Those Aircraft carriers

[Harbinger]

BBC NEWS | UK | Video of new aircraft carriers

So what do we want two hulking great carriers for? we can defend our island from land airstrips cant we? The only use for these will be offensive.

Are we really still playing at being a world power?

[steve fowler]

BBC NEWS | UK | Video of new aircraft carriers

So what do we want two hulking great carriers for? we can defend our island from land airstrips cant we? The only use for these will be offensive.

Are we really still playing at being a world power?

So our main world wide interest's are not important to you then?, and the remaining outposts of our long gone empire who are still under our flag are to be left without any protection should they need or ask for?, plus we should dump our long proud navy and just count on the RAF to protect Britain from future attacks or bad guys on us should we?.

These new carriers are needed as our current carriers are becoming old and out dated.

Plus the fact being they have secured jobs for people for the next few years up and down the UK for now.

[twizzel]

BBC NEWS | UK | Video of new aircraft carriers

So what do we want two hulking great carriers for? we can defend our island from land airstrips cant we? The only use for these will be offensive.

Are we really still playing at being a world power?

King Edgar the peaceful never went to war and nobody went to war against him, he had a very large and well trained army, and a very large and well trained navy. That is why we need a large increase in our military both in p[ersonnel and equipement. These large carriers will also be available for humaitarian work as and when needed. I trust that answers your question.

[twizzel]

BBC NEWS | UK | Video of new aircraft carriers

So what do we want two hulking great carriers for? we can defend our island from land airstrips cant we? The only use for these will be offensive.

Are we really still playing at being a world power?

By the way we are still a world power.

[j622]

So our main world wide interest's are not important to you then?, and the remaining outposts of our long gone empire who are still under our flag are to be left without any protection should they need or ask for?

I was going to make the same point; we still have 14 overseas territories under our sovereignity, including the Falkland Islands. Even if some in this country believe that Britain should leave these places to their own devices, the people living in them certainly don't seem to, and that should count for a lot!

If Britain is to play any role in the future of the world, she needs a strong military. Recent conflicts have shown that it is essential that we maintain our armed forces, and these carriers are necessary. Our current carriers are not only old, but were never entirely fit for purpose.

The new carriers aren't destined only to fulfill an offensive role - history teaches us that such ships played a vital role not only in defending the Falkland Islands but also in securing victory in the second world war (surely no-one is going to argue that was an example of Britain being on the offensive?). However, we should not be afraid to take pre-emptive action if we deem it necessary, and for this to be effective we need a carrier capability.

[Wowbanger TIP]

we had a fascinating discussion on the utility of the Queen Elizabeth class earlier.

http://www.democracyforum.co.uk/brit...vy-merger.html

[steve fowler]

I was going to make the same point; we still have 14 overseas territories under our sovereignity, including the Falkland Islands. Even if some in this country believe that Britain should leave these places to their own devices, the people living in them certainly don't seem to, and that should count for a lot!

If Britain is to play any role in the future of the world, she needs a strong military. Recent conflicts have shown that it is essential that we maintain our armed forces, and these carriers are necessary. Our current carriers are not only old, but were never entirely fit for purpose.

The new carriers aren't destined only to fulfill an offensive role - history teaches us that such ships played a vital role not only in defending the Falkland Islands but also in securing victory in the second world war (surely no-one is going to argue that was an example of Britain being on the offensive?). However, we should not be afraid to take pre-emptive action if we deem it necessary, and for this to be effective we need a carrier capability.

Thanks J622 and welcome to the forum.

[Harbinger]

So our main world wide interest's are not important to you then?, and the remaining outposts of our long gone empire who are still under our flag are to be left without any protection should they need or ask for?, plus we should dump our long proud navy and just count on the RAF to protect Britain from future attacks or bad guys on us should we?.

These new carriers are needed as our current carriers are becoming old and out dated.

Plus the fact being they have secured jobs for people for the next few years up and down the UK for now.

.


The RAF did a pretty good job in 1940.

The Falklands has an airbase in case you hadnt noticed, as does Gibralter, whatever other dependancies there are we dont need.

King Edgar the peaceful never went to war and nobody went to war against him, he had a very large and well trained army, and a very large and well trained navy. That is why we need a large increase in our military both in p[ersonnel and equipement. These large carriers will also be available for humaitarian work as and when needed. I trust that answers your question.

No it doesnt we can protect ourselves with a strong airforce and army. The Navy should be equipped with patrol boats and the occasional detryoer and sub.

These are offensive weapons.

By the way we are still a world power.

Hahahahahahaha

I was going to make the same point; we still have 14 overseas territories under our sovereignity, including the Falkland Islands. Even if some in this country believe that Britain should leave these places to their own devices, the people living in them certainly don't seem to, and that should count for a lot!

If Britain is to play any role in the future of the world, she needs a strong military. Recent conflicts have shown that it is essential that we maintain our armed forces, and these carriers are necessary. Our current carriers are not only old, but were never entirely fit for purpose.

The new carriers aren't destined only to fulfill an offensive role - history teaches us that such ships played a vital role not only in defending the Falkland Islands but also in securing victory in the second world war (surely no-one is going to argue that was an example of Britain being on the offensive?). However, we should not be afraid to take pre-emptive action if we deem it necessary, and for this to be effective we need a carrier capability.

No we dont. We have land bases in the areas we want to protect.

[Hartlepool]

Forget the Carriers,build more Subs and a few Battle fleets.

We will need to protect our own shores in the future,we can do that with a Navy with air support for it and a larger Army.

Lets not forget we now have 61 m people in the UK and none of them more than 75 miles from the coast.

Let our enemies carry out invasions by sea or by dropping a million parachutists,it makes no difference,in either case they will be completely outmanned and surrounded,by us.

Let them try to land on the Yorkshire Moors,the Lake District,Scotland,Wales,Salisbury Plain or the New Forest or even Dartmoor,it makes no difference,they can not progress,and they damned well know it.

We can defend this island and its coast from the Land,Air and Sea against allcomers in the modern day and age,after all,the EU still dont have our Nuclear Deterrent, or our balls either.

Of course you will have the usual surrender monkeys and Communist EU supporters stating reasons why we should not or could not defend this country of ours as usual,but hey,what the hell do they know?

When back to back,shoulder to shoulder,the British will see this next one through,to our benefit.

[Harbinger]

Forget the Carriers,build more Subs and a few Battle fleets.

We will need to protect our own shores in the future,we can do that with a Navy with air support for it and a larger Army.

Lets not forget we now have 61 m people in the UK and none of them more than 75 miles from the coast.

Let our enemies carry out invasions by sea or by dropping a million parachutists,it makes no difference,in either case they will be completely outmanned and surrounded,by us.

Let them try to land on the Yorkshire Moors,the Lake District,Scotland,Wales,Salisbury Plain or the New Forest or even Dartmoor,it makes no difference,they can not progress,and they damned well know it.

We can defend this island and its coast from the Land,Air and Sea against allcomers in the modern day and age,after all,the EU still dont have our Nuclear Deterrent, or our balls either.

Of course you will have the usual surrender monkeys and Communist EU supporters stating reasons why we should not or could not defend this country of ours as usual,but hey,what the hell do they know?

When back to back,shoulder to shoulder,the British will see this next one through,to our benefit.

Yes, more subs, more missiles more Army.

Withdraw from the various shitholes we currently 'police' and shore up the borders.