'Britain lacks money to protect itself'
Britain cannot afford to protect itself against all potential threats to its security, defence secretary Liam Fox has warned. He further added
"We don't have the money as a country to protect ourselves against every potential future threat," he said. "We just don't have it."
No money flow from colonies itseems..
What has 2nd world war got to do with current defense budget of England :-/
P.S.- I apologize for my fellow countryman's poor grasp of history.
Yes, that would save a few pounds :O)
But, here I think he is looking to restructure the armed forces to suit the new environment. For example, lot of our hardware was sourced with a strategy of defending Europe from USSR in mind. That threat is no longer there. So perhaps we don't need as many tanks or APCs. Perhaps we need more helicopter gun ships and long range bombers and drones...
The idea is to have a complete review of the armed forces and their structure ..
Dot.com What about Iraq
shapil
if the pull out their forces from Afghanistan, probably they can save it.
exile- British had washed-up India's economy, and perhaps unity too.
passage to where .Com?
i can offer them a safe passage.
Your sense of history is rather skewed. I can understand patriotism, but you are stretching it a bit ;)
Ha ha venky, japan wanted to save India from the imperalists!!! No wonder you needed the British to unify your country and put it's instituitions in place before you could run it yourselves....
Fat Man was dropped by Boscar, only Little Boy was dropped by Enola Gay
if money alone would have saved...no rich man would have been killed.
The US aided the British because we are allies, that is why countries had alliances, it was the precursor to the UN, and Japan got involved to eliminate the US fleet of Carriers, they were unfortnate in attacking a place where the carriers weren't, so the US mobilized all the carriers, and setup for a massive invasion, but realizing the defensive positin Japan had, and knowing what it needed for Normandie, the US opted to save US soldiers, an resources and sent Enola Gay with Fat man and Little Boy to avoid excessive loss of US resources.
You don't neccessarily have to be attacked to take up arms. Japan's objectives had always been to secure the resources of Southeast Asia and China.
India would imho would have had to fight in the end.. However, it is all conjecture isn't it.. India did fight and aided the fight on many fronts.
britexpat: Why would an Independent India wanted to enter the war unless it was attacked. The only reason the Japanese wanted to attack India was because it was under British Occupation.
exiledsaint: My argument is this - it was a fight of colonial power all along even United States involvement was because of its interest in the Pacific and SouthEast Asia.
For a long time after the breakout of war, US used to export oil to Japan and the US held an isolationism policy of non-intervention.
Till the Japs decided that for it to expand in Southeast Asia and in China it had to neutralise the American fleet, which led to Pearl Harbor and we know after that what happened.
Such are the spoils of war :O)
I am sure that as the conflict spread, even an independent India would have felt compelled to enter the fray...
But the fact remains that it was a World War ....
have fun,,
britexpat: It was fought at every colony held by European powers. You had those wars in Burma since the Japs raided in from that side to get at the British and Egypt was also under Britains occupation. That's why some of the theatres of War was in Africa too.
It wasn't like these colonies had any independent choice in choosing whether or not to enter into the war. In India, there was a huge protest when the British Indian Govt. announced that it was going to be part of the war without consulting the Indian political leadership.
BTW, eventually it seems that India contributed 2.5 Million men to the WW2 campaign.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India_in_World_War_II
...
mmyke: Isn't that the kettle calling the pot black :P
What about Burma and Egypt ?
By the way, we are digressing :O)
you are an idiot
The defence secretary wants to make sure his budget does get cut too much, but then again who will attack Britain? France? Germany? Norway?
Well I guess japan would argue against that. The war in the pacific and they got close to indias Borders.....
britexpat: I am Indian, I am of the view it wasn't really a World War, more European :P
AbuAmerican-
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/uk/Britain-lacks-money-to-protect-itself/articleshow/6203687.cms
Let's not get into that old argument... It'll only spoil the special relationship :O)
britexpat: The Yankees feel it would have been a reality had it not been for their 'timely' intervention :P
Hitler said - “Where Napoleon failed, I shall succeed, I shall land on the shores of Britain”
Look where it got him :O)
lol weve heard that one before
lol weve heard that one before
it will never be defeated,,,
This was from an interview yesterday...
Basically the government is looking to cut defence budget, so they are "rationalising" the expenditure.. It's a way of forewarning the armed forces and the public..
There may be cutbacks in expenditures on new tanks, planes etc or even a reduction of troops based overseas like Germany, Falklands, Sierra Leon etc..
Britain sissy don't worry big brother Sam will protect you.