Comments by "the truth hurts" (@thetruthhurts7675) on "The impact the Ukraine war has had on global defence spending" video.

  1. We, as in the UK, have the 25th largest population in the world, and the third most powerful (on paper) armed forces in the world. For example the RN has greater tonnage than Spain, France, Germany, and Italy combined. The RAF is only smaller than the Russian airforce in Europe, while the Army is effectively the most powerful in Europe given the show that Russia has shown their paper tiger power to be. So despite a commitment by this government to spend 3%of GDP by 2025, what more exactly is there to do, other than modernise, and improve? We are the largest spending nation on defence in Europe, last year Britiain actually spent £71.4billion on all aspects of defence, honestly what do you want from the UK here? Not counting research (which is actually a seperate budget), Service and civilian costs (another separate budget), and Boris's 2 now £20.9Billion uplift for the armed forces we spend on defence (actual costs of training, running, and servicing equipment, and sailors Royal marines, soldiers and airmen, and women) £45.9 Billion a year. Only China with $193.3Billion, and the USa with $738Billion spend more than the UK. Raising the total defence budget to 3% of GDP will mean that in 2025 we will be spending quite a bit over £100Billion a year on defence. keeping us as the third biggest defence spender in the world!!
    13
  2.  @TheBooban  For Poland to even match the Uk forces would require an investment today of over £500 Billion for the next seven to ten years you even have the German tanks which don't work in battles. The Polish Have NO navy, and how much do you intend to spend? Oh yes the New amount is $45 Billion or £35 Billion!! The Uk spends in total just over £71Billion. How is Poland going to spemnd that mush even adding $10 Billion which will give you 4%GDP makes under what the Uk spends just on dfence, not including research, civilan infrastructure, and Munitions, and Equipment spending.
    4
  3.  @markcummings6856  Well as last year we spent 3.3% of GDP on the defence budget expenditures, and Defence core spending is set to rise by £11Billion alone this next year that makes the UK the largest spender in Europe on defence, strangely more than Russia. Only India, China, and the USA spend more on defencve than the UK. This year the total spend is £71.2 Billion whilst as this chart shows we spent £68 Billion last year or 3.3%of GDP. Not everything is covered by the "defence" budget, which does stand at £49 Billion alone (In Europe only Russia spends more than that on defence). We spend a further £10 billion on research, then civilian cotractors to Uk defence is another £7.5 Billion, whilst Equipment procurement yet another budget is roughly £20 Billion. The Uk is a small country and even France if given a jump start by the USA could take half of it inside a week. After that they and Russia would spin to a stop, northern rugged territory (NOT FIT FOR Tanks ETC) would see to that. The soft south is so called for exactly that reason. Youalso assume a Russian navy mostly made up of Junk from the 1980/90's would stand any chance against the relatively small Royal Navy. Like every one else ever here you swallowed Russia's propaganda piecemeal. NATO's biggest worry is that that junk navy could actually cross the barents sea, and invade Alaska. Invading both the UK, or Alaska means that the largest force in the world is honour bound to get involved (NATO). Your point totally misses the idea of NATO and the mutual defence pacts at it's core. Plus do you NOT think the UK would Know something was going on from messages sent from Sweden, Norway, the baltic states, Eastern Europe, Finland, and even from the mediteranean. it is not like Russia could actually surprise the Uk as in this direction every where it goes are NATO aligned countries. Your point forgets several very large political, and huge military logistic problems. Do try harder your point is very easitly taken apart. Plus if our defence is in a deplorable position, then the Us forces are laughable. Numbers yes but in effect? Useless as they were when I was in the Royal Navy.
    1
  4.  @ehcourse8479  Your first point is exactly correct. Even france gets it's ships for less than the RN. Our biggest help is being the third largest defence supplier after the USA, and Russia. Russia NOT FAR behind? Really you seem to NOT know anything about history at all Germany from a standing start in 1942 took Kyiv in just three weeks. Russia is sdtill losing territoory top troops trained by mainly Uk forces. For your next statement that means you also have no grip of History. The world today is more stable than it has ever been. Less wars around the world, than in the 1960's alone. So the 25th largest nation has the third most lethal forces in the world and you think anything the US says about UK defence matters? There are only three countries with global reach in the world, one is a temporary country, that is France, they cannot sustain forces at distance fopr long periods of time as shown by the simple fact that the Uk is sending troops to aid them, the only two that can maintain troops at a distance from home is The USA, and the UK. I don't care what the USA says about our forces man/woman for man our troops are worth at least ten of theirs. Finally you do rtealiose that even at the height of Empire the British army was only ever maintained at 40,000 men? Oh of course you didn't you think the empire took hundreds of thousands of Briotish people to enforce. We lost it simply because the rest of the world worked out the UK is a relitvely small country with a very small population.
    1
  5.  @GonzoTehGreat  tens of Billions on which aircrfat carriers exactly? The QE, and POW cost £3.5 Billion. The Carrier for the US costs tens of billions. I think you have something in your eye. Carriers are the best projection of power you can have. Next (and I haven't read beyond ths stupid thing about the carrieers yet) you will be saying we don't need Nuclear weapons as well!! OK do you know exactly how we got these carriers? NO is the answer you need here. You ahve to go back to an EU idea to have three QE sized carriers we were to get two France one. We did france as always reneged on their part of the deal. These are European weapons dedicated to the UK but defended by European ships as well as Uk ones. The Dutch for example now permanenetly have a frigate in Plymouth, or with the QE as part of the escort. Com,e on this is simple defence stuff not going top Mars stuff!! The QE was designed for the F35B NOT super hornets which are so out of date the harriers we sold are replacing them!! Boy this was old news two years ago! This next part is so laughable I had to quote you personally here "Consequently, these RN aircraft carriers are vulnerable to attack by peer adversaries (specifically China), but lack the range to retaliate and cannot operate without the support of the USMC, which obviously restricts their power projection." The idea is that we get enough F35's for two ships, the USMC help while we obtain those aircraft. Once again this is NOT rocket science we are here building a capability from the ground up, unlike in the past where we had carrier aircraft, and these could operate until the new ones come into being. The British Army is suffering from a recruitment and retention crisis. Look I served in the Royal navy back in the 1970's to 1990's. There were never then the numbers of personell that were required to fill vacancies in any service let alone the army, recruitment criies are part of the job for any country that is NOT the USA (because college is what the US armed forces is to most people that join). It is the same today. Skills are actually required of the British armed forces whilst the US armed forces is like a college Join up, get a qualification (because the US education system is that bad) and serve then get a decent job in civvy street. That IS US service life. not UK service life. Also the recruitment crisis is simply because the private company (this is the only part I agree with you on here Government mismanagement, Ben Wallace the present defence minister admits to this as well) is not up to the job, they loose hundreds if not thousands of parts of the paperwork for joining every year, my own son didn't join the RAF because he was told by this company to reapply twice in one year after they admitted they had "lost" his previous paperwork the year before.
    1
  6.  @GonzoTehGreat  If you really want to blame anyone for the present debacle over carriers it was the Labour party specifically that cancelled CV1 a QE sized carrier back in the 1970's Don't blame the Torries for Labour mismanagement, and stupidity!!
    1
  7.  @GonzoTehGreat  The UK is the only NATO country providing help to France in the Sahel region of Africa. The Uk IS at the centre of NATO, and is not only running the only NATO base in Ukraine, but leads many of the NATO operations around the borders of Russia. Have you not seen the relationships which are being forged with german forces now? Or is this just because I am half German and my German family coment to me on these and thus I know we have just set upa joint operation with German armed forces? Personally I seriously doubt it is my German family telling me this, but the new British/German unit is real!! Fortunately the SUN still never sets on the countries, and dependencies ruled by the UK!! NO NATO country was prepared for this war Even the USA has had to ramp up making munitions to supply Ukraine, and they admit their stockpiles were as depelted as the Uk Stockpiles. The ONE thing this sordid thing has shown is that maybe there should be more consideration of the use of intercahngeable weaponry 155mm munitions semms to be a NATO standard now, as does Javelin/NLAW mixed units, so why not other weaponry? Really does the USA help in the Falklands? NO. This is still the furthest permanent base from home soil by any country in the woprld Is there US help in the Seychelles? NO. Cyprus? NO. Northern Ireland NO AND THIS would NOT be wanted either. Nigeria, on the whole NO. Ghana NO. Uk alone does these where is this massive US pressence you talk of? One final thing : ALL wars last longer than predicted.
    1
  8.  @GonzoTehGreat  It doesn't matter what political party I am or which is NOW in Power Labour cancelled most of the British developments and research including CV1. This is a fact not political position, or claim. The MOD shares NONE of the blame they do as they are told by their then political leaders much of which over the last 40 to 50 yuears because we live in a dual party state is countering previous political ideology.
    1
  9. @TheShreester " "Carriers are the best projection of power you can have." For what purpose? The UK isn't the USA. The RN cannot operate around the world without allied support unless it commits it's entire fleet to a single carrier support group, leaving the UK defenseless." I just have to comment on this because it is preposterous. Who do you think supplies the US navy in European waters? The US RFA (equivalent) does NOT. Basically the UK, France, Spain and Italy provide NATO stores to US warships in European waters. I worked in a naval base that stockplied US weapons in case of war, it is preposterous to think you believe the USA provides everything for it's own ships in European waters. The USA Does NOT supply the Uk base in the Arabian gulf with anything either. Sorry you must be a jingoistic American, or Rusky here, you fail totally to understand NATO organisation. the Uk base on the Seychelles must according to you be resupplied by the USA, or the falklands, neither are to be brutal here. internationla power projection of the UK is only overshadowed by the US alone no one else. Wow now I am going to be brutal with yopu the UK doesn't need the USA to provide anything whilst at sea unless in US controlled waters this is a NATO agreement.
    1
  10.  @GonzoTehGreat  Retention is a problem, the main thing is the forces on the whole train people to a higher level than in civvy street, so they get enticed away. The Royal marines for example have a whole raft of high paying jobs that they can get into in "civilian" companies who pay a whole lot more than the Forces do for say protecting shipping from pirates. I live in an area that has a few forces mainly the RM, and army now, deployments for civilian companies are ALWAYS longer than for the forces. contracts are always a minimum of 6 months to a year. Pay is the one thing that is the problem for the forces. Why do you try to say that Afghanistan was unnecessary? It was and still is the hot bed of the Taliban who enacted the biggest terrorist atrocity on the USA. You don't think the US has the right to hit back? Iraq I do agree with, I still think he was induced to attack Kuwait, in order to remove him from power. That is only what I think though, and I have no real evidence for what I think happened over several years. As to your last point : "Increasingly, for similar reasons, both current and ex service personnel have also discouraged their own relatives from joining. Perhaps the Ukraine War will encourage more to enlist now that peace in Europe is no longer guaranteed. We shall see..." is the most rediculuos statement I have ever read after all the rest about "unnecessary invasions/interventions in the Middle East." Just how do you get from your possibly valid point which I have just quoted to the war in Ukraine being a possible recruitment thing? Wow that is some convoluted logic there!! So as an ex forces person myself neither of my sons is in the military, my eldest has a company (British of course, though he has US companies on his portfolio) that will help build the Abrams replecement tank, and other military equipment. The youngest is just being head hunted by a company involved in tech for the military, he did try to join the RAF (after leaving university) but after several attempts via the private company, all of which they somehow "lost" his medical paperwork, or even his application papaerwork and after three years of trying to join he gave up, now he works for Microsoft and runs the part that did Avatar 1 and 2 here near where I live, but the company trying to get him now have given him all kinds of inducements to work in the town he lives in, and from home if he wants to, and NOT where they are based normally, he starts for them in 2 weeks time. He is (until this Friday) a Junior CEO of Microsoft, but will only be a board member of this company, See even civilian companies have difficulties retaining staff!!
    1
  11.  @GonzoTehGreat  So I left the Rn for pretty much the same reasons, though in my case I had been reporting my boss as a bully for the last two years. I ended throwing him over the side of our ship in the Arabian gulf. He was court martialled for assualt, and then they threw everything sbout the bullying at him as well. His promotion papers were ripped up in Gibraltar. That is enough of my personal life. No one gets shouted at for 6 months in basic training! If you are then you are a liability, and constantly getting things wrong. Military food is very good if you are not in the Royal Navy, obviously it is not always burgers and chips.I joined the RN in the 1970's and we were not shouted at at all during the basic training. Richard from Hull in the RAF sounds like he was not cut out for the military in the first place. I lived in accommodation of various kinds, from when I was at Prestwick airport with the RN, in nissan huts (which were actually rotting away), to hotels in Weymouth, because there was not enough accommadation on the navy base at Portland, and everything in between, I even shared a house that had staff for a time in Scotland. Whilst in Prestwick we didn't pay accommodation chrges because of the state of the places, and they were building new accommodation which was then state of the art in Prestwick. Those technicins who join the forces go on to run things in civvy street, so why exactly wouldn't you join in the first place? Once again as an officer, and technician (Artificer) in the Royal navy in the 1970's there were never enough people to go around even then. Most squadrons were light on personnel, though apart from the troubles in Ireland when I was in there was nothing really going on that we got involved in other than a small local war in the Falklands. Money is the retention issue, my own brother in law signed on for 32 years to get the large pension, however when his previous boss came knocking offering him £50,000 a year to train the Saudie Airforce he left toot sweet. pretty damned fast I can tell you. he was on around £13,000 a year as a technician at the time!! I don't think that the pay gap has actually widened per se since that time, just maintained the same relative pay gaps.
    1
  12.  @GonzoTehGreat  There is one massive problem here. You are arguing with as we say the converted about retention in the armed forces. Only the UK, France, and the USA are constantly involved in the so called war on terror. So these countries do have a certain commitment to their armed forces that none seem to maintain after leaving the forces. The indigenous population of Afghanistan are NOT sympathetic to the Taliban, they were and still are too afraid of them to take up arms against them. The Wrong country lead the coalition in Afghanistan. NO plan, no overall ideas as to how to counter hypocrisy, corruption, and terror, no idea how to handle the future. Basically the USA never had a plan for getting power food, water, and aid to people without the simple necessities of life. As for the way to pay for developing the country the USA flatly refused a British Idea that would have funded the redevelopment of Afghanistan through sheer shortsightedness absolute lunacy. They allowed the Taliban to take over the Poppy fields possibly THE most short sighted thing as a leader and a country has ever done, Britain actully suggested that ALL Afghan Opium be bought by the west's health care systems and used by them, NO came the reply from the USA lead by big Pharma, and now most of the Opium trade in the world is controlled by the Taliban, Helmand province alone controls 39% of the global Opium trade.
    1
  13.  @AbuHajarAlBugatti  Ask the Taliban, and Russia about that.
    1