Defence isn’t fundamentally about armaments. It’s about legitimacy.
If people do not believe a society is worth defending, then no quantity of weapons will save it. And neoliberalism, which is designed to reward the few, cannot now demand sacrifice from the many.
That is why I think the only credible defence policy now is a politics of care: a society that values everyone, delivers for everyone, and earns loyalty by legitimacy.
Spending more on the NHS will show PutHitler what’s what, what?
If people do not believe a society is worth defending, then no quantity of weapons will save it.
Even a stopped clock is right twice a day. I find it hard to believe that the stout indigenous yeomanry would think our new population and woke ruling class worth defending. The blue-haired land whales and soyboys are incapable anyway.
Compare and contrast with the IDF.
https://www.instagram.com/sashagusov/reel/DSps1H_jWUv/
He comes so close to making a point and mongs it up, does Ritchie.
Yes, Martin van Creveld would likely agree that morale/moral is supreme in warfare. It’s absolutely necessary (but not sufficient) to win.
To win at war, you must be swift as a coursing river, with all the force of a great typhoon. You must be strong as a raging fire, mysterious as the dark side of the Moon.
Yeah, but, what if the other side has guns?
Boy was I a fool at school for cutting gym
Isn’t this from the same class of people who think the UK’s history is all racism and not worth defending?
As Amelia says…
I’ve scoured the history book and find no mention of a NHS or even welfare state in 1914 and yet millions volunteered to fight.
There was a welfare state in 1914. Unemployment insurance and the Old Age Pension already existed. There was a precursor to the NHS: the “panel” system of GPs for labouring men. So apart from being entirely wrong you’re quite right.
Millions volunteered to fight because of peer pressure. My Grandmother once tearfully told me about how vile her and her friends were to the boys that didn’t volunteer to fight. At the time she had no idea of the living hell they were forcing those boys to face. That realization only came later when the survivors returned.
The thing is I agree with both Norman and Steve to some degree. He’s got some validity to the first part of his post. There’s commentators on here committed to the Ukraine misadventure and who actually believe the threat from Russia is the same or greater than the threat from
Militant Islam – which is frankly insane.
At least he isn’t advocating conscription for the current shit show so that’s in his favour. The problem is he supports all the policies that mean people aren’t volunteering. We have to end Net Zero, DEI and put an end to Big Trans as a first step. Only then can we get society back on an even keel.
I’m still trying to understand what the Russian threat actually is. I had a pretty good idea in 1987, when the Red Army still existed, but current Russian military potential is pathetic by comparison.
They’ll seize Estonia or something? Some bollocks about ex-KGB agents being poisoned? Not sure how we’re supposed to defend against that.
It doesn’t take a Red Army to conquer Europe if it’s only defense is a caring society. Ras Putin has already demonstrated a propensity to invade westward. How far does he need to get before Europe decides it needs more than ‘caring?’
AND, how much of this attitude is based on the idea that US will save them? That paradigm is subject to change.
If you have an army and you want to invade somewhere (likely to keep people’s attention away from domestic problems), you have to invade somewhere that’s possible.
Russia can go west, south, east, or north.
East is basically the Pacific. No roads there.
North is an ocean covered in ice. Yes, even with gorbal worming. It’s several thousand miles before you reach people.
South is desert, or ice, or mountains. And south of those are the people that have so many they perfected human wave tactics. This is unlikely to go well.
West has pretty much all the roads. And you’re facing rich people with tiny armies.
So west is the likely route.
Plus, Ras Putin remembers well when Russia controlled Europe to west of Prague. His only goal is likely reestablishment of Russian hegemony. He isn’t looking to gain anything from Ukraine but Ukraine itself.
The only people I ever see talking about Putin plans to invade the rest of Europe are people who benefit from scaring people about Putin’s plans to invade the rest of Europe.
Even if he wanted to, and there is no proof that he does, anybody with any understanding of fighting in built-up areas knows that it would be a quagmire of unprecedented proportions.
He wants the bit of Ukraine which he and many of the people who live there regard, rightly or wrongly, as belonging to Russia, he wants his warm water port secure, and he wants to make NATO stick to its old pledge not to advance to the Russian border.
Whether or not he is a giant cunt, these things are in an historical perspective not unreasonable.
As a great man once said, if the European Union countries are so opposed to him and his military adventure, why are they funding it via buying his oil?
It’s a puzzle for the ages!
anybody with any understanding of fighting in built-up areas knows that it would be a quagmire of unprecedented proportions
Oh. Gamecock assumed Europe had roads AROUND built-up areas.
Like Japan’s Pacific fortresses. Halsey/MacArthur scratched their heads, and sailed around them.
What if Paulus took the Rostov-on-Don cutoff, and headed straight for Baku? For Germany, the Battle of Stalingrad was stupid. And fatal.
They’d still have to reckon with the Red Army being able to stand up more divisions than the Germans ever thought possible, more quickly than Germany could defeat them.
Russian oil supply flowed through Baku. It had existential strategic value.
But, yes, Germany got into a war of attrition with a vastly bigger state. They killed 5-1, 10-1, and sometimes even 20-1. But the Germans didn’t have the 1 to lose.
AND, look at the Battle of the Kursk Salient. Zhukov had FOUR ARMIES just waiting for the battle to end before pushing on to Ukraine and Belarus.
“A good plan, violently executed now, is better than a perfect plan next week.” While the Germans planned Kursk for months, the Soviets prepared extensive defensive lines. And brought in vast armies in reserve. The Germans were clueless.
I fucked Germany, I can take a lump of flesh in a fucking waistcoat.
Sending an army west across Europe is one thing. Sending the vast quantities of fuel, food and ammunition needed to support them is prohibitively difficult.
In WW2 General Patton’s rapid advance was supported by the “Red Ball Express”. This was a supply convoy moving over 12,000 tons of supplies each day to keep his army rolling. At its peak more than one truck per minute was passing any fixed point on the route and travelling at no less than 25mph. This went at high capacity for 24 hours a day for several weeks before ramping down to a lesser rate. During its 82-day lifespan, the Red Ball Express completed approximately 120,000 to 125,000 total truck missions (round trips).
It was possible then due to air superiority. Try it now and a few drones flown from a hidden and safe location 15 miles away would block that road with wreckage and the advance would slow to a snails pace.
Excellent points! The logistics would be impossible.
As Omar Bradley said: ” Amateurs study tactics, professionals study logistics.”
The threat is a combination of Cold War thinking and current.
The Cold War thinking is that the USSR was a real threat because it had lots of people and lots of resources to build weapons and armies with. And it did just that. Letting Russia build itself back to that level seems imprudent.
Current thinking is that *none* of Russia’s neighbors want to be associated with current Russia in any way, based on long and bitter experience.
The threat of Russia actually being stronger if they take over Ukraine is probably overblown at this point.
If Ukraine had given up as Putin seemed to think would happen (the “three day war” IIRC), he’d have more people and more stuff, more or less for free.
The threat is control over lots of resources, making it easier to get control of more.
Of course even if Russia took over all of Ukraine tomorrow, it would likely take decades to build it back up, even if the population settled down. As opposed to starting up a guerilla campaign, which is the likely outcome of any ceasefire.
So Putin basically gets nothing out of this.
…and he’s never looked likely to after the first week, which is the main reason why I’ve never understood his action. It takes resources and effort to subdue an unruly conquered population, as he ought to know well.
Russia went in as a poorly equipped “police action” as there was seemingly no thought that Ukrainians were dumb enough to fight back in any meaningful way and turn the take over into a war which Ukraine couldn’t win. Unfortunately Ukraine was encumbered with a very popular leader and when he told them to fight they did and pushed back an army that was not equipped and supplied for the new task
There isn’t one. Why would Putin want to go to war with us? To what end? Our shit agricultural land? Lack of minerals? Lack of strategic benefit to him? Put yourself in his shoes. What order are you going to invade Europe? Britain would be near the bottom of the list, with Switzerland and Denmark.
There is an elite desire for doing something big and important. Not locking up shoplifters or fixing the potholes but something that makes them feel important, like defeating a dictator. They want a legacy. To be Churchill. And they’ll lie to do it, and spend your money and your lives. They are utter traitors.
☝️
If you cannot perceive the Russian threat to the UK and the West, then you need to awaken from your dogmatic slumbers. In no particular order, the evidence is:
As for your claim that “current Russian military potential is pathetic”, I would observe that tyrants are not rational: often, they’ll attempt the probably impossible, because what matters to them is how strong they perceive their forces to be, not how they are seen by the enemy.
Meanwhile, V_P is wetting himself over the Islamic threat even though the Islamists’ current military potential in the UK is utterly feeble compared to Putin’s current military potential on its western borders…
“The regular cyber-attacks on the UK reliably ascribed to Russia”
By whom? The same people who said that Iraq had WMDs? There are lots of reasons for cyber attacks including simply non-government criminals. Locking up someone’s data, and if they pay a ransom doesn’t have to be a government operation? Show me where I can download a dump of all the information about these Russian cyberattacks.
“Russia’s alignment with other hostile states – eg China, NK, Iran etc”
When have China and NK been hostile towards us?
“The Putinist ideology (v. Alexandr Dugin) of ultimately creating a vast Eurasian empire stretching from Lisbon and Ireland to Vladivostok.”
Tell you what, when he invades Poland, we’ll act. Agreed? That’s gives us over 1000 miles before he’s at the Channel.
“Russian violations of UK and allied airspace”
Happens. Bit of piss taking. Did they leave when we told them to?
“Troop movements on the borders of Moldova, Finland and Poland over the last 10+ years”
But they haven’t stepped a yard over. If they’ve got this Dugin plan, why haven’t they crossed?
“15 Russian assassinations on UK soil in c.25 years, which are clear evidence of hostile intent.”
Right. Russians. And basically, traitors. People sharing state secrets. Not caviar and matryoshka doll salesmen. If they’d gone to the USA, how many Russian assassinations would there have been in the UK?
“Russian mapping of key cables in the North Sea.”
Why? https://www.submarinecablemap.com/
“Russia has nukes”
So does France. Should we bomb Calais? (I probably shouldn’t ask this here).
No. Just make more nukes!!!
Show me where I can download a dump of all the information about these Russian cyberattacks.
Classified information. But even V_P, the nutjobs’ nutjob on here, concedes that Russia is:
Very active in the field of cyberattacks and in the intelligence sphere I would agree but these threats are under investigation by the relevant Security services.
When have China and NK been hostile towards us?
Eh? What planet are you on? UK intelligence identifies China as a primary security threat – through cyber espionage, political interference, and economic leverage over critical infrastructure. The UK government has formally accused “Chinese state-affiliated actors” of malicious cyberattacks on the UK’s electoral watchdog. Chinese hackers have been linked to cyber-attacks on the UK Foreign Office. Reports increasingly indicate China uses higher-education partnerships to steal intellectual property, often for military applications.And Chinese firms have acquired c.£100 billion in critical UK assets, including utility companies, transport hubs, and renewable energy components…
Happens. Bit of piss taking. Did they leave when we told them to?
Probing is a classic military tactic…
But they haven’t stepped a yard over. If they’ve got this Dugin plan, why haven’t they crossed?
Because Russian nationalists think in centuries – not next year, like you! Post-Ukraine, they will aim to consolidate and re-arm. There’ll be no mass invasion of Western Europe in the foreseeable future, but we can expect much nibbling away at, and claims over, the borders of Western nations – probably starting with Moldova…And so it will continue…
Right. Russians. And basically, traitors…
The rule of law applies in the UK, and extra-judicial executions (ie murder) are illegal here. Extradition – even apprehending while in a non-UK jurisdiction – may be acceptable.
