The Ministry of Defence has confirmed that decisions on whether the United States can use its military bases in the UK for operational purposes are taken on a case-by-case basis and require UK approval, though specific criteria are not disclosed for security reasons.
In written answers to questions from Independent MP Jeremy Corbyn, Veterans Minister Al Carns said the department could not set out detailed factors publicly, explaining that “due to operational security reasons, the specific factors of consideration cannot be disclosed.” He added, however, that “all decisions on whether to approve foreign nations’ use of military bases in the UK for operational purposes considers the legal basis and policy rationale for any proposed activity.”
Addressing whether US forces require approval to use UK bases to move military equipment onward to a third country, Carns confirmed that permissions are not automatic. According to the written answer, “permissions to utilise UK military bases are considered on a case-by-case basis, dependent on the nature and purpose of their activity.”
The minister also stressed the limits of what the government is willing to discuss publicly, stating that “for operational security reasons, we do not offer comment or information relating to foreign nations’ military aircraft movements.”
U.S. forces in the UK
United States forces have maintained a long standing presence in the United Kingdom since the Second World War, forming a central part of the wider defence relationship between the two countries. This presence is rooted in shared strategic interests, close intelligence cooperation, and the UK’s geographic position on the western edge of Europe. While the number of permanently based US personnel has fluctuated over time, the UK continues to host key facilities that support American operations across Europe, the North Atlantic, and beyond.
The majority of US military activity in the UK falls under United States Air Forces in Europe and Africa, with several Royal Air Force stations made available for American use under long term bilateral agreements. Notable examples include RAF Lakenheath, RAF Mildenhall, RAF Feltwell, and RAF Fairford. These bases support a range of functions including combat air operations, aerial refuelling, intelligence and surveillance activities, logistics, and the temporary deployment of bomber aircraft. Although the sites remain sovereign UK bases, they are operated day to day by US forces in coordination with the Ministry of Defence.
Hell no.
Kick every US base out of the UK.
We pull all our bases out of Europe, especially those in Germany.
Trump watches too many Hollywood war movies. Maybe he should read history books and understand the the US has NEVER won a war on it’s own.
When was the last time any country won a global war on its own.
The American Civil War?
Sorry I mean’t to attach the comment to the comment above!
Only in America would anyone think of a civil war as being global
Like the World Series 😂
🫡🇺🇸
So Jim, as this community’s leading (only?) Starmer apologist are you welcoming his latest U-turn as much as I am?
Starmer frustrates me no end – he is far too managerial in his approach and shows very little urgency.
That said, I really like the Government’s focus on re-building our defence industry and supporting infrastructure which has been the key to our successes throughout history e.g. Napoleonic Wars and WW2. If you read accounts of WW2, it’s clear that we were absolutely fantastic at innovating and building new equipment and capabilities. It is vital we get back to that.
BUT it’s all moving at a (no doubt fiscally) prudent but (annoyingly) glacial pace. Arghh.
I suppose I should console myself with the fact it would be even worse under the Tories (they probably find something else to privatise to their mates or scrap programmes so they could cut taxes).
And if Reform got into power they would probably scrap things like GCAP, re-sell the defence housing and just buy lots of expensive American stuff, and even worse then use it to support an USA invasion of Greenland – all to please Trump and Putin.
Who exactly is Britain going to fight with 5 frigates, maybe two operational submarines and about 40 f35s? … it’s all delusional. Either Britain significantly shrinks its regional aspirations, massively increases defence spending or it does what it is told, when it is told by the US.
If you want to go to war, do you really plan on F35? Good question. It is not a plane you control, so all the leverage is handed over to whoever supply you spare parts. You make have it for autorised action, but can’t count it for war, since it is an asset only available as long as the company of your ally allow you to do so.
There is a far bit more to the British armed forces than that Roy and who are we going to be going to war with in and exactly how well prepared are they for a naval and air conflict with the UK.. because any theoretical UK other nation war would be a naval conflict… and the only nation on the planets not having the same issues with their naval power is china ( even US naval power is on a downward spiral)..our main likely enemy Russia has even more issues with its navy than we do.
To be fair he did not say global war, he said war.. you added the global bit… and it’s not really possible for one nation to win a a global war because the nature of a global war requires many different political entities to be involved..
Was Vietnam global? Was Afghanistan after we left global? When they tried and failed to defeat the Taliban where as we left once we had put in a government and military to hold their own. Which they ultimately did not.
Remember to insist that they pull out of Diego Garcia and Ascension as well, and as those two have GPS Ground Stations mitigate for the loss and the costs of replacing.
Also “Carboy”, “Sounder”, and numerous other intelligence installations are to a large part paid for by the NSA as part of the GCHQ/NSA UKUSA 5 Eyes link up, so account for that as well.
The fallout on the intell side alone would be ruinous.
And what would happen to the UKUS 1952 MDT and AUKUS, as well as UK participation in the F35 and other projects?
Our bases in Germany are minimal, and are there to facilitate the Army’s training and movement to Eastern Europe, so account for that as well with new areas in the UK to replace Sennelager, new depots to replace Wulfen and Ayrshire Barracks.
Spend more money on SF too to replace the CV22s the SAS have access to in extremis, as they’ll be gone.
Just a few examples, untwining from the US would be very tricky to say the least. I suspect many let their hatred of Trump “trump” all other real world considerations and realities.
List of US sites for interest.
Lakenheath.
Mildenhall.
Feltwell.
Molesworth.
Alconbury.
Blenheim Crescent.
Fairford.
Welford.
Croughton.
Barford St John.
Menwith Hill.
Plus US dets at several other locations embedded with the UKs MIS and whose vast resources we get full use of, directly impacting the UKIC, so account in the budget for those as well.
Tricky but necessary, we can’t afford the dependence we have.
For sure we will have to accept a smaller global military footprint.
Hi Danielle,
You characterise your approach as realistic and those arguing for a clearer break as being motivated by a personal hatred of Trump, but I think you’re being very generous to yourself and misrepresenting others’ motivations.
I looked through the list of capabilities you think would be at risk if we split from the USA. My first reaction was ‘so what’? There is a huge set of assumptions behind your argument which I think need explaining and justifying. Why is it in the national interest for us to keep them? What do we in the UK get out of trying to maintain a global presence or capabilities? What do we lose, in concrete terms, if we no longer have them in their current format? What mitigations could we put in place?
As things stand, I can’t see why it is worth putting up with MAGA America’s histrionics and hostile behaviour purely for the things you mentioned. So, I don’t see your approach as ‘realistic’ so I can only assume it’s based on a nostalgia for a past status that is no longer relevant.
France held on to Algeria for far too long with no obvious financial or strategic benefit to themselves, purely because the French elites thought that France could only be France if it had an Empire (ditto Indo-China). It got itself into all sorts of trouble because for reasons of ego and a stubborn refusal to let go of the past and focus on its current needs. Something, to our credit, we in the UK didn’t do (as much!).
I don’t like Trump but he is only the current figurehead of a much more nationalistic America which isn’t going anywhere. This is the future and we need to adjust ourselves to it. Like the French (who got it right on this!), we urgently need to insulate ourselves so we have more leverage in our future dealings with an ‘America First’ USA. That is a ‘realistic’ approach I could get behind!
Cheers.
Morning Tim.
My list, and detail, was extremely basic!
If you’ve studied ( maybe you have, maybe you haven’t) the depth of cooperation and indeed joined at the hip between GCHQ NSA and the wider British and US military in several key areas like i do daily for decades you’d see with horror how much that will impact our own military.
Nothing nostalgic or past status about it, reality.
Which will be obvious by now is my number one regard and priority above all, our own military. Just saying bye bye USA is hamstringing our forces in ways so many here just do not understand. I made a list of centres of cooperation and jointry a few weeks ago, acronyms of course, shall I go and find it for you to study yourself?
I will say with confidence many here will never have heard of half of them, or they even do.
