The OSINT Bunker podcast regularly delves into the intricacies of modern warfare and global conflicts, this time, the panel took a look at Russian disinformation.

In a recent episode, retired Lieutenant Colonel Stuart Crawford, a 20-year veteran of the Royal Tank Regiment, was invited to share his insights on the role of disinformation in modern conflicts.

Drawing from his extensive experience, Crawford offered a nuanced perspective on the ongoing conflict in Ukraine and the broader global landscape, highlighting the importance of understanding and combating misinformation.

The panel for the OSINT Bunker podcast includes @OSINTtechnical@geoallison and @AnAustinThing2.

Crawford began by defining misinformation and disinformation, explaining that misinformation is information that’s wrong due to various reasons, while disinformation is the deliberate manipulation of information to present a false picture.

He noted that disinformation is something that the Russians are very good at and have been for a long time. He said, “The difference between Russian disinformation and Western disinformation is that the Russians tend to do it on an epic scale”.

Crawford also discussed the dangers of cognitive dissonance in the face of misinformation, stating, “the biggest one of the biggest enemies of finding the truth is cognitive dissonance, by which I mean, don’t don’t give me that information, because it doesn’t agree with what I think already. And, you know, you see that all the time. And that’s dangerous, because people are closing their minds not opening their minds”.

He emphasised the importance of using multiple sources of information and applying judgment in a mature and reasoned way. He said, “I think we just have to be I think we have to be alive to what’s going on. We have to use multi source, broad spectrum sources of information. And then I think we have to apply our judgement in a mature and sort of reasoned way. And I think that’s the way to combat it”.

Adding to the discussion, co-host George Allison highlighted a specific example of misinformation involving the British aircraft carrier HMS Prince of Wales. He pointed out how Russian sources misrepresented the situation when the ship was having parts removed (and eventually replaced) for sister-ship HMS Queen Elizabeth whilst in port for repairs.

This news was spun into a narrative that the ship was being scrapped, demonstrating the power and reach of misinformation.

Allison said, “There were claims on various Russian language, Russian English language, channels on Twitter, Facebook, etc that HMS Prince of Wales was being scrapped and out that news grew arms and legs. It just it just kept going. I’m still, you know, I get tags and tweets, for example, people tagging me in with Russian accounts gloating about the ‘news’ that the ship has been scrapped despite being at sea.”

If you want to hear more from Crawford, we recommend heading to his own podcast here.

What is the OSINT Bunker?

The OSINT Bunker is a defence and security-based podcast aimed at expanding people’s knowledge of the geopolitical landscape using open-source intelligence. It fills a niche that most people (most people reading this anyway) have for up-to-date, accurate and balanced information on ongoing conflicts.

What is OSINT? For those who don’t know, OSINT stands for open-source intelligence, which refers to any information gathered from public sources about an organisation, event, individual etc. In practice, that tends to mean information found on the internet, but technically any public information falls into the category of OSINT, whether it’s books or reports in a public library, articles in a newspaper or statements in a press release.

Episodes typically cover the UK and international defence matters.

Tom has spent the last 13 years working in the defence industry, specifically military and commercial shipbuilding. His work has taken him around Europe and the Far East, he is currently based in Scotland.
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

118 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
The Artist Formerly Known As Los Pollos Chicken
The Artist Formerly Known As Los Pollos Chicken
3 months ago

Aye I don’t really think we in the West are in any position to point the finger when it comes to mis dis or mal information especially given the last 3 years .Alas certain topics we can’t talk about. All governments lie including our own this is simply fact as anyone who wants to look can see with the government documents that are released after decades of being withheld. Yes the Russian state is a cesspit of propaganda just like our own. Censorship protecting you from reality. Its very sad the majority put their wholehearted faith into believing without question… Read more »

klonkie
klonkie
3 months ago

Hey Mate, welcome back – good to see you posting again!

The Artist Formerly Known As Los Pollos Chicken
The Artist Formerly Known As Los Pollos Chicken
3 months ago
Reply to  klonkie

El Klonkers , never been away matey I’ve plenty posts it’s just they go up 4 weeks after I send them unless they don’t 😂 , I’m on THE LIST as a Russian troll or something 🤪 for some reason ? Anyhoos you’ll prob never even see this 🙈

Always remember young man the art of good posting is not being a member of the London boys group think club 😉

🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🇬🇧

Klonkie
Klonkie
3 months ago

Morning Mate, my bad. I haven’t been on the site much of late. Enjoy your posts man, god sense of humour which lightens the load of those tragically pathetic russkie troll posts. 😉

The Artist Formerly Known As Los Pollos Chicken
The Artist Formerly Known As Los Pollos Chicken
3 months ago
Reply to  Klonkie

you got that right Amigo GOD sense of humour I’m better than good cos I don’t follow the shitehoose collective group think London boys we are the world crew 👊🏼 BRiTISH to the core and HM forces #1 supporter 🇬🇧

🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🇬🇧

The Artist Formerly Known As Los Pollos Chicken
The Artist Formerly Known As Los Pollos Chicken
3 months ago
Reply to  klonkie

😉👍🏻

🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🇬🇧

Luke Rogers
Luke Rogers
3 months ago

“Saddam can hit us with WMD in 45 minutes”. Domestic or Russian disinformation differs in desired outcome but is aimed squarely at us. Russia aims to demoralise and confuse us out of fighting, domestic disinformation is to subvert democracy and take us into illegal wars.

Airborne
Airborne
3 months ago
Reply to  Luke Rogers

Shit the bed you spout some chuff me old China!

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
3 months ago
Reply to  Airborne

Perhaps part of the problem w/ Mad Vlad’s (and the Orcs’) performance in UKR was that they believed their own disinformation! 🤣😁

Airborne
Airborne
3 months ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

Absolute spot on, he also beloved his head sheds when they told him they were good to go for the invasion! 3 days vladdy, 3 days, back to Moscow in time for vodka and 2 litres of 2 stroke…..now how did that go then 😂👍

Jonathan
Jonathan
3 months ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

Infact a lot of it is aimed at his own people as well as other haters of the west ( a lot of the African military dictatorships etc). Authoritarians need to ensure their own people believe a narrative of threat and and danger from outside and within..or why would they put up with it all.

Duker
Duker
3 months ago
Reply to  Airborne

hes right . It was an orchestrated litany of lies for an illegal invasion- UN refused to go along with the pre-emptive war- no different from Putin

Airborne
Airborne
3 months ago
Reply to  Duker

Not on about his illegal war part, if you read mine and other posters you will see we agree, I’m on about the rest of the anti NATO guff he spouts, along with much more pro Russian anti Ukraine vomit.

JOHN MELLING
JOHN MELLING
3 months ago
Reply to  Luke Rogers

Enlighten us as to which illegal war are you refering to?

Luke Rogers
Luke Rogers
3 months ago
Reply to  JOHN MELLING

There is enough information in my comment for anyone who can tie their own laces to figure that out.

Duker
Duker
3 months ago
Reply to  JOHN MELLING

Unless its direct self defence, any invasion is illegal under ‘international rules’ unless approved by UN security Council . Which it wasnt – remember.
Eg Falklands – self defence. Iraq – illegal invasion.

Jonathan
Jonathan
3 months ago
Reply to  Duker

In reality international law is a bit of a joke and only works if you’re signed up to it…nations will alway do what they believe is in their best interest and that includes making war. In our world there has only really ever been one final arbiter and that’s the power of your army and the wealth of your nation…everything else is in reality just structures of diplomacy built up to reduce the need for that final arbiter….but might and wealth still make right.

grizzler
grizzler
3 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan

“might and wealth still make right”…we’ll soon be buggered then…

Jonathan
Jonathan
3 months ago
Reply to  grizzler

It always has and alway does Grizzler, especially in geopolitics, the best you can get from a nation state is enlightened self interest..it’s better not to go to war generally..but when a nation decides the other way it will go to war and bugger the consequences…and just to be even more negative the winner generally gets to always writes the ending. In reality the UN very much survived as a way to prevent a full blown conflict between the nuclear powers…but international law is only really as effective as the signatories want it to be… the Antarctic treaty conventions are… Read more »

Paul.P
Paul.P
3 months ago
Reply to  grizzler
Duker
Duker
3 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan

Belonging to the UN itself the only core requirement
Other international treaties do require ratification, thats true
International criminal court, Law of the Sea, Geneva conventions on the Conduct of War and so on

Jonathan
Jonathan
3 months ago
Reply to  Duker

Although there are 11 sovereign states that are not in the UN so even that is not universal. The best example being Taiwan, then there are another around another 30 or so disputed territories that could or should be nations, the CIA lists 237 counties vs the 193 recognised member states…many of the unrecognised ones are nations that have been subjugated buy more powerful member states or are attempting to cede. Even to become a members state of the UN is a play of power influence and wealth that some smaller nations in a shadow of a larger more powerful… Read more »

Cedric Brown
Cedric Brown
3 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan

The International Court of Justice has powers to prosecute individual people, but it has no power or authority to bring prosecutions against a sovereign nation.

Cedric Brown
Cedric Brown
3 months ago
Reply to  Duker

Use of the word “illegal” is unhelpful. The decision to invade Iraq was a breach of the UN Charter, which is a serious matter, but UN had no means to bring USA or UK to any form of justice.

Duker
Duker
3 months ago
Reply to  Cedric Brown

Its justly used for Putins illegal invasion of Ukraine….all the time

Sauce goose and gander

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
3 months ago
Reply to  Luke Rogers

Russia aims to demoralise and confuse us out of fighting, domestic disinformation is to subvert democracy and take us into illegal wars.”

Which means to most people with a modicum of common sense,

Giving us a right giggle at the people spouting the drivel being pushed out.

Jon
Jon
3 months ago
Reply to  Luke Rogers

The forty-five minute claim was supposed to refer to battlefield WMDs, but mutated by the press it became an ability to hit our bases in Cyprus. Subsequently, the press complained that this misunderstanding was never corrected, but that completely missed the point. Arguments over where the Cyprus misinformation came from was itself a misdirection. The original statement that battlefield WMDs could be fired in forty-five mins was also wrong, because there were no WMDs in the first place and the governments of the UK and the US were sick of waiting for the UN to find them. It reminded me… Read more »

Nigel Collins
Nigel Collins
3 months ago
Reply to  Luke Rogers
Luke Rogers
Luke Rogers
3 months ago
Reply to  Nigel Collins

Are you having a stroke Nigel? Blink twice if you need the warden.

AlexS
AlexS
3 months ago
Reply to  Luke Rogers

Since when Saddam could not hit us with WMD in 45min? Did not Saddam had chemical rounds?

Wasp snorter
Wasp snorter
3 months ago
Reply to  Luke Rogers

The WMD reason irritated many and convinced few, ultimately though, a vicious dictator with form on invading neighbours was removed. Appalling lack of planning and lack of understanding led to the quagmire that followed. In terms of Afghanistan, there was a broad coalition of at least 8 western countries and even mellow support from Russia for that, and anyway you can’t not expect the US to kick in the door of the safe haven of its enemies who just murdered thousands of its people. Not sure why you are even comparing this to the epic scale of misinformation that Russia… Read more »

Luke Rogers
Luke Rogers
3 months ago
Reply to  Wasp snorter

We removed a vicious dictator, when he ceased to be “our guy” in the region which unleashed ISIL. For some reason this was a sudden priority that screwed the Afghan operation which was triggered by the Saudi attack on the US. Gets confusing doesn’t it? They were not “so called illegal invasions”, they bloody well were illegal invasions. Our own side queered the pitch then bleats about Russia pulling the same games. No sympathy from me. What was that weapons inspector called who was driven to suicide again? Remember that? How “irritating”. I just can’t square the circle of why… Read more »

Cedric Brown
Cedric Brown
3 months ago
Reply to  Luke Rogers

Your inability to distinguish the differences between sets of circumstances is worrying, as is your determination to spread d/misinformation. For example, “Saudi attack on the US” implies that 9/11 was an act perpetrated by the Saudi state, which it most certainly was not.

Duker
Duker
3 months ago
Reply to  Cedric Brown

Thats is so . It wasnt an attack by the Afghan state either but they got invaded
Whats your take on the Saudi state attack along with Emeratis on their neighbour Yemen , aided by US and UK

Wasp snorter
Wasp snorter
3 months ago
Reply to  Luke Rogers

don’t blow a fuse on me buck rogers and stop quoting my words back to me like some bore, I was against the Iraq war at the time and know all the angles, so no lectures as I’ve just eaten. If you want to talk about Iraq war and the failings of the Blair government then fine, but don’t do it in the same breath as Russias full scale land grab of Ukraine. It’s not the same so don’t try to muddle them as all in the same camp.

