The Left Slowly Sinks Britain

[Dakota435]

Rue Britannia

By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Friday, March 30, 2007 4:20 PM PT

Hostage Crisis: Britain's response to Iran suggests the British lion now keeps its teeth in a jar. Would Winston Churchill have responded to the kidnapping of British sailors by running to the League of Nations?

Time was, the HMS Cornwall or any other British warship would have simply blown the Iranian motorboats that seized 15 British sailors out of the water. But these are the days when Western leaders run to the United Nations seeking meaningless resolutions of condemnation.

The problem with the West is we never get it. We never grasp the fact that appeasement, conciliation and endless negotiation do not work and that the only time documents achieve peace is when the words at the top read "unconditional surrender."

It's been 28 years since our embassy hostages were paraded on Iranian TV, and it was that weakness on our part that had tragic consequences for decades to come, culminating in the attacks of 9/11. This time it's British sailors, and every enemy from Osama in his cave to Ahmadinejad in his bunker is taking notes.

Maybe it's fitting that the British sailors were kidnapped almost literally under the guns of the Cornwall. If so ordered, the frigate could have blown the Iranian Revolutionary Guard flotilla out of the water.

Along with her sister ships Cumberland, Chatham and Campbell, Cornwall is slated to be mothballed as the British government does what no foreign enemy could ever do — sink the Royal Navy.

Two months ago, Britain announced that almost half its fleet of 44 warships will be mothballed due to defense budget cuts. British naval forces have been so degraded it is doubtful they could pull off 1982's Falkland Islands mission today.

This time next year, according to plans, the British navy that once ruled the seas will be roughly the size of the Belgian navy. According to the London Daily Telegraph, the cuts "will turn Britain's once-proud Navy into nothing more than a coastal defense force."

Last month, Blair announced that 1,600 British troops will return from Iraq in the next few months, further reducing Britain's presence to about 5,500. At their highest point shortly after the defeat of Saddam Hussein, British forces numbered over 40,000. The world's fifth-largest economy now supports an army 28th in size.

The mullahs in Iran clearly see today's Britain, beset at home with threats of terror, as a weak link in the war on terror. They have their own domino theory: Pry Britain away from the coalition of the willing, and it will speed up America's decline as well.

The commitment to defend freedom is not a school dance; no nation can afford to say it's tired and will just sit this one out. Britain should know this from its own experience. No piece of paper, no capitulation to tyrants, ever brings peace in our time.

Britain has stood with us and often stood alone with us. To be fair, she now hears voices in America calling for retreat from Iraq, even from the world stage, and sees her ally going wobbly. It would behoove us both to remember the words of Winston Churchill in another dark hour when the West faced another gathering storm:

"If you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a small chance of survival. There may even be a worse case: You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves."

[Hollis]

I guess it demonstrates the hardest faught battle is not on the battle ground but at home. Iranis know they have a bunch of willing allies in the West will to fight for the Irani for their own poltical reasons.

[Atlantic Friend]

Hostage Crisis: Britain's response to Iran suggests the British lion now keeps its teeth in a jar. Would Winston Churchill have responded to the kidnapping of British sailors by running to the League of Nations?

What Would Winston Do indeed ?


This time next year, according to plans, the British navy that once ruled the seas will be roughly the size of the Belgian navy.

Excuse me ? Sounds a bit outrageous. Either the Royal Navy has been scuttling ships like there's no tomorrow, or Belgium has started a new naval arms race.

[Dasein]

Time was, the HMS Cornwall or any other British warship would have simply blown the Iranian motorboats that seized 15 British sailors out of the water. But these are the days when Western leaders run to the United Nations seeking meaningless resolutions of condemnation.

Not in the 20th century, at least, and perhaps not even likely in the 19th century. For example, during the Amethyst affair, the British didn't bomb Bejing. I am not aware of a single incident where the British doing what the author describes. Rather, limited action and diplomacy have been the standard of British policy.


The problem with the West is we never get it. We never grasp the fact that appeasement, conciliation and endless negotiation do not work and that the only time documents achieve peace is when the words at the top read "unconditional surrender."

The fact is, negotiations and diplomacy work quite well, and most incidents are resolved without force of arms. While the presence of arms itself is motivation for diplomacy, it is no the use of those arms itself which resolves the incident. It is a rare case where one must resort to total war and bring about unconditional surrender.

The author seems to suffer from the sort of historical myopia common among the neoconservative propagandists who cannot draw lessons from any time in history other than 1939-1945. Every possible threat is described in terms of Hitler and the Nazis, every leader on our side must be the next Churchill or Roosevelt. All negative things arise from diplomacy, which is really appeasement, and the ultimate solution to any crisis is total war.

[Lov3ll]

Hostage Crisis: Britain's response to Iran suggests the British lion now keeps its teeth in a jar. Would Winston Churchill have responded to the kidnapping of British sailors by running to the League of Nations?

I'm pretty sure Britain has no more chemical weapons. p-)

[solidarnosc]

This time next year, according to plans, the British navy that once ruled the seas will be roughly the size of the Belgian navy.


rofl
Wow. Only last month it was the size of the Dutch army. :) Not a convincing way to make a point. Belgian navy has about 15 ships in total of which 3 frigates. The best ship we have is a 15 year old second had M-Fregat from the Netherlands. We ofcourse have no subs, no aircraft carriers, no assualt ships for landing operations etc...etc...

Aircraft CarriersShip NameLaunch DateDisplacement (Tonnes)Total CrewHMS Invincible (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001001003)197722,0001051HMS Illustrious (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001001002)197822,0001051HMS Ark Royal (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001001001)198122,0001051
Amphibious Assault ShipsShip NameLaunch DateDisplacement (Tonnes)Total CrewHMS Ocean (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001005001)199520,700265HMS Albion (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001005002001)200118,500363HMS Bulwark (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001005002002)200118,500363
Type 42 Destroyers Batch 2Ship NameLaunch DateDisplacement (Tonnes)Total CrewHMS Exeter (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001004002)19794,820253HMS Southampton (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001004007)19804,820253HMS Nottingham (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001004006)19804,820253HMS Liverpool (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001004004)19804,820253
Type 42 Destroyers Batch 3Ship NameLaunch DateDisplacement (Tonnes)Total CrewHMS Manchester (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001004005)19805,200301HMS Gloucester (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001004003)19825,200301HMS York (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001004008)19825,200301HMS Edinburgh (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001004001)19835,200301
Type 23 FrigatesShip NameLaunch DateDisplacement (Tonnes)Total CrewHMS Argyll (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h00100100200a)19894,900181HMS Lancaster (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h00100100200e)19904,900181HMS Iron Duke (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h00100100200c)19914,900181HMS Monmouth (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001002006)19914,900181HMS Montrose (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001002007)19924,900181HMS Westminster (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001002005)19924,900181HMS Northumberland (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001002008)19924,900181HMS Richmond (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001002001)19934,900181HMS Somerset (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001002002)19944,900181HMS Sutherland (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001002004)19964,900181HMS Kent (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h00100100200d)19984,900181HMS Portland (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001002009)19994,900181HMS St. Albans (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001002003)20004,900181
Type 22 Frigates Batch 3Ship NameLaunch DateDisplacement (Tonnes)Total CrewHMS Cornwall (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001003003)19855,300250HMS Cumberland (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001003004)19865,300250HMS Campbeltown (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001003001)19875,300250HMS Chatham (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001003002)19885,300250
Vanguard Class SubmarinesShip NameLaunch DateDisplacement (Tonnes)Total CrewHMS Vanguard (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.2440)199515,980135HMS Victorious (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001003001002)199515,980135HMS Vigilant (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001003001003)199515,980135HMS Vengeance (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001003001001)199815,980135
Swiftsure Class SubmarinesShip NameLaunch DateDisplacement (Tonnes)Total CrewHMS Superb (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001003002002004)19744,900116HMS Sceptre (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001003002002002)19764,900116
Trafalgar Class SubmarinesShip NameLaunch DateDisplacement (Tonnes)Total CrewHMS Trafalgar (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001003002001005)19815,200130HMS Turbulent (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001003002001001)19825,200130HMS Tireless (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001003002001003)19845,200130HMS Torbay (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001003002001007)19855,200130HMS Trenchant (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001003002001002)19865,200130HMS Talent (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001003002001006)19885,200130HMS Triumph (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001003002001004)19915,200130

Antarctic Patrol ShipShip NameLaunch DateDisplacement (Tonnes)Total CrewHMS Endurance (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h00100100f001)19916,000112
Castle Class Patrol VesselShip NameLaunch DateDisplacement (Tonnes)Total CrewHMS Dumbarton Castle (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001008006001)19811,42745
River Class Patrol VesselsShip NameLaunch DateDisplacement (Tonnes)Total CrewHMS Tyne (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001008007001)20031,67730HMS Mersey (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001008007002)20031,67730HMS Severn (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001008007003)20031,67730HMS Clyde (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h00100100800b001)20071,84738
Ocean Survey VesselsShip NameLaunch DateDisplacement (Tonnes)Total CