The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - November 20, 2008

Dunnigan's and Bay's Latest
Advertisement
New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Squad Battles: Winter War
2.Silent War
3.Manoeuvre
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 

Online Giving

Utah SEO Firm

Xango

Smiley Gifts for Babies
Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
United Kingdom Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Interesting UK Specific Defence Websites
jimbo55    1/26/2008 6:56:17 PM
Besides this discussion forum of course, there are some useful and interesting sites out there for UK specific information, resources and discussion etc

link
link
link
link
link


Have been reading strategypage for ages but this is my first post. Thought you might be interested as there doesnt seem to be a UK specific topic in the links section of strategypage so hope I am not breaking any forum rules!

 
Quote    Reply
 Latest
 News 		  Most
 Read 		  Most
 Commented		  Hot
 Topics

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted
Pages: 1 2 3   NEXT
Armchair Private       1/27/2008 5:15:02 PM
That last link contains some of the best UK specific thoughts that I've seen.
 
Quote    Reply

Armchair Private       1/27/2008 5:17:15 PM
h*tp://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/
 
Quote    Reply

paul1970       1/28/2008 5:19:56 AM
very much in its infancy but has some interesting ideas and a refocussing of ambitions.
 
Paul
 
Quote    Reply

flamingknives       1/28/2008 2:52:55 PM
Possibly a bit of a BAEsystems bias.
 
Quote    Reply

Armchair Private       1/28/2008 6:55:00 PM
Out of interest flamingknives, are you suggesting that it's directly biased or influenced in some way by BAE? Or something else?

Ta
 
Quote    Reply

jimbo55       1/29/2008 5:08:56 PM
Having read it fully, it suggests scrapping Nimrod, the new carriers and the F35, all with BAE involvement, thats a big chunk of revenue loss for them so I dont think it is biased in the way you think.
 
Quote    Reply

flamingknives       1/29/2008 5:40:44 PM
On the other hand, they're super-keen on the CTA 40mm, the Typhoon, other BAE surface ships, UAVs and getting rid of things without so much BAE involvement.

I wouldn't say that they were necessarily influenced by BAE, but their focus seems a bit BAE-Centric.
 
Quote    Reply

jimbo55       1/29/2008 6:49:09 PM
Yes, I agree but the fact is that BAE is a UK company with an established foothold in the UK armed forces so I suppose it is natural for a UK site to suggest buying british. Just been reading the page on the carriers, seems to have whipped up a bit of outrage
 
Quote    Reply

jimbo55       1/29/2008 7:17:08 PM
Yes, I agree but the fact is that BAE is a UK company with an established foothold in the UK armed forces so I suppose it is natural for a UK site to suggest buying british. Just been reading the page on the carriers, seems to have whipped up a bit of outrage
 
Quote    Reply

jimbo55       1/29/2008 7:30:16 PM
Yes, I agree but the fact is that BAE is a UK company with an established foothold in the UK armed forces so I suppose it is natural for a UK site to suggest buying british. Just been reading the page on the carriers, seems to have whipped up a bit of outrage
 
Quote    Reply

jimbo55       1/29/2008 7:40:56 PM
Yes, I agree but the fact is that BAE is a UK company with an established foothold in the UK armed forces so I suppose it is natural for a UK site to suggest buying british. Just been reading the page on the carriers, seems to have whipped up a bit of outrage
 
Quote    Reply

jimbo55       1/29/2008 7:42:18 PM
Not sure how this has happened or how to remove the duplicates, can a moderator get rid of them?
 
Quote    Reply

paul1970       1/30/2008 4:52:53 AM

Yes, I agree but the fact is that BAE is a UK company with an established foothold in the UK armed forces so I suppose it is natural for a UK site to suggest buying british. Just been reading the page on the carriers, seems to have whipped up a bit of outrage


nothing wrong with that...
if you have no "empire" to protect and expect all your operations to be defensive or combined with other nations then why bother with carriers which are of limited capability. is it not better to spend the money elsewhere on the real priorities and into research for the next 50 years.
 
Quote    Reply

Armchair Private       1/30/2008 3:03:53 PM



Yes, I agree but the fact is that BAE is a UK company with an established foothold in the UK armed forces so I suppose it is natural for a UK site to suggest buying british. Just been reading the page on the carriers, seems to have whipped up a bit of outrage



nothing wrong with that...

if you have no "empire" to protect and expect all your operations to be defensive or combined with other nations then why bother with carriers which are of limited capability. is it not better to spend the money elsewhere on the real priorities and into research for the next 50 years.

So good he said it thrice... I think it's when you press 'reload' on your browser. It reposts.

I've always seen CVF as optional as it's offensive only. Having said that I'd still rather have them, as they provide flexibility that would otherwise be unavailable. And in the context of a few paltry billion spread out over a number of years they're cheap compared to GDP of well over a trillion per annum.
 
Quote    Reply

Armchair Private       1/30/2008 3:04:51 PM
....er four times.

Trice? :-)
 
Quote    Reply
Pages: 1 2 3   NEXT

StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2008StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy