Youtube comments of the truth hurts (@thetruthhurts7675).
-
86
-
53
-
49
-
42
-
39
-
37
-
35
-
33
-
33
-
32
-
27
-
27
-
25
-
23
-
23
-
22
-
22
-
20
-
18
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
13
-
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
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
@Quinston82 Actually better he never says anything about womens health from man's perspective ever again. Any man making the pronouncements he does should be shut up and ignored totally.
Then here is the thing Ben answers rudimentarily, then argues. He is saying that only his version of the world (pretty much like all the other religious zenophobes) that matters. The sooner he, and his kind are ignored especially in US politics the better for the real world.
Shapiro is always angry in the way he delivers his rebutals, he Never lets peopel interject (even when he makes the most idiotic false statements) or question him further. Thsi the way Andrew Neil is doing it is called Journalism. Listen to his delivery it is sharp. loud, and angry. "IF BEN IS WRONG." Wow I say this in rebuttal to that point : "Anything he says about healthcare, and Abortion is provably incorrect, most especialy healthcare.
All Andrew Neil wants him to do is answer the question givebn to him. He avoids all of the questions and simply tries to shout Neil down. Andrew Neil is the first really good journalist he has come across hwo won't let him not answer. The guest should know the style of the interviewer, so he should ahyve been breifed on exactly what to say, though as a man on abortion he has nothing to offer full stop.
The Audience here expect Andrew Neil to do this. It his is style of interview, and why NO top American political people will be interviewed by him. All he wants is the reasoning, and straight answers. Shapiro tries to avoid every question. When asked about a miscarriage and women potentially being criminalised for them he ignores the question, because we all know that as a Jew he thinks women should have no rights. Pretty much like US Christians, and ALL Muslims.
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@_ArsNova I was bought up religious, but then i saw the indoctrination, and am not in the least religious now. Do please explain what the "sins of the father" means. If it means I pay for my 25 times Grandfather invading England twice, before he joined the team who won in 1066, then just how am I resoponsible for that? Do please explain this to me. Bear in mind that I, like many people here, am a simple person who needs this explaining just exactly why I have to pay for something NOT done in my name, not done by me, in fact not done by anyone in my father's family because they honestly never left Shropshire after moving there in 1066. This idea is to say the least the sickest idea the left has ever come up with. Let us not forget it was Africans who sold Africans to Europeans. Does that mean we need to start excuting thoes Africans great, great grand children now, to square up a wrong that has nothing to do with them? Also as a British person why should I have to listen to the drivel about slavery when William the conqueror banned it in England in 1066?
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@hamletksquid2702 "It's not about geography. "Long-term Russian needs" are a result of their interests as defined by Vladimir Putin."
Wow I have never ever seen someone get this so wrong!! Geopolitics is a set of rules by which a country must seek to ensure it's borders, and also ensure it's power in the world. Wothout knowing Geopolitics you will never be successful as a country. The basic tenet of Russia is expansion, expansion, expansion, to it's pre defined natural borders (from which it can project power, and can stop any incursions by foreign powers. This is totally about land, and the need for Russia to secure it's one and only warm water port. If you don't see that as the prerequisite for this then I suggest you NEVER comment on Youtube again, because you obviuosly have no idea of how Russia sees itself (defenceless in the face of the west), or how Russia wants to appear on the world stage (a power that can defend itself, and protect it's closest allies). So YES it is in this case purely about land, and the aquisition of a buffer between Russia and the west. Putin's aims are the self same aims as those laid out bt Tzar Peter the Great, it is the survival of the country that he is solely interested in, nothing else in politics matters at all!!
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
The NHS is totally paid for by National Insurance, with something to spare. We raise 11.5% of GDP by NI, the NHS costs just 9.9% of GDP. Boris increased NHS spending, and started 40 new hospitals, this wil lead to the NHS costing just10% of GDP, leaving 1.5% of GDP for which pensions payments are the main use. Being able to defend the country, and the people therein is infinitely MORE IMPORTANT than breeding highly educated well looked after slaves!! Defence should always be paramount, but only in times of tension, and war should it be the main focus, Churchill was the person who said this after laying out his ideas that finally became the NHS in 1908.
In my humbleopinion defence spending in the UK should never be less than 3.5%, (peace or tension timethis is totally affordable and ensures the future of many valuable tech and heavy industryu jobs in this country. The Roman General Publius Flavius Vegetius Renatus famously said of such things in his book "Epitoma Rei Militaris," Which roughlytranslates to this : "if you want peace, prepare for war." This is something Britian has never been very good at except in the case of WW1.
3
-
3
-
3
-
@emmy9345 The Issue with that is the UK is one of only three countries able to globaly mount offnesives. The other two being the USA, and France (only for short periods, or limited numbers in France's case). The problem is What Europe doesn't need is a country with Global commitments and it's own more powerful agenda, which as we proved with the EU debacle, didn't always match those of the UK. The UK is only one of three countries (the same three countries as I mentioned earlier) who have true global reach, and global soft power. Being the main ally of an emerging Japan doesn't sit well with America, and the EU, that is where Britian is headed, and the Uk already has more influence in Japan than the USA has ever had. What Britiain doesn't need is paying for countries that refuse to meet their EU commitments, and being told by at best a small minded set of unelected bureaucrats what we can or cannot do on our own. this has become very apparent since Brexit, Brussles thinks it controls what Britian can, or should do when in reality it has had it's wings clipped mightily by little Britain. I say this as a person with a foot in both Germany, and England, being of German/English parents. Britian does lead where Europe follows, that has become very obvious in the last three years.
The edited bit.. Also Britian is already a part of a Europe wide set of forces, it is known as NATO, another smaller EU army is not the way to go!
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@danielhutchinson6604 Erm which Vietnam conflict do you mean? The Chinese invasion that was simply a rout of a Chinese army? The French debacle, The US debacle? Or the British one in which Vietnam was calmed the vietnamese beaten, and de weaponed in 18 months? Do go on these have all been since WW2 by the way China sent 100 tanks, 500,000 men a complete air division, and barely made their first objective, and were battered to a standstill, then shoved back to the border by just 80,000 old men, and young boys, the vietnamese border guards whilst Vietnam sent it's army to depose China's ally Pol Pot. Shame you actually know so little about REAL history isn't it?
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@pn9468 Strange isn't it that everyone says "Ballbearings" was a Swedish thing. However during the first months of Operation Barbarosa (the invasion of Russia) for example, a complete division lead by General Erwin Englebrecht (the 163rd infantry division) was transported entirely by Swedish railways. This alone was Sweden siding with Germany. Notably Switzerland on the other hand allowed German troops to rest and recuperate, but they didn't allow the entire transportation of a divisions of troops. Doing so would have possibly affected the allies in France. Sweden from the start of the war was sided with Germany. Plus they could hardly stop the ballbearings being made in either Europe, or America. They were involved in government industries in which they (SKF) owned 50% of the company in England (Luton), Germany, France, and Italy, as well as several in the USA. In this case making the machinery and the ballbearings could have been done outside of Sweden, but to the detriment of Germany, and it's wartime needs. Sweden supplied well over half of Germany's ballbearing needs at least until 1943, and never more than 30% of the Uk needs during the same time!
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@jayte4932 So Russia lost the second largest city weeks ago Kharkiv. Odessa the third largest city is still and always has been in Ukrainian control. Dnipro has never been taken by Russia in this war, in fact the Russian line here has been pushed furthes south. Donetsk is being retaken by Ukraine, Russia has never had city number 5 Zaporizhzhia. Number 6 is Lviv which is on the Polish Border, NO Russia hasn't been here yet!! No7 Kryvyi Rih is outside Russian influence, and has never been under Russian controll since this started. No 8 Mykolaiv, this is also beyond the limits of Russian influence You better have control of the next 2 to even pretned to be credible! No9 Sevastopol was illeaglly taken by Russia, who guaranteed the borders of Ukraine in 2014. Some guarantor Russia is!! No10 Mariupol. It took Russia months to take this city. SO NO RUSSIA DOES NOT HAVE 4 of the largest cities under it's control. it barely has 3. What is really funny hre is that the world is watching the death throes of the most aggressive country in the world (Russia so you don't make any mistakes here). and aiding Ukraine to wipe out your children Those being mauled and killed in Ukraine now, armed forces, and crush your none existent economy!
Kherson is not a suicide bid. The Russian army are running away they cannot get supplies to the front line, because of this Ukraine is the rolling Russian peasnts up as I write this.
My people don't claim anything The ghost of Kyiv is still killing Russian peasant soldiers, around Donetsk. Putin and Russia are doomed to a very slow death, even China your supposed best ally has sent aid to Ukraine, but they refused to do so to Mother Russia!! HAHAHAHAHA. My people were teaching the ukrainian army street fighting as this started, and MY PEOPLE ARE the only other country to have permanent base inside Ukraine, BECAUE Ukraine wants my country there, finally my country is not the USA.
Russia is the most agressive country in the world, they didn't need any excuses to invade Ukraine I fully understand the political implications for Russia if Ukraine HAD joined NATO. Make no bones about this now Ukraine, (the whole country including Crimea) will join NATO. This is because of Putin the best recruitment person NATO could have in the world!! The only country that has Oligarchs is Russia and yes you are correct if the Russian oligarchs do stop this then the world will be free of it's greatest menace Putin was succered into breaking up Russia which is exactly what will happen directly from this.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
You have confused dictatorship with constitutional Monarchy. The King CAN remove Parliament, NOT the other way around. The Queen, is the ruler of the country, as is now King Charles Parliament exists by their tolerance. If the queen/king refused Royal Consent to the government this would automatically in the Uk lead to a government having to resign, and gain a new mandate in an election. The Queen did actually use this Royal Perogative abroad famously, when she removed the Australian Government, you are obviously going to ask when this happened so here is the date the rest you can look up : 1st of October 2013. She instructed her governor to remove the Prime mnister of Australia. She can do that to the British Prime minister, because he is HER main minister and is still answerable to the king, or Queen of the England, and long may that continue. She was what is known as a Regnant Queen which means she ruled the kingdom of Both England, and Great Britain, and Northern ireland. King Charles is the defacto power in 15 other realms around the world, as was his mother. These are NOT the crown dependencies, they are places like Canada (who agree to have the queen as their ulltimate power), and Australia. A constitutional monarchy (of which ours is the only one in the world at this time) is where a country is lead mostly by the Monarch's senior minister, who actually have no power themselves, but is still very very accountable to the monarch. For example only the Monarch of the UK can declare war, and mobilise the armed forces. Only in the UK does the monarch appoint the senior minister, and that minister has to attend regular breifings with the monarch. Long may this system last, because of the stability of the British monarchy we find ourselves in a unique situation in the world, a small by size and population, country with great power both soft, and hard around the world. Effectively the monarchy of the Uk have along with most of their prime ministers had but one aim : the absolute power of England in the world.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Mark-Haddow I rather think heritage would disagree with you totally. Youir Nationality is where you are born, not where your forbears were born. For this you have to thank a Black Labour politician who denies the existence of heritage. Simply by the fact that he and his family for the last 250 years could not survive in the country his antecedents originated. He publically stated heritage beyond one generation is nothing, and to prove it he stated that for a wager anyone from Africa could take on his challenge and go live there unsupprted in the region their family originate. Strangely his challenge has never been taken up. He was, and is descended from namibian bush people also known as Saan. These people exist simply by being able to read the ground from the top. they can tell you by looking if dry sand contains water holes. Victoria was born here, thus is/was English. I was born in England, though my hair colour gives away the fact that my forbears came here with William the conqueror, and were in fact Norwegian/Swedish, and my family name includes "son of" a minor Norwegian Lord. I am English, by heritage, and birth, my mother was german thus I could claim German citizenship, as can my two sons, who can through their mother claim Perian, and Yemeni citizenship. However they will tell you they are English not German, Iranian, or Yemeni. My ex wife's father who was yemeni but serving in the British army had her registered at birth in the British Embassy as British English. Now I don't care what you think of heritage but the present royal Family has lived in this country for well over 100 years, they even anglicised their name to become Windsor. Thus thet also will tell you they are English!!
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@chrisburke624 Russia doesn't have the capability to land, and sustain a force in the UK. The one thing this has proven, is that what I have been saying about Russia not having the capabilities everyone has been stating for the past ten years is true. They may have a few nukes, a few tactical ones as well, but honestly their present budget for defence doesn't allow for the maintenance of everything they have let alone their forces, Thus they have large army, airforce, and navy personel numbers , but not the numbers of useable equipment everyone thinks they have. The action they did with HMS Duncan in the black sea where they were actually shooting at Duncan as she sailed south of Crimea, and the videos showed they could only use soviet era equipment, and that Duncan probably could have sunk everything that was tailing her with very little expenditure of their ammunition.
2
-
@aleccap5946 You are just trolling here, you obviously have no idea as you have just admitted. There is no whisper of a third carrier at all and as for Traps and cats the QE class proves they are outdated. The Ford Class carrier Gerald R Ford has been around for a year longer than the QE, and what exactly has it done in those 6 years? Nothing at all. They have just finished the basic workups, and finally installed the weapons lifts (which as of yet haven't been tested under sea trials for several weeks in a row, and at full stretch), the carrier has yet to complete the carrier integration tests that the QE and the POW did three years ago which is why both the QE, and POW can command a carrier strike group. The Aircraft numbers are simply because no one yet has the full compliment of aircraft they ordered from McDonnell Douglas. Cameron didn't want traps and cats unless they work which until now EMALS on the Ford class has not. They have ripped the decks apart to put ever more powerful Magnetic runs, and the best they can get is 3 consecutive launches in total, before the system catastrophically breaks down. All Military stuff takes time to integrate, but EMALS is just a joke system. So in the 6 years the Ford has been afloat she has spent a grand total of 5 years 10 months in docks or dry docks. Cameron,. and the Tory government were dead right to dodge that particular bullet, or you could troll even more here. The Chinook was bought by the Labour Governmemt with no recommended additions, like anti collision radar causoing the death of twenty top Northern Ireland security people from both the Army and RUC on the second of June 1994. The best thing Labour have ever done is either resign, or loose the election for the Tory party to sort out their mess.
Oh you asked what 1960's conficts that affected us, well you nothing as a person my bet is you were still a twinkle in your mother and father's eyes. This is the full list opf British conflicts in the 1960's :
Brunei Revolt 1962–1966
Indonesia–Malaysia confrontation 1962-1966
Dhofar Rebellion 1962–1975
Aden Emergency 1963–1967
The Troubles 1968–1998.
Most of those you won't even have heard of I suspect.
Now be a good person and shut up about things you obviously know nothing about!!
Or please tell me exactly why the UN agreed to the 38th parallel at the end of the Korean war. I want to know exactly not "that was the UN agreement."
