Surely you are aware of Cabinet members having to agree with government policy or resign. I am sure that a number of Ministers knew that George Bush was useless and that the Afghan war and Iraq war would be a waste of men and materials. Ask yourself, as they did, can you influence more inside the tent or outside it.
One of his first acts on defence is to reexamine how the budget is being spent. Ukraine tells us that drones are rather more critical than expensive obsolete hardware- so is there a possibility of getting many more bangs for our bucks whilst reducing overall spend? Do we really need aircraft carriers that don’t work? Is there much point in investing in tanks? Where will they be used? Look at European rather than US solutions, which come with strings attached, huge initial and ongoing costs and the whim of fickle American politicians as to whether we will get them even having paid up front……
"Under a new concept known as 20-40-40, the Army will shift away from Cold War-era doctrine in favour of a more tech-driven approach.
The idea is simple: 20% of combat capability will come from traditional platforms like tanks, artillery and attack helicopters, 40% will rely on expendable, largely autonomous systems such as loitering munitions and kamikaze drones, and the remaining 40% will consist of reusable, AI-enabled assets including surveillance drones that can operate with or without human input."
Ukraine and Russia are still using tanks - just in a very different way. At the end of the day you still ned to get real humans to places to win a war, and the the better protected they are the better!
And the carriers work as well as anyone's, and will be getting their own set of drones. The Royal Navy are well into developing drone based ASW capability (see Atlantic Bastion) and are developing large drone warships to accompany the manned ones.
It's all slower than it should be, obviously, but it seems to be coming - and pretty much everything being developed in the UK, as well as the rest of Europe, is completely free of US parts or data as far as they can be - that lesson's been learnt.
If Burnham seeks your advice, would you have anything to suggest as regards a UK tactical nuclear weapons capability and potential nuclear sharing with allies?
I admire the author, and I hope he is right.
Surely you are aware of Cabinet members having to agree with government policy or resign. I am sure that a number of Ministers knew that George Bush was useless and that the Afghan war and Iraq war would be a waste of men and materials. Ask yourself, as they did, can you influence more inside the tent or outside it.
You’ve completely missed the national security aspects of Hillsborough Law
Burnham's Coup was Launched by UK Parliamentary Black Caucus MP
by W. Bernell Brooks, Editor: http://theveseyrepublic.com & theveseyrepublic.substack.com
One of his first acts on defence is to reexamine how the budget is being spent. Ukraine tells us that drones are rather more critical than expensive obsolete hardware- so is there a possibility of getting many more bangs for our bucks whilst reducing overall spend? Do we really need aircraft carriers that don’t work? Is there much point in investing in tanks? Where will they be used? Look at European rather than US solutions, which come with strings attached, huge initial and ongoing costs and the whim of fickle American politicians as to whether we will get them even having paid up front……
For the army at least, this is the aim:
"Under a new concept known as 20-40-40, the Army will shift away from Cold War-era doctrine in favour of a more tech-driven approach.
The idea is simple: 20% of combat capability will come from traditional platforms like tanks, artillery and attack helicopters, 40% will rely on expendable, largely autonomous systems such as loitering munitions and kamikaze drones, and the remaining 40% will consist of reusable, AI-enabled assets including surveillance drones that can operate with or without human input."
Ukraine and Russia are still using tanks - just in a very different way. At the end of the day you still ned to get real humans to places to win a war, and the the better protected they are the better!
And the carriers work as well as anyone's, and will be getting their own set of drones. The Royal Navy are well into developing drone based ASW capability (see Atlantic Bastion) and are developing large drone warships to accompany the manned ones.
It's all slower than it should be, obviously, but it seems to be coming - and pretty much everything being developed in the UK, as well as the rest of Europe, is completely free of US parts or data as far as they can be - that lesson's been learnt.
US parts free is increasingly critical
If Burnham seeks your advice, would you have anything to suggest as regards a UK tactical nuclear weapons capability and potential nuclear sharing with allies?