Last edited 3 months ago by Wasp snorter
Duker
Duker
3 months ago
Reply to  Wasp snorter

Invasion is invasion, you cant separate them like you do for convenience. Both are for misguided reasons, and both on a country that wasnt a threat to them. The real reasons for the Iraqi illegal invasion was oil at the heart of it. At the time the west was beholden to the Saudis and their oil, so it was to protect that and gain economic control over Iraqs oil was the core of the plan- couldnt say that- so various false angles were used – as any politicians find that the underlings will find plausible reasons for any fantasy they… Read more »

Luke Rogers
Luke Rogers
3 months ago
Reply to  Duker

I believe you can separate types of invasion. There is at least an honesty to a good old fashioned land grab. The last set of wars the UK have engaged in have been political, costly and ultimately pointless. If we ever had a government that straight up had the balls to say “we are going back in the business of gaining land and resources for the UK”, they would have me and many others cheering in the streets. We could offer to help Ukraine, but Crimea? You are never getting that back. That will be our payment. Although personally I… Read more »

Wasp snorter
Wasp snorter
3 months ago
Reply to  Luke Rogers

Agreed Crimea will never be returned, Those wars also cost us in terms of military effectiveness, Blair’s government made cuts to help pay for those invasions, plus the snatch Land Rover scandal and the vacuum of power and bloody chaos left behind, I struggle to vote for either party as both are so poor and incompetent and lie all the time.

Luke Rogers
Luke Rogers
3 months ago
Reply to  Wasp snorter

For the first time, I may not bother to vote next year. I’ve spoiled my paper the last 2 times. Nobody in politics today is worthy to run a Tesco Express and I admit I am thoroughly demoralised by this last decade. The only thing that would get me back in a conflict for this country would be 40+ acres of arable land with a water source and suitable house, signed over to my son and family in perpetuity.

klonkie
klonkie
3 months ago
Reply to  Luke Rogers

Luke , I couldn’t agree more with. I will not settle for a mediocre set of candidates. ThEy can all bloody well work harder for my vote!

The Artist Formerly Known As Los Pollos Chicken
The Artist Formerly Known As Los Pollos Chicken
3 months ago
Reply to  Luke Rogers

Absolutely agree the political system in this country and the West in general is broken, basically a corrupted steaming pile O shite. I will never vote again.

Its now self evident if voting made any difference they wouldn’t let you do it.

As a man much smarter than the members of “One Voice” in here once said-

“There are none so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free.”

🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🇬🇧

Airborne
Airborne
3 months ago
Reply to  Luke Rogers

Then you’re a throbber and if spoiling your vote, or not voting then you are not entitled to winge and cry about who ends up in number 10! You have to admit you allowed that specific party in and therefore you go along with their agenda and policies! No need to cry about, for example the removal of illegal immigrants to Rwanda, or the exploitation and licences for new gas and oil fields, if you didn’t vote in the last election!

Luke Rogers
Luke Rogers
3 months ago
Reply to  Airborne

Wtf are you on about? Spoiled ballots are still counted but there really is no point, I live in the bluest of Tory constituencies and nothing will ever dislodge the pricks. If I had my way I’d be deporting people in the millions, not allowing 600k in a year because they are related to the unelected PM. I’d also be fracking the bejesus out of the land to extract every last drop, and none of the licenses would be on the international market. It would be for domestic sale only and capped at 2015 prices.

Airborne
Airborne
3 months ago
Reply to  Luke Rogers

Wow Lukey, don’t worry the Tories will be dislodging themselves, but then you will be disappointed when Labour get in, as the policies of the left involve needing immigrants to come over, get leave to remain, and then vote for the left! And do you really think all 600k coming over are related to the PM, a little casual racism there I see!

Wasp snorter
Wasp snorter
3 months ago
Reply to  Duker

Meh, have to slightly disagree. Invasion is invasion as it’s the same word, yes, but tomorrow is tomorrow also but what you do tomorrow and I do will be different. I’m not separating invasions for convenience, I could say the opposite, you are saying they are all the same for convenience. What about counter-invasions then, so when we retook the falklands or Ukraine gaining back ground, is that invasions is invasions. All habitable land in this world has changed hands and been fought over, so we should be intelligent enough to argue the nature and reasons for an invasion. I… Read more »

Luke Rogers
Luke Rogers
3 months ago
Reply to  Wasp snorter

You’ve just eaten at 0400? Are you unironically in Moscow?

Last edited 3 months ago by Luke Rogers
Wasp snorter
Wasp snorter
3 months ago
Reply to  Luke Rogers

No just poor sleeping routine, working late getting stuff done cos I’ve taken the rest of the week off. Barnsley isn’t Moscow and Yorkshire isn’t Russia last I looked. Although Sheffield may launch a drone attack soon.