Just kicking the US out as the original poster wanted because of Trump isnt going to happen, it hamstrings our military. Such a “divorce” will take a long time and needs to be carefully managed on our part. If the US went ahead regardless, which i doubt as they need our and other NATO bases for their own projection, well, they’re screwing themselves at the same time.
Look at the ideologists “in charge” of the current government here. Anti US for so long in every way, until they’re in the driving seat and see for themselves. Hear from the CDS, from C, from DGSS, from DGCHQ, from their NSAs, the sheer scale of what we have immersed outselves into.
And with Trump around with his vindictiveness and unpredictability he’d be wanting retaliation when we say, off you go!
A realistic and more balanced approach I could get behind is a gradual wheening off of US kit for European or home made, but again, that’ll take ages as US kit is good for the most part and where are the Brit equivalents of Chinook, F35, C17, and on and on.
On the intelligence side, not a chance, and our UKIC and our military directly supports each other, anyone ever considered that?
I guess it’s possible ENATO with the UK as part and the US divorce and the intelligence side remains, of a fashion, as now, but again I look at the impact.
I often suggest so many here are pretty clueless as to what’s behind the fancy weapon that goes bang, and I remain of that opinion. The back up areas cost a lot of money. Take TLAM for example. Yes, we could go and buy a European version. What of targeting and the intell support of that. Where are the untold billions coming from for extra space and other intell assets and intell people we get through 5 Eyes?? This blasted government cannot even stump up the money to buy 25 helicopters or 80 guns! Even the payment for 6 Sky Sabre Launchers of a measley 100 million I read is spread over 3 years!!!
We lost our place as a world power after WW2 to the US, and generation after generation of politician removed our capabilities and our industry and became subservient to the US in so many areas, especially Foreign policy. I’d rather that had not happened, but it has. Yes, lets be like France, but France doesn’t have what we do on the intell side and I’ll look on sadly when we have thrown that away and posters here are suddenly shocked when HM forces are suddenly even more impotent than now.
Finally, others motives on Trump, Farage, Starmer, Cameron, any political movement, are clear as day here for all to see. We all have our beliefs, including me. I’m not being generous to myself at all. I see the attacks daily, and I too indulge. I’ve suggested a blanket ban on UKDJ before, but, when I try to bite my tongue and hold back on the politics and other’s just carry on with their own platform and agenda, well, I’ll join in as well!
I’ve ranted long enough, shall I list, as suggested all the joint areas of US UK military so we can all decide where the billions are coming from and what replaces them in a fantasy world where our own military isn’t impacted to irrelevance?
Like you said, so what?
Yep it should only be done due to a catastrophic collapse in relations.. ( the US invaded Greenland would have been one).
But it’s fair to say the US needs to be off our reliable allies list and we need to have a plan in place around our own security without any dependence… yes we can and should focus our defence and geostrategic goals on mutually working together with both the US and EU as well as non EU, US allies ( Norway, Canada, Middle Eastern nations, South Korea, Japan Australia NZ etc) but the core premise is that if an alliance fails we can still protect our core geostrategic interests.. ( home, Atlantic islands, BAT, gib, cyprus)..
Agree. Greenland a big Red Line and I supported Starmer in what he said.
I’ve always wanted an independent Great Britain as a good between between both camps, not dominated by either. Which is why I voted out.
But, that was with a stable USA. If the USA went all Putin we’d have no choice but to rejoin the EU I feel. We are Europeans at the end of the day.
The hit on our military and intell community would I feel finish us as a medium major power in the short to middle term as the rebuild would be too great and all British governments are wed to welfare for their vote share.
I agree to me the Uk has a great opportunity to be a bridge power between the US and EU as long as they stayed cordial allies.. unfortunately it’s looking like they are going to split into to separate geopolitical poles.. and we are to exposed in the world to be completely independent if the west splits into poles.. Russia wants our guts on a plate, Argentina wants the Falklands, Spain will want Gib, Cyprus will want the bases back..
In the end in a multi polar world ( China, US, EU) nobody will come to our rescue and everyone will want a piece of us..
