Current Politics in the United Kingdom

[frankoboff]

Originally Posted by charliels531

Thank you, Palo. People who whine about "war plans" or "spying on allies" are either ignorant or disingenuous. We and, I assume, Britain, have war plans for a war with Canada and Switzerland.

Likewise, what angered me about the revelations from Edward Snowden was his stupid revelation that the NSA had tapped Angela Merkel's phone, and the fake outrage that followed, forcing a German public servant to resign over the "accidental" tapping of the U.S. ambassador's phone.

What would we have given to have had a tap on the German Chancellor's phone in 1932?

Finally, Palo, I assume you know, but have been too polite to say, that the U.S. has always had a first-strike policy, based on our dubious belief that a first strike by another country (guess who?) would require preparation which would be visible for at least 48 hours before launch.

It's likely the first strike policy was an aspect of Game Theory- the underlying mathematical underpinning of 'nuclear stalemate' so likely the USSR had a first strike policy also.

Some interesting facts about "Britain's independent nuclear deterrent" (a phrase used by the serving PM whenever it was time to renew or update Trident, the UK's submarine based nuclear arsenal)- It's never been independent. We don't own it, we lease it from the USA. At any given time I believe around a third of the missiles aren't even in the UK but at King's Naval Base in Georgia.

Also worth noting that Trident system doesn't even have USA target locations on the map. If a mad narcissistic tyrant took over the White House and decided to keep his campaign promise of nuking Europe we wouldn't be able to retaliate.

So then Brexiteers, how's that for sovereignty?
.

[victor meldrew]

Sovereignty, its never been about that for me, its all the crap, waifs and straifs that you never see or hear on the news.

Britain's nuclear deterrent is little more than a splash in a pond, most of us know when the ruskies and the yanks push the button its doomsday for us all.

[frankoboff]

Originally Posted by victor meldrew

Sovereignty, its never been about that for me, its all the crap, waifs and straifs that you never see or hear on the news.

Britain's nuclear deterrent is little more than a splash in a pond, most of us know when the ruskies and the yanks push the button its doomsday for us all.

Waifs and strays? If so, what waifs and strays?

[Dr Pepper]

[QUOTE=palo5;4882612]Like in Afghanistan?


A singularly inappropriate example palo-given Russia's past history there..

[Dr Pepper]

Originally Posted by haroldeye

Incidentally I was told that there were plans for the protection of Canada against American aggression as late as 1914.

Actually a lot later than that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Plan_Red

And had the Washington naval treaty of 1922 and the London naval treaty of 1930 not occurred, there may well have been war between Britain and the US in the late 20s or early 30s

[charliels531]

Originally Posted by haroldeye

Incidentally I was told that there were plans for the protection of Canada against American aggression as late as 1914.

I certainly hope they still have them. Just because our first four attempts failed doesn't mean we won't try again!

Every time somebody sings the praises of the great love between Canada and the U.S., I play a recording of Stan Rogers's Barrett's Privateers.

[frankoboff]

Originally Posted by charliels531

Thank you, Palo. People who whine about "war plans" or "spying on allies" are either ignorant or disingenuous. We and, I assume, Britain, have war plans for a war with Canada and Switzerland.

Sorry I don't buy it. Government is actually more ad hoc than that and 'ad hoc' is being flattering.

Remember that the big existential threat to the West since the end of the Cold War has been Islamic terrorism. I saw a documentary on Tony Blair and New Labour who were in power at the time of 911. No one present in any branch of government including the civil service at Number 10 nor at the foreign office knew anything about Al-Qaeda or Muslim extremism. One of the civil servants had to go to Charing X Rd and buy a book, read it over night and brief everyone at Number 10 including the Prime Minister. This wasn't a failing of the elected officials but a failure of the system.

The war in Iraq- the 'quick and easy' war. Topple Sadam, job done. Zero exit strategy, zero local knowledge of how the local factions work, zero understanding of what Sadam's removal would do to the balance of power in the region. This was a part of the World that had been under intense US scrutiny for decades.

I know it's tempting to think just because the NSA tap civilian and elected politician's phones that they must have a plan for everything but I've yet to see any evidence of that.

[charliels531]

A major problem in the U.S. has been that our Republican Party has become so detached from reality that the elected politicians at the top do not communicate with the civil service. Neither party is totally innocent, but every national politician thinks he knows better than someone who has worked on the problem for 20 years. The best example I can think of was a counter intelligence FBI agent who in the 1990s became convinced that Osama bin Laden, who had been a U.S. "ally" in Afghanistan, was a great threat and, by 2000, had concluded that he intended to destroy the World Trade Center in New York City. His warnings went unheeded until very late in the Clinton Administration and he quit in frustration, taking a job as director of security for the World Trade Center, where he died on 9/11/2001.

Now we have a president who refuses security briefings because he takes the word of Putin and Kim over that of our intelligence agencies.

P.s.--One of the "bets" among liberals in the U.S. was whether G.W.Bush would ever try to say "Shiite" in public. He never did.

--------------
I got lost in my rhetoric again. This discussion was about war planning. At least in the U.S. we have civil servants who have a detailed understanding of virtually every problem we face or will face, but we are afflicted with an ideologically-bound political class who think that winning an election makes them smarter than anyone. It has not always been the case. I suspect the same is true in Britain.

[dohupa]

Originally Posted by charliels531

Now we have a president who refuses security briefings because he takes the word of Putin and Kim over that of our intelligence agencies.

Don't know much about Trump, but he gives me the impression he has the mind of a 15yo. FBI and the like are trying to control me, so they're my enemies - Putin on the other hand, may have helped me to win the election, so he's my friend.

Generally speaking, he proved he has a liking for figures like Putin, Erdogan and so forth. In other words, dictators who rule their countries with no respect for democracy, political opposition and most importantly, the theory of separation of powers by Montesquieu. I'm sure in his mind, people like them are obviously big-shots. They rule for decades (despite the fact they may have destroyed opponents, thrown in jail thousands and so on), so they're like idols to him.

I was watching this the other day and I was amazed (the babe is gorgeous, but that's a different story ).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qc4ahnZzVM4&t=46s

I can't believe the US President (let alone the leader of the strongest country in the world), was at some point actually tweeting this stuff. It'd be hilarious, if it weren't for real.

[haroldeye]

Man's a numpty. She's worth a squirt though.