2
-
2
-
2
-
@dm32904 LOL However Even Georgian goat herders as you call them beat your backsides. Russia has a long, long, history of failure. Heck your army couldn't even beat Finland in WW2 which of course emboldened Hitler to attack Russia!! Though what you say about NATO in afghanistan is NOT correct. To invade Afghanistan NATO would have broken up. ISAF was a UN mandate, and included Sweden (not NATO), New Zealand (not NATO), Azerbaijan, (I don't think Russia, or President Putin, would like you to say they belong to NAO), The UAE (definitely Not NATO), Singapore (Not NATO), Jordan, (Not NATO), Ireland (Not NATO), and rather strangely another Russian controlled country Georgia. Putin invaded here first, they are definitely Not NATO, and I now think you are bound for the Gulag to even state they may be part of NATO!! Putin did in fact vote for the action in the UN, well he orderred his Un delegate to do so.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@war8036 Erm No this is based upon something as a Russian you will not know. The NATO agreement is based solely on the 1947 alliance between Britain and France which has at it's heart the idea of mutual defence, and none aggression. Any country joining NATO effectively signes this defence compact. So there is nothing Western, or Ukrainian in my synopsis of what NATO can, or cannot do. Unlike the most aggerssive country in the world, Russia that is presently dying, and finally will be bought to it's knees by something called the Dutch disease. Do look it up, Russia's whole economy is based upon oil, thus is prey to what is known as Dutch disease. Stopping oil flowing from Russia WILL collapse the Russian economy because there is no other industry to replace it in Fascist Russia!!
The edited bit : You see my knowledge is based upon things like Geopolitics, history, and the fact that I actually did time in the British Forces. So actually know things about what might, or might not happen today.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@nodramalama9531 This is her official titles. Do please notice Scotland is not included in her titles :
"Elizabeth II, in full Elizabeth Alexandra Mary, officially Elizabeth II, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of her other realms and territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith, (born April 21, 1926, London, England—died September 8, 2022, Balmoral"
Those are her titles. There is no difference in that title for Scotland
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Hellndegenerates Yes Only in the USA where the legal age of consent used to be 12, and in the state the person made the claims from she was 17, and the age of consent in that state it happened was rather strangely 16, in the Uk consent is the highest in Europe at 16. So your definition of a peado as you say differs around the world! Personally she agreed to go to London, and New York, she knew what was expected, and in states where it is legal she consented. No case to answer, as New York Police have repeatedly stated!! Do tell me why some US states then have the youngest consent laws in the world.
Sctually if you think the roya family had anything to do with Diana's death you are flipping wishes there. They were killed by the Egyptian secret service, the missing vehicle has been found and was rented to two egyptians who had false passports. The Senior Al Fayed had been an Egyptian spy, and as far as the Egyptian secret services say he had stolen millions from them. Wow for you to not even know this si a scandal.
No matter what morons like you say I would far rather have the queen, and king now than a corrupt individual like Trump!
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@keystone6162 Well actually as luck would have it the FA have approached me as I am a total failure as a potential England manager, rather like Southgate (He got to the most finals, and semi finals of any international manager and has the dubious honour of being the only one NEVER to have won anything, even with the Under 21's). Here is just how good I would be as a future England Manager. I am a life long Liverpool fan (at least 61 years supporting Liverpool just so you know). So when Liverpool won the 2005 Champion's league Final If I had been the liverpool manager the scorer of the second goal, Vladimir Smicer, would NOT have played for Liverpool for longer than a week under me, so would NOT have been available to score the second goal in Istanbul. Something my then 10 year old son (now 29) has pointed out many, many times to me. So although I am tempted, and rather to be truthful, rather Flattered by the FA's offer, and the simple fact I have NEVER managed a football team at any level means I had to say NO.
2
-
2
-
2
-
@xsentfromuk8938 Basically you are telling me my ex wife is wrong, she is in charge of a mental health section of the NHS, and has been a mental health nurse (with a doctorate in Mental health now) for over 30 years, and you are saying my ex wife is lying to me. That is your point here is it? Before you answer this think hard on your reply. There are very many people with far more complex jobs than nursing. There have always been more patiemts than nurses, there has never been a time when the number of nurses to patients is the same, or even near parity.
I don't know where in the uk you are from but to be honest I have been in London hospitals with family, southampton Hospitals with family, our local ones, and even Yorkshire hospitals, and other than a Saturday evening i have never seen violence towards staff verbal, or physical. An aggressive nurse broke my ex wife's grandmothers femur (thigh bone) while we were there because she insited my ex wife's grandmother move in a certain way, that she could not, and she was so aggresive the break was audible, as were the screams from a 90 year old woman. Most situations even my wife says are caused by nursing staff not explaining exactly what is going to happen, or why. My eldest son was treated with nothing short of shall we say angellic treatment, nothing was too much, and this was King's College Hospital London on the NHS, not private where you get less nurses, and medical staff per person as most of these people will find out. Real stress by the way in the medical world, is when you are doing battle medicine in a war zone, and being shot at continuously. not doing as you are told, following simple instructions (which every often they do not), and monitoring machines as they do now in a heated airconditioned ward.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
@Mari_________ So I only normally go for since 1945. However I do know you are lying and haven't checked what yopu say because of the aggression against Turkey alone by Russia in the last 200 years. So I will go back to 1796 to be fair to both sides technically the USA wasn't a thing before then. Russia has 39 between 1792, and 1916. Whereas the USA has 63, the vast majority of those are internal, over 50, in expanding the country. So abroad the USA has say ten. Now since 1914!! So Not counting the Russian civli war Russia has 60 wars of aggression, all started by Russia. The USA by comparison has 29, one doesn't count because it is called the Tanker war in the gulf defending oil tankers, and one of the others is a no fly zone enforcement for the UN, and includes Russia, so I didn't count it for Russia either. So ten wars between 1792 outside the USA, and 1914 for the USA, as opposed to 39 for Russia all expansionist invasions. After 1914 29 for the USA, and 60 for Russia.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tinamiles9328 "labour bought it in after the war , labour party was very different to what it is today , its more Torey than ever, both parties have played their part in destroying the NHS"
Well yes they did, but Bevan who was the coalition health minister in the war was the one who played politics with people's lives. He saw what a great vote winner it could be, and so he stopped Churchill at every step getting the NHS started in WW2. Then the Best Health care system in the world, by a long way is the French one, which ois everything Churchill actually wanted for the NHS, Bevan cocked the NHS up, so much that private hospitals are insured as hotels to save them money and unlike in France (whare by law they have top have intensive care units if they are private) where they have to perform all of the health care cheaper than the NHS. As for your point about the NHS surgeries all over the country (not just down south here) being taken over by a private health company, they were being closed as the numbers prove 1% of the UK population is over 700,000, but they have 1% of surgeries because of Labour. This has been going on since they were in power.
AAAH I also see you are a square or Conspiracy nut job. That does explain your previous here. Covid is real, Coronavirus is one opf the common cold bugs, just check it out.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@suroot By not reading i have conceded. Lol I only wish life was so simple!! HAHAHAHAHA Look there are a whole series of books on present world problems and if we can, or should solve them politically. Go get a short education, and read two books called the Power of Geography, and Prisoners of Geography, then read a shaort tome called The politics and international relations of Modern Korea. In all three of those books korea is looked at geopolitically, you will (if you read them at all) find exactly what I have said to be correct There are entire volumes written by both the US, and Uk defence establishments, and freely available online. I will debate with anyone, but sheer ignorance, and asuming something that is not true as you have shown I refuse to debate with. Being ignorant of what goes on in political circles, and then espousing that ignorance does NOT make you right, but very wrong, and also potentially very dangerous
My, as you call it "lack of objectivity," is far worse than your stupendous arrogance, and lack of understanding of world politics today. Now do go get a short education in a realm you wish to comment, and have not the fainest idea of anything you are saying. Personally my bet here is that you think the incident presently acting itself out in Ukraine is nothing more than a land grab by Putin. In this you could NOT be further from reality. Putin is following a tract written in or before 1725 and is called "the will of Peter the Great." Of course you know nothing of this, and you have no idea now what I am talking about, Wikipaedia claims it a false document, other more serious (none Russian funded) institutions are divided! I didn't read your last post simply because as you are so far wrong there was no point. Your point you would concede two of the countries and not the third is the kind of stupid arrogance I have only ever strangley come into contact on here, and you are continuing the trend on YouTube!!
One other thing YOU do need to look at is if you type into any search engine "will Korea give Japan all of it's intelligence on China?" YOU will find that there has been a major spat between the two countries there are pages on the internet on this, and your ignorance is simply astounding to soemone like myself.
Finally It is NOT myself who needs to "fact find." but you, as you have consistently proven here. Now I hope you feel reasonably chastised because I have never known such ignorance, and arrogance to exist in one person. Thank you for your inept input, however it has not been educational to myself, but just a constant irritation that YOU think only YOU are correct here when whole books, pamphlets studies, and defence analysis have been written on this issue recently, and over the last 20 or so years.
1
-
@DJ80s I don't need you to give me anything. Korea Does NOT allow the USA to share all of it's information with Japan in what is called the Trlatteral alliance. Korea doesn't fully trust Japan, Japan does NOT want a united Korea because Japan only sees the Korean peninsula as an express route for Chinese military to aim towards Japan. Do go look at a map and you will see there is nothing to hinder transporting huge amounts of military equipment through Korea up or down the peninsular. Even today war, and influence, are absically about Geography.
Modern day Japan no longer have pacifism written into it's constitution, just how do you think they have been able to build a carrier the same size as those they had ion WW2? Japan is an ally of Korea in name only, purely because of an aggressive China, and a very reluctant one at that, no matter what you think, or believe. Japam are in the alliance at the behest of the USA. Which is exactly why the USA allowed Japan to change their constitution to have an Army, Navy, and Airforce.
1
-
@suroot @Steven I don't have to read your comment beyong this to answer you "You're arguing that the US aid sent to Russia during World War II is irrelevant."
The answewr whether you like it or not is YES it was irrelevant, just like the US Forces in India. The only aid that did any real good was to the UK, or China.
So let us look at a few fact shall we the Russians had over 230 up to a maximum of 250 Divisions on the front facing Germany, the USA sent what ecxactly?
Over 4 years the US sent 16,000 tanks 4,000 a year, that equips 6 divisions, plus spares, at the rate the Russians lost them. A WW2 Russian division had between 560, to 600 tanks, i've rounded up the number of American tanks to more like 5,000. So the USA sent the equivalent of 6 divisions of Tanks and you think that was significant? Honestly? Are you for real?
The rest of the stuff the USA sent looks significant as well until you break it down like this. So once again the USA aid to Russia in WW2 was in fact irrelevant YES.
1
-
@suroot Oh I am accused of rewriting History? Is that it? This is the American tea pot calling the British Kettle Black syndrome!! Do please let me know exactly where I rewrote any history. Aid was sent, but as I said most of it ended up on the sea bed, which is why Russia has never paid a cent for it!! 552,117 casualties is that all? From a total population less than a sixth of the USA 387,000 British troops were killed, with around 800,000 casualties. Russia had 11.4 Million deaths and a total of 27 million in total lost their lives, this from a population smaller than the USA. There is nothing that you can say that puts the USA at the head of anything in WW2 hell you even stole the nuclear bomb secrtets from the UK who first split the atom in 1917. So in order of magnitude of deaths the USA isn't listed in the top 10, PS, this list is the TOP 11 nations:
Countries with the Highest Total Casualties in World War II:
The following countries have the highest estimated World War II casualties: the Soviet Union (20 to 27 million), China (15 to 20 million), Germany (6 to 7.4 million), Poland (5.9 to 6 million), Dutch East Indies/Indonesia (3 to 4 million), Japan (2.5 to 3.1 million), India (2.2 to 3 million), Yugoslavia (1 to 1.7 million), French Indochina (Laos, Cambodia, part of Vietnam) (1 to 2.2 million), and France (600,000).
Thus YOU ARE AS DO ALL AMERICANS TRYING TO REWRITE HISTORY YOUR WAY. Please note my country doesn't make that list either, and we fought alone for most of the war!! Germany made Russia our allies!!!!!
Your next point is so far from the truth it is just ludicrous "Then you neglect and fail to mention that the United States entered the war and opened multiple fronts that diverted troops and resources from being focused on mother Russia.! Germany had throughout most of their invasion 3million troops in Russia, they never moved a single division from Russia to defend the western front after the USA deigned to enter the fight. Japan never moved any troops out of China and they had over 1million in China.
Your next point is a blatant lie : " there no subs patrolling the seas to sink American aide, " The next is from Wikipedia.
"The field of battle widens (June–December 1941)
Growing American activity
A SB2U Vindicator scout bomber from USS Ranger flies anti-submarine patrol over Convoy WS-12, en route to Cape Town, November 27, 1941. The convoy was one of many escorted by the US Navy on "Neutrality Patrol", before the US officially entered the war.
In June 1941, the British decided to provide convoy escort for the full length of the North Atlantic crossing. To this end, the Admiralty asked the Royal Canadian Navy on May 23, to assume the responsibility for protecting convoys in the western zone and to establish the base for its escort force at St. John's, Newfoundland. On June 13, 1941 Commodore Leonard Murray, Royal Canadian Navy, assumed his post as Commodore Commanding Newfoundland Escort Force, under the overall authority of the Commander-in-Chief, Western Approaches, at Liverpool. Six Canadian destroyers and 17 corvettes, reinforced by seven destroyers, three sloops, and five corvettes of the Royal Navy, were assembled for duty in the force, which escorted the convoys from Canadian ports to Newfoundland and then on to a meeting point south of Iceland, where the British escort groups took over.
By 1941, the United States was taking an increasing part in the war, despite its nominal neutrality. In April 1941 President Roosevelt extended the Pan-American Security Zone east almost as far as Iceland. British forces occupied Iceland when Denmark fell to the Germans in 1940; the US was persuaded to provide forces to relieve British troops on the island. American warships began escorting Allied convoys in the western Atlantic as far as Iceland, and had several hostile encounters with U-boats.
In June 1941, the US realised the tropical Atlantic had become dangerous for unescorted American as well as British ships. On May 21, SS Robin Moor, an American vessel carrying no military supplies, was stopped by U-69 750 nautical miles (1,390 km) west of Freetown, Sierra Leone. After its passengers and crew were allowed thirty minutes to board lifeboats, U-69 torpedoed, shelled, and sank the ship. The survivors then drifted without rescue or detection for up to eighteen days. When news of the sinking reached the US, few shipping companies felt truly safe anywhere. As Time magazine noted in June 1941, "if such sinkings continue, U.S. ships bound for other places remote from fighting fronts, will be in danger. Henceforth the U.S. would either have to recall its ships from the ocean or enforce its right to the free use of the seas."[49]
A Mid-Ocean Escort Force of British, and Canadian, and American destroyers and corvettes was organised following the declaration of war by the United States in December 1941."
So before the USA was involved in the war effort the US Navy were sending convoys to meet Canadian, and British escorts (hell in fact there is a film on the most famous 1941 convoy starring Tom Hanks as the captain of a an American warship fighting his way through convoy attacks BEFORE the USA enterred the war). Do go get a small amount of education, and learn to read, then you will find out that what you gullible Americans believe to be the truth is actually poppycock!!
I do feel sorry for your rather small nation because most of you think you did most of the stuff during, and since WW2 when fact and the truth is really far from what you lot peddle as reality. Even the latest American wartime naval film is simple propaganda that leads people to believe that the USA and not MY COUNTRY, the UK captured the very first Enigma machine with all the log books intact!!
So do please try to rewrite your version of history here, but please beware that I will out quote you with the actual truth, which is why I use this moniker here, because the truth really does hurt people as gullible as yourself.
