The United States Second Fleet achieved full operational capability on December the 31st, 2019.

In May 2018, the US Navy Chief of Naval Operations announced plans to reestablish the Second Fleet amid heightened tensions between NATO and Russia.

Since its re-establishment in August 2018, Vice Admiral Andrew Lewis, the commander of the Second Fleet, has led the resurgence of the US Navy’s newest numbered Fleet, amid a return to “great power competition as outlined in the National Defense Strategy”, say the US Navy.

“Within an increasingly complex global security environment, our allies and competitors alike are well aware that many of the world’s most active shipping lanes lie within the North Atlantic,” Lewis said.

“Combined with the opening of waterways in the Arctic, this competitive space will only grow, and 2nd Fleet’s devotion to the development and employment of capable forces will ensure that our nation is both present and ready to fight in the region if and when called upon.”

The achievement of FOC signifies 2nd Fleet has reached sufficient capacity to sustain command and control over assigned forces using the operational functions and processes of the Maritime Operations Center and Maritime Headquarters, in accordance with US Navy Doctrine.

The Second Fleet will primarily focus on forward operations and the employment of combat ready naval forces in the Atlantic and Arctic, and to a smaller extent, on force generation and the final training and certification of forces preparing for operations around the globe, say the US Navy.

George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

98 COMMENTS

  1. 2nd Fleet has two carriers available to it at the moment, plus their strike groups and who knows how many attack subs (a lot). Not too shabby.

  2. Might be called into action sooner rather than later?

    Let’s hope the new UK government will finally realise the threats facing us and increase defence spending significantly.

    • Might be too late. The strait of hormuz might be about to get a lot more dangerous for shipping.
      Itd hard to know if it would make a difference though if there is not going to be a direct conflight.
      What’s to stop Iran from using mini subs to lay mines everywhere and effectively close it off then deny responsibility.

      • If a load of mines suddenly appear in the Straits, Iran denying it isn’t exactly going to matter. Even the Russians would probably agree that it was the Iranians.

        I imagine Montrose and Defender are going to be on bloody high alert right now, and the minesweepers are probably going to redouble their efforts.

        • Sadly, the pitiful hole in RN warship building in the last decade is coming home to roost? If this current crisis escalates, I fear, it will fall to the RN to do the lion’s share of UK operations. I would like the new government to speed up Type 26/31 build programme by choosing an English yard to help in such a strategy. The current Type 26 project is too extended considering the carriers are built and will soon be fully operational.

          • While I agree with the spirit behind your response, your suggestion is heavily flawed. Introducing a third yard into what is a relatively small build programme isn’t economically viable in either the short or long term.

            A better approach would be a more modest increase in the shipbuilding budget, get the current schedule for T26 moved up and additional hulls approved for T31. Set up the Clyde for T4X and Rosyth for one of a multitude of different contracts in the late 2020s/early 2030s time frames (the Albion replacements for example). No emergency rush is going to produce a ship soon enough to matter against Iran, we should remain focused on creating a sustainable industrial base.

          • any f factory able to produce heavy plate fabrication, and has access to the sea should b utilised by the m.o.d modular building should enable a wholistic approach by more areas of british idustry and faster builds could be the result.

          • Why would the MOD want dozens of suppliers to do a job only a few are needed for? You end up paying more for the same outcome when you factor in fixed costs (one factory producing 2X amount of stuff is cheaper than two factories producing X each because you only have one set of administrators, equipment, transport etc).

            Our build times aren’t long because of delays in supply chains, they’re long because they’re being artificially inflated to match the rate at which the MoD can pay for them, or issues have arisen from inexperienced staff and poor project management

          • I don’t see having extra shipbuilding capacity as flawed. In fact, unless there is a remarkable turn around in the Middle East, towards peace, I fear the current RN resources are not capable of widespread protection? If you send warships to these zones of tension, there is no logic in sending anything but true fighting ships. Today the RN simply does not have enough hulls to act in a fashion that our merchant fleet expects and deserves. The current maintenance problems need to get sorted and fast, to enable the RN to put to sea its maximum effort if called upon by the Government.

          • Trying to split a limited workload between too many yards IS flawed. You end up creating more jobs in the short term, which then disappear when the work dries up. Having just one or two yards that produce specific ship classes is more sustainable and saves money through efficiencies.

            Shipbuilding needs to be a steady drumbeat so that yards can build up and retain experienced workers, instead of having to lay off staff then train new ones. That’s the sort of thing that is contributing to delays and flaws in the Astute build and the OPVs for example.

            Relatively speaking, our merchant navy is well protected. The Greeks have the largest merchant fleet yet no real capability to protect it. Meanwhile the RN has two escorts and a flotilla of minesweepers protecting British flagged ships in a hotspot

          • Callum, you are not getting my point. I want to see more shipbuilding capacity, and no redundancies, once the work is completed. That yard or yards, would be chasing other projects and not necessarily military. The UK needs to rebuild the shipbuilding industry for both domestic and overseas markets.

          • The problem with having more yards is that you’ve then got multiple yards competing against each other, not just for a limited amount of government contracts but also a VERY competitive export market. Some examples: the USN has all of its destroyers built by just two yards now. All of France’s frigates and exports are built at a single yard.

            The Clyde isn’t getting all the pie, is it. Rosyth is being invested in as a second site. With the experience and credibility gained on T31, Babcock will be in a much better place to compete with BAE Clyde for future contracts (nothing immediately, because the Clyde has a full order book for the next decade).

            As stated by numerous people, the Clyde production rate has been artificially slowed by the government to fit their budget schedule. That doesn’t excuse the poor quality of work on HMS Forth, but given that they were responsible for correcting it and now have to a satisfactory standard, that excused as a one off.

          • It’s the governments choice to build at this rate, presumably to achieve greater economies of scale with Australia and Canada.

          • Or, you know, have the Clyde tighten up standards? If they don’t then Rosyth gets a tasty contract as the primary yard.
            You don’t get to whine about the dissolution of British shipbuilding then in the same breath say you want the ships built abroad.
            Pick one.

          • I just hope Montrose and Duncan have full war loads on board! If things do escalate and I think that is a very real possibility they could need every missile they can carry.

          • Does Montrose have Sea Sparrow (or whatever it’s called)? I’m always fearful for the safety of RN ships if they become involved in combat. I think it comes from the Falkland War and the regular reports of yet another stricken RN ship. A lot has been learned from that war in terms of shipbuilding and materials, however, it just needs one lucky strike (HMS Hood) and we would be down to three ships!

          • I think there is a case to be made to have a third yard with 51% Government share to get a handle on costs. This happened when we had the Royal Dockyards building Capital ships to counter being ripped off by Armstrongs. Their build speed was exemplary.

        • All RN vessels down in the Straits are in defence watches. When I was working with the Montrose crew a few months ago they had done something like 50 days in defence watches with only a couple of 24 hour stand downs in that period.
          Since then they have gone home for 3 months and the second crew is now on board and carrying on where the others left off.

          • Gunbuster, that sounds like a tough tempo and basically is a war footing. Not unreasonable given the way thngs are in the Middle East at the moment.

            Certainly underlines the benefits of double crewing..!

            Keep safe everyone.

    • And yet the latest SDR is still scheduled to major on savings ‘efficiencies’. There’s waste in all large organisations and cutting it where prudent is essential. However, the larger the Department the more the waste, but that does not stop tens of bilions in tax receipts being thrown at these if there’s votes in it – with very little required oversight in evidence.

      • I don’t think defense spending will drop, but we clearly need to maximise every penny spent on defense if the government has committed to increased health and social care spending.
        That means no more screwing about with failing defense procurement projects. Babcock need to deliver and deliver on budget, Warrior LEP should have been scrapped years ago and the money spent to increase Ajax and Boxer numbers. With increased availability we could get away with reduced numbers if 40 year old warriors cant make it out of maintenance for more than a week.
        If a new turret on challenger means half the numbers we would be better just updating the electronics, FCS, drive train and add APS. The riffle barrel will do fine for another 15-20 years when it can be replaced with a joint US/FR/DE /UK replacement.

  3. Considering the US action overnight on the Iranian general, this second fleet might be required in the Med too before long? We may be on the verge of an interesting year?

    • Iran will undoubtedly react but if they engage in open war with the USA it will mean the end of the regime there, so that should restrain them.

        • Do I detect a note of sarcasm ? They will use their proxies, of course, but keep it to a level that doesn’t force them into open conflict.

          • But that will be apparent, any use of proxy could still result in an all out response from the US. The situation is on a knife edge right now. Iran is adamant it will retaliate and in order to back the threats up they will need to be visibly seen to do so – in one way or another. Either way the result is going to be the same…….

        • They are already attacking the USA They attacked the US embassy in Baghdad. They are already intended on attacking USA, or were until this bloke was defenistrated. Its seems interesting that when Obama watches as Bin Laden is blown away the bleeding heart liberals just shrug… But go ape $h!T when Trump sees off a couple of murdering terrorists intent on killing americans (and other western christians!).

          Iran can shout and threaten but if it pushed too hard it would be bombed to bits. The self serving ayatolas know that. They are in fact on thin ice. The real people hate them and the republican guard know in any so called war they would find their barracks blitzed. They would crumple.

          • Obama sent several helicopters worth of SEALS to kill Bin Ladin and showed the word how he saw it happen.
            And he sent them to do it clandestinely in a foreign country.
            There is no difference and I’m happy sitting with my feet up.

          • Bin Laden was the worlds most wanted terrorist that British blood, as well many other nationalities in the coalition was spilt trying to catch

            He masterminded the largest terrorist attack ever on American soil

            Nobody knew who Soleimani was before he was killed, nobody including you

          • So why are you getting all upset? An obscure terrorist that murdered heaven knows how many. Why are the Left so upset.

          • What terror has he been involved in? How many civilians has he murdered?

            How many US civilians died in his latest terrorist attack?

            What terrorist group is he part of?

          • Why do you keep going on about the left, most left leaning people around the world couldn’t give a s**t, they probably care more about what’s going on in Australia

            Do you mean the left in the UK, US and some of Europe? Probably because it’s their sons and daughters that might be put in harms way because of the whims of an unhinged US president, and plenty of people on the right are hardly supportive of this, even some European leaders

          • He wasn’t an obscure terrorist that’s the issue, he was a Major General and member of the Iranian government reporting directly to the Ayatollah and arguably the second most powerful member of Irans government. He was in charge of the Revolutionary Guards Quds Firce which is the 10,000 strong Iranian brigade responsible for special forces, Black Op’s and foreign intelligence, equivalent to CIA and SEALs. Its the equivalent of assassinating a Cabinet member or Secretary of State.

          • Well I’ll go with that. I was told that no one in the media had heard of him.
            As with Putin then, he has been authorising the murder of westerners… e.g. mainly Americans. And of course Bin Ladin had done the same until Obama agreed to get him shot… shot in Pakistan.

        • You mean assets. B1 Bombers in Saudi, amongst others. At least 1 Ohio class Cruise Missile sub and lots going on behind the scenes. When Trump says Targers will be hit hard and fast you can count on the right kit being in the right place to achieve that…….

  4. The reactivation of the 2nd fleet would appear to be in direct response to Russia’s increased activity in the North Atlantic and perhaps China’s limited (so far) deployments to Russian ports in the Baltic.

    The news out of the Middle East is serious, but any response from Iran will be asymmetric in nature and could make use of proxy forces. Not a good start to the New Year…

      • I would imagine they wouldnt have the funds to build too many of these types of subs a bit like what happened to the armata tank.

      • Hi Helions,

        Looks good on paper but as dave12 points out they are unlikely to be able to build that many of them. Pretty much like everyone else except the Chinese and the USN it seems.

