British aircraft carrier and strike group visit Singapore

No longer part of the EU, means we are even more linked to the US, we will like it or not follow them into the next stupid war that means nothing to anyone

Realistically the US isn’t going to face off directly against China, which means proxy wars, no different than Iraq/afgan are our future.

The point is to deter the Chinese from doing something stupid. I don’t think anyone would be particularly happy by a Chinese invasion of Taiwan or Australia being bullied into being a client state. By partnering up with allies in that region we can make a substantial contribution to keeping Beijing away from regional hegemony.

Because it’s very clear, no western government is going to get drawn into a long unwinnable war in the middle east anytime soon.

Can’t see any more large scale interventions in and around the Middle East, no support for it amongst US electorate and no desire for it from any President who wants their support plus I suspect holding the US together might be biggest priority of any President and increasingly so as the US declines in power and influence which will be like a knife to the heart of the sense of invulnerability and confidence of average Joe. It’s all why Biden wanted was willing to take the flak esp near term for the Afghan exit.
Simple fact is our future is increasingly reliant on what happens in SE Asia and if China decides to turn the screw it could pretty much cripple Western especially European economic stability almost over night. So the choice is simple and inevitable, either (as many want) allow it through capitulation to achieve all it wants by saying and doing nothing hoping that will be allowed indefinitely to remain as relative flies on its elephant ass as long as we don’t upset it; or we form wider alliances which together might build some barriers and hopefully limits to its ultimate aims. Equally while making sure if we hold together (big if) it won’t feel free to exercise its political and military might freely and without fear of consequences. One takes the choice and both are being argued at present though I for one don’t accept the likely benevolence of the prime player involved inherent in the former choice judged on historic precedent. But making out our future and defence sits purely in the Atlantic or in Europe like we had the freedom to do for 50 years post war just is delusional now and will be at least until the unlikely event of changing from making us totally reliant on Chinese and Asian exports generally while thus empowering and ensuring that China in particular will have the means to buy and acquire through other means all the spare food and resources throughout the World which we require to even exist as a civilised entity.

So yes basing a carrier or battle group in Singapore is not practical, desirable or logical but in my view, but sporadically operating with others and using it to form wider alliances as a part of a greater resulting line of defence and influence through voyages like this is very much a positive in my view or as much as it can be in a world full of undesirables threats anyway.

The Cold War was about deterrence.

Making the risks of doing silly things unacceptable.

Thus the risk of attacking a QEC task group is that you loose 50+ aircraft and probably other assets by going down that route. So that is an unacceptable calculation to anyone. Yes, you might overwhelm defences eventually but the cost of doing so is so high that realistically only a desperate megalomaniac would do that.

Steve, I don’t recall my time in Afghan being remotely concerned with securing oil/gas for the UK.

[Oil reserves were only found in 2010 (which post-dates involvement) and they have no oil industry to extract, refine or export hydrocarbons].

I feel the next 20 years of British military operations will follow a different arc, and that we will be far more reluctant to follow American adventures overseas, unless they involve a peer or near peer opponent for the US.

We are a global power but not a super power which only the US and China can claim , so which nation are you comparing UK power too ? I’m being suspicious that you are a Russian troll due to your lack of reality , or you are just too woke again lack of reality.

Exactly my thought.

I think this has less to do with being a global power but more to do with upholding international trade waters & forming alliances with eastern allies not as solely western powers but as multinational force to check China’s growing indifference. If you really think that the our focus should be on the middle east over oil & gas (soon to be made redundant fuels) you should really rethink your understanding of the world & leave it to those that know better, namely our own leaders & govt. departments!

Sounds like Brexit sour grapes. Get over it mate – Britain is back on the World stage and about time too.

Round of applause for Rob I’ve had enough of these Wokers and Remoaners my god what’s wrong with having Bulldog gumption, hope the Navy renames on of the Subs Amerthyst that crew had some balls , Bullies don’t like it when other turn up for the bullied , China even added Taiwans Olympic medal too her own tally so as too Beat the US on the medal table that how trustworthy they are you can tell if the Party is lying when on TV their LIPS are moving dead give away

Hear! hear! Cheers Tommo 👍

Have you ever youtubed Amythyst? Full film available in Europe but blocked here!

Yes indeed Dave the First Doctor Who William Hartnal starred in it , little side dit in 1984 our ship visited Toronto, Canada just round the Lake ,Laid up in a Scrap yard was,the Amerthyst sad ending for such a Ship , She should have been the centre piece at the Royal Dockyard , Chatham as the Ship that defied Moa

That’s a whole thread! Vanguard should have been kept, a Leander, an Invincible and perhaps a 42, but, I’m not Navy so I’ll leave the list to the grown ups!