Luke Rogers
Luke Rogers
3 months ago
Reply to  Wasp snorter

Don’t let those peoples republic of South Yorkshire lads push you around. I struggle to sleep in these short nights too, really sucks.

Cedric Brown
Cedric Brown
3 months ago
Reply to  Luke Rogers

Beware of arguing from the particular to the general. The WMD saga was one specific instance of disinformation, whose sole purpose was to support the idea of going to war. Other domestic disinformation serves other quite different purposes.

Wasp snorter
Wasp snorter
3 months ago
Reply to  Cedric Brown

Agreed

Frost002
Frost002
3 months ago

Obviously Prince of Wales was never going to be scrapped or sold. The next party in power however, will take a very different view.

Deep32
Deep32
3 months ago
Reply to  Frost002

Will it now?

Let me guess, Mad Vlad looking to buy a low mileage 2nd hand carrier to replace the pile of junk that is playing at being a front line aviation asset with the Rus Northern Flt?

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
3 months ago
Reply to  Deep32

Russian Northern Fleet simply needs to make the pier both mobile and oceangoing. 😁

Deep32
Deep32
3 months ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

😂👍

Jonathan
Jonathan
3 months ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

I think you will find that they are just fine tuning their bastion policy…..if it never leaves port it’s hard to get to…..after all their main aim is to look impressive and they cannot do that if they have broken down…or been humiliated by a generational or two newer set of of NATO ships and subs.

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
3 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan

One really does wonder who would drink the Kool-Aid? 🤔

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
3 months ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

Er…huh…wanna slam-dunk bar bet winner? The accurate statement should be who would drink the Flavor Aid? Per Mr. Google. Who knew?

Cedric Brown
Cedric Brown
3 months ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

Admiral Kuznetsov is apparently unable to sail or even float without the support of its’ pier (group).

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF
3 months ago
Reply to  Cedric Brown

😁👍

Duker
Duker
3 months ago
Reply to  Frost002

Labour were the ones who had the policy to build 2 large carriers and operate them as such.
Conservatives after the election initially wanted to only operate 1 and have the other as non operational.
Same happened to the T23 replacement, the T26 design was progressed from around 2009 but the Defence cuts of the Conservatives meant it was put on the back burner till months before 2015 election , the glacial pace means the first might be in commission 10 years after the 2015 election

Jim
Jim
3 months ago
Reply to  Duker

Sorry don’t you know that the Tory’s have always been a friend to the navy and British shipbuilding in general, that’s why people still howl thatchers name from the Clyde to the Tyne to the Mersey 😀

Duker
Duker
3 months ago
Reply to  Jim

Treasury is still full of Thatcherites and often the Defence Secretary is one of the party cadres from her time who worked for the party immediately after university till a seat comes vacant 10-12 years later ( Hammond)
At least Wallace was in the military

Louis
Louis
3 months ago
Reply to  Jim

The collapse of the shipbuilding industry wasn’t Thatchers fault. It was a self inflicted wound by the Unions and the refusal to modernise.

Last edited 3 months ago by Louis
Jonathan
Jonathan
3 months ago
Reply to  Louis

I’m going to disagree a bit, yes the unions played a role, but actually most of the refusal to modernise was happening from around the early 20c and was driven by the owners of the yards wanting to maximise profit without investment..they had grown up without international competition and grew in hubris…yes you can say in the late sixties and seventies the Unions played an equal part..but the owners were the seminal cause of British shipyards being to generations behind their competitors, the unions of the seventies just exasperated what was already terminal.

Last edited 3 months ago by Jonathan
Paul.P
Paul.P
3 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan

‘Refusal to modernise’ is phrase which covers a multitude of sins. Unions are guilty of it when they can see that ‘modernisation’ proposals will lead to job losses, or they do not believe employers’ assurances that it won’t. Employers are guilty of it when they choose asset stripping for short term profit rather than get stuck into the hard work of re-engineering systems and production methods. Employers who command the trust of their employees can modernise. It’s a question of having a culture of respect and the confidence to take the workforce with you. German and Japanese companies operating in… Read more »

Jonathan
Jonathan
3 months ago
Reply to  Paul.P

Yes indeed, a very good summation.