        There was a link to an article on the RN’s next generation SSN as well. Unless, things really change at a political level that’ll be another programme that delivers too few units.

        https://www.forbes.com/sites/hisutton/2019/12/08/new-intelligence-on-the-secretive-next-generation-british-attack-submarine-ssnr/#20129470107c

        At least we may have learnt the lesson of not gapping the SSN / SSBN programme, here’s hoping.

        • Hi C.R.

          Completely concur with both yours and dave’s assessment on the realistic sub numbers the Russian Navy can put to sea in terms of absolute builds. The Russian economy in 2018 was 400 billion U.S. dollars smaller than the U.S. state of Texas’ alone (Forbes). Their population decline is getting worse with only 111 million Russians projected in 2050 from a high of ~ 142 million in 1990… Not enough to fund a massive war machine. Especially being reliant on a one resource economy.

          However, they don’t need to build a large number of them to win the strategic mission of keeping a large portion of U.S. and possibly NATO ASW assets (depending on NATO’s involvement which is not a sure bet) busy in the GIUK gap in the event of a conflict with the Chinese on the other side of the world. Combined with their existing Kilo class and Seawolf analog boats, there would be more than enough Russian hulls to accomplish that mission.

          I’m not sure the Russians WOULD join a Chinese conflict against the U.S.(look at their “war” against Japan in the dying days of WW2 for a roadmap) but by merely rattling their sabres they could assist the PLA without actually getting involved in a shooting war. Which IMO would be the plan.

          That link is one I ran into a while ago (I think I posted it in a relevant thread alongside one describing the USN’s Virginia follow-ons). It’s very interesting that both the RN and the USN are planning multipurpose large volume attack boats that are almost the size of SSBN’s. In fact, being based on the SSBNs now in development for both services. It gives some insight into what the composition of the USN (and RN) fleet will be in the future for one. Fewer CVNs and large surface combatants and more undersea capability both manned and unmanned. The developing threat environment definitely points in that direction…

          Cheers and Happy New Year!

          • Hi Helions,

            Yeh, Happy New Year to you too mate.

            China and Russia have an interesting relationship and sharing a common boarder I think puts China in the driving seat of that relationship. Russia, the biggest country on the planet with a shrinking population, as you point out, and potentially huge under developed resources that must be very tantilising for China. Perhaps it is no surprise that Putin chose to update Russia’s nuclear arsenal early in the rearmament programme. The time to really get worried is if the relationship grows and we see Chinese troops west of the Ural Mountains. Very unlikely, but the world is a strange place at the moment and it wouldn’t half catch NATO unprepared! For me a Rissia China alliance would be a serious and scary if very unlikely development – but not completely impossible given the way politics is re-aligning at the moment.

            You are absolutely right that the Russians do not need to have many subs in the Atlantic. As you know the RN fought the Battle of the Atlantic twice in two world wars and twice we came very close to being starved out (1917 was the closest moment). In ww2 there were only 50 u-boats at the start of the war and the RN – the biggest navy at the time – really struggled to contain them! NATO ASW is not at its best the moment and will need to respond right across the board if the Russians manage to bring even a few of these into service.

            The RN has finally learnt that steel is cheap and space is free! The Astute’s and T45’s are proving that. Building the next gen SSN’s on the SSBN pattern takes it to the next level – although I think that the case for a smaller Air Independent Propulsion SSK would be strengthened as the UK’s significant littoral would be vulnerable to Russian SSK’s and big SSN’s are probably not best suited those shallow waters.

            Cheers and thanks fo rthe links always interesting…

          • The Russians know perfectly well that the PRC is far more of a threat to them than NATO and the U.S. Once the Chinese have milked them of every drop of weapons technology they will be relegated to the ignominious role of natural resource mine to the PRC without any say in China’s policies towards the rest of the world.