Your welcome Dave

Just read this in the Economic Times ROB China-Pakistan military tensions over Substandard and poorly maintained hardware with an array of modern Armaments from Beijing After the Pak Air force took delivery of Ucavs unmanned Combat Aireal Vehicles That don’t work More tacky exports from China Should of just given something the Chinese did invent KITES

yep I really do think that. Just look at all the different nationalities contributing to the task forces. Look a where they conducted the exercise. And then consider China’s open hostility to Taiwan.

“Carrier destroying weapons” have always been there…they are nothing new.

In actual reality the military invasion of Iraq in 2003 was tremendously successful, defeating Saddam’s Armed Forces in a little under 6 weeks.

The 2001 invasion of Afghanistan and removal of Al-Qaida was equally as successful. It was also equally as short and swift, being offensively complete within 6 months with extremely low coalition casualties and cira 15,000 Taliban dead.

The UK, nor the US were ever beaten militarily on the battlefield. the tactical choices by local commanders saw to that.

The following strategic decisions made by politicians are what crippled the effort & dragged it out for 20 years. Deciding to creep into Nation building.

So I disagree entirely with the sentiment that third parties would view Iraq/Afghan as the West no longer being a threat.

On the contrary, turning up & degrading the conventional military might of an enemy has been tried and tested very successfully in multiple theatres.

The one thing you would not see is the West trying to occupy China. We would simply cripple their offensive ability and leave them to lick their wounds and consider their futures.

Try to invade China would be a fools errand & entirely not needed.

China’s only option within the next 10 or so years would be to simply sit within the outer island chains and attempt to make the area inaccessible while they carry out a potential invasion of Taiwan. Over time, stand off weapons and sub’s would soon change that.

The only ground war with the exception of island skirmishes, would be the final push to liberate Taiwan & potentially an invasion of the Zhanjiang Peninsula to temper Chinas ability to retaliate.

Just my thoughts anyway.

I would add I can’t see any of the above actually bearing out. In reality I think if anything were to escalate it would do so extremely quickly and as quickly dissipate into a stalemate for fear of nuclear exchange.

The issue is you can’t take the initial invasion and what came next in isolation, they were one conflict, and have demonstrated to policticans /media/ the general population that another war is not on the cards, and I’m sure our opponents also know this. It’s the same thing that happened to the US after Vietnam, the policitcal will to go to war again took decades to occur.

If it’s another war like iraq1 / Falklands, where your only aim is to kick out an invader and stop, then maybe, but if it had the chance to needing to go further or escalate, i can’t see any desire will be there for long long time.

However who knows, hard to predict the future.

My fear would be unlike Russia and the West, China hasn’t had to learn that yet, especially as it grows it’s might military and economic to unpredicted levels and various historical slights to feed its xenophobia and Nationalism. Taiwan is it’s one short term military priority (it sees it as sovereign territory) and it’s when not if invades, especially if the World turns a blind eye as it tests the water of opposition and opportunity. However even beyond that it’s expansionist policy is admittedly one of using economics and perceived threat to attain its goals, first in securing Asia and increasingly however world wide. But, like other Empires before it, military incursions no doubt will inevitably follow, only fuelled by the confidence gained by taking Taiwan further excursions will be difficult to resist. Happened with Rome, Persia, Britain, Germany, US internal expansionism, Russia, as military options grew from economic frustrations (real or as excuses) especially when as with China it is increasingly reliant on external food and raw materials.

Rule No. 2 in the Book of War; Don’t send your land armies into China.

– Field Marshal Sir Bernard Montgomery.

I dont know, Boxer rebellion went quite well when Europe, Japan and US scrounged together a joint taskforce from local troops to rescue the hostages.

If it hadn’t been for Charlton Heston we would have lost Peking,

… or into Russia, I would add.

That’s rule No. 1: Don’t march on Moscow!

RULE ONE listen too your Intelligence officers before you drop 12,000 Airborne into Holland

Maybe but in that case we might as well accept our eventual fate of resulting self destruction in a generation or so because there will simply be no place for us or Europe in this ‘brave new world’ people are just too blind to see it yet, or are too selfish to care like the Spanish Aristocracy were for centuries while the country. Collapsed around them and eventually took them out.