As for being Ungrateful that is just preposterous, however the USA did not win the war. Britain and the Empire and the Russians were already starting to beat the German menace before America deigned to join.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@andrashavas None of the interested countries involved with Korea want a united Korea. Japan is one of the Guarantors of that peace, They are eternal enemies of Korea, so a united Korea is a no go for them, The USA doesn't want yet another Eastern Superpower in the making, it will have enough on it's hands with China over the next 100 years. China doesn't want a united Korea on it's southern border with the ability to Emulate unification in the same manner as Germany, whichever way it were to go. Russia agreed with the UK for their area of Influence to be the 38th parallel, and above, so they don't want any country moving that border either way. Korea for the major powers and the UK is a permanent settlement. The only problem would be either the West or the East over doing their support so that one part felt emboldened enough to attack the other, the chances of this happening get more likely the more the power shifts in favour of the West, which could force a China that sees itself having no major ally into overstating support for the north in some way.
Ukraine WILL NOT be split into two parts, they have won around Kyiv. Even in the south they are slowly beginning to roll up over 76 Russian Battalion Tactical Groups (BTG's are small units consisting of around 800 men and women each, roughly 200 more than the size of a British battle group) in the Ukraine. Russia has made no significant advances since they started this new phase for Donbass only, and their strategic plan was to cut donbass off from the rest of the country by moving slightly to the West, and cutting through to the south. This effort was stopped and rolled up on the firsty day they tried it 15 Russian BTG'S GONE no longer existent.
China's big headache problem now is that Russia is showing how bad it's equipment is in reality, and that the vast majority of China's military is based upon Russian equipment. No one else in the world is prepared to sell China anything of Military worth, so they now need a home bred military industrial complex, this will effectively put the Chinese economy into reverse for at least the next ten years to just match Russia's military output in exports. This is just when two bubbles in China are about to burst. The first being most of the major western companies in China want out, so China is having to offer huge finacial benefits at the cost of increasingly huge amounts of Taxation money. Whilst the second is the fact that the ghost city bubble is beginning to burst, and will (on it's own) put the Chinese economy into a full reversal for the next ten to 15 years, to get back to where they are today.
The final point I have to make is that Ukraine wants ALL Russian ethnics out of Donbass, and Crimea (where they have been commiting slow genocide on the Crimean Tartars the ethnic majority, and originally Turkish. Plus as to Kores they are in a calm before the storm mode one wrong act by any of the major international powers (even France) culd spell diaister for the whole country, so everyone the USA included are pussyfooting around a problem that even if the country were to suddenly unify only gets bigger geopolitically. Japan Russia do not discuss their problems, but as Russia begins to show just how weak they are this may embolden Japan to start asking at the UN for their islands back, which Russia has stated it will not let happen.
1
-
@Blackspeaks That is one of THE most AROGANT, and IGNORANT posts I have ever read. China, and Russia DO NOT want North Korea to have South Korea, also the US and Japan do not want the other wy around. North Kores has minerals China needs, but a united Korea would then be a super industrial power to rival even China in less than ten years. Your ignorance on that alone is totally astounding. Russia having Ukraine is like the French giving the UK the port of Breast, and the Norman regions back. Again one of THE most astoundingly ignorant statements of modern times. Russia is following the Ideas set out in the will of Czar Peter the Great, the ultimate aim of Russia in this is the middle east, and Saudi Arabia with it's wealth of natural warm water ports. So you would cede control of Moldova, Turkey, Syria, Egypt, Iran, and Saudi Arabia to Russia with one small gesture would you? That after all their main end game. Next Giving China Taiwan is like saying to Russia they have to give Siberia to the USA because it is closer Washington than Moscow. Once again showing total ignorance in Global geopolitics, would you also hand over Nepal, and Bhutan to China? They also claim sovereignty over areas of these coutries. The world you envision would be a far more dangerous place than it presently is. I personally Thank whatever god you believe in, that you do not possess the legal power to do as you envision.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@alingare3916 AAAHHH ok so Russia invades a sovereign country using a pretext "On December 24, 1979, the Soviet Union invades Afghanistan, under the pretext of upholding the Soviet-Afghan Friendship Treaty of 1978. As midnight approached, the Soviets organized a massive military airlift into Kabul, involving an estimated 280 transport aircraft and three divisions of almost 8,500 men each." As you can see the Afghan people themselves called it a pretext, or lie!!
Are you actually ignorant of history? Since WW2 Russia has invaded 29 sovereign countries, the USA? 13!! Russia is THE MOST AGRESSIVE COUNTRY IN THE WORLD, bar none!! Russai is using a false flag event in Ukraine, it is gathering false flag information in Moldova, and it has recently started in Finland, which is exatly why they HAVE applied to join NATO. Chechnya was NOT about terrorism at all, just like the illegal encroachment there today. Russia is the worst country on the planet to have as a neighbour! Go back to siberia because as a Russian troll you aren'tvery good are you? No one wants any part of Russia other than China. Russia has to expand to stay alive it has two desires warm water ports, and it has it's eye firmly set on Saudi Arabia!!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@CyanideSunshines Wow that means the UK, Spain, and France are in real big trouble because there are only roughly 40 to 50 countries world wide the Uk has not invaded directly (and won) or 20 to 25 indirectly. Those we didn't do I think you will find China, Japan, Mongolia, and the two others I named did all of the rest. So just how far do we go back? Can the Uk get reparation money from say Denmark, Italy, France, Holland, Algeria, Tripoli, for example? The last raids on the uk by the corsairs who were north African and took people as slaves was only as recent as the 1500's. See what goes around comes around on a small planet.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
US Health care is so, so bad that the largest provider of healthcare in the USA is a company that (we in the UK call a charity, you in the USA call "not for profit") is called Remote area medical. It was set up in 1985 by an Englishman called Stan brock, it is based upon the NHS in the UK. Stan Brock was so appalled at the state of US healthcare that he started the charity. RAM operates around the world. In his words he thought it wrong that "medical insurance for healthcare in the USA is legally allowed to operate in a way that is criminal in other western countries." Bercause of the rush for profit, the USA has by far the worst healthcare in the western world, even Russia and Cuba have better healthcare, and that is despite paying more for healthcare than the entire western half of Europe. Even Switzerland dropped the American system of healthcare because it was way too expensive for them, now they have free at the point of use.
Also the NHS is the brainchild of none other than Winston Churchill, Nye Bevan the Labour health minister (in the coalition government in WW2) stopped Churchill implementing it early in WW2, because he saw what a vote winner it would be, so he played politics with the lives of British citizens being bombed by the Luftwaffe. Churchill first started talking about free at the point of use healthcare, in the UK Parliament, before the Labour party, or the communist party of Russia, existed, back in 1908.
Also the socialised system (a term coigned in the USA to frighten voters with the thoughts it is socialism under another name) is used in the USA for fire departments, the armed forces, the criminal justice department, the Coast guard, FBI, CIA, and the state, and federal government. In the Uk compulsory National isurance pays for the NHS, and has money left over for other use. A "socialised system" is just taxation to pay for something like the armed forces, and government!!
RAM : https://www.ramusa.org/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remote_Area_Medical
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@MrSeekerOfPeace Ok however the EU refuses to recognise unilateral votes of Independence. The main thing is that the independence movement is losing momentum, because the actual vote is down from 48% to 45% of the Scottish people at the last election, which is why she had to go with the Green party, but most Greens realise socialists like her have no concept of green issues so the local green voters in Scotland won't vote for her, and independence. Plus the final issue for Scotland is that ALL scottish born people MUST vote according to the EU to make it legal, that means the Scottish people in England must be included in the vote this time. If she was correct there would be a consensus of voters for independence at the border region, and in the north of Scotland, BUT there isn't she is using Glasgow to steamroller the population who do not want independence. Luckily the population of Scotland is dropping so more, and moe English bor people are moving there for retirement, and will NOT vote for independence. See how this should work according to the EU everyone living there gets a vote, and everyone born there gets a vote, or the EU doesn't recognise it as legal she has been told this everytime she asks for backing from the EU, and ignores it totally.
Plus once in a generation is not just every 7 years, it is 25 years at least, so she has no legal reason for this vote now, she just knows that the longer she keeps spending money from England on independence, and NOT on the things it should go on she is doomed in the long run. This is the act of a person who knows she cannot win. Scotland without the four places that have asked for crown dependency stsus is NOT viable either.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
MacMFer We do NOT lack the freedom of speech at all as you infer. I can grab an orange box on a saturday, and go to speakers corner and say almost anything, there aren't any other countries in the world that can do that. British Common law enshrines the freedom of speech, NOT even the government can change that, the first amendment has been redifined several times. There is NO right anywhere in the wolrd to be offended yet people think their feelings have more importance than the right to call out problems. I state on here I abhor religion, but would defend your right to a magical invisible freind to my death. Prayer is being banned in public spaces in the UK except places of worship, as it should be there is also a move thanks to a case in the USA to ban swearing on any religious book in court, perjury is committed more often under religious oath in a court room than anywhere else. Oh one final thing here the houses of Commons and the Lords are exclududed from all limitations on free speech, unlike the USA federal system, and the Senate.
The first amendment was because the founding fathers forgot the right to the freedom of the press, we do NOT have a law confering either the right to free speech, or the freedom of the press, they are a given, under any party, that is why the ruling party always claims the press, and especially the BBC is against them. Freedom of the press isn't limited by any law here in the UK, they can and do tap phones computers, and electrical without court consent with impunity. The Police here, as they do in the USA have to go to court and get a judge to give them the right to tap phones, the US press also needs court warrants to tap phones, because your laws allow NO TAPPING of wires or phones without court orders, or the newer pen tap law. Do I live in a freer country than the USA? You bet your bottom dollar I do!
1
-
1
-
MacMFer State pension like the NHS is covered by National Insurance. My whole story lacks context. The UK doesn't tax food, or childrens clothing, most state benefits are tax free. My state pension is taxed on the last 4% of the income, the rest is below tax levels. My other pensions, and wages are taxed, but the taxation is less than 10% in total of my income. You stated we pay 50% tax, with no context at all, your claim is that the highest rate of income tax in both the Uk plus another 5%, and in USA you state the top rate plus another13% of wages, is what everyone pays, utter diatribe.
1
-
MacMFer Yup you are still trolling. National insurance pays for Winston Churchill's greatest invention the NHS, in the USA my son cannot get insurance for work, or to visit the USA, because of a pre existing illness. Health care in the USA sucks! What isn't taxed in the UK? OK, Food, and children's clothing in the UK are NOT taxed at all. Then because I work and have to wash my clothes I get that tax free! so yes I personally pay less than 10% of my earnings in taxation, that may change in the near future because my state pension, private pension, and Forces pension all get inflation busting rises in April! I might actually pay 11% of my income in taxation. OH yes ALL income whilst at sea ia tax free, thus when on a liner, i get no income tax at source there either! In the USA you do pay tax whilst at sea don't you?
1
-
1
-
Accusations of bias. Oh yes, here we go yet again, as a right wing tory this comes again, and again, and again. The BBC charter states that they cannot be involved in politics, and they do it extremly well. It doesn't matter whether I watch right wing casts, or left wing casts this view of BBC bias "against us" is continual. It really does do the BBC credit that they get as many (if not more) left wing accusations, and Labour complaints than they do right wing, and Tory complaints. Thus once again I say the BBC is doing exactly as their charter requires staying in the middle, as proven by a total of 4 complaints (two each) of bias from Labour, and the Conservatives this last month. Keep up the great work BBC and ignore these bias accusations until they really do prove a political bias.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@RedRider1600 However Russia has around 375,000 ground forces in it's army those used to fight land wars. For this operation they sent 150,000 troops (Russian figures not western by the way, and just under a half of the entire ground forces of Russia) into Ukraine, reports (admitedly western, and Ukrainian) say there have been around 48,000 Russian deaths, and possibly even higher wounded numbers, wounded numbers are always higher than dead by the way. Even allowing for half of those, which is somewhere between what Russia admits, and Ukraine claims. That still means 50,000 dead or wounded, with thousands of prisoners. Mobilizing now for war won't work. Russia has to fill the gaps today. To train even cannon fodder like Russia and China do takes 3 months, so there is nothing Russia can do presently. Claiming Russia was just playing around means you are not as clever as the Russian military, who actually declared the number of troops on their "special operation." With those figures, and the extra 50,000 Putin announced almost straight away isn't playing around by any stretch of the immagination. Russia may have called it a "special Operation, but that is for people like you, and the foolish public in Russia!!
Do read this it is where I get my figures from for the ground forces, yes the Russian army is larger than that, but they have so many jobs to do :
"The CIA World Factbook also gives figures of 200,000 to 250,000 Federal National Guard (ie reservists) and 850,000 full-time military personnel, which it breaks down into 375,000 ground troops, of which 40,000 are airborne; 150,000 in the Russian Navy; 160,000 Aerospace Forces; 160,000 Strategic Rocket Forces and approximately 90,000 other uniformed forces, including 20,000 special operations forces."
Like just about every other person here I am gobsmacked by the lack of the Russian ability to prosecute successfully this war, and did indeed think Russia would take Ukraine in the same amount of time germany took Kyiv in WW2, roughly 5 weeks. I am shocked at how badly Russia has prepared for this "cakewalk," and just how bad the Russian military really is. This perhaps has been the biggest underestimation of your enemy since the war of 1812 between the USA, and the UK, where the UK burned the capitol and most of Washington to the ground, whilst fighting Napoleon, and his allies around the globe!!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@andtri716 It clearly states that the woman they interview at 1.51 who is doing the training has had combat action. Just pointing out your foolishness. For all to see. Plus 35 year olds are normally reserve troops Ukriane isn't losing dog food troops at any where near the rate Russia is, so these are reserves NOT the guys who are on the front line most of the time. Do look at the returning home vidoes to see the age difference, plus the real differences between Russian dog food troops and Ukrainian troops who do get to visit home, Russians ALL end up dead in a field! In the last 6 months Russia has lost 50,000 of it's most able troops in Syria, and presently is about to be booted out of Syria, it has lost Azervaijan, and is now loosing Georgia. Does this look like a country that is going to win in Ukraine at all, yesterday the Russian dog food troops was a record count of 1,300 in one failed attack. Tha one attack is the new record in Ukraine, and they are losing troops fster than even China, Russia and North Korea can train them. Not a good look for the new axis of evil at all is it?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@juanitalee225 Why do I quote scripture? Honestly am I NOT allowed to quopte your own book correctly back to you? Oh dear, come on, you people don't know your book at all and expect everyone else to accept the lunacy that comes from people who "think they know" their book. This is exactly why you don't think I should quote it to you. Yet as a life long atheist I DO know your book rather better than you. Plus I was raised in a very religious family, who eventually saw the falseties of Christianity, and the Abrahamic religions.
