General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About
David Houseman
BFBS Forces News
comments
Comments by "David Houseman" (@davidhouseman4328) on "BFBS Forces News" channel.
Previous
2
Next
...
All
Why's it silly? It's very relevant to Forest/Bush fires.
14
jagara1 huh, how does that make sense?
14
Why?
14
8000 civilians is only those verified by the UN, the actual figure will be much larger.
13
@franfountain7278 Influence, as opposed to force which is hard power. All those armies we train around the world will look more favourably on us.
13
We don't have to worry about Russia because of actions like this. We won't have to fight because we are prepared to.
13
Super Hornets will fly along side F35C until the F/A-XX comes along.
13
Its civil unrest in the context of a war zone, ie. Irregular combatants.
13
The UK and France are closer than NATO, Lancaster house has more cooperation than average members.
13
Proud Indian 2,000 km isn't pulled out of the hat. It about the distance across Europe to the Russian border. A specific consideration of the Strike Brigades is to get to the frontline before the fights lost.
12
It not worth spending all the money to develop an aircraft alone. In terms of building the F35 is a net export as we build more in parts than we buy in aircarft.
12
Trust to do what? We will be getting millions but not losing anything, this isn't buying up, it's buying from.
12
@meme4one of course not. Defence including our allies and interest. It's not like there's no wars going on so you can claim there's no need for our forces.
12
@monsterg4603 a did a quick count on Wikipedia UK wars and it gives 44 wars in the 70 years prior to WW1 compared to 28 since NATO.
11
NATO acts by consensus not at Washington's behest. The Iraq war for example wasn't a NATO op because there wasn't agreement.
11
Thanks for buying British.
11
Oil companies do pay hundreds of millions if not billions in tax each year. And oil isn't just for making money but essential for normal people.
11
@desnebula5699 the nukes haven't moved forward as NATO expanded.
11
Never occupied except the large part of its history under Sweden and following that by the Russian Empire.
11
Given technology advances that makes perfect sense.
11
The British plan is 50 years with a major refit half way. Given India previously used second hand carriers I'm sure they will get plenty of years from a new one.
11
@rpm1796 the argument is air superiority is just about information. The F35 denies it to the enemy via stealth and picks it up better than the enemy by it sensors. That make sit a boss CAP aircraft. Once we've adapted the meteor it has the weapon advantage too.
11
Don't be foolish, we can wield a position of respected leadership but its much harder with people claiming we should rule.
10
The UK cost was for 2, it's a video fail.
10
Well this video failed on the cost comparison.
10
The suggestion that only a quick victory is a victory is ignoring the question completely.
10
NATO kit, training and intelligence is helping Ukraine as we speak.
10
Rather than a restriction I'd guess it was a choice, a couple of weeks assaulting and then regroup. Either in Kherson or because it's gone worse than planned.
10
There's more than just Steel in a carrier.
10
It is just wrong, the 6.5 covers two.
10
@jimohara I think they are still on non lethal aid but an army need medical supplies as well as guns.
9
Agreed. I think it just depends months mission type. Sometimes is more like basic training, this sounded more advanced tactics that even we've only developed recently.
9
We need to keep up the support. Importantly we seem to have failed to ramp up ammunition production. A year ago that would have made sense, now its government incompetence.
9
It doesn't have a catapult, adding one isn't a slight modification.
9
Rosyth, as it says, in Scotland, where it was built.
9
Good stuff. I'd like to see an expanded engineering section for helping developing nations and rebuilding after war.
9
On a basic front they are fellow human beings. On practical front what we are spending is small compared to what we spend on defence each year and yet it is doing the same job.
9
Why wouldn't you need stealth, missiles go Mach 4 and beyond.
9
@marcusaetius9309 what didn't you understand about the example proving it?
9
Sending weaponry to conflicts was the norm through the coldwar. This difference is the amount of publicity in this conflict.
9
Sugarnips IV Early in development. But it designed to avoid dogfight and hit from range.
9
Not a lot, then you vote them out at the next election.
9
@YourMom-rk1me if your talking in total then yes, the USMC is stronger, it's 20x bigger. But that size means selection is a lot easier.
9
Of course it will be an unspecific enemy that comes from the east and happens to speak Russian but I want to know numbers, which planes are playing the enemy, results, tactic. All the stuff our airforces can't tell us.
9
@jamjardj1974 Goalkeepers the Dutch CIWS
9
Your not into big bums then?
9
I'm afraid India won't be allowed them, too much contact with the Russian defence industry.
9
It's not about an air force challenging them but stopping an attack, which would likely be from none state actors.
8
The first thing is make sure there is the funding for the current plan (we waste too much starting things and not following through). The second is build up stocks of ammo and other consumables. Third is the speed up the current plans. Only then would I increase the size and there won't be the money for that. My worry is they will look for headline numbers rather depth.
8
Although a carrier could do some work your probably better off with something like a bay class with a well deck as the jet fighter focus doesn't help much.
8
Previous
2
Next
...
All