John Healey (Defence Secretary) resigns.

Maybe a basic nuclear capability is what’s needed, and spending more on drone technology and defensive anti missiles. Iron domes have made a huge difference in the Middle East
What did you have in mind?

We definitely need low cost CIWS. But we also need a navy and some planes to go with our aircraft carriers
 
Last edited:
What did you have in mind?

We definitely need low cost CIWS. But we also need a navy and some planes to go with our aircraft carriers
I had in mind the best sytstem available. And maybe ramping up protection of our undersea cables.
 
Starmmer getting some action, the story mentions Royal Marines are involved but surely this is classic sb s territory.

The Navy can do that on their own without the Marines let alone the SBS. Its not as if they were being shot at. Still if you have Marines spare then it's a good training exercise.
 
Let's hope it's not a Trump-like knee -jerk reaction following the defence Secretary's resignation.
It’s tempting to think it’s more PR than pre planned, but probably arranged with the bye election in mind. God knows how it was funded. Maybe Nige was persuaded that it fell under personal security, and chipped in
 
It’s tempting to think it’s more PR than pre planned, but probably arranged with the bye election in mind. God knows how it was funded. Maybe Nige was persuaded that it fell under personal security, and chipped in
Funding isn't an issue.

The decision to actually do something about the shadow fleet is a political decision but other nations have also been starting to enforce sanctions recently.
 
Funding isn't an issue.

The decision to actually do something about the shadow fleet is a political decision but other nations have also been starting to enforce sanctions recently.
It was a joke (obviously a bad one) about Healys reason for resigning
 
Funding isn't an issue.

The decision to actually do something about the shadow fleet is a political decision but other nations have also been starting to enforce sanctions recently.
The problem is that it's little different to Iran closing the Straits of Hormuz.
It's a political decision peculiar to the alliance of the western Nations as sanctions against Russia over the war with Ukraine.

It damages UK's reputation for upholding the laws relating to the freedom of navigation.

The result so far: 1 Indian national has been arrested.
Even this arrest is based on political decisions and actions.
 
Don’t we keep the cargo?
On suspicion?
How much does it cost to hold and maintain a tanker on the South Coast for the duration of an investigation and trial?
And is that worth the loss of UK's reputation as an observer of the laws of freedom of navigation?
 
Don’t we keep the cargo?
It’s presumably a win win, if the ruskis don’t claim the cargo we keep it, if they do claim we keep it. Whats concerning is their response, maybe clip an undersea cable in six months time. Unless your Yacksly- Lenin in which case it’s the act of a friendly power.
 
Back
Top