So does France. Should we bomb Calais?
No, because France is ally…duh!
Well, Russia was able to gin up a bunch of “refugee” invaders when Finland got uppity and joined NATO a few years back.
Our own government is bringing in millions of legalised Third-World immigrants every year, plus tens of thousands of illegals.
…commentators on here…actually believe the threat from Russia is the same or greater than the threat from Militant Islam – which is frankly insane.
How do you assess threats? Particularly ones of different types? Unless your method is reasonably objective, describing those who don’t share your priorities as “insane” reveals more about you than about the relative threats.
My position has always been that the Russian threat and the islamic threat are both serious but – for practical purposes – broadly equal. The former is largely external; the latter is largely internal. Funding for combatting these threats comes from different budgets and are the responsibility of different agencies; so they aren’t mutually exclusive.
And accusing me of being a CIA plant on the very slender basis of your feelz –ie disagreement with some of my opinions — is borderline barking, if not insane. Your ‘evidence’ does not support your conclusion…
And accusing me of being a CIA plant
I heard you drive a Studillac and have a hook hand from fighting that shark.
No, my chaffeur drives a black armoured Audi with heavily tinted windows, and my heterochromic white Persian cat always travels beside me.
Here’s a basic threat assessment
Russia – located more than a thousand miles away (approximately)- an aging,demographically declining populace and armed forces which while more numerous than our own have spent three years trying to conquer their immediate neighbour and failing miserably. Shut out of the West by rounds of sanctions and economically struggling (albeit they have pivoted East) – Even in the event they were able to consolidate their gains in Ukraine, that’s approximately the limit of their reach. Any attempt to attack Poland or The Baltics would bring overwhelming response from the US on Industrial targets across the Western Russia. Very active in the field of cyberattacks and in the intelligence sphere I would agree but these threats are under investigation by the relevant Security services. Generally have few, if any captive politicians and almost no demographic presence in the UK.
Militant Islam. Disparately spread across multiple (as many as 50) countries.Demographically vibrant with a number of countries having demographic birth rates of more than 4 children per couple, many of which will be male due to society and religion being set up as aggressively misogynistic. Increasing armed strength, A religious commitment to the overthrow of Western society. Millions of trained killers in situ across all countries. An estimated 40 brigades of militants active in the UK across every major urban centre.Dozens of terrorist atrocities across multiple decades. Fifth columnists in every part of the Uk public sector, including most of the Labour Party,Greens, Liberal democrats, Plaid and the SNP. Literally hundreds of new reinforcements arriving in the UK
to receive benefits and housing every month. Demonstrations calling for the death of all non Moslems weekly. attacks on all other religions on a daily basis.
Based on that – I think I know which the greater threat is…
Any attempt to attack Poland or The Baltics would bring overwhelming response from the US on Industrial targets across the Western Russia.
Really? Not sure Trump or JDV would do that…
Millions of trained killers in situ across all countries. An estimated 40 brigades of militants active in the UK across every major urban centre.
In the UK at least, thousands of semi- or untrained killers, in cells or lone wolves. As I have explained before, the “40 brigades” is a myth. As of 2020, MI5 – apparently, according to MSM speculation – had a list of over 40,000 islamic terrorist suspects, but this is a total number of individuals, not organized brigades! (And 40,000 doesn’t equal 40 brigades.)
I think you just proved the CIA link without me even needing to provide evidence. To say such pickings regarding The severity of Russians threat are slim is an understatement. Joseph McCarthy can rest easy. I wouldn’t worry too much, legions of CIA and MI6 agents are milking this. They’re still at it daily in the Telegraph and Times so there’s clearly a market for this take.
Does your mum know you are on here? If not, I think she should be told.
I disagree about the Russian threat being largely external. A while back someone posted a link to the list of Soviet procedures for destabilising, enervating and undermining enemies. Annoyingly I’ve lost the link. Despite the fall of communism there’s no reason to assume that Russia has stopped doing this to perceived enemies, i.e. us. China is certainly doing something similar.
And there’s no reason to assume that only Soros and his fellow travellers are funding Woke. It’s certainly in Dugin’s interest if Western societies collapse because of woke decadence.
It’s certainly in Dugin’s interest if Western societies collapse because of woke decadence.
Why do people assume that Russian crank has anything to do with anything? He’s the Slavic Ritchie.
All Putinists are cranks, and this crank is influential and so dangerous.
Dugin is a founder of Neo-Eurasianism, the ideology promoting a Russian-led Eurasian empire that will serve as a counterweight to Western liberalism and “Atlanticism”. His 1997 book, Foundations of Geopolitics, is highly influential in Russian military and foreign policy circles.
Dugin long advocated the annexation of Ukraine, which he deems essential for the creation of a Russian empire. He promoted the term “Novorossiya” (New Russia) before the 2014 annexation of Crimea.
He is the director of the Ivan Ilyin* Higher School of Politics at the Russian State University for the Humanities. He is also closely linked to the pro-Kremlin, Orthodox TV channel Tsargrad.
*Ivan Ilyin (d.1954) advocated Christian (Italian-style) fascism for Russia. He is often quoted by Putin. Ilyin believed that Russia and Ukraine “are bound together by faith, tribe, historical destiny, geographical location, economy, culture and politics”, and predicted: “History has not yet said its last word”. In 2005, Putin had Ilyin’s remains repatriated from Switzerland and reburied in Moscow with military and religious honours
Does your Mum have an inkling of the reality of your life in the intelligence services and is it as glamorous as portrayed in the Bond movies??
Your immaturity of judgement – particularly your evidence-free accusations – suggests you are barely out of short trousers. Do grow up! And my mother is long dead….
Hold your horzes. Your absurd, utterly evidence free puffing up of the Russian threat suggests you are seriously in hock to the CIA. Your complete failure to consider the Islamist threat as far greater when people are being killed every year by ISIS terror attacks is deeply concerning to the extent that one wonders if ISIS are supplementing your income. Given their infiltration of Central Asia (usually hitherto considered A primarily Russian Sphere of influence) that is quite conceivable. As for ‘evidence’ you have offered almost nothing to suggest that the imbroglio in the Ukraine isn’t a complete waste of time and resources. One can only conclude that you are a compromised asset apparently very much at ease with the Islamic takeover of the UK.
It’s often said that people don’t fight for a cause. They fight for the people beside them in the battle. The people they know. If you found yourself in battle with the current bunch of no hopers, would you bother? Or would you switch sides?
Would you really be much worse off living under Putin or Pooh? Government is rapidly closing the difference.
“Better Red than dead.”
Tyrants are not rational.
Compared to whom?
The Tater is going to have some issues – since the government seems to be ramping up the conscription rhetoric where they’re going to force men to go die for Ukraine and here he will be with a social media record of opposing that.
This will ding his social credit score badly.
Unlike the Chinese, the Brits hide the score so you can’t see it – very 1984.
Conscription is a complete fantasy. The Britain that would have gone along with conscription, dutifully sent its sons to die, has itself been killed.
The kind of society Britain is in 2026 will never be able to conscript people to fight a war. It would just mean massive rioting, youngsters hiding or fleeing the country, and people chucking bricks and bottles at recruiters. Sniggering Sir Simons in Whitehall, who sneer about how “we” (they mean you, plebs) have to “fight Russia” have a big, ugly reality check coming their way.
So I hope they try it
You say that . . . but you gave up your guns. And your knives. Willingly. No one is going to be *asked* to ‘send’ their sons – that’s not how conscription works anyway;) No one is asked if they want to be enslaved.