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
3 months ago
Reply to  Duker

Hmmm…no mention of the Labour Shrill Lord West of Spit dont Swallow who pushed for the carriers at the expense of the rest of the RN. Where were the carriers built? Who as Chancellor /PM at the time? How did Spit dont Swallow end up as a Labour Peer I wonder? I was still serving when Delivering Security in a Changing World hit the messdecks. I was the Warrant WE Weapons on HMS Marlborough, one of the T23s that was cut, and I was one of the last 3 people off the gangway as we turned the lights off and… Read more »

Jon
Jon
3 months ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

When you cut the money, cuts to hardware and troop numbers follow. It can take many years before they do, particularly of long-lasting platforms but it’s inevitable unless budgets rise again. The effect of John Major wasting the “peace dividend” in the 1990s was still being felt years later. You can’t lop a third off the budget and expect no platform cuts. We can argue whether West should have pushed for carriers over escorts, but the Navy should have still been able to afford both. As for the mealy mouthed Defence Reviews that pretend to justify no need for whatever’s… Read more »

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
3 months ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Bravo GB. BRAVO!
Some balance and perspective for a change, Labour are no better than the Tories when it comes to Defence.

Redshift
Redshift
3 months ago

It is also worth remembering that the Tories have been in power for 34 of the last 50 years, and if Argentina hadn’t invaded the Falklands in 1982 then the armed forces would have been decimated by the Thatcher government’s plans which were abruptly reversed.

1945 to 2023

28 years Labour
50 years Tory

1973 to 2023

16 years Labour
34 years Tory

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
3 months ago
Reply to  Redshift

Morning. Indeed.

I don’t go by years in charge, I go by cuts, and who did what when.
I’ve studied it so long I can almost parrot fashion repeat who cut what when.

Which is why I always list Labour cuts alongside Tory ones as they’re both as bad, and in fact Labour’s period 97 to 2010 set the groundwork for where we are today, especially regards the equipment of the army.

Redshift
Redshift
3 months ago

Maybe, but it was the Falklands war which stopped some extremely serious Tory cuts from happening , without that event we would have been weaker much much sooner.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
3 months ago
Reply to  Redshift

Yes, indeed. But they didn’t happen, so it’s a what if. The cuts were stayed til 91s OFC then 94s FLF.

The RN from 35 to 23 escorts, Fast Jet Sqns from 23 to 12 and SSN from 15 to 8 did, ftom 97 on. And all the cuts to the army, equipment not personnel, before 2010 and the Cameron massacre.

Both are as bad as each other. I don’t believe Labour coming next will be the panacea many are making them out to be.

Frank62
Frank62
3 months ago

Indeed, we hold whatever government is in power to account when they harm our defence.

Cedric Brown
Cedric Brown
3 months ago

One thing that almost no politicians understand. Lead times in the military for both men and equipment are very long. Any cuts you make CANNOT be restored without very significant delays occurring. If at any time you wish you had more resources available to you, you are already many years too late. I was in a meeting once where an OF-8 (Vice Admiral) tried to explain this to a government Minister; had it not been for an unexpected fire drill, blood would have been spilt.

Frank62
Frank62
3 months ago
Reply to  Redshift

It was proposed Tory cuts that caused the Falklands war. That’s why Nott resigned as he was chief in advocating & implementing them. Thatcher really dropped the ball not sending a warship earlier to deter Argentina, but she only became committed to Falklanders after the invasion happened. Before that they were dispensable. Too much history ha been rewritten since or ignored as not fitting the “saint” Margaret Thatcher hagiograpohy.

grizzler
grizzler
3 months ago
Reply to  Frank62

She had her good points and her bad- too many like to remember only the good.
I’d like to think distance may remedy that – but I doubt it.

Cedric Brown
Cedric Brown
3 months ago
Reply to  grizzler

More importantly, almost none of the policies which she implemented were of her creation.

Wasp snorter
Wasp snorter
3 months ago
Reply to  Frank62

Yes but history has not been rewritten at all Frank, the points you make are well documented and well understood and no history of the falklands I’ve ever seen ignores the causes. She certainly was no saint and I say that having lived through the miners strike in the home town of Arthur Scargill. The credit to Thatcher was that she was committed, when making a difficult decision and on this decision, she was right to push for a retake despite misgivings in its outcome, she didn’t play it safe as she knew losing those islands by military force was… Read more »

Louis
Louis
3 months ago
Reply to  Redshift

The Nott cuts are continuously over exaggerated.
The amphibs were saved before the Falklands War.

All that would go were some obsolete escorts, HMS Invincible and Endurance, whilst SSN numbers would be increased which was a trend Labour had started.

97 to 2010 was a far worse time for the Navy
12 SSN reduced to 7
9 frigates all less than 15 years old cut
T45 order halved
Sea Harrier cut
Invincible decommissioned
MARS programme was a complete failure and waste of money.
MCMV cut from 28 to 16
40% cut in personnel

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
3 months ago
Reply to  Louis

And on. And on. And on. And the RAF cuts, and the Army cuts, and the cancellation of so many programmes leaving the Army having to do them all now. Most of all to the RA.
Such, such short memories some have.

Redshift
Redshift
3 months ago
Reply to  Louis

You win 😀 although moving funding of pension onto the mod and the nuke deterrent to the RN was a sneaky thing to do 😀

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
3 months ago
Reply to  Redshift

Absolutely bloody outrageous. That little elephant in the room is what is causing the greatest problems to this day.. .That and the Army going round in circles at what it wants.

Nick C
Nick C
3 months ago

Just as part of that debate, my 95 year old Mother is part of that 2% of gdp that is the defence budget. She gets her share of my late fathers pension, earned over 30+ years service. I fear she would not be up to much in a shooting war, but her widow’s pension allows the politicos to fudge the figures.

Frank62
Frank62
3 months ago
Reply to  Louis

The Nott cuts under Thatcher directly gave the Agentines the correct impression that we were withdrawing most of our presence from the south Atlantic. Apart from the token Stanley garrison, HMS Endurance was the presence, imminently due to be sold/scrapped. Then our capability to intervene/re-take them if invaded was to be seriously cut by the sale of Hermes & Invincable. The rights of the Falklanders were being quietly pushed aside, until the egg-on-face moment when Argentina invaded. Considering the stark reality that we got the Argentine surrender just a few hours before the first big winter storm that would’ve curtailed… Read more »

Simon
Simon
3 months ago
Reply to  Louis

there were personal cuts across all three services in the Nott review. Also a Sea King replacement was in the balance

klonkie
klonkie
3 months ago
Reply to  Louis

excellent commentary Louis. Over the period 97 to 2010, the RAF went from from 23 front line jet squadrons to 8.

Jonathan
Jonathan
3 months ago

My balanced view, is they both pay Minimal lip service and as you say are as rubbish as each other….in really the majority of the voters don’t care and if they don’t care then elected politicians don’t care. They only care if it looks like we are heading to war…and even then they are all as likely to deny it will ever happen for as long as they can. The only real difference is that Labour have to show they are not hitting manufacturing….so they have to keep a drum beat of ship and other equipment being built and the… Read more »

Last edited 3 months ago by Jonathan
Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
3 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan

Hi J. Having said that, where was the drumbeat of equipment for the Army 97 to 2010?
Zilch, beyond Titan, Trojan, Terrier, Panther, and the Afghan UORs. After CH2, no follow on, after AS90, nothing, all RA modernisation plans cancelled.

R&D establishments, sold off, DERA split in two.

So while I instinctively agree with the comment on Labour and manufacturing, it doesn’t always play out.

Cedric Brown
Cedric Brown
3 months ago

Governments always want things on the cheap because they believe that the only way to get into power and/or stay there is to offer low levels of personal tax. That applies to parties of all political ideologies.

Cedric Brown
Cedric Brown
3 months ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

What was West supposed to do ? Clown politicians decided that we could defend the realm without men or equipment and he was tasked with making it happen. I would be very surprised if he did not try to persuade HMG of its stupidity, but he was never going to win that battle; his only other option would have been to resign as a matter of principle but that would not have changed anything.

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
3 months ago
Reply to  Cedric Brown

I met Lord Spit n Swallow a few times. I mealy mouthed politician and the worst 1st Sea lord in the history of the RN and that is a long history! Never gave a straight answer to the questions the people he commanded asked him.
I spoke to people on the side who worked directly for him, and they had an extreme dislike/ hated him.
Some of the other stuff that was/did the rounds at the time regarding his susceptibility to kompromat was shocking.

Marked
Marked
3 months ago
Reply to  Frost002

The next party in power were the party who ordered the 2 carriers you gormless Russian prick!

Robert Blay
Robert Blay
3 months ago
Reply to  Marked

Don’t hold back 😄👍

Jonathan
Jonathan
3 months ago
Reply to  Frost002

And what makes you say that..any evidence at all, that they would something so counter intuitive……..

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
3 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan

Shit stir….nothing more.

Bringer of facts
Bringer of facts
3 months ago
Reply to  Frost002

Nope, Corbyn is gone ….

Cedric Brown
Cedric Brown
3 months ago
Reply to  Frost002

When the coalition government came to power in 2010, it discovered that its preferred option to scrap the second carrier was much more expensive than building it, so it decided to complete the build and then either sell the ship or put it into “extended readiness” aka mothballs. Some time later somebody managed to make the government understand that 24/7 carrier availability implied at least two (preferably three) ships, and PoW was saved.

Cedric Brown
Cedric Brown
3 months ago
Reply to  Frost002

The only remotely rational options are 0 carriers or 2 carriers.

Frost002
Frost002
3 months ago
Reply to  Cedric Brown

Explain the situation with the French Navy?

Westerly
Westerly
3 months ago

If it’s if it’s if it’s too good to be true, it probably isn’t

CHRIS MORGAN
CHRIS MORGAN
3 months ago

I think if Russia spent half as much of their budget on actual tanks and artillery as they do on trolling and starting stupid rumours online, they’d have won the war by now.

The web is infested with them.

Cedric Brown
Cedric Brown
3 months ago
Reply to  CHRIS MORGAN

By far the greatest inefficiency in the Russian military is money being siphoned off as it flows down the chain of command or out to contractors. I read a RUSI paper which suggested that between 40 per cent and 85 per cent of the budget was “lost” in this way..

Last edited 3 months ago by Cedric Brown
Esteban
Esteban
3 months ago
Reply to  CHRIS MORGAN

And there is zero effect on people on the internet listening to this other than simpletons like yourself. Check the scoreboard and try not to get your knickers in a bunch.

Redshift
Redshift
3 months ago
Reply to  Esteban

The British get their knickers in a twist, the Americans get their panties in a bunch, please try to keep your metaphors correct.

Airborne
Airborne
3 months ago
Reply to  Esteban

Ah did you not just comment on one of my posts about name calling (which I didn’t) and look what shite you have commented to another poster! 💩💩💩

Jonathan
Jonathan
3 months ago

one bit of this article that irritated me was saying miss information created cognitive dissonance…misinformation has nothing to do with “creating” cognitive dissonance..cognitive dissonance is created when you are forces to take an action or witness something that does not align with your core values and belief systems….it’s actually one of those nasty little things that pop up in PTSD..so a solder with a Christian/western value system who has a core belief you don’t kill people and then kills in the line of duty will have a massive level of cognitive dissonance ( it’s why in war enemies are dehumanised),… Read more »

Last edited 3 months ago by Jonathan
Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
3 months ago
Reply to  Jonathan

👍 Thanks for that insight, mate.

Bringer of facts
Bringer of facts
3 months ago

Vlad is always harping on about how he aims to destroy “Anglo-Saxon” Culture, meanwhile, at home, the wokeists (useful idiots to our adversaries) are trying to argue that the Anglo-Saxons did not exist.

Trev
Trev
3 months ago

Very true, my British aboriginal status is at risk mate

grizzler
grizzler
3 months ago

isn’t all race just a construct – apart from the human race…..😉

Cedric Brown
Cedric Brown
3 months ago
Reply to  grizzler

There are often huge differences in appearance between races (e.g skin colour), but the differences in DNA between those races is extremely small, fractions of a per cent. Having said that there are massive levels of redundancy in our DNA, well over 90 per cent.

Esteban
Esteban
3 months ago

This whole discussion sounds like it’s the fault of Russian disinformation…. When in doubt claim it’s Russian disinformation. That sounds like how the US government likes to hide as well. Let’s try to use some critical thinking ourselves, shall we?

Cedric Brown
Cedric Brown
3 months ago
Reply to  Esteban

I am constantly staggered by the way in which the vast majority of people are prepared to believe almost anything they see or hear, and never make any effort at all to check what they have been told. For that reason, I think it is extremely important that we rebut all disinformation as much as we can, and that we use hard facts and rational arguments to do so.

Esteban
Esteban
3 months ago
Reply to  Cedric Brown

Agreed 100%…. We all have the capability to think for ourselves. Or even just try a little bit to think for yourselves. Let’s work on those skills. Anything you hear or read or see for the love of God on the internet question it all.

Airborne
Airborne
3 months ago
Reply to  Esteban

Correct but you do seem to have such an anti-UK stance that your biased gibberish ensures no one bother to listen to your US fanboy blathering!

Airborne
Airborne
3 months ago
Reply to  Esteban

💩💩👜

Natasha B Badenov
Natasha B Badenov
11 days ago

“…because people are closing their minds not opening their minds”.

I see this happening all too much.