The edited bit. This was why over 500 years ago we had the age of enlightenment, which meant that we could have the bible read in our own languages, and NOT accept what someoen else stated your book really said every week. Enlightenment meant the Bible was translated to English, and German , and then every other European Language so that if YOU can read YOU can read the book for yourself. Let us NOT forget that your leaders fought tooth and nail, burning so called heretics who simply wanted the bibile in say English, yet the Church tried to keep it secret. The more enlightenment we have the better.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@albertafarmer8638 Because I have read your book, and it is so full of holes that I wonder why people like you follow it!! For example we have well over 7,000 years of written history from India, China, Egypt, Greece, the middle east, and rome, not one of them ever mentions any kind of world flood. Local floods yes world floods NO. Plus when your magic invisible friend fictitiously made said flood because mankind wasn't doin what he said there was in fact only one law from that farcica; none genius. It was "Do Not Eat From the Tree of Knowledge, the rest came after said fictitious flood. I do ask you how a banished people could eat from a tree in a garden they couldn't ever get back to? Also those laws....... What a farce as YOu think of Moses as "The law Giver," when historically the real law giver for manking lived in Babylon, and the bible quotes some of his laws especially in the NEW testament. THE law giver was a King of Babylon who wrote his laws on a stella (large standing upright stone) his name was Hammurabi, and a man thought of civilising laws 200 years before your all powerfull fictitious friend sent Moses to Babylon to copy these laws. He didn't spend 30 days upon a mountain he rode to babylon and back again with a stone hand carved by a mason in the city.
1
-
@zhufortheimpaler4041 So here is the crux of the matter, from what you are saying YOU MUST be German. I have looked at is the Challenger 3 justa leopard 2A9, and the answer unremittingly comes back NO it is a new concept. I certainly understand why you would think it is a leopard, however everywhere including German sites state the following:- "Challenger 3 will be a step changer in tank development, and will be the best tank in the world when it comes into operation." Rheinemetal are NOT using Leopard components at the UK factory building the Challenger 3, so your assertions are crazy. It may be a Leopard 2A7 body now, but it will NOT end up a "A7 variant, or any other variants of Leopard because it is an upgrade to 148 Challenger 2's. I simply don't understand why they would convert the Challenger to a Leopard (starting with a Challenger body, and chasis), especailly as the Leopard isn't as good as the Challenger 2, which Ukraine have currently proven.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@nightmark2120 Personally I don't think there will be a "Nuclear war" MAD ensures this is not going to happen, no one wins is the outcome there. Germany is now buying English Gas from the North sea, it is no longer dependent on Russia, the same for Belgium, and Holland. Holland also have small under sea reserves they didn't touch, but most certainly will now. As for trade Caviar comes from Russia, that will never stop, also NATO buys things from Russia as well, they could just as easily be made in the west, but in times of war, or tension like now, it leads to stabilisation of a certain kind.
Russia wil never be a puppet state to China, if that was going to happen it would already be so now, China's financial budget is vastly superior to any other country, other than the USA. Russia has to watch it's Siberian borders first, China now sees Russia as week, and this will give China the impetus to "do a Tibet," or Mongolia. That is to force enough Chinese people there that they are in the majority, and then do what Russia tried in Donbass.
Hopefully Zelensky will stick to his main aim, of reclaiming Crimea, and cede Donbass, or declare both as none Russian ethnic population areas (they are in the minority in both areas, and cause by far the most trouble). Ukraine's biggest problem now will be terrorism, after the talks end Russia will try to terrorise the Ukrainian population into leaving, that is also why Zelensky wants a hard border between both countries. Also no matter how much he says he will be a neutral country to Putin, Ukraine WILL join NATO at the earliest convenient time, for security he has no other option.
Finally I personally really do hope Turkey becomes one of the guarantors for Ukraine's security, they have fought more wars with an aggresive Russia in the last 300 years than almost any other two countries combined, only the UK, and France have been in more wars than those two, but not against the same country all the time. Turkey will place troops on the frontier, and aggresively patrol the border, they hate Russia with a passion, partly to do with the Crimean Tartars treatment (the majority population in Crimea) at the hands of ethnic Russians, and partly to do with Russia's constant expansion into their territory. Plus the loss to Russia of the Crimea, will be seen as a gain for Turkey, and they will seek permission from ukraine to base naval units in Crimea. In this way Russia becomes hog bound, by both NATO, and China, and Putin becomes the weekest leader of Russia ever, and the only one to cede ground.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@notsaying543 Have they? The USA offered their Patriot air defence systems to Turkey, who went for the s400's. Both the UK, and France are currently in Turkey helping Turkey develop weapons, and delivery systems, in the UK's case it is their own fifth gen fighter. Since when exactly has NATO not aided Turkey? They still make parts of the F35 aircraft despite Trump throwing his dolly out of the pram over the s400's. Not sure if they have any yet though, but it is a discussion Biden has reopened.
WHY does the USA not want Turkey to receive the F35? That is simple honestly. Greece has the Russian s300 system, and Turkey is buying the s400 system. There is a world of difference in what both countrys are getting in the packages. Greece insisted that they, and only they maimtain their systems (which strangely means Russian scientists, and technology people on NATO soil, but only temporarily at the beginning. However Turkey signed up for the whole s400 package. This is THE major differece here, it means Russian scientists, and technolgy experts on NATO exercises, thus givivng them all the information they can gather about the F35 and how to find, and then track it. The Uk were a tad angry as well, but hey ho an ally is an ally, is an ally, and the UK and Turkey have only been on opposite sides in WW1 in possibly the last 250 years.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@danieljerram7964 Oh good this is one of the reasons I use this moniker on here. So then tell me exactly which Tsars, and what paper Putin is following? Then if you know explain it, and the reasoning geopolitically, it is all rather simple really, as well as historic. This should be a good discussion, but I don't expect a reply from you that is too much in depth, or too historically accurate, partly because I personally don't believe you.
Oh your point about the RAF and interceptions of Russian aircraft? Honestly it is at least once a day, it only gets reported here if the QRF aircraft have to do more than one interception in a day, but the press never tell how many interceptions were done, just roughly how many Russian war planes were intercepted. Russia also runs the GIUK gap several times a day, and the Channel waters are the busiest sea lanes in the world bar none! Not much trade passes through the Bosphorous by comparison, and the Black sea fleet isn't that impressive in real life, as they showed recently when they Followed HMS Duncan on it's journey throughj international waters off Crimea
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@youtubehatesfreespeech2555 LOL, sorry!! OK so basically for a brief (I mean whole chapters in a book) run down on geopolitics there are two very good books (written by an English Journalist of all people) which when I am answering people on here are never very far from my side, and are a tad dog eared now. The first is simply called Prisoners of geography. The very first chapter deals with Ukraine, Russia and Europe. Ukraine historically was the playground of cavalry the forrunner of integrated armoured and tank warfare, and is actually the soft under belly of Russia, which can lead directly to, and beyond Moscow. It also eplains the brief history of the area, By this I mean it doesn't go back to the Mongols, or the Vikings either, the latter founded Kiev (Kyiv) Moscow, and Khakov (Kharkiv) along with several other Major Ukrainian and Russian cities along their trade routes to Constantinople. The Slav's are simply the people whom the Norse (sweden, and Norway mostly in this case and via this route) enslaved to sell at the markets at either end of the journey. The last was just an aside for you. LOL
The second is called The power of Geography, it isn't quite as good as the first, however it deals with the smaller powers for example Iran, Isreal, Saudi Arabia, the UK, Australia, Greece, and Turkey. It has it's own very good reasons to be read. I think anyone commenting on here should have at the very least read both of those books, they explain exactly why we are where we are today, and with just a tad of extrapolation where we are heading tomorrow politically, and globally. Both are written by Tim Marshall. He has also written several other top selling books
1
-
@youtubehatesfreespeech2555 Article ten written by the two countries who technically founded the alliance forbids this from happening. NATO grew out of the 1946 alliance between france and the UK. it didn't want to stand alone against either Germany (if it revitalised as it had before WW2, or Spain under Franco, who were the major national socialist country then in the world. the articles of joining NATO have been rewritten specifically for NATO, however they still contain the same original concept, we (The UK, and France) will accept any like minded country, and aid in your defence. This is the sole reason both Turkey, and Greece are both in the alliance, both need aid in stopping a rampageous Russia, and aid sometimes against one another. simple really Turkey wants aid in stopping Iranian influence in their area of influence, it makes sense to use this time as a talking point as to what aid that should be, and what defence measures they need now. Just who do you think aids Hesbollah in Lebanon, ceratinly NOT Isreal, Egypt, Turkey, or Saudi Arabia.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@PeterTrimboli 2.3% of GDP is what the Uk claims it spends. Boris that clever fellow raised it from 1.98% to 2,2 Rishi, added the extra 0.1% Ben Wallace is on record as stating 3% is the absolute minimum. I thinkl Rishi is also commited to the amount that Liz Truss commited to, which is 3% by 2025. We actually spend truthfully including Boris' extra defence spends, roughly 5% of Government spending if you include the Boris 5 billion a year (or 18billion over 3 years extra commitment), defence procurement, and defence total research raise this to roughly 5.5% of total Government spending or £71.5 Billion a year making the Uk the 4th highest spending country on defence in the world, only the USA, China, India, and supposedly Russia spend more directly on their armed forces. However the amount directly for defence should as I ststed be a minimum of 3%. 0.7 on defence would add another 10billion a year in total to that figure, which is reasonable given the fact we need more ships, more aircraft, and more soldiers.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@judgedredd8876 Russia sent roughly 150,000 troops to Ukraine, the Ukraine armed forces in total pre the invasion was said to be 196,600, of which 35,000 were their airforces, and the naval element is roughly the same today at 15,000. This leaves 125,600 to face Russia's 150,000 at its worst Ukraine has never had the more numerous troops on the ground, nown as numerical parity. Today the numbers of Russian troops including those recently mobilised for Russia is roughly 250,000, whilst Ukraine now has roughly 200,000 troops of it's own. Russia is losing eberywhere from a position of superiority, and numerical advantage. Russia also has a far larger so called reserve with 2million so called reservists, while Ukraine has 900,000.
So once again your points are false as always!!
1
-
1
-
1
-
@davidfaraday7963 It is not my clarity or lack of here, it is your comprehension that is at fault. My points were clear and concise, I haven't left out important details, except for deliberately leaving out the names of the countries I am talking about in two cases only. I am sorry for you if you didn't understand, however you are the only one ranting about comprehension, and clarity on here, so I make my point this way. YOU claim the high ground in comprehension, and clarity, and grammar, by inference. However as the only person making these claims, not just here, but on any thread I post on, or get replies on, then maaybe, just maybe your comprehension is lacking, not my clarity here.
1
-
@davidfaraday7963 What is confused about mant countries win one on one wars with larger powers, a few have won against two or more. One has won on it's own against the next three greatest world powers, and one country, Mongolia, is the only country to have forged an Empire whilst continuously beating all of the odds on 3 fronts never having superior fire power manpower, or even in most cases their choice of ground on which to fight. If taht is garbled, and that is what I have written now for the last 2 posts, then I honestly wonder at the standard of your comprehension.
My final point was simply this : only one country has beaten Vietnam since WW2, and alone, and inside 18 months. The UN gave the mandate, and then a safe Vietnam was handed over to France.
I cannot account for your low standards of comprehension or understanding unless your natural (birth) language is NOT English.
1
-
@davidfaraday7963 Vietnam ....... HAHAHAHAHAHAHA... NO Vietnam has only ever faced one enemy at a time, and lost as I said to one inside 18 months since WW2.
My reply is simply this many many countries have won wars when supposedly outgunned, and outnumberred by a larger power. The USA for example constantly tells the world they beat the world's greatest ever power (which is true by the way), as an example of this. So one country beating another when they are supposedly the smaller power, but recieve aid from their own people, and (as in the case of the USA) other nations, when fighting "one on one" victory can be far easier than expected. Some countries Germany for example has always lived with the nightmare scenario of war on two fronts, both East, an west as have Austria, and Italy. Their is though only one country that forged an empire first honed purely out of revenge, then to stop China ruling it, and then facing the nightmare of war on 3 fronts, which has one from a position of never fielding in any place an army larger than the enemy, or having the security of knowing if they lose there are reserve armies, because their's were fully engaged elsewhere, yet through all of this they forged the world's 5th Largest Empire. These people basically at one time controlled almost all of Asia, apart from Japan, and India. They did go on eventually to control totally Afghanistan, and India. That empire was the Mongol Empire started by the person you know as the "Great Khan, or Genghis Khan."
Vietnam....................... I nearly spat my breakfast out all pver the floor I was so shocked at the wrong assumption, and laughter!! Vietnam only has one real enemy CHINA. Who by the way they have beaten easily since WW2!
Was That simple enough?
1
-
Correct, only you really only know of the Vietnamese victories since WW2 of Vietnam. No one seems to know that the vietnamese have also been beaten just once, and in under 18 months since WW2. Also of course no one ever seems to remember that winning against just one enemy that outnumbers you isn't too difficult, many countries have in fact done this, winning against two even in defnsive wars has been done, but is difficult, However only one country has continously fought wars on three fronts, always outnumbered and supposedly "outgunned," Yet despite this they won when attacking on three fronts, or being attacked on three fronts, and formed the world's 5th largest Empire. Also being outgunned/outmanned in your own country is not really a thing, especially when the whole population works towards you demise.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@goenzoy712 But it is like the Russian experience in Afghanistan a war by proxy. The west will continue to pour money, and weapons into Ukraine for as long as it takes because doing this is cheaper than fighting Russia, and China head on for NATO and it's allies. Russia like Afghanistan will not be allowed to win this war, they are facing creeping death on various fronts as it is, lack of imports, no tech to build new modern weapons, and nearly 3million left Russia because they would NOT be drafted, as well as the real problem here, Russia is the only so called developed country to have a falling birth rate, and no imigration. Plus the border regions of Russia to the south are now at a tipping point, with wars being fought that in the past Russia stopped. Sorry but Russia is already dead, the body just hasn't stopped twitching yet.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Dear silly people!! Boris has NOT broken any law. to become a law things have to go through both houses of Parliament several times, refined, re refined, read, and re read. The Queen also has to sign them into the staute books. What has happened is he had a "party" at his home, which for the duration of his premiership it is. The only thing he did was be stupid enough to allow people who work for him to eat in Number ten's garden (no one can do this without his permission). What he did is break an emergency measure, believe it or not this is NOT a criminal offence, in the great scheme of things it is not even as bad as a speeding/Parking ticket. Emergency rules are time bound, and are NOT classed as low level; criminality, whereas parking tickets/speeding fines are. Also anyone commenting on here should know that there are several extant laws that nearly everyone breaks every day/week. Therefore only if you are 100% sure you have not broken the law in any way then should you comment, just because you do not know of the existence of so called archaic laws doesn't mean you can carry on doing what in effect are criminal acts, and then be hypocritical on here. I always say show me someone who says they have never broken the law, and I WILL show you a liar!!
1
-
@donaldkasper8346 RPG's Don't need to get in on top. This is the idea for taking the tank out from a distance. However regadless of what tank you have and the reactive armour the only tank in the world not to have been taken out by enemy RPG's is the Challenger two. However RPG's are designed to take on the armour of a tank, and defeat it, given close enough range, and the fact the tank is made unable to move given in almost all cases enough hits they will. What constitutes enough hits? 70, and 14 for the challenger didn't do serious damage to the hull, whilst RPG's have destroyed every other tank type. In the case of the tiger two is enough, abrams roughly the same. Those cases were touch extreme, where the individual tanks could not move for what ever reasons, or were trying to get away froma situation they were kind of stuck in.
The idea of the latest designs of weapons against a tank, are to take on the so called weak spots. However the west (well UK?USA/possibly Germany and France) already has an anti NLAW/Javelin defence on all of our tanks. It does depend on the country of origin, but technically they all aim to destroy the anti tank weapon in flight, or with another shaped charge expelled at the critical explosive moment deflect the strike away from the tank. They can in the case of the shaped charge even stop the latest Russian anti tank mine from destroying the tank, because that ejects a small missile, that arcs up over the tank, and directs it's chage down in the NLAW style. Think the idea of the covers the Russiams use is simply to try to stop the javelin, or the NLAW having a direct shot at the top of the tank, however basically anything designed to go through a tank's turret top will cut through a cage of domestic grade steel as if it isn't there at all.
The rubber on the Russian tanks is not an addition to stop bullets, it is what is inside those supposedly reactive armour things you see on a Russian tank, not an additional layer on top of the tank, it is the Russian version of reactive armour!! Do look at some of the early Ukrainian videos of the tanks they destroyed, or captured and you will see them showing this.
Anyway why this dicussion here? The west and Ukrainian tanks can, and are destroying the poorly designed Russian tanks by the handfull every single day. That is what we should be praising here, not the semantics of defence of tanks, and how they can be trapped and destroyed, No matter my hubris over the NLAW and it's success in Ukraine, the Javelin is also having the desired effect, as are most western designed weapons systems. This mini tank, actually designed to be airlifted is not really supposed to be used ina tank style war, it doesn't have either the armour, or the weapons to take on MBT's.
1
-
@karlfranzemperorofmandefil5547 Finacial Grants are for liquidity, not weapons also are you talking Euros, or dollars here? Because in Dollars it is 1.2bilion, while the uK has given $1.5 billion or $2Billion. So if you are using Euro's that equates to £880 million. I Think your figures are Euros, not dollars or sterling the two main international currencies. so if we use Euros here you need to divide by 1.25 to get the sterling equivalent, to go the other way from £ to Euros multiply by 1.25. Thus 1,3 billion euros equates to £1.1billion. So in Euros terms you seem to be giving a lot more until talking in the 2 trade currencies.
Also this chart may help Europe's help by GDP is the highest, but includes Latvia, and Poland, and Germany. meanwhile the UK has provided a total of 0.24% of GDP, while in total Germany has provided 0.08% of GDP, less per head of population than Denmark.
https://www.statista.com/chart/27331/countries-committing-the-most-of-their-gdp-to-ukraine-aid/
So Yes by comparison with both the UK, and the USA, Germany has actually provided very little!!
1
-
@johnathanh2660 To be honest it isn't a tank, it is an light armoured reconaisance vehicle. It still won't really travel a 60MPH, unless it has been attacked, and they are hare tailing it back to freindly lines. in a war it sneaks along hoping not to be seen by the enemy, it can defend itself, but not against MBT's it can also actually go places foot soldiers cannot because of it.s light ground weight. There are many cases including in the falklands where the troops dismonuted, only to be sucked into the morass the vehicle was sat on top of.
My point is to show both that tanks don't travel in wars at 45MPH. In fact the only tank to have sustained multi RPG hits while staionary, and not become a coffin is the Challenger 2. RPG's are effective if you "Trap" the enemy somewhere either they set out to take, or funnel them into pre ordained positions. I also take your point about theJavelin, but the NLAW is the most succesful anti tank weapon in Ukraine, because it is the only one to have taken out an entire Russian convoy of AFV's MBT's and armoured transports for weapons, and at this time it is Ukraine's anti tank weapon of choice, because it is a multi use system, and most combats are close quarters, while the Javelin has been very good at pre set points of concentration before moving to the front. Actually used together as they successfuly have been by the Ukrainians they make an awsome pairing, because the NLAW does front line, and Javelin does reinfocements before they know what is coming. However as you say developments have been made to defeat defences used on more modern tanks, and upgraded tank versions. This is a natural evolution of war, someone develops something, someone develops the thing to stop it, then development after development later we have remotely operated tanks, with remotely operated anti tank weapons.
Also a true fire and forget weapon gueses where the enemy is going to be because it uses midflight inertia. or GPS, and the speed the enemy vehicle was travelling when fired, both the NLAW and the Javelin do this to some extent which is why they rae extermely good at hitting their targets.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Ok so to answer this you have to realise that Neither of the 5 major powers involved with Korea want a Unified Country. The first separation between the two was between Russia and the Uk way back in 1945. The present demarcation positions were agreed by both the UK, and Russia as the edges of their areas of respective influence. China doesn't want a unified Korea for the obvious reasons that a unified Korea would rival them politically and economically, South Korea alone already does this. The USA, and Japan do not want a unified Korea, because a communist (Chinese influenced) Korea would be a sword to Japan's heart, and the UN couldn't enforce a united Korea lead by the USA, simply because this WOULD lead to WW3, and China will NOT allow American influences on it's borders. The UN doesn't want either side to start a war because of the Global implications. So in other words North Korea is never going to be able to attack the South, and Vice versa because of the powers involved locally. The problem with Korea is it is an absolute nightmare to try to defend, there are no major natural lines of defence, which run east to west so from north to south there is no natural defensive position for a defender to hold. which is why China and Japan were always fighting over it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@shannonhenson609 YES we can teach you lts about war. Since WW2 only ONE country has won in Vietnam, and subdued the population. France, the USA, and even China all notably singularly failed in Vietnam where it only took 18 months for the UK to carry out the new UN's mandate. Plus that tiny debacle in the late 18th century was a side note to an actual world war. Britain was fighting the next three world powers (France, Spain, and the Dutch republic) at the same time We ended France as a sea power, we ended both the Dutch republic and Spain as an Empire builder and lost in a then, small backwater country, now called the USA. In fact whilst YOU Australia, and New Zealand were getting your asses handed to you in Vietnam we had to fight alone agianst a Chinese paid for insurgency in a much larger country called Malaya, we won you lost. Sorry bud you were lucky with timing in 1776, is all.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
You are seriously Joking here. Servicemen and women aren't "Badly paid" at all. They admittedly don't get the X factor payments other NATO troops do, but they make more on allowances when in action, thus it factors up their individual pay significantly. For example when I was in the RN my take home pay was higher than a technical teacher (Maths and science), and if we worked it out correctly my pay could double while at sea, depending upon where we landed first, and exactly how long we were at sea between dockings. There are plenty of ways of enhancing the pay scale you get so that you end up with almost double your takehome pay if you just get some qualifications.
As for the Borrowers, this is because the USA has a stupid budget for defence, and they don't care what they give to British forces (or French forces) who are in action with them. If you can get kit from an ally that is better than ours in certain conditions (Italain Mediteranean kits were better than British ones when I was in service, so I used to buy them, or aquire them if allowed by superior commanders), then surely even someone like you can see the benefits to the exchanges.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@freethinker284 Ukraine hasn't used forced conscription. Putin is. Yes I understand everything I say on here is correct, because rather strangely here in the west if a news agency uses a satelite picture, you can access those yourself. We do not live in fascist states here isn the west, unlike you in Russia, the nearest to no freedom is actually the USA. Plus we can still get RT if we try hard, but your TV is so controlled that it is a farce. Also I can get Chinese state news, south China sea news, and nonme of those reckons you are doing well in Ukraine at all.
"On top of that Russia has a lot of locals fighting on it's side." This is the biggest joke statement I have seen here. There are even Russians who live in Ukraine fighting against Russia. Only those forced to fight for the most aggressive country in the world are doing so, and when they get the slightest chance they are killing their leaders, and joining Ukraine. Syria you forgot to mention has sent troops as well, around 3,000, however 10,000 Syrian Volunteers are fighting for Ukraine, even people from Georgia, and Azerbaijan are fighting against Russia in Ukraine. I personally know an Azerbaijany doctor who has left the Uk to join friends fighting for Ukraine's freedom. You see this I know is correct because of my rather racially mixed up family, and freinds. Just watching any news is not very clever so I have fostered good relationships with people I have met thrughout my life (rather strangely Russian as well) and I think in this instance the information I can access is rather better and more correct than yours. So how will Russia rtesupply those troops in Kherson now that the ukarinians have the south of the city (the bit that is where the bridges are)? You see normally troops try to take piecemeal the places they are attacking however like the German army in WW2 Ukraine has learned that the best way to deal with Russian troops, and armed forces, is not to do what Russia would do!!
So for once yes I believe the old news on this channel totally
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@aniksamiurrahman6365 LOL. I am NOT a blind western Idiot, as you claim. I have quoted to you what China is saying. You still quote from where exactly? No where to be brutal here!! Look I honestly don't care whether they are ferries, fairies, or pontoons. You have to keep moving them from place to place, or they will be destroyed As the Russian army found out at Stalingrad. They won there because the General in the field started moving ferries from one landing place to another, because 90% of ALL Russian ferries crossing the river were destroyed as they crossed by indirect long range German fire. Honestly this is not advanced Nuclear physics, or quantum mechanics we are discussing here. It is very simply a matter of simple but partially effective military strategy. You have two pontoon, or Ferry bridges, leave them there long enough and they will be hit by your enemy, and thus consequently to you useless. Stop with the lunacy that Russia can just do as it (or you thinks it can) wants, it cannot. To put your stupidity to the point here If a pontoon bridge is inside the effective artillery range of your enemy for over 4 hours then expect direct hits every 20 minutes, if you are slightly clever and you move it to somewhere nearby every three hours then you have a chance that it will remain intact. Something as I said Russia learned the hard way at Stalingrad. no one has yet come up with a fool proof way of stopping enemy artillery hitting static targets repeatedly. Your knowledge of simple military tactics is about as much as the Russian tactics at the start of this was stupid. You keep repeating the same things I have told YOU CHINA says the resuply is inermittent, not Western media. To be brutal here I am the kind of person who buys two extremes of the daily news reads both then looks at various channels to find out the truth. Russia is NOT telling anything like the truth about Ukraine. Let us just start with the fact that a fascist state (Russia) tried to claim that Ukraine was right wing. Well if Ukraine was right wing then even the Communist party must have been a centreist party justifying it's existence by proclaining the rights of the individual (which everyone knows is NOT the case). Putin and his regime are almost as far right as the Nazi party were, and he the world's ultimate Russian right wing oligarch.
1
-
@aniksamiurrahman6365 Yes since last May. Where is the great Russian army now in Kherson? Cut off on means of getting food, water, or ammunition. Kherson which Russia mnade so much news about is about to become Ukrainian again.
Ahh Russia has invaded more countries since WW2 than the USA. Thank that famous Russian site Wikipedia for this information :
1945 Soviet–Japanese War (Part of World War II) Soviet Union
Mongolia Japan
Manchukuo Victory
Karafuto Prefecture is annexed by the Soviet Union and incorporated into Sakhalin Oblast.
Kuril Islands annexed to the Soviet Union
Liberation of Manchuria, Inner Mongolia and northern Korea, and collapse of Japanese puppet states there.
Partition of the Korean Peninsula.
Manchuria and Inner Mongolia are returned to China.
1946–1954 First Indochina War North Vietnam Việt Minh
Laos Pathet Lao
Cambodia Khmer Issarak
Supported by:
Soviet Union France France
• French Indochina Vietnam (1949–1954)
Cambodia Cambodia (1953–1954)
Laos (1953–1954)
Victory
Vietnam is partitioned between North (controlled by Việt Minh) and South (controlled by the State of Vietnam).
Geneva Conference
Departure of the French from Indochina.
State of Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia gain official independence.
1950–1953 Korean War North Korea
China
Soviet Union United Nations
South Korea
United States
United Kingdom
Australia
Belgium
Canada
France
Philippines
Colombia
Ethiopia
Greece
Luxembourg
Netherlands
New Zealand
South Africa
Thailand
Turkey Ceasefire
Establishment of the Korean DMZ
Minor territorial changes
1955–1975 Vietnam War North Vietnam
Viet Cong and PRG
Pathet Lao
GRUNK (1970–1975)
Khmer Rouge
China
Soviet Union
North Korea South Vietnam
United States
South Korea
Australia
New Zealand
Laos
Cambodia (1967–1970)
Khmer Republic (1970–1975)
Thailand
Philippines Victory
Withdrawal of American forces from Indochina
North Vietnamese victory over South Vietnam
Dissolution of the Republic of Vietnam
Communist governments take power in South Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia
South Vietnam is annexed by North Vietnam
1953 East German Uprising Soviet Union
East Germany East Germany East German demonstrators Victory
Uprising suppressed
1956 Hungarian Revolution Soviet Union
Hungary ÁVH Revolutionaries Victory
Crushing of the revolution
1968 Invasion of Czechoslovakia Soviet Union
Bulgaria
East Germany
Hungary
Poland Czechoslovakia Victory
Moscow Protocol
Soviet military presence in Czechoslovakia until 1991
1969 Zhenbao Island Incident Soviet Union China Indecisive(status quo ante bellum)[7]
Tactical Soviet victory[8]
Strategic Soviet victory: Ceasefire Agreement Signed.[7]
1991 Sino-Soviet Border Agreement[7]
1969–1970 War of Attrition Egypt
Soviet Union Israel Inconclusive
Both sides claimed victory
Continuation of Israeli occupation of Sinai until 1982, when Israeli provisional control over the Sinai Peninsula ended in 1982 following the implementation of the 1979 Egypt–Israel peace treaty, which saw Israel return the region to Egypt in exchange for the latter's recognition of Israel as a legitimate sovereign state.
1974–1991 Eritrean War of Independence Ethiopia Ethiopia
Cuba (until 1989)
Soviet Union (until 1990)
South Yemen ELF
EPLF Withdrawal (limited involvement)
Independence of Eritrea after the fall of the communist government in Ethiopia
1975–1991 Angolan Civil War MPLA
Cuba
Brazil
Soviet Union
граница SWAPO
граница MK South Africa
UNITA
FNLA
FLEC Stalemate (limited involvement)
Three Powers Accord
Withdrawal of all foreign forces from Angola
Independence of Namibia
1977–1978 Ethio-Somali War Ethiopia
Cuba
South Yemen
Soviet Union Somalia Somalia
WSLF Victory
Somalia broke all ties with the Second World except for China and Romania
1979–1989 Soviet–Afghan War Soviet Union
Afghanistan Afghanistan Afghan Mujahideen The operation of the Red Army in Afghanistan failed to change the situation in the country
Geneva Accords of 1988
Withdrawal of Soviet forces from Afghanistan
Continuation of the Afghan Civil War
Russian Federation (1991–present)
Date Conflict Location Russia (and its allies) Opponent(s) Result
1991–1993 Georgian Civil War Georgia Georgia (country) Georgia
Russia Georgia (country) Zviadists Victory
Zviadist revolt crushed
1991–1993 War in Abkhazia Abkhazia Russia
Abkhazia Georgia Victory
Abkhazia gained de facto independence
1992 Transnistria War
PMR trucks on the bridge between Tiraspol and Bendery
Transnistria Transnistria
Russia
* 14th Guards Army (elements)[9][10][11][12]
* Don Cossacks[13]
* Kuban Cossacks
Ukrainian volunteers
* UNA-UNSO.[14][15] Moldova
Romanian volunteers and military advisers
[9][16][17] Victory
Transnistria gained de facto independence
1992 East Prigorodny Conflict North Ossetia-Alania Russia
North Ossetia-Alania[18] Ingush militia Victory
Expulsion of ethnic Ingush from Prigorodny by Ossetian militia
1992–1997 Tajikistani Civil War
Spetsnaz troops dismount an APC during the war
Tajikistan Tajikistan/ Tajikistan
Russia/ Russia
Uzbekistan
Kazakhstan/ Kazakhstan
Kyrgyzstan/ Kyrgyzstan
Turkmenistan/ Turkmenistan
United Nations UNMOT
Austria
Bangladesh
Bulgaria
Czech Republic
Denmark
Ghana
Hungary
Indonesia
Jordan
Nepal
Nigeria
Poland
Switzerland
Ukraine
Uruguay
Supported by:
Belarus/ Belarus[19] (weapons supplies)
China
India
United Tajik Opposition
Islamic Renaissance Party
Democratic Party
Party of People's Unity
Rastokhez Popular Movement
Lali Badakhshan
Gorno-Badakhshan[20]
Jamiat-e Islami (until 1996)
Afghanistan Afghanistan (until 1996)
Hezb-e Islami Gulbuddin (until 1996)
Afghanistan Taliban factions[a]
Supported by:
al-Qaeda[22]
Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan
Victory
United Nations-sponsored armistice
1993 Russian spillover into Azerbaijan Azerbaijan Russia
Azerbaijan
Huseynov's Forces
Withdrawal
Reassurance of National Security
Huseynov's Forces are kicked out
Russia establishes peace for now in Azerbaijan
Strengthens ties with Azerbaijan
1994–1996 First Chechen War
A Chechen militiaman takes cover behind a burned-out Russian BMP-2 armoured vehicle
Chechnya Russia
Chechnya Chechen Opposition
граница Ichkeria
Mujahideen Defeat[23]
Withdrawal of Russian forces from Chechnya
Khasav-Yurt Accord
De facto independence of the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria, but de jure it remained a part of the Russian Federation
1999 War of Dagestan
Russian federal Spetsnaz forces in Dagestan
Dagestan Russia
Dagestan
IIPB Victory
Start of the Second Chechen War
1999–2009 Second Chechen War
A farewell ceremony for the 331st Airborne Regiment of the 98th Airborne Division withdrawn from Chechnya
Chechnya Russia
Chechnya
граница Ichkeria
Caucasian Front
Mujahideen Victory
Russia regained control over Chechnya
2008 Russo-Georgian War
Tank-like vehicle with soldiers aboard
Russian BMP-2 from the 58th Army in South Ossetia
Georgia, South Ossetia and Abkhazia Russia
South Ossetia
Abkhazia Georgia Victory
Occupation of Abkhazia and South Ossetia
2009–2017 Insurgency in the North Caucasus
FSB Spetsnaz members during an anti-terrorist operation in Makhachkala, Dagestan
North Caucasus Russia
Chechnya
Dagestan
Ingushetia
Kabardino-Balkaria
North Ossetia-Alania
Caucasus Emirate ISIL (from 2015) Victory
Defeat of Islamists
2014–present Russo-Ukrainian War
Russian unidentified special forces take control of a Ukrainian military garrison in Crimea
Donetsk People's Republic militiamen checking with civilians in a cellar during the Battle of Ilovaisk (2014)
DPR elite Republican Guard troops during the 2018 Victory Day parade in Donetsk
Ukraine (incl. Crimea) Russia
Donetsk People's Republic
Luhansk People's Republic
Ukraine Ongoing
2014 Russian annexation of Crimea
Russo-Ukrainian War
Minsk Protocol, an un-implemented ceasefire agreement
2021–22 Russo-Ukrainian crisis
2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine
2015–present Russian military intervention in the Syrian Civil War
Two Tupolev Tu-22M3s bombing ISIL command posts and weapon warehouses in the Deir ez-Zor area, 2017
Sukhoi Su-30 pilot talking to a Russian Air Force technician in the Khmeimim Air Base
Syria
Russia
Syria
Iran
границаHezbollah ISIL
Ahrar al-Sham
Tahrir al-Sham Syrian Opposition Ongoing
Preservation of the Syrian government headed by Bashar al-Assad.[24]
Syrian Armed Forces recapture more than 30,000 square kilometres of area, including Latakia, Aleppo and Palmyra, break the three-year-long siege of Deir ez-Zor and take control of that city[25][26]
2018–present Central African Republic Civil War
Delivery of Russian BRDM-2 armored vehicles to Central African Republic, October 2020
Central African Republic Russia
Central African Republic
Rwanda Central African Republic Coalition of Patriots for Change
Horrendous isn't it? Just like the rest of Russia's aggressive history of invading near neighbours!! Sorry but in this the truth really does hurt doesn't it?
1
-
1
-
@bobmorane2082 What does the UK give? or the EU, orAustralia Canada, or Poland, or Sweden, or Norway, or Finland? Luckily for you South Africa hasn't yet sent it's long range guns that can stike from 76 KM away twice the distance of any Russian artillery. You forget that Russia has allowed NATO to proxy fight against it. Most of the new Ukrainian NATO weapons out distance all of the Russian artillery so you can have as much artillery as you like shooting back at Ukrainian artillery, but it cannot reach them. So piece by piece the Russian positions and artillery are picked off at leisure, and range. russia has basically run out of it's strategic reserves of ammunition, or we would see more than 70k a day shot into Ukraine. Plus 70k along a front like stretching for the entire Donbass is actually very small amounts in any one area. In Ukraine Russia is slowly but increasingly, and more importantly more speedily losing ground, lives, troops, and the war.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ChayMiddleton I know you were that is why I replied sarcastically.
So to give you the official RN definition : Not just two floors (decks), but TWO DECKS permanently above the waterline. This is how the RN officially assigns ths name ship, or boat. Henvce submarines are boats because they don't have two decks permanently above the waterline, whilst patrol boats have just one deck above the waterline, and fisherires protection vessels have two decks above the waterline. Honestly it is a very simple idea, and the US navy use the same nomenclature. OK? Simple stuff really.
As for the RN, it is always getting the wrong end of every deal, the RAF are NOT hoarding the F35's the first RN squadron 809 formed this year, and they are NOT RAF. All F35B's will eventually end up in the Royal navy, though it may take some time. We currently have 3 squadrons though the third is not fully equiped. Patrol boats cannot take more than 30 mm canon because of the weight. Honestly this is all very simple stuff here. So storm shadow is F35 cleared and we have enough ammunition for both carriers at full strength at sea for a year. The RAF knows they cannot keep the F35's theRAF are in the military sense the "Licensing" people for fixed wing aircraft, whilst the RN is for rotary aircraft. This is why the F35's have to be cleared through the RAF. The rAF squadrons are commanded by RAF personnel, but havve RN pilots in the main. Those wishing to remain in the RAF will stay there, but all of the others are Royal navy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@johnbobson1557 What? A carrier that has a flood during sea trials (which is what sea trials is all about) and a carrier that has a steering/propulsion problem? Whilst the Ford itself took 6 years to get the Launchers to do more than 20 launches without breaking down, so in that time the deck was ripped apart 5 times when they installed larger and more powerful EMALS systems, then just last year the US Navy admited the Ford had just one of it's weapons lifts fitted, that didn't work because it was the wrong lift gear. The USS Ford is a year older than the QE, and only tyhis year became ready for sea! I think you are being a tad too harsh on big Lizzy, and the POW, They are after all THE most technically advanced aircraft carriers in the world, cost less than a third to build and less than a tenth of the cost of the Ford, or Nimitz class to run, can outlaunch, and outland/recover ANY US carrier in any given 24 hour period. You honestly don't really have a clue do you? You think once something so large and technical is built that is it for the entire future of the ship. I am just glad you are not, and never have been, in any western forces!!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@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
-
@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
-
@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
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@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
-
1
-
@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
-
@brandondaway1 Ok so whilst both Radar will pick up an image of the Harrier, the F35 has a reflected image smaller than a bird. When both are stationary they are very difficult to find in all of the clatter in a fighting front line. Doppler radar uses the doppler effect to spot something moving very fast (a fighter jet) the harrier is known to have ambushed Russian made aircraft with doppler radar, and pulsed doppler radar. Here is description of just how the Harrier or even a storm, can disapear from a pulsed doppler radar :
"To understand this, consider a situation where the measurement causes the phase of the pulse to shift by 400 degrees. Mathematically, this is identical to a shift of 40 degrees, because it has gone through an entire cycle (a full 360 degrees). Speeds causing shifts such as this are called the "blind speed." It is a function of the pulse repetition frequency of the signal, so by altering this signal, meteorologists can prevent this to some degree.
Edited by Anne Marie Helmenstine, Ph.D."
So your claim has been proven false by the science world!!!!!
The edited bit...... You see there is also a problem with any form of doppler radar, it HAS to be optimised to see either staionary, or moving objects, it cannot do both at the same time. Thus as I said a Harrier, and the F35 will when stationary NOT be seen by a doppler radar optimised to movement. Thye can be switched to staionary objects, then they won.t see the rest of the western airforces that cannot stand still. Russia has this as a very real known problem, and thus far NONE of the Russian systems are known to attempt to solve this major Doppler radar problem. Jst like your country sherriff in the USA using doppler radar to spot speeding traffic, the radar will not "see" any staionary vehicles by the roadside ever.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@moistman6930 The EE lightening was the very first aircraft capable of supercruise. So what is your point here? Super cruise just means it can cruise at speeds higher than Mach 1 or supersonically. The EE lightening was the very first aircraft in the world to do this!!
Agility IS way more important than the ability to not be seen on a radar, there are only two aircraft in the world that can not be seen by modern fighter radar, the F35, and the Harrier Jump jet. Modern radar are doppler based, so both the Harrier, and the F35 can stop in mid air, ths disappearing from Doppler radar. Alll fighting is done subsonically, in fact only 1% of dog fights since WW2 have been above the speed of sound, and none of those were missile fights either!!. The Typhoon, and in fact all modern fighter aircraft have sophistcated proceedures to avoid being splashed by BVR, which in fact accounts for less than 0.001% of all combat since WW2. Processors can react faster than missile systems can alter course, or have you not noticed that the ultimate idea for flight is people less fighter aircraft?
Why turn as slowly as a Spitfire in a fight? The Typhoon is the only aircraft that can accelerate through +9Gee turns, amd then go straight through -5Gee. That would fold a Spitfire up in mid flight, and spit out the dead pilot!!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@hamletksquid2702 es you are spreading misinformation. NASAMS HI mars are all recent US weapons sytems, as is TITAN a drone disrupting system. The US as is the Uk are sending some, but not all of their latest but older stock weapons systems to Ukraine Stop getting all offended when someone points out the truth. As I said the truth is out there for everyone to find, and you werte being disparaging to Ukraine. I have NOT deleted my comment at all here it is on this thread as I posted it this morning, thus more disinformation, and lies from you :
"the truth hurts
the truth hurts
6 hours ago
@Hamlet K Squid They have US modern systems, this is for the swarms of drones, it isn't cost effective to shoot drones down with NASAMS or Starstreak from the UK. So they will use Vietnam era weapons simply because the drones all fly slowly. You are spreading false and malicious fake news here."
I stand by what I said here, you are lying for no good reason. Or for political reasons to try to aid Russia. Then for some reason you are disparaging Ukraine with this stupid comment :
"Hamlet K Squid
Hamlet K Squid
1 day ago
@Sunny Mitra - They don't want OUR modern systems in Ukraine."
You should be ashamed of your self for that statement, people in Ukraine are dying defending your, and my liberty, and all you can do is act like some teenage girl who has been told the truth for once. Go back to where you come and take a really big look at yourself, you were offended by what exactly? The Truth? Well that is why I use this moniker on here, if you don't like being told the truth then don't post such idiotic stuff in the first place.
Finally by telling you that you don't get the moral high ground if you are offended, or hurt wasn't me claiming the moral high ground just putting you firmly in your place. Now please DO NOT reply again unless you are going to confirm you were maliciously spreading misinformation!!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ilikelampshades6 Lt in which Navy? Also unless you are some kind of specialist a pay rise for medical staff is not what happens on joining the NHS from the RN. As a Leiutenant in the RN you would receive between £42,850 and £50.957. Let us assume you were a step 5 lieutenant, the pay for this is £48255. To get a pay increase of 20K you need to be band 8b in the NHS which gives £68,525. This includes such jobs as : Strategic management (which as an ex lieutenat you aren't qualified for). head of education and learning (you could have been a schooly, and thus might just get this job, and schoolies do very little in the RN at best), you couldn't be a Clinical Physiology service manager, not qualified to the right level as an ex Lieutenant, a head orthoptist. This you just might be, though I very seriously doubt it. Band 7 is more likely, though still improbable, which means you did a very short time and were only a step 1 Lieutenant.
The edited bit : Plus if your workload in the NHS I doubt is less than the RN, because my wife retired recently as head of pschological services for Devon, and her work load was immense, so much so that she used to switch her phone of at weekends so no one could call her.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@danielkrcmar5395 Ok I will name two who were defeated, but ultimately ended with their prize. The first individual who even had to fight just to stay alive after his father was killed by the Tartars was one Genghis Khan. He lost a few of his early battles, but had bright idividual generals who turned the tide in his early years. Then when Genghis went on his domination of. Asia he was the individual with the ideas. He fought a constant war on 3 fronts, was never in a position where any of his armys were greater in number than his enemy, and with his unique individual style which was able to totally adapt to not only numbers of enemy, but also to how they fought.
Then the next individual on whom British France was based Richrd the Lionheart. He was also individual in his outlook on battles. He started early fighting his father, the English king, he even with his elder Brother burned Le Mans because his father was holding out there. He won most of his battles on campaign including swinging the tide in the middle east for the Christians, He beat the Muslims in the middle east from which he learnt much of the things he did when fighting the French. He built the most imposing Chateau in France called Gaillard based on what he learned about seiges in the midlle east. In fact it was Richard's idea to ally with the mongols in the first instance to beat the Muslims of the middle east, and make Christian areas much safer!! Those are just two individual leaders. Whereas Richard's Brother John (who relied on his organisation called the Army) LOST France, and after Kublai Khan the empire split into the Hordes, and was never the same again. You see organisations are slow to react, slow to change, where as individuals in a war always make the major difference. See Sun Tsu on the effectiveness of individuals in war. or Von Clausewitz.
Sun Tzu :
“In the midst of chaos, there is also opportunity” This is about the individual NOT the collective organisation.
Von Clausewitz :
"He argues that war is “subjective,”[IV] “an act of policy,”[V] and “a pulsation of violence.”[VI] Put another way, the nature of war is chaotic, inherently political, and violent. Clausewitz then states that despite war’s “colorful resemblance to a game of chance, all the vicissitudes of its passion, courage, imagination, and enthusiasm it includes are merely its special characteristics.”[VII] In other words, all changes in warfare are those smaller pieces that evolve and interact to make up the character of war." This is also a necessart thought on individuals.
What both are in fact stating is that only the brilliant individual leader can apparently "see through the fog of war," and react as is Necesary, and win through!
1
-
Individualss win wars, groups are predictable! the main difference in the war of independence was that despite the American leadership a couple of their military leaders were very capable, whilst the Uk hoped to hold onto the American colonies whilst they beat France, Spain, and the Dutch Republic at the same time (next 3 biggest powers in the world then). Patton or Bradley? Patton was such an individual, whereas Bradley was a coward, who ran from the front at the Battle of bulge, Monty, (mainly) and Patton had to shore up his mistakes, and predictable moves. For which Monty, and Patton recieve very little praise!!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Dingdangdoo Yes 6,000 very different diverse people who are extremely freindly, and after a few beers they will even introduce you to their views on life, and their very friendly hands, and handiwork. Not the ones to get on the wrong side of as friends though, as the USMC, and other Marines of NATO, constantly find out to their chagrin!!
