Mothballing the Fleet (Fred Thompson on Iran)

National Review Online ^ | March 28, 2007 5:15 PM | By Fred Thompson

[DBCJR]

Tony Blair’s getting angrier every day. But if past Iranian hostage takings are an indication, he may be upset for a while. The American-embassy hostages were held for 444 days, and the Israeli soldiers kidnapped last year by Iran’s Hezbollah puppets still aren’t free.

Blair is threatening to escalate to a “different phase,” but Iran’s leadership knows something that most Americans don’t. Two months ago, Britain’s government announced plans to mothball almost half its naval fleet due to defense-budget cuts. Much of its existing navy is already so degraded; it would take over a year to get into action. According to the British newspaper, the Daily Telegraph, senior naval officers say that the cuts “will turn Britain’s once-proud Navy into nothing more than a coastal defense force.”

In fact, the British naval forces have been so neglected; the U.K. probably couldn’t pull off the Falkland Islands mission today. The world’s fifth-largest economy now supports an army that ranks 28th in size.

What are they thinking?

Continued below

[DBCJR]

The 9/11 attacks should have been a wake-up call to our allies — but they seem to have had a tranquilizing effect instead. Despite a series of both successful and thwarted attacks since then, Britain, France, Italy, Poland, Spain, Germany, and Canada have actually cut their active-duty forces. And the percentage of those countries’ economies spent on defense was reduced over ten percent by 2005. Many are still falling.

Unlike much of Europe, which seems to have lost the will to protect itself and its democratic traditions, many of the new aggressors are increasing military spending dramatically. And many seem willing to sacrifice masses of their own populations if that’s what it takes to force the West into submission.

Continued:

Let’s be clear. Iran’s kidnappings are part of a plan to see that nothing interferes with its quest for nuclear weapons. If successful, other dictatorships will follow suit. This is not the time for the free world to neglect its own defense.

My Comment:

We get a glimpse of the Thompson's decisiveness toward action but restraint of rhetoric here. Fred's diplomacy is non-offensive toward this important ally, but hints the case for American responsibility in her aid. He is looking presidential.

[DKNY]

No thanks, we had a glimpse of Fred Thompson in action when he caved in to John Glenn during the Senate hearings. Pelosi and the rest of the Democrats would walk all over him.

[ozzymandus]

If the brit navy vessel on the scene had opened fire on the iranians instead of sitting there and letting them kidnap their sailors, this would be a non-incident.

[Aria]

I am VERY excited about his potential!!!! I heard him on Paul Harvey yesterday and at the end he said he would now be doing commentary for ABC. I pray he only uses that as a temporary platform before he throws his hat in.

[Jack_Macca]

A totally misleading expert.

Britain is mothballing 30 year old harriers and pretend aircraft carriers for new planes and two REAL aircraft carriers.

It has also recently passed a vote in the Commons to upgrade the Nukes.

As for the 28th largest army and the implication of small military spending. Since when has the UK ever had a massive volunteer army? Also, the UK is the World's fifth largest Military spender.

Poor journalism.

[HeartlandOfAmerica]

There's my Fred.

Now that they've emasculated their forces, all that England can do is to 'de-escalate' their thorniest problems. Read that as run and hide.

It took me by surprise too. I figured that if ANYTHING would prompt Europe to rearm, it would be 911 and the rumored attempt on NATO headquarters in Brussels.

Guess not. Suicidal decadents in europe.

[FreeReign]

Fred:Let’s be clear. Iran’s kidnappings are part of a plan to see that nothing interferes with its quest for nuclear weapons. If successful, other dictatorships will follow suit. This is not the time for the free world to neglect its own defense.

Good to see Fred out there saying this.

[Logical me]

Don't get me wrong because I consider the Brits our best and only real friends. But the liberals in their Country have done this to their Navy because, like the rest of the so called free world, they rely on the US to do their dirty work. A word of caution - This would be exactly what the liberals in this Country did during Clintoon years and if they had their way (like the jackasses in San Francisco) they would rape our services again.

[capt. norm]

Welcome to FR.

Correcting mistakes made by the media is one of the great things regularly done on this forum.

US media, as usual, got it wrong.

[lexington minuteman 1775]

RUN FRED!

[Logical me]

How long ago was this upgrade authorized? And what has the past dozen or so years look like?

[AFreeBird]

Poor research on your part. Google brought this up at the top. From a London Telegraph article (think the folks in London might know a thing or two about it?)

Royal Navy commanders were in uproar yesterday after it was revealed that almost half of the Fleet's 44 warships are to be mothballed as part of a Ministry of Defence cost-cutting measure.

Sailors standing on the aircraft carrier HMS Invincible, which may never go to sea again

Senior officers have said the plans will turn Britain's once-proud Navy into nothing more than a coastal defence force.

The Government has admitted that 13 unnamed warships are in a state of reduced readiness, putting them around 18 months away from active service. Today The Daily Telegraph can name a further six destroyers and frigates that are being proposed for cuts.

A need to cut the defence budget by £250 million this year to meet spending requirements has forced ministers to look at drastic measures.

MoD sources have admitted it is possible that the Royal Navy will discontinue one of its major commitments around the world at a time when Sir Jonathon Band, the First Sea Lord, has said more ships are needed to protect the high seas against terrorism and piracy.

whole article

[LiberalBassTurds]

Don't confuse the Fred supporters with the facts. :-)

LBT
......

[Jack_Macca]

The first part of your question can be answered by this page:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6448173.stm

I am unsure what you mean by the second part though.

[thinking]

Front line military, are expendable; always were, always will be....sorry folks, but that is the way it is...

[Proud_USA_Republican]

UK has decided providing welfare and housing to a never ending flow of islamic extremsist immigrants is much more important than funding its military.

[BobS]

"I pray he only uses that as a temporary platform before he throws his hat in."

He can't do that the way you wish. There are contracts that define things. He has to follow a certain format. He did use one segment a few weeks ago where he told the Mexicans where to go. That was Big Time.

[BamaCharm]

Apparently, Fred is the one with the facts in his corner. See the article posted above. I believe I could support Fred for prez.

[Jack_Macca]

You need to realise one thing. The Labour Party is hardly likely to say that it is building a new fleet is it, especially when Gordon Brown is taking over in six months or so.

The article is a plant to gain support for more military spending. The Telegraph is a Conservative paper. Notice how it mentions France will have a better Navy. This is to get people angry. Think about it.

I do agree with the general sentiment myself though. However, we will have to wait for a Conservative Government before these wrongdoings are corrected.

BTW, I am probably closer to London than you! :)

[Jack_Macca]

UK has decided providing welfare and housing to a never ending flow of islamic extremsist immigrants is much more important than funding its military.

There is the same proportion of Muslims in the UK as there is in the USA.