"Claims that Israel is mounting a zoological assault outside its borders are not without precedent."
backwards & superstitious peasants springs to mind.
32 posts • joined 15 Nov 2007
1. Will you attempt to maintain Britain as a Great Power (ref: RUSI - A Force For Honour)?
2. How will you maintain Britain as a Great Power (ref: RUSI - A Force For Honour)?
3. Are you willing to cough up the requisite beads to fund that strategic ambition?
Britain should follow the Strategic Raiding doctrine as outlined by RUSI.
"Eastwood told the BBC that the incident left him feeling humiliated and "like a second-class citizen".
He should feel like a first class pillock for being stupid enough to sign-up for an ID card.
I am glad he feels humiliated, he should. When the cattle rolls up for him he will no doubt climb onto it himself sporting a gay little smile on his face, with nary a concern for where destiny may take him!
Kongrats to Gnome, it's about time they sorted this out and it looks like they finally have.
KDE4 has been painful, but by the time KDE 4.3 arrives in summer 09 I think its fair to say that the KDE4 dream will finally have arrived too, 18 months after the initial release.
Given the inherently evolutionary nature of Gnome I am going to be generous in my prediction and say that it may take only 6 months to fully realise the dream of Gnome3, in which case the Q4 releases of Ubuntu and Fedora in 2010 using Gnome 3.2 will be very interesting products.
KDE has a huge headstart (and will retain a greater benefit from the greater leap IMO), but Gnome will close the gap (between concept and delivery) quicker with the result that the transition is less painful from the publicity and marketing POV.
Good luck, I am a confirmed KDE fanboi but i'm all for good competition, and Gnome will need v3 to provide that.
i have owned one of these for about four months now.
i bought it because it was the smallest physical shall that contained a 10" screen, as this is what matters to me in a netbook above all else; diminutive size.
i can recommend it to all except netbook gamers who might find the vertical screen resolution of 576 pixels an impediment.
operation flashpoint from GoG works great tho.
"The BNP is not a political party, they are a bunch of racist, sexist, anti gay, holocaust deniers, they would be illegal in some countries (Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Israel, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Poland, Portugal, Romania, and Switzerland)."
but this isn't Austria, and it isn't illegal to do/be any of those things, and the BNP is a legal political party.
thate fact that you don't like their 'politics' does not give them less legal rights than you enjoy to express your more mainstream views.
"Defence Secretary Des Browne said: "This CSR means an additional £7.7bn for Defence by 2011 - the longest period of sustained real growth in planned defence spending since the 1980s"
A one and a half percent increase when defence inflation is running at closer to eight percent, at a time when the armed forces are on a war footing with consequent high equipment wear, whilst UOR equipment purchase is in part being clawed back from the defence budget rather than the supplementary operations budget.
All of this after we sunk below the 2.5% of GDP post cold-war Defence spending threshold (now at ~2.1%), and as a consequence failed to fund the Strategic Defence Review of 1998 which was the definition of our Defence priorities and requirements, the result of which has been nearly 15 years of underfunding.
There. Has. Been. No. Substantial. Budget. Increase.
The fact that you use Des Browne as the source to refute Gov't under investment in the Armed Forces is laughable.
but i sense the distinctive style of Lewis Page, and once again you are essentially wrong.
There has been no substantial budget increase.
Defence spending is falling as a proportion of total Government spending.
Defence inflation is rising much faster than increases in Defence spending.
The Armed Forces ARE paying for operational costs.
Equipment is wearing out much faster than planned due to constant operations.
The Armed Forces are on top of all this suffering from 15 years of underinvestment.
If the MOD can find a way to ditch tranche 3 of Eurofighter without paying nearly as much in penalties then all to the good, perhaps the saudi sale is how they will achieve this.
The Navy needs to order at least eight Astute subs in order to maintain a healthy sub industry that will be able to provide a Vanguard replacement.
The Navy needs eight T45 AAW destroyers.
The Navy needs eight larger ASW destroyers to replace the T23 frigates.
The Navy needs eight Global Cruisers able to act independently of the now non-existant flotillas on global duties.
The Navy needs eight small multirole warships otherwise defined as C3.
A few years back we asked ourselves what we wanted the Armed Forces to do, it was called the Strategic Defence Review and all told it was a pretty thorough and well thought out document.
The next logical step was to direct the Treasury to provide the money necessary to achieve the vision................... and this is where things fell down.
Yes, Defence inflation is much higher than the standard variety, yes there has traditionally been a lot of waste and mismanagement from the MOD, and yes there is an element of pork barrel politics in an attempt to preserve UK defence industrial capacity.
However, the simple fact is that all of this was known and yet we still neglected to provide the funds to reach the desired goal, i.e. the Strategic Defence Review.
We spend a miserable 2.2% of GDP of Defence, far lower than the high-point of the Cold War (around 4.0%) so we can easily match Defence inflation.
The MOD is getting better at Defence procurement; yes slowly, and no it will never be as good as the private sector, but it is getting better and has gone through 10 years of Treasury enforced asset stripping.
There are areas of strategic Defence Industrial capacity which the UK has decided to maintain for strategic reasons, this will cost more. I agree that where this is not the case we should buy cheap American kit.
But you are fundamentally wrong on several of your assertions, notably:
> Eurofighter - we cannot just cut the order, the contractual penalties are allegedly nearly as onerous as buying the kit in the first place. It is a shame that we are committed to buying so many Eurofighters, best we learn for next time rather than make silly assertions about solving current problems.
> Royal Navy - we have a competance in blue-water power projection that will always be useful, which will disappear for a generation if we slash it now.
We need those two Aircraft Carriers and the thirty-two escort Warships, as well as a minimum fleet of 12 nuclear submarines, slash-n-burn is not the answer.
Yes, we need more soldiers, and yes they must be paid more, but the answer is to follow the advice of the UKNDA and increase the Defence budget to 3.0% of GDP.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022