The edited bit. Last year they were so freindly to their USMC counter parts, that they finished an exercise within an hour of starting, specifically so that the USMC could go get cleaned up. and go home whilst they (the Royal Marines) played around with the exercise grounds, and their equipment, for them!!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jonathanpork-sausage617 Well from the units using foreign people there seem to be very few casualties, the sniper known as the ghost is still operating in Ukraine, as well as several ex British/Canadian/US snipers There is one video on here of a British guy with a Ukrainian unit and he says the other "Foreign" troops left to join other units or were killed, however he has been there since it started. I would say from the videos shown on here Ukraine is doing roughly 3 or 4 to 1 in their favour, because of the western weapons they now have. Let us not forget that Ukraine only has limited people compared to Russia, so they are frugal with attacks, and only commit when successfully operating. Each operation they do seems to be advance consolidate, make defences, attack repeat, repeat, though their tactics are very good, this is possibly becuase of just who has been training them after they get their basic training done. Those guys are a very famous British unit, and were training them from around November last year.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
This is Possibly the most stupid statement on YouTube this month. I am half German, my mother's family came here, to England, before WW2. I am English, born on the island of Great Britain in Shropshire. I am extremly proud to proclaim this as my nationality. My father was English they have been here traceably since 1066 (probably WAY longer than your forbears to be honest). My wife is also a mix. Her father was Born in Bourton on the water in the cotswolds to a second generation Yemeni Family, he became and was a warrant officer in the British Army. His wife was of Iranian (they say Persian) Extraction, and they met in London, NOT at a mosque at all, her parents (English/Persian) lived in Golders Green, her mother (my wife's Grandmother) was the poshest person I have ever heard speak English, including the Royal Family.... So my wife is Yemeni Persian. She was born in Yemen during the Aden crisis because that was where my father in law was at the time, as where her two older sisters, she was registered as British at Birth through the British Embassy. try telling her she isn't English enough, and she will show you the sharp end of her tounge pretty damned fast. My boys are thus a quarter German, a quarter English, a Quarter Yemeni, and a quarter Persian. My eldest son is an atheist as I am, and has a global business he set up himself, with several global patents His wife is English. Do please tell him he isn't English enough and see exactly what you get!! My youngest son (who is a Christian) who is English by registration IS English, as he will tell you, though he has married an Italian woman, they both live here in the Uk because he is a Junior CEO of a small American company you may very well have heard of called Microsoft. Now his wife is also a mix, her mother is Philipino, and her father Korean. Though try telling my youngest daughter in law she is NOT English, and she will tell you to go take a long walk off a very short pier. Both of my boys were born In Dorset, and either of them would laugh at your stupid post to be honest here, they are both over 6 feet ten inches tall, so do please tell them they aren't English enough for your personal form of racism!!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@oceangrey8796 Really? The Commonwealth countries are dismantling from England..... As they should? Where exactly? Is this thre truth here? Or maybe are you lying as a republican? I rather think it is the letter, and that you are trolling here. Because the Empire was smaller than the Commonwealth. The Queen (not politicians) is the one person responsible for the success of the commonwealth. Which countries are unshackling themselves? Do pray tell, this is going to be interesting to see the mental gymnastics you are going t go through for this to work your way!! Because every single country voted to have Charles as head of the commonwealth after the queen. This is a situation where countries voluntarily joined a group that has not one single abiding directive, no single cultural centre, and most certainly has NO single political aim. Yet it is the second largest congregation of countries in the world, only the UN is larger. Charles is head of what will become a, larger in world politics, more powerful group of Nations, joined by one thing, a commonality of history. You trully sound like some kind of delerious romantic republican who honestly has the silly idea that democracy gives you a say in anything. This idea is more outdated than the idea of a monarchy. I seriously pity people like you who lie and have at his core a contempt for things you don't have an incling of how they work,and how they formed. You have this rose tinted idea that Democracy, and corrupt politicians will be better than anything we presently have.
Let me tell you this in the Uk only 20 parliamentary seats actually decide a government, and strangely it is those same 20 more or less every election. Whilst in the USA the president is NOT elected they are chosen by a government Quango called the Electoral College. No matter the size of the popular vote the electoral college choose the winning president. There is no such rose tinted thing as democracy anywhere in the world, when a country gets too large to assemble in person in one place to vote annually on what new laws should, or shouldn't be passed then you enter politics, and the corrupt world of politicians. The founding fathers didn't trust the American peolel to chose the correct winner, so they introduced qungo to do so called the Electoral college!! The senior house in Washington is NOT elected, the house of representatives is just that, people NOT elected to power but chosen by state by the twin party system. The US has no more democracy than Russia, or Turkey!!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@sourojeetmaitra1583 Then why doesn't India admit that it was us, and NOt them who ended the caste system? Come on this is where people like you fail. The Royal navy stopped over 18 million potential slaves being transported to either the Americas, or to the Islamic world, for nearly 200 years the Royal Navy alone tried to stop slavery single handedly yet no one ever knows this, or isn't interested because it raises the very ugly head of Black people enslving and selling other Black people. These people were first enslved by their own people, and sold for trinkets to the traders. Without Kenyans and Nigerians there would have been no slave trade!! Those are the people who have to pay any reparations to the people living in the USA now. The country of Britian was never involved in instituional slavery Because in 1066 William the Conqueror outlawed the owning of another person in England, or the trading for remuneration of any kind (my words, not his law words) of people within the realm then known as England, basically northern france, and the Channel Islands, and England and Wales.
Returning items given to the crown, or Universities is not an agenda thing because they were given freely. The Elgin Marbles for example do have a Firman (letter of instruction to take them to England), they were given freely, and NOT stolen. Cleopatras needles (New York, and London) were bought by an American businessman from the then Egyptian government and they knew they were going to be taken to Britain and America. They were sold to him because Egypt wanted to cosy up to Great Britiain and the USA, NOT France. Two examples of so called stolen things regularly bought up by people like you!
1
-
1
-
@tomceman4451 Just because a number of people beleive something happened or did NOT makes no sense what so ever. More people by the way live in Europe, and the west and are Atheist than religious, so your numbers for those religions are skewed by the church because they claim everyone in the Uk is Christian. Neither of my boys were ever christened, and therefore cannot be christian at all. 1.6 Billion Muslims also makes a massive assumption in that everyone in so called Muslim countries are Muslim. People Forget that the second Pope is in a Muslim country, and his position of Patriarch of the Egyptian Orthodox church in Egypt (Cairo to be precise removes nearly 200, million so called Muslims from that total number. Then the people who think you as a Christian and the Muslims themselves follow a usurper, and man lead by the devil the Jainian religion who have John the Baptist as thier prophet. There is also a group that now numbers some 200,000 in Egypt, and in the religious world is the fastest growing group called Ba Hai who shouldn't be counted as Muslim. There is an Saudi Arabian man who owns his own British company and was chairman of the CBI who belongs to the oldest montheistic religion in the world (Zarathustrianism) who's family here he says and his congregation in the UK (a sizeable number he claims) are wrongly called muslims. labelling you see as you have doner is not very good at all. In fact with the number of Atheists growing inside the muslim world I would think the total number of true believers as they say are just 750,000 to 800,000. Jordan a supposedly Muslim country has around half of it's population none muslim by their attendance at different places of worship.
So the largest number of people under the religiuos banner are atheist. 95% of Chinese are Atheist, the Japanese are 90% Atheist Shinto doesn't have a god, All Buddists are atheist they don't have a god, and more Koreans have never heard of your god, or can't be bothered to believe in it, or any other to be honest.
Let us use that word you chose believe. There are currently in the world two meanings for the word The American, (meriam Webster) version is simply accepting something as true, however the much ,ore widely used English definition (Britiain, Australia, South Africa, Kenya, Nigeria New Zealand, and canada all use English dictionaries, not American English dictionaries) is accepting something without proof, or evidence as true.
As I said there is NO evidence t all for the existance of the mythical Jesus person outside of the bible, and the Koran, neither of which when they talk about this person were written in the first tense, or even in the same decade. Matthew was written at least 80 years after the so called events happened Mark was at best 20 years later, and you religious people claim these as if they are witness stories. THEY ARE NOT, they are stories made up on long dark nights when trying to stop children crying with fear at very best.
Finally NO credible historians believe the myth you claim as real existed at all to be honest. Peopl like you need to be woken up, not in the so caled liberal modern way, but to the real truth of history. If you are certain here, because you said you wouldn't reply earlier, I am sure my life will be better without your rude interruptions, and false claims to be brutally true here.
1
-
@emmanuelrobert208 Thank you EMMANUEL ROBERT FOR POINTING THIS OUT HERE. Without you there would not be even more evidence that I am aware of AGAINST slavery in the British Empire. Britain paid compensation to former slave owners because we stopped it!! NOT as you claim to former slaves, but their previous owners!!
Wow You really have been digging haven't you? However the slaves you mean were paid FOR, NOT COMPENSATED, way back in 1837, and was finally paid off in 2015. However you say it was reparation to slaves!!! WOOH boy are you wrong here. The Uk has never paid reparations toslaves, because we ended slavery everywhere, the £20 million to which you refer was to compensate "SLAVE OWNING FAMILIES," NOT slaves who were freed by Britain.. Evidence :
"The Slave Compensation Act 1837 (1 & 2 Vict. c. 3) was the world's first major act of compensated emancipation and an Act of Parliament in the United Kingdom, signed into law on 23 December 1837. It authorised the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt to compensate slave owners in the British colonies of the Caribbean, Mauritius, and the Cape of Good Hope in the amount of approximately £20 million for freed slaves. Based on a government census of 1 August 1834, over 40,000 awards to slave owners were issued. Since some of the payments were converted into 3.5% government annuities, they lasted until 2015." Courtesy of Wikipedia this is from this :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slave_Compensation_Act_1837 Wiki iby the way is Russian, so to balance the position this next is from USA today :
"“In 1833, Britain used 40% of its national budget to buy freedom for all slaves in the Empire. Britain borrowed such a large sum of money for the Slavery Abolition Act that it wasn’t paid off until 2015,” a graphic posted by the political activist Raheem Kassam reads."
Do notice the most important part here it says to buy freedom for all slaves in the Empire (this was before Wilbuforce's legislation that actually banned slavery throughout the Empire.
Oh USA Today, from which the last post comes : https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/06/30/fact-check-u-k-paid-off-debts-slave-owning-families-2015/3283908001/
Next : https://taxjustice.net/2020/06/09/slavery-compensation-uk-questions/
Thus as I first stated (and now I thank you for even more evidence which you very obviously didn't read correctly) England, and then Britain fought the rest of the world single handed to end slavery. I am very much obliged to you for your erroneous post, or I would NOT have known Britain paid compensation to slave owning families Before Slavery was abolished in the British Empire.
1
-
@tomceman4451 You see here you are using the American Believe, which means to accept something as true, whilst I am English, and use the real meaning of the word Believe which is accepting something as true without proof, or evidence. To be honest there is simply NO evidence, or proof as to the existence of this mythical Jesus who in reality is just a conglomeration of the previous prophets in the bible, and other gods like Horus, who was born on the 25th of December, of a virgin, with a god father who had no parts to make him. Rather starngly even in the bible many people were "virgin" births.You see if you look at history, and mythology there are certain things that crop up for any man made god. Religion is simply to control YOU.
However if you believe (without proof) that a person existed 2,000 years ago, and his awful morals were what disctates your life then to be brutal here, who would wish to talk with someone who belives gay men should be killed, gay women should be killed, children should be sacrificed, and that a megalomaniac genocidal self aggrandising mythical being dictated the laws of the world. To be truthful here you should be pittied, and seriously the more I have interaction with religious people I think they all should have to undergo some form of psycholgy test to see if they are able to make their way in the world as do the vast majority who don't believe in any god at all. Needing some form of invisible friend in adulthood is peculiar to the majority of the world to be honest here.
So finally, I understand, and know that your dual god's, both good, and evil are man made, and to be honest here personally I don't care whether you, or any other religious person of whatever faith, respond to this or not.
1
-
@jamesbrice6619 I didn't mention Mary at all. Why would I? Other than to say that the whole thing about the birth is made up? Virgin births are common in the bible, and rather strangely are very common in mesopatamia, and the rest of the middle east Horus is born of a Virgin for example, did you not know this? Honestly as if one so called virgin birth was unique in your book!!
If they were written from simply a different perspective then why would they NOT agree about the birth. At least that testimony should be roughly the same should it not? But even this they cannot agree on.
Matthew has them already in Bthlehem, and the wise men are lead to a house by the star. After supposedly fleeing the killing of the first born (which provably is a myth) they fle to Egypt, but they return to Nazareth, in Galilee.
Luke which was written at least in the same time frame as Matthew (within 40 years or so). Joseph and Mary are in Galilee, but have to travel because of this stupid "go where you were born" census, that didn't happen. This census to which the book refers must be the first one in Ceasar augustus reign which was in 7AD. It was the first one we know that was actually carried out in this region. Because Joseph is of David's line he has to go to Bethlehem instead of Jerusalem where he would have been born....... Luke has no flight to Egypt, no wise men, no paranoid Herod (because the none existent wise men didn't visit him), jesus is born in a manger, it is here the shepherds visit Joseph, and mary. Luke has no guiding star, angels do the directing.These two the earliest wrtitten, and the closest to the actual events are so contradictory that they couldn't be put before a court as evidence for a birth anywhere.
Mark doesn't think the birth is relevant, he does repeat that your prophet is from Nazareth, but simply fails to mention Galilee at all. In fact it is the blind beggar who states Jesus is from Nazareth in the book.
John even fails to say anything about Galilee even after he mentions the discussion about the prophecy in which Jesus must come from galilee he doesn't say that he does, and specifically NEVER mentions Nazareth.
Then Paul despite the fact he should know all about this chahracter he is now following, never connects the prophecy of where he should be born to Jesus.
Finally the book of revelation that book that should know everything. Well it simply fails to mention anything to do with Nazareth, or Galilee. You would think this book would at least mention the census, or the wise men, or the shepherds, but it simply doesn't.
So once again conveniently your church fails to address these issues, it just combines them into a homgenous whole, and tells us the wise men arrive later.
1
-
@jamesbrice6619 The Gospels DO NOT fit together at all. They are not compatible. Let us start witht e holy ghost. In all of the gospels it lied to them on various important matters. The Holy Ghost of the Gospels is NOT omniscient, so doesn't know everything..
So then Luke says Joseph's father was Heli, whist Matthew says he was the son of Jacob. Contradiction Number 1
Mark says there will be no signs, Matthew says there will be one, which was the sign of the prophet Jonah, whilst Luke says there were two signs. Contradiction number 2
How Jesus recruited his first disciples in all four gospels is totally different, Matthew says they left their Father. Mark Names Zebedee as their father, and he says they left with the hired servants, Luke says they left everything, and John even has two attempts and contradicts himself. Contradiction number 3
On should they carry a staff Matthew, and Luke say NO, John says yes, Mark doesn't think this important that they should take nothing but a staff, or no staff even. Contradiction number 4
Even they cnnot agree on whether John The baptist knwe whether he was divine, and the messiah, Luke and John both say yes initially, then Luke changes the story by having John ask “Are you the one who is to come, or shall we look for another?” Contradiction number 5. I could go on, and on, and on. You obviodly don'tt know your book at all if you think the gospels fit together with one another!!