            Siberia has about 3 people per square mile on their side of the Amur River. China? ~ 100,000,000 live on the Chinese side of the region… You do the math…

            Cheers

            Cheers

          • Maths Na, its getting late over here and I’m a couple of glasses of wine to the better 🙂 But obviously the Russians are seriously outbumbered, hence my point about Russian nuclear weapons and the fact I do not entirely discount the chance of Chinese troops west of the Ural Mountains…

          • Yeah I saw a bbc documentary called Simon Reaves in Russia,apparently a lot of Chinese are taking over Russian abandoned farms bordering china as most Russians have migrated away from the area, it also mentioned Putin giving out medals to families with over 3 children.
            The threat from Russia is also information, he is trying to legitimize dictatorships and floods the internet with its troll factory’s endorsing liberalism is dead which is total BS of course and Trump needs to get on board with that even if Putins got a tape recording of Russian hookers urinating on his bed lol!!!

          • Interesting article C.R. Thanks. The only point I don’t understand is the reluctance of the RN to include VLS tubes into their formidable submarine designs… Wonder if it’s culture, cost, or politics (both within and without the service)…?

            Cheers

          • You me both Helions, but there may be a good technical issue which creates some sort of trade-off. If this is the case – and I am surmising here – then the RN may simply have made a different choice based on different operational priorities.

          • Nope.
            The Majority are defueled.
            Some also had “trouser leg” issues on the reactor cooling system which helped to hasten the out of service date.

          • Unfortunately No. All decomissioned boats are stripped and hulked awaiting dismantling. They are simply in floating storage.

      • Hi Trevor,

        I think they have already hit the organ grinder along with quite a few of his lieutenants apparently so I wouldn’t be surprised if their operations aren’t significantly disrupted…

  6. If you really think that the UK can defend itself in a war with a major power without US assistance then fine. If not, the UK has no other choice but to remain a close ally of the US.

    • Without the US backing up Europe there would be very little stopping Russia reasserting control over the baltics in the same way they did in Georgia and Ukraine. Sure that does not directly threaten the UK so maybe we should just scrap all defense spending because no one is directly threatening our borders.

      • Who cares who has control over the “Baltics” combined population same as Scotland, would hardly be a game changer either way would it

        • The US could apply the same logic to the whole of Europe. They did for a while and look where that got them.
          If Russia did regain the Baltic’s unchallenged they wouldn’t be too long re-asserting their influence/control over the slavic states. The serb’s would certainly welcome them. Before you know it the Border with Russia would effectively be Poland and Hungary.

    • Look out your window and you’ll see Russian naval and air activity in the seas surrounding the UK. The Russia that assasinates its “enemies” with impunity on British soil.

  7. I think the chances of Iran taking serious military action is zero. State sponsored terrorism and other nasty tricks they will come up with but they do not have the capability to wage war in any accepted conventional way. Much as I dislike Trump he ( or those in the State Dept, ) have for the first time backed up talk with action.. You attack us…we are coming back at you. As long as he can be kept away from twitter this could be a real step forward.

    • Correct. The bleeding hearts , the lefties like Corbyn, said nothing when Iran proxys attacked the US embassy and other westerners. That’s what’s called appeasement. Its the reaction, the counter attacks, to these “proxys” will make the Iranians think twice. Its allowing ourselves … effectively by the USA … to refuse to be salami sliced by these “proxys” that will stop Iran.

      • Wondered how long it would take for the undoubted Corbyn-Iranian axis to be brought up. What next….a pusillanimous EU is to blame for encouraging Iran…the prism of the right-wing is back to its Mr Magoo best. 🙂

        • By all means substitute the “pacifist left”. There is little difference except that Corbyn takes the trouble to lay wreath.

      • Trevor, if you took the time and can get your head around the concept, you can search peoples twitter history to see how many times in the past they have mentioned a particular word

        You see if you searched all your guys, the opposite of the “bleeding hearts” you keep mentioning, you know the Trumps, Shapiros, Fox News and practically every single right wing commentator that exists, search before a few days ago for the word “Soleimani”

        I’ll save you the trouble, not one single right wing commentator has never so much as mentioned this guys name in anger, before he was killed he never existed in the US news networks or politicians minds

        Now they all have PHD’s in Iranian military history, about a guy 95% of them had never even heard of

        Admit it you didn’t have a scooby who he was either, like 95% of the people on here

        Now you’ve got your tanks on the lawn as well as the stiffy in your pants at the thought of some more conflict in a far away desert that you’ll have f**k all involvement in, watching it all unfold with your popcorn on the BBC

          • Why are you only classifying hysteria as being against it?

            Are people not being hysterically supportive, are people pretending to actually know who Soleimani was and are experts in Iranian politics not hysterical, they weren’t talking about it before the other day was they

            What about Helions on here giving us step by step links saying “round dos” he’s hysterical about it

            It’s the same thing every time, anyone who isn’t supportive of conflict is some “bleeding heart left hippy” it’s utter nonsense

          • The “Right” are being mildly supportive and suggesting that the USA are entitled to defend its interests.
            The “Left” are howling about “WW3”. I’m guessing that Corbyn has already phoned in his order to Interflora.

          • If that makes your simplistic “left and right” worldview easier then of course, except it’s not all like that at all like I have explained to you above

            Don’t think they deliver to Iran

      • HI Helions,

        Yup, I think the Iranains are in a bind but obviously the situation is still very danagerous.

        I have been thinking about the nature of the strike and agree with the article, going for the man is a damned site better than hitting a country or a city. It was a geniume and very rare pin point surgical strike. I was surprised when the news broke that such a high ranking Iranian was in Iraq, so I can only guess at how surprised ordinary Iraqis are!

        I think there is a significant risk that the Iranians will take their time and get a significant strike in at some point so we are not out of the woods yet. In the meantime there are plenty of hot heads trying to make a name for themselves.

        Thoughts with all those in harms way at the moment…

        • He has been in Iraq many times and in Syria too, all reported in middle East press. He was a bona fide military officer, so no reason to travel incognito.

          Quds force is the Shia external operations arm, responsible for establishing Iranian leadership of Shia populations for Iran’s ends, which Quds have done by training and arming militias in the 4 states with Shia majorities (Iraq ) or large minorities (Syria, Lebanon, Notth Yemen).

          Not sure that killing the commander was the right answer, he will be replaced by his 2ic, it just places commanders on the US/Sunni muslim side at risk, as well as Western troops and civilians.
          It will not prevent Iran pursuing its nationalist, expansionist agenda or wrest back control of these countries from the militant Shia vice

          It strikes me as a foolish, naive and rather petulant move by the narcissistic US President

          • Hi r cummings,

            I share your misgivings with regards to mounting an attack in the first place but at least the choice of target was precise – better than hitting targets in populated areas.

            I think the current situation was virtually inevitable after the US pulled out of the nuclear deal with Iran and re-imposed sanctions. As I have said elsewhere we are in strange times with the old geopolitical norms being re-written. Iran has learnt to push to the limit of the old boundaries, with the US being the target of their ire. I think the US has finally run out of patience and is in effect now re-writing the rule book in line with what it sees as acceptable behaviour. Of course, that is not likely to be acceptable to everyone but the real danager is that someone somewhere miscalculates and the big guns come into play. That is always the risk in the game of international bringmanship and we have paid a terrible price for such miscalculations in the past.

            Having said that I think the risks are widely understood and many, including supporters of Iran, are calling for restraint. That could reflect the shock within Iran’s leadership that one of their own was successfully targeted and that they are well aware that they cannot possibly take on the US in a conventional war. The US appears prepared to escalate still further if pushed but what has clearly changed is that the US has significantly changed the threshold(s) for action which effectively renders Iran’s experience of how far it can push those boundaries obsolete. Under those circustances the wisest way forward for Iran might be to heed the calls for restraint and pull back from the brink…

          • Interesting read thanks, Helions, and yup I would pretty much agree with what is being said especially with regards to China. They are getting way too bullying and now they are pressuring Germany as well as the UK over G5 – Hmm something smells rotten there…

            As for the middle east, they just got the rules re-written so they will ALL have to think about what it means, but Iran has the most urgent need to stop and think. The choice of 52 targets is symbolic and few are talking about that – 52 US hostages in ’78 – its a first in modern times (that I can think of at the moment) for a Western country to use such sybolism and possibly not the last. Not sure what it means, not thought it through yet, but it seems consistant with the current political changes we are seeing so it matters…

          • To Trump I think this must be simple. Threaten them with the aim of forcing them to put their guns down so everyone can remain safe and Trump can bring the troops home (and get the credit). Are things that simple I doubt it.

          • Hi Mark B,

            May be Trump is thinking like that, but it occured to me that the aims of recent US actions were more about reining Iran back from its current course. Certainly all the comments have been about a planned Iranian attack, so relatively short term stuff. Any longer term impact would likely not last that long as I think there is a risk that Iran will do something. They may even wait until Trump leaves office as they can play the long game as well as any.

            I’d be surprised if the US thought that this action would force Iran to put the guns away all together, far too many experienced and clever people at the State Department and CIA for the US to not be aware of realpolitik within Iran.

            More likely is that the US will have to back up this action with further well targetted strikes, preferably against other key leadership targets and assets (rather than the country) to underline that the US is prepared to meet asymetric warfare with asymetric warfare – the US certainly has the capabilities.

            What has changed big time, is that the US has finally run out of patience (if that is the right word) and is showing that if other nations are prepared to step outside the norms then the US will answer in kind.

            There are dangers in this move as it may well further weaken the current rules based geopolitical structure, but that assumes that it is still current! So much is clearly in flux at the moment that I think that rather than trying to maintain the current system we may need to start to think in terms of what is going to replace it as we may well have little influence what comes next.

            Went and had a look at HMS Queen Elizabeth and the Prince of Wales between Christmas and the New Year. They looked really impressive, but with China in mind another one or two would be more reassuring…

  9. Interesting comments regarding Iran even though most here have limited understanding of what’s been done. I am pleased to see many wish to stay out of what’s to come, I just hope your government continues to think the same

    • I am sure neither of our counties interests lie in stoking the tensions in this area of the world. Whilst I can see how Iran avoids conflict I wonder if they will make the effort.

      • I don’t see either the americans or Iranians backing down, neither side wants to talk or show weakness so the best you and I can hope for is our countries not to getting involved

        • Oh Trump will want to talk at the appropriate time. His terms are probably predictable. The question is are those with influence in the region going to work together to get some form of harmony for the area. Not sure this type of nonsense is good for anyone.

          • You have more faith than me Mark, trump’s words are meaningless and the red flag raised so some will have to die first. Maybe the other ME countries and even Putin will have some luck calming Iran anger but they would have to offer much in return. I’m sure any ME country with US military are shitting themselves right now

          • If Iran responds by shedding US blood then it will escalate until Iran understand they cannot win. Better for everyone to open some back channels and arrange some face saving for all sides.

          • Iran already understand they cannot win, but they also know the US cannot either so for now it will be blood for blood until someone offers a good deal or the price becomes to high. For all the years the US/UK have spent in this part of the world I am always surprised how little you understand.

          • You might be right Ulya. As a Brit I might point out that our policy on the ME differs significantly from that of the US. We moved out long ago reluctantly returning only when there was a danger the US and Russia had got their shit together. That was a little premature – perhaps one day.

          • I think that may be a reasonable analysis of the casual observer of the situation. By and large, the British have a good reputation in the Middle-East. I have personal experience as to the respect that British diplomats have in Arabia. The British Foreign Office has a long history of Arabist sympathies and is respected for this, Iran is a different case. Relations that had soured under Mosaddegh improved with the Shah, only to be downgraded by the 78/79 revolution. Being a friend of the Arab world and the Persians is a difficult trick to master. Don’t confuse the ‘shoot from the hip reactionaries’, that you may see from time to time on this site, with the British Diplomatic Service….they really are not the same thing! It’s all a question of perceived imperialism…and who can blame them?

          • Interesting. Any views on the likely reaction from the Oval Office and State Dept to a less than diplomatic reaction from the Persians?

          • I guess we’ll find out by morning with dozens of IRGC missiles raining down on U.S. bases in Iraq… Going to get interesting.

            Cheers

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here