies with the navy or the government, doesn't matter, either way it is a dereliction of duty and the failure of governments of all persuasions to look to our defences that have reduced this country to its knees where it is incapable of defending itself or anywhere else.

👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

MOnica to blame Starmer for the state of our navy when he has been PM for less than two years is very unfair. The Tories ran out defence down through underfunding for years and now when we need it it isn't there.
The media going after Starmer for this is totally wrong as Labour has listened and is trying to improve our defence.
The MAGA media as it has been called will do their best to undermine this country.
I did not vote Labour and was a Tory supporter years ago.

M0nica

ronib

Well now we know that under Starmer, the first line of defence for Cyprus comes from Italy, France and Germany. Let’s not pretend.

Totally agree with you. And yard workers only working 9.00 - to 5.00.

I can remember both the Suez crisis. My father was in the army in what is now the Royal Logistics Corps. The depot he commanded was staffed mainly by civilian workers and they were working all hours, my father with them to get all the stores needed ready and away asap.

As for the navy. The ship should have been ready and waiting, reuiring less than 24 hours to sail. It is not as if we were living in an absolutely peaceful world and the US attacks were totally unexpected. In turbulent times like the moment all our armed services should have been given instructions to make ssure they were ready to deploy within 24 hours. Why else do we have armed forces, if they need weeks to get ready if anything happens?

Yes - they are supposed to be ready at all times, otherwise there isn’t a lot of point in having them. In a way Trump had a point because we were and probably still are relying on the USA far too much.

Casdon

It would be much easier to have our war fleet ready for service immediately if we had more of them. Have you actually looked at the size of the UK fleet, and seen how many of the ships are in refit or not currently in service?

As far as I can work out, we have 1 destroyer, 1 rescue ship, a couple of white elephants in the form of aircraft carriers and a submarine.

Have no idea what we ideally need, but it does seem a tad lacking.

Casdon

It would be much easier to have our war fleet ready for service immediately if we had more of them. Have you actually looked at the size of the UK fleet, and seen how many of the ships are in refit or not currently in service?

That is what is so appalling, whether the fault lies with the navy or the government, doesn't matter, either way it is a dereliction of duty and the failure of governments of all persuasions to look to our defences that have reduced this country to its knees where it is incapable of defending itself or anywhere else.

I supported Starmers policies and thought he would make a good PM but that was 2 yrs ago.
In the event the GE gave him a massive majority that he can't control, so he is forced into unpopular compromise, making him look weak. Currently being able to retain a majority at the next GE looks very uncertain, assuming he survives that long.

It would be much easier to have our war fleet ready for service immediately if we had more of them. Have you actually looked at the size of the UK fleet, and seen how many of the ships are in refit or not currently in service?

ronib

Well now we know that under Starmer, the first line of defence for Cyprus comes from Italy, France and Germany. Let’s not pretend.

Totally agree with you. And yard workers only working 9.00 - to 5.00.

I can remember both the Suez crisis. My father was in the army in what is now the Royal Logistics Corps. The depot he commanded was staffed mainly by civilian workers and they were working all hours, my father with them to get all the stores needed ready and away asap.

As for the navy. The ship should have been ready and waiting, reuiring less than 24 hours to sail. It is not as if we were living in an absolutely peaceful world and the US attacks were totally unexpected. In turbulent times like the moment all our armed services should have been given instructions to make ssure they were ready to deploy within 24 hours. Why else do we have armed forces, if they need weeks to get ready if anything happens?