Please stop this you are just making your life more miserable by your ignorance, and to be honest showing yourself as someone who is ignorant of what he claims to know.
1
-
@jamesbrice6619 Josephus did NOT write what you claim. No Jew would put what he wrote. The Jews DO NOT see him as the messiah. Josephus would never have written that at all. There are several versions of Josephus book from antiquity, and only the Slavonic book makes this claim. All of the others are copies as is supposedly the slavonic version, However none of the other extant books have that particular passage in them. because you believe in this myhtical none existent paerson of course you will claim the only version of the book to mention him at all is right. None of the other versions on the Jewish wars with Rome bother with the so called messiah. So that one is an obvious addition by the church!!
You do realise that if you use Matthew mark, Luke, and John, that their evidenvce is 75% contradictory. They cannot agree on a single event in this charcters none existent life.
Wow Josephus, and the bible. there are more books about Harry potter today than about your chahracter using your logic then Harry potter is real!! the bible does NOT prove the bible.
The Devil? Who is this character? Do you even know your bible at all? In the old testament the "Devil comes to Earth 12 times to test various prophets, and yet this "Devil" in each event is a different angel sent to testmankind. OH dear, oh dear, what a shame you don't actually know your own book. The DEVIL. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA Lucifer to give him his name is just a bastardisation of a Greek minor god called Lux Fer (the Bringer of light, or in other words the Planet Venus). HAHAHAHA Oh dear what a pity this could have been really good if you had NOT chosen Josephus!!
1
-
1
-
@thelmadickinson6811 There are 200 Comandments in the old testament, all of them from the god you believe in. He states categorically that he is here to fulfill them. Every one of the commandments, not just the ten commandments but all of the law of the Prophets. Come on this is nursery stuff. This is from the NIV King James Bible :
"17 Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. 19 Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven."
Everything else you wrote is just ridiculous. As I say there are NO contemporary historians, or writers who mention him. If you believe there are then name them, go on I challenge you, I need corroborating evidence for his existence from those on the west bank at the time, or those in "Syria" the region that controlled the area he lived in.
Then there is that stupid census, where everyone has to travel to where they were born to be counted!!! What a load of absolute twaddle, we couldn't do this today without major world upheaval, Roma definitely couldn't then either because imagine the Legions in Britain having to return to Germany, France, the middle east, and North Africa, That census is just fiction for a start. There was a census in Syria in 7AD, and that was the first census in the area after Rome conquered it, and it was Roman delegates counting people, live stocks, and land in the area.
1
-
@jamesbrice6619 Wow really? there are NO contemporary historians around the Roman world, or who were at the time in the west bank area of the Syrian region of the Roman empire, who write aout this person, The thing with the killing of the first born is totally fictitious because Herod was a client king of Rome, and if he had done this he would have needed Roman approval, or been executed for the act. That is Just the very start of the evidence against the myth fictional characrter who shares a commonality with just about every other God son in the religious myth world. To say it is ignorant to claim he didn't in fact exist, or was put on a cross (Pontius Pilate mentions every other person he crucified in his memoirs, but NOT your immaginary friend), is crass ignorance, and pure adherence to childhood indoctrination,
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@boofuu3145 By the way you can, just simply move there. Or if you have a problem whilst on holiday in, or simply visiting, France then of course your treatment will be covered by the French state. Why are you so megalomaniac about the very small cost of treating people from aboad? You can get free treatment in the USA for example by joining their largest health care provider (which is based upon the NHS) called remote area medical. They are a not for profit which was set up by Englishman Stan Brock, they will treat you for free, and with the better healthcare standards of the NHS than those of the USA, and it will NOT cost you a penny, or a cent. Why are you such an ingrate that everything has to be paid for by the recipient? Is it that you have been suckered into US health (don't care, we only want your money) care is better than here, IT IS NOT anywhere in the USA, and their private system is in a worse state than any other western country's healthcare systems. It is so bad that the only place in the world you could make the tv series Breaking Bad is the uSA, everywhere else you don't have to bankrupt yourself to get cured of Cancer!!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Arterexius It is their ultimate goal. They need Kherson, and it is in reach. Full stop. I didm't reply to you in anger if I had, I would have made so amy mistakes that you wouldn't have understood what I wrote at all. Why did you add a J to Zelenskyy? LOL!!
Ok so Ukraine has somehow magically invented it's whole army, and airforce. In the biginnig they had just Russin Soviet era equipment. 90% of the equipment they use now is Russian bulit, and from the soviet era, Get off that high horse of yours, and stop trying to kid yourself that russia is fighting an equal in any way here. Ukraine are using Western/British equipment, and some American weapons. It takes a while to kick start an industry, and longer to get weapons transfered from one country to another. As this goes on More, and More western modern equipment will arrive, but as for now they have 4 Himars, 6 British MLRS, and 2 US MLRS.. That dioesn't even make a dent in the Russian front line.
War doesn't bring trade? Are you honestly trying top say that here, and now, Both Britiain and the USA have got their defence industries producing equipment at a rate not seen since Afgahnistan, and Iraq. Wow boy are you short sighted, and have seriously no idea here.
Ice breakers? Why would Ukraine need Ice breakers? It doesn't have winter bound ports like Russia. If you are going to suggest the Russian fleet in valdivostock could break an American blockade in the middle using ice breakers to create a route through the ice then seriously there is no furhter discussion to be had here. That is possibly the stupidest military analysis statement ever made in the world!! Saint Petersburg is also Ice bound in winter, no ice breaker helps the Russian fleet to run the Skagerak, and break into the north sea, Mumansk is ice bound in winter, and takes many ice breakers to keep it or any of the other Russian ports operating on a single route in, and out.
If Crimea isn't necessary why on fuller's earth did Russia invade Crimea go on this i have to see!! Sevastopol is the largest balck sea port, and at the moment the largest Russian port even though it is illegally occupied, and will become Ukrainian again. Now please don't reply with the level of stupidity you just did, I will not reply if you do. Finally do a little bit of research on just how thick the ice is in the main Russian ports in the winter.
Now as I said unless your geopolitical knowledge rises exponentially in the next 24 hours you sewriously aren't worth spending time on answering your questions, ans even sillier statements!!
1
-
@Arterexius Wow. Well I have made tactical analysis mistakes!! Comparing Germany and it's invasion of Soviet Russia to Fascist Russia and it's invasion of Ukraine is exactly the right thing to do! Russia's Tecnology is supposed to be more adavanced than that of the Ukraine. For example the Armata was before this, considered better than a Challenger 2. So comparing Russia with Germny in WW2 is perfectly acceptable. So that was the first and Second dealt with in short order.
Correct NATO doesn't need a black sea port it presently controls the black sea from Bulgaria, Turkey, and Romainia. All three have Black sea ports, and are presently blockading the Russian Navy from going much further south than Crimea. Also despite what you claim Sevastopol is the most influential port Russia presently has because it is the only one that is not winter bound by ice. So YES RUSSIA DOES IN FACT NEED A BLACK SEA PORT. Especially for it's navy that is really what the invasion of Crimea was for.
Why are we talking about a port? The reson is that Russia needs Black sea ports, and from these believe it or not ships can transport goods far faster by sea than by land, and bridges. Exactly why do you think Russia has allowed Ukraine to export Grain by the Black sea? If land routes were as good to transport goods then of course the rest of the world would have been using the roads in Ukraine to the EU to transport the grain the world needs. Do you honestly NOT follow the politics around this war, and Why Putin agreed to Ukraine transporting unmollested grain from it's ports there? Wow come on this is very simple stuff, and should be extremely easy for even someone like you to keep up with...
Why is a silly little bridge important to Ukraine? For possible future Russia/Ukaraine wars it is in entirely the wrong place. It leads to the no mans land towards the middle east. Surely even you should know that strategically it has absolutely no importance to this war, or any future war. Russia can cut it far too easily, it isn't like several bridges across an area that has vast amounts of commerce between the two countries. The real problem for Russia is having NATO tanks withtin hours of Moscow. not whether Ukraine needs a bridge towards China, and the southern Asian lands.
IF Ukraine retakes Crimea!! Are you for real here? That is NOT an if, it WILL happen in the next two years.To retake Crimea, Ukraine actually doesn't need the bridge at all it needs Kherson. Kherson controls both the potable (drinkable if you don't understand what that meant) water, and the power to Crimea, and most of the Kherson Oblast. Wow to be honest you know actually nothing of the politics and geography of war
Your points are also none existant. ukraine has stated that they WILL only go into diplomatic talks with Moscow when, and only when they have Crimea. How is it you don't know any of this if you are commenting on here? Ukraine will never go into talks with Russia again about it's borders. Russia has already signed an agreement with the UK, the USA, and Ukraine. For destroying it's Nuclear weapons (some 1,700 warheads in total, the third largest in the world, then and now) Russia along with the other two countries granted certain security guarantees to Ukraine. These included this, which I quote from that famous Russian site Wikipedia :
"1. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine.
2. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defence or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.
3. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, to refrain from economic coercion designed to subordinate to their own interest the exercise by Ukraine of the rights inherent in its sovereignty and thus to secure advantages of any kind.
4. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine, as a non-nuclear-weapon State party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used.
5. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America reaffirm, in the case of Ukraine, their commitment not to use nuclear weapons against any non-nuclear-weapon State party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, except in the case of an attack on themselves, their territories or dependent territories, their armed forces, or their allies, by such a State in association or alliance with a nuclear-weapon State.
6. Ukraine, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America will consult in the event a situation arises that raises a question concerning these commitments.
— Memorandum on Security Assurances in Connection with Ukraine’s Accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons"
Do please note Number 1 on tht list!!
As you ca see Russia guaranteed the borders and country of Ukrane, but it has since 1994 invaded Ukraine, a sovereign country twice to which it gave supposedly cast iron guarantees. Putin, and Russia have no honesty, they are happy only when they get what they want, which is to expand the Russian borders to natural boundaries that are difficult to cross or attack, thus westward the would really like Russia to end on the Spanish border, but several rather influential countries say no.
Finally with your graspof Geopolitics (no idea at all) I think you shouldn't even bother writing on YouTube any more unless your grasp of military, and geopolitics grows exponentially in the next 24 hours, and it really won't.
1
-
@Arterexius It doesn't matter what Ukraine wants, Russia needs to have it's border on the black sea. Simple geography means that with NATO tanks around 600 miles (less than the length pof England, and Scotland) from the centre of Moscow, on land that are the best conditions for tank warfare; wide open undulating plains. This means that russia can never settle for an independent Ukraine. Plus Russia needs the black sea ports more than NATO. The german armies took Kyiv in 5 weeks from a standing start, this land from Mongolia to the eastern side of France was first the playground of cavalry, now it will be the playground of NATO tanks. THAT Russia can never allow. The bridge itself is not a great startegic tool unless you want to occupy southern Russia, or the Crimea, wher whole armies can be bottled up by some claver tactics, and lots of artillery, some lightly armed, but very mobile armoured vehicles with anti tank guns. It's real position is commercial, and in selling grain and goods to Russia.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@xsentfromuk8938 It isn't only my point of view. However I simply fail to see how people who are the only people in the world to dictate their terms of employment can possibly have any stress at work. I am NOT saying you don't get stress, but compared to Police, and Prison Officers, Military Personel, Fire fighters, Airline pilots, and Rescue personnel (not an exclusiove list) health care workers in a hospital simply don't get the same level of stress. Most if NOT all people leaving the NHS go into agency work, or move abroad and do healthcare work there. Most do come back to the NHS because the stress on them in a ward environment is not as high as working for an agency, and the roles given are far less rewarding in the private sector are more regulated, and defined, but give less responsibility. Personally I would outlaw all agencies hawking people for huge amounts of money to the NHS, which was another discussion my ex and I had. She works 4 days a week, and does 2 Agency days for really a stupid amount of money. Why when she chooses should the NHS have to pay her 8 times her normal wages (yes the agency she works through charges 8 times her wages, with another twice her wages as their fee) to do exactly the same job? That is where the NHS is losing money hand over fist!
However as you say we are never going to agree, your point of view is not from a battle line, or down a cave rescuing people or arresting someone who has just killed your best mate. I am being prosaic a little, but truthfully realistic when doing this.
I will say thank you for the time you have given, you never know you may have been one of the staff who gave my boys, and an aunt (who the US system had told us was going to die) the best treatment in the world by the NHS, and I will as a right wing Tory always back you and your people to my dying day. I think the ideas as espoused by Churchill, and the ideas that formed the two best health care systems in the world (French, and British) are something to be marvelled at. Despite what I have written here, I do appreciate everything you do, and every day you go into work. I know like teachers most of the problems you face are government driven because they give you the rules you have to abide by. I have, and will continue to do so, defended the NHS on here, and Quora ( a question and answer site), as deeply as if it were my personal possesion. Good luck in your future, and once again thank you for the work you do. Personally I would willingly pay twice the cost of the NHS to see it reamin in Government hands (when the exhorbitant US failing system costs exactly that to the US state) exclusively, but I do know it is the best thing since sliced bread!!
1
-
@xsentfromuk8938 12.5 hour shifts? In a hospital, when I was away from home 6 days a week (weekends included for my previous job) and living in Hotels!! Stress? My sons have both spent time in Hospital, and family have done so as well, my ex is a mental health nurse who started in the community, working inside a hospital honestly you truthfully have no idea of what stress is until you have dealt with mentally ill patients, or drug addicts on a daily basis as my ex wife did, and still does in their homes!. Hospitals are stressful only if you are doing things incorrectly, or not organised.
My previous job involves me being questioned today about accidents to aircraft, that killed or injured people this last two years, legal questions on safety, what I did, what I know the companies did after my advice, and coroners courts every time there is a crash/accident. I am in my 60's now, retired from that job ten years ago, and my first coroners court was as a young lieutenant in the Royal navy when a Captain had died in an aircrash that he was piloting. Stress is once a week sometimes slightly more often getting FAA (US)/AAIB (British)/BEA (French)/BFU (German), and any other country's air safety board paperwork through the door asking what I did, what I advised, what the company did, how components I authorised are supposed to work, etc. Every one of those has to be answered with a solicitor, and a barrister present. That is stress because I was reasonably good at my job!! There isn't a day goes by from when we were married to now that my ex wife doesn't actually say she is extremely glad she didn't understand maths, and physics at school!!
Stress on a ward in a hospital, you are having a laugh here!!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ashtonmillis4951 Actually I will give you 4 out of ten for your reply. Starting with MOST people don't loose an interview Ben does so badly he walks offair. Then your next, and most ludicrous statement Shapiro is a Jewish commentator, as such he peddles fantasy as the truth, and then you skip back into the real world Shapiro never uses reality he uses fantasy as if it were the truth. Logic and evidence are the truth, fantasy, and religion are NOT! Shapiro only argues from the Jewish perspective which gives him the "right" to, he thinks, decide what a woman can do. The real truth is you are also so badly screwed up by religion you failed to see thia at all. Shapiro IS by far the weakest debater out there, and never discusses what he is asked, as this proves, he just keeps regurgitating 3,000 year old fantasies as if they were fact. All of which have been totally proven to be false, or just fantasy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1