In reality I don’t think anyone believes we are a World Power, though it’s in the interest of Boris and co to try to raise internally (and externally for that matter) the perception we are stronger than we are of course, however it’s really about forming alliances with Countries like Australia (an up and coming vitally placed power) Japan much more powerful than people give credit to and India a potential Super Power (plus not insignificant smaller powers) while hoping in so doing that this will stop the likes of Indonesian and Malaysian (both vital players) becoming mere puppets of China, for both are rightly trying not to take sides but will inevitably go with who they see as the greater influence/threat if a relative balance between power bases is not kept so that they can sit on the fence.

People talk of a new Cold War but that’s in its own Asian veneer is happening anyway as China grows in power and influence and military might. Ignoring it will simply mean China will have won it. Only accepting that we are a middling power and thus making essential joining with other middling and indeed a range of other sized powers too with mutual needs can give any hope of a secure future. Or as secure as is possible or we just wait for the inevitable catastrophe.

a cold war “with chinese characteristics” perhaps? 😉

Steve what is your Bee in your bonnet. First of all we stopped being a global superpower only in 1956 with the Suez crisis…that’s hardly a century. The carrier is about working with other friendly nations to show China that the west are serious about it following international norms. The Brexit statements are really unncessary and I’m not sure why you included them at all. In many ways your statement was a little bit childish and I think you are more intelligent than that. There is no need to make cheap shots that do you no justice at all.

I think we stopped being a superpower once the Cold War started and the UK economy tanked, then we became a ‘significant global power’ (Suez 1956 proved that we could not operate in opposition to US policy, but not that we lacked power projection or a global perspective).

We are still a global power of course, by any indicator.See what the Henry Jackson Society said in mid-2018 after a most rigorous study of all factors (not just a count of military strength) – https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/new-study-ranks-britain-second-powerful-country-world/

Steve a modern carrier strike group with stealth jets and SSN’s can really ruin your day. It’s not something you can ignore. If you do you’ll lose something you like really like really quickly. It’s not an insignificant military threat and just saying it is doesn’t make that fact any less true.

China’s flexing of her expansion round the SC Sea isn’t just too intimidate her Neighbours but also Show her Population how superior their Communist style of governing is it keeps the Natives in line with the Party’s doctrine

I get what you’re saying about being a pufferfish… or a hedgehog; the price is too high for the prize. But, strategically, Singapore is quite important due to its location. In a conflict, by the way, I doubt the Chinese would lose any capital ships.

Given Singapore doesn’t share any land borders with China either the Chinese are going to have to fight their way through a load of countries to get there, or they’re going to have to do everything by sea. Which makes the PLA Navy the sole target of the Singapore navy, air-force and any shore based defences.
So the odds are that they would lose shops – I’d don’t anyone uses “capital ships” since WW2. Carriers would be the obvious target, a single loss would be a high blow to Chinese pride and numbers. But I would expect troop transports would be the other, an altogether easier target. Given the Information Age we now live in, it’s certain that images of every single burning or sinking troop transport will be broadcast globally by Singapore.

No one has mentioned the close relationship of as I still call it Burma has with China how the military junta, has allowed China access too its mineral and Forests wealth lining their pockets and also how the democratic rule was erased last year If China needs an Allie look no further than Burma

Sumerish looking morning today Geoff -bring on summer I say! Lookin forward to the end of this Covid lockdown, I’ve had enough!

Not sure I follow. Why does the FAA not get 100% of the budget for F-35B procurement and operation and the RAF 0% – that costs Defence the same as 50% to RAF and 50% to FAA.

Well I didn’t realise until recently that it’s a controversial thing to say. There are a few people on here who’ll disagree but the way the budget is shared out is that first the nuclear deterrent is deducted then the rest is split evenly between the 3 services. It may vary a bit one year to the next depending on equipment programmes but over time that’s how it’s done. So the Army has land forces plus AAC. The RAF aircraft plus RAF Regt. The RN has the fleet plus RM plus RFA and FAA. So the RN doesn’t have anything like the RAF’s budget for aircraft. Why is it like that. Well it was begun to reduce the vicious interservice battles over who gets what and it has certainly reduced it but not removed it entirely.

No need to pool resources – just give the Royal Navy all the F-35B funding and the RAF none – it costs Defence the same.

This twin service plan does not happen elsewhere.

Boot on the other foot – It would be bizarre for the FAA to be allocated some Typhoons (obviously do the right training etc) and operate them alongside RAF Typhoons at RAF Coningsby. It would also be odd to issue the RAF with some Apaches (train the guys properly of course) and have them operate side-by-side with AAC Apaches at the army’s Wattisham Flying Station.