If we sided with the US ( and I don’t like where the US is going) we will always be on the periphery and never sure of support ( I would not trust the US to support in the Falklands over Argentina).. and the EU would rightly be very suspicious of a US client on its north western flank and controlling the med choke points..
Where as in the EU we would be secure and an equal partner..
It’s not like we will ever be allies of China.. so it’s US, EU or in the middle of three power poles all on our own..
As I’ve said a few time I think the new geopolitical and geostrategic realities mean the UK is going to have to swallow a pile of sick at some point one way or another.
That is not going to be the advantage to anyone except Russia and China. Best thing to do is hunker down and wait for the Orange toddler’s presidency to end. Things probably won’t go back completely to normal but I suspect even Vance will have better judgment.
Vance? Really? He’s not displayed any yet! MAGA is a billionaires dream construct. they don’t care about democracy or people, just what makes them even richer, even quicker, raping the world’s resources. Unless we deal with big money overeach our future will be grim , dystopian & most the worst projections for the world will be guaranteed.
Western democracies are suffering from a very bad case of Tall Poppy Syndrome. In the USA, the top 0.1% hold 14% of wealth (even in the Gilded Age of the 1920s, it was only 8%) and able to use this vast wealth to corrupt the political process to their own benefit.
I don’t think democracies suffering from a Tall Poppy Syndrome can survive. They run a significant risk of falling into authoritarianism unless the problem is addressed. The USA is just the canary in the mine in this regard.
The core question is do you want to live in a functioning democracy with a rule of law that applies equally to all; and if you do, what are you prepared to do to defend it?
And anyone who witters on about socialism or communism at this point is part of the problem.
USA 2026, Russia 1910 – The two countries have something in common regarding how wealth is shared.
This lead to democratic issues enabling a Trump to rise to power.
RICH individuals adapt to keep their wealth, they don’t fight him, but before he got to power, they had an agenda of their own to avoid that people think about them. I do understand very well why people wanted to fight democrates. The anger a few rich individuals handled democraty before them led to anger. The happy few have then used anything in their power to embrace this anger and turn it to their advantage, creating another unbalancement.
In short, due to the disproportionate amount of wealth carried by very few people, the US society is gradually becoming more and more unstable.
Given the myth a few men keep pumping, the garage theory and so on, the system can carry on for a while. But it is not good for the world.
I don’t think it can ever really go back.. the problem is the US has shown that its checks and balances will not mitigate around complete geostrategic fuckwitery from a president.. this mean the USA is now always one vote from abandonment of any alliance… you cannot build a strong alliance around that.
Trump is just a megalomanic chancer.. Vance is very close to a Christo fascist who want to isolate the US from everyone else.. and he hates European nations with a passion.
Oh dear, such opinions are blatantly uninformed but also silly in its extreme. These bases are essential to NATO and are not bargaining chips between childlike political squabbles.
But they are only valid as long as NATO is valid.. and first and foremost NATO was about deterrence and deterrence is about capability, credibility and communication of both.. is NATO in anyway communicating credibility? I would say not.. is Putin in a post Ukraine war in anyway going to think the US will be running to aid a random Baltic or Balkan state that falls into Russian influence.
Not sure where you are going with your post but let’s all understand the orange man, he waffles, talks without a speech writer or prompts and is liable to say some weird shit! Putin isn’t going anywhere for the next couple of years, yes a Baltic land grab is the most obvious and quick operation for the Russkies to do, but Putin may be mad but he isn’t stupid and he know NATO, when push comes to shove will continue to be NATO.
The question is does Putin think that.. ? And after Trump would an isolationist US president ?
The quicker we draw down the US presence in Europe the better.
As long as US forces are based in Europe or part of the NATO chain of command for European operations MAGA and the European main stream media will perpetuate the myth that Europe is defenceless without them.
Political paralysis is Europes big problem not a lack of military force, logistics or even intelligence. Most of what the US was providing is gone and even in space based assets Europe can provide almost everything it requires not to fight and win the Euro Atlantic Area.
Japan, South Korea and Australias lack of any support for Europe over Greenland shows Europe doesn’t need to come to anyone’s aid in the pacific now.
The US can and should do what France did in the 60’s and leave the NATO command structure. Anything else just risk a perpetuation on the current situation and close down its European bases.
If the US won’t leave the UK should lead an expanded JEF structure incorporating Germany, Poland and maybe Canada is they are now serious.
How many European countries sent troops to the Falklands? How many European countries send troops to Gibraltar when Spain gets aggressive. How many European countries would station troops in the Falklands if Argentina started becoming more aggressive now?
Australia was one of only 5 countries to support us over the Diego Garcia dispute, with Hungary being the only European country to do so. Australia and New Zealand provided more support in the Falklands than every European country. French engineers were directly responsible for the deaths of Royal Navy sailors.
Even down to the pettiness shown by the EU over the last few years over Brexit. The idea that European countries are better Allies than Australia (or New Zealand) is just so utterly ridiculous that it’s hard to believe you’re actually British.
This just reads like a toddler throwing a tantrum. It’s the most geopolitically blind take I’ve seen ever seen.
OT -> Private Bonespurs’ comment on NATO troops in Afghanistan is beyond contempt
Well, that’s bound to piss them off…. Or piss off the Commanders doing all this paperwork to submit for review that might trickle down into discourse with the current lot in office at home.
Meh, it’s a little thing, it’s now having them explain everything to us and you know what, that’s a good thing.
It is worth noting that President Trump and his minions are actively trying to sabotage NATO. As such, if NATO still exists when he exits power and the USA is still a key member, then they have lost this battle. Defeating Trump in battles is something that would give me great pleasure.
I think he is accelerating all this madness now to try and break as much as possible before the US Midterms, at which point, we can only hope his malign actions will be curtailed.
Nevertheless, we should harbour no illusions about things going back to the way they were before and prepare for the worst. The West has been enjoying the smell of its own effusions for far too long and now we’re starting to choke.
As a side note, did anyone else notice that the emblem of Trump’s new Board of Peace is a copy of the UN badge except, instead of a map of the world, it is a map of Central and North America? Oh, and it is gold in colour.
Allusions. Harbour no allusions. I don’t want David Mitchell to come and shoot be in the head.
You were right the first time. Illusions!
Interesting photo choice? I believe that is a F22 Raptor, none of which have ever been permanently based in the UK.
Typical that good old Corbyn is asking, doesn’t he know that these arrangements were in place even back to Eldorado Canyon in the 80s?
*an
It does look like a Raptor, with the external fuel tanks, full flaps and air brakes I would suggest it is one that had just arrived from the US in ferry configuration and needing every little trick to stop. You don’t get to see that very often.
What. An. Aircraft. It looks menacing. At first I thought, oh, F35, but the engine intakes differ, the canopy is higher, and the vertical fins a huge.
I know what you mean but I was always a little disappointed that the the YF-23 didn’t win. I always thought it was a stunning aircraft to look at.
Ha! Me too. And the YF23 occurred to me too when I saw the photo, with that profile.
What is your view on the Boscombe incident in 94, which has been reported by some to be a variant of the YF23, if that aircraft went black?
Well, everything suggests that the YF-23 was stealthier and faster than the F-22 so if you wanted to push that aspect then it would make a good candidate especially with improved engines. But as far as Boscombe is concerned I’d describe the YF-23 as either square or diamond shaped rather than triangular as the reports might indicate so I would tend to lean towards it being something else.
Also flying it from the same location as the ETPS would make sense for us, but less for the US where they have much more secure and remote testing areas available. The UK is far too built up for genuinely secret testing. I say this as someone who lives not too far away from BAe Warton and we regularly get Typhoons doing test flights in the area as they work on the new radar.
Of course if they were flying SR-71s out of there to try and hide the missions from the usual satellite coverage then I’d say that black and sort of triangular fit and you could fly a partially disassembled one out on a C-5. I doubt we will ever get the actual truth though, especially if someone is not happy about a multi-million pound screw up involving a classified research project.