You guys told on each other during Covid. Regular people *are still* covering up for the rape gangs.
The only people who would be rioting at being conscripted are the immigrants – and *they’re not the ones that will be conscripted* because it would be ‘racist’ and they control the government anyway.
Did you hit your head in 2022 and just come to?
Wake up, Mr Freeman.
Did you not notice the people being arrested for speaking out against the regime?
Very few people had guns… Very few “family people” have or had knives… Lots and lots of people have sons and daughters, or grandsons and …daughters.
Apples v helicopters.
“Very few people had guns”
I had a rifle. And I’m very few. So you are right.
I’d like to see anyone try to conscript from Dewsbury. Unless it’s for ISIS.
The anti-rapefugee hotel protests were an amuse bouche. White people have finally entered the chat.
So, January 2024:
Now the results of a new YouGov survey show that 38% of under-40s say they would refuse to serve in the armed forces in the event of a new world war, and 30% say they would not serve even if Britain was facing imminent invasion.
Notably, this was before the recent White Awakening. Do we think that 38% figure would get bigger, or smaller, if the risk of having your limbs and your testicles burned off became a real possibility rather than a theoretical one?
Not gonna work, is it? This isn’t Ukraine, can’t kidnap people and drive them to the front. They don’t have enough jail cells for objectors either. Not that prison is much of a threat.
No point in self-demoralising by talking about Muslims and whatnot. The important thing is what British people do. I grok that our “institutions” are now fragile and hated enough that conscription would immediately blow up in their faces. And there’s literally nothing on the horizon that’s going to make people less angry.
You can absolutely kidnap people and ship them to the front. Armies have done exactly that for centuries.
They don’t need jail cells for the objectors – they have cattle cars and a railway link to the front.
Yeah. I’m thinking of the press gangs rounding up recruits for the navy in the good old 18th century.
You can absolutely kidnap people and ship them to the front. Armies have done exactly that for centuries.
Is it future or is it past?
Idk why you’re doubling down on this. You’re not going to get very far trying to kidnap Zoomers and make them do anything. Fantasy World Dizzy stuff. You’ve met young people these days, yes?
They don’t need jail cells for the objectors – they have cattle cars and a railway link to the front.
From Paddington, do they?
Why do you assume the British state, or other horribly unpopular, failing European states, are that powerful?
Blokes are currently leaving the SAS because they no longer have any faith in this country. If self-motivated individuals like that aren’t interested, good luck with the rest of the population.
And rightly so:
General Sir Peter Wall, who led the British Army for four years, says there’s “absolutely no doubt” the legal changes are damaging the military.
He’s heard reports of an “exodus” from the SAS and SBS.
Everyone should leave the British Army. The British government doesn’t have your back, so you’d be a fool to risk your life for them.
The SAS in particular, you are put in a lot of situations where the simple thing to do is to just execute the enemy. They probably broke the Geneva Convention during the Iranian Embassy Siege. But you don’t want to be dragging prisoners around in that situation. Taking civilians hostage, you deserve to die.
And the problem is that people can see things differently decades later. At the time people probably thought about Bloody Sunday that it was a Fuck Around Find Out situation. You throw rocks at soldiers with guns, you’re fucking stupid. One of the soldiers thought he saw a device. And at the time that might have been a reasonable thing to think. You might think differently today. Had it been tried in 1973, they probably would have walked.
Giving up on defence would make it easier for Donald to make the UK the 51sr state. That would please Richie, wouldn’t it?
Honestly, y’all are safe. We’re walking in the OTHER direction.
Thought that might be the case, bobby b. I suspect you feel the same way about Oz.
But what do you think of Greenland??
He’s managed to circle the entire world and arrive at Heinlein from the other side. A society that depends on slavery to defend itself does not deserve to survive; in reference to conscription. And if you have arrived at depending on conscription they yes by definition the people have the opinion that the cost of defending the society is not worth defending it.
But it can be managed. Commissars with pistols just behind the lines.