I think it pretty certain that something happened, AFM did a good piece on it at the time, apparently a Northrop design known as AV6, Air Vehicle 6.
I went down after but was far too late.
Old commie Corbyn would love the US to leave the UK and NATO, if he has the choice he would invite Hamas in to set up on those babes. Just a silly question, already known to the anti Semite Corbyn. The US are essential to NATO, and like the orange man or not, Europe have leeched of the US regarding defence ever since the implementation of NATO. The orange haters should actually thanks him, as his attitude and direct approach since his inauguration last year, have made European leaders sit up and listen, and actually make commitment to increase and improve their own defence. Our dear leader also listened, but has chosen to ignore as its not what the parliamentary labour party, the ones who are running the front bench, want or are interested in.
Exactly.
There’s a lot to what you say, but the US gained more than it paid for. Leadership of the free world was more than just a self-aggrandising title. The rest of NATO followed US leadership in geopolitics. The price of not having a strategic geopolitical competitor in Western Europe was that “leeching” you referred to. Now Europe and the US will go their separate ways and although they’ll often agree, sometimes they’ll butt heads in ways that haven’t happened for 80 years. Sometimes America will lose.
But Jezza’s a true patriot! Just not to the UK.
That is how hegemony works the leading pays in sustaining its power to provide security to its hegemony and then it harvests the geopolitical and economic benefits.. but it mean the other lesser powers are always dependent.. we did not ask India to supply a navy .. we did.. the problem is the present US thinks it can have its hegemony cake and eat it and Europe needs to therefore become independent of US hegemony..
Like it or may mate Europe will not want to lose the US as the main NATO player, no matter what shit they say! Otherwise Europe will have to increase everything from defence spending to about 10% per county, move its industries to a war footing and get a grip on its own populations to join the military! All in the slave of maybe 2 years.
Slave? bloody fingers, should read space!
Let’s be honest if Europe actually spent 4-5% and got its shit together Russia would not have a hope.. it’s a nation of 130 million and a GDP of under 3 trillion.. Europe is 500 million people with a GDP of 27 trillion.. it could and would put Russia in a box it could not get out of..
I disagree with the spending percentage but I agree militarily Russia would not have a chance against a fully armed and equipped Europe type NATO! But Putin is a gambler, and he would gamble on the fact that if he made a quick Baltic land grab, without the US as NATO lead, Europe and its selfish politicians and Government would be far to slow and indecisive to react!
I think the greatest factor in Europe raising our defence spendings is the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Trump as usual takes all the credit. Most of us here wanted greater spending decades ago & have consistantly said so. Such an ignorant & spitefull nonentity Trump is. I just hope & pray Trump on steroids, so to speak, just hastens the revulsion at home in the USA that forces him out of office far sooner & returns sanity & reliability to the USA for tha sake of freedom & alliances across the world. We really need a responsible adult in charge!
If the USAF have to ask for approval for operations from bases on British sovereign territory…
will both the RAF and USAF have to ask for approval for operations from Mauritius once Starmer has handed Diego Garcia’s sovereignty over to them?…
No, Diego Garcia is a Soverign lease, no permission required.
👍🏻
US ‘asks’ – UK dares not say no.
Hasn’t Comrade Corbyn got more important things to worry about?
Like trying to work out how his new party (that contains both islamists and far left wackjobs) is going to somehow not tear itself apart
I’m sort of hoping he really focuses on making it work pisses of his constituents and losses his seat.
Funny, The French took jokes for decades and it was ok. Trump makes a simulât comment and uk is shocked. Funny.
Since when did the French have a sense of humour ?? Oh, I see what you did there.
So, why don’t you have a good laugh at trump’s comment?
Gradual rundown for me. They are unreliable, not the US Forces, but the Maga idiots who showed their true colours this week. Any person with an ounce of nouse can see the internal events currently in the Us are reminiscent of 1930’s Germany. For some of us? Those are grounds enough to seriously question ethics and morals.
Our future, in common defence, lies with the Nordic and Europeans who see the real threats, Putin and the Chicoms.
Our current crop of useless politicians show what a spineless bunch of fools they are, obsessed with welfarism, net zero and denying the realities. We need to rearm. End of.
This statement feels rather weaselly.
Trump will conclude that “silence implies consent”, rather than the UK Government’s “politeness in the hope of moderation”.
Trump gets nothing unless a yard brush is inserted down his throat, or a porcupine from a run up with a message attached.
Usual boot lickers on here.
Happily be a US vassal state, bullied and humiliated on the world stage just so we can pretend to matter to them. A US senator cut a Greenland shaped cake with pro Russian politicians at Davos, celebrated on US media. It’s not just Trump, this runs deep in the US establishment, maga talk of taking Diego Garcia & Falkland Islands off us as there is nothing we can do about it, and people want this to carry on? For NSA scraps and bases for them to use so it looks like we’re their “partner” do me a favour.
That’s about as patriotic as Corbyn is, just a different side of bringing Britain down even more into dependence and irrelevance. But at least Corbyn won’t be on his knees holding tightly, while Trump and maga p**s on the graves of the 457 killed in Afghan, like some are happy to do so they can still get a Uncle Sam to pat them on the head and say good boy.
CANZUK, EU or new Europe/Canada defence framework is the only option for Britain to be an equal partner with a bloc.
Morning Sole. Long time not seen you post.
Boot lickers. That’s disappointing from you, as I remember your long time ongoing war of words here with Chris ( was it Chris, it’s been so long ) about a decade ago and that you were cordial and respectful to me when I chipped in, despite our opposing politics, due to me being respectful to you.
As you said at the time, and I quote.
“I’ll speak with you Daniele, as you at least have shown respect.”
For interest of all, you were about the only poster in those “good old days” pushing Corbyn for PM and supporting
Momentum, just so current posters here know your loyalties.
I’d say the same to you as in my conversation with Tim further up. Sure, CANZUK, great, even back in the EU, so we can be as subservient to them as many felt before, whatever, or a new Europe Canada defence framework. All sounds great in theory. Trump indeed has done some outrageous things I oppose, and his attitude to the environment and wildlife appalls me.
How is it done while minimising the impact on our military and defence community? How? From Aukus to sub tech to nuke tech to SF to the intelligence side.
Realities, not boot licking. How do we do it in reality? It’ll take devades.
Good morning Daniele
We actually shared a lot of the same politics ie immigration, state ownership and increased defence spending, but I get your point. Chris H yes.
My loyalties lie with my family and country, full stop, as opposed to many in this country I don’t treat politicians, parties & “left” or “right” like a football team, I’ve voted Labour and Conservative, when the country is on the bones of its a**s people drift to extremes and want radical change, I’ll make no apologies for that.
We can do all that ourselves and with similar allies, we have the brains and skill to do anything the US does, albeit on a smaller scale. But we will never do that unless we start the long break up now. Read Angus Hantons book “vassal state” how America runs Britain, it’s eye opening, the US has targeted and runs key sectors in Britain extracting any potential growth opportunities for themselves, we are without a shadow of a doubt a current US vassal.
We can leave the EU and all the turmoil that brought but we can’t leave the US defence orbit? Is this where we are now, not even able to do what the French do without America holding our hand.
Boot licker wasn’t meant as a personal attack on you, I’ve always carried on reading the site and enjoy your posts.
Hi Sole.
Great, our mutual respect endures, good to see you, anyway!
The book is noted, and I’m always open to changing my views with evidence as times change.
Yes there would need to be massive levels of communication of capability and credibility.. Europe would need to show it will stand together and take on anyone that steps over its lines… it can be done. The world is heading to a multi polar state of power politics and I want the blocks to be the US, Europe and China.. not the US, Russia and China.. I don’t want Europe to become some richer version of Africa that the US, Russia and China pick to bone…for that to happen the leading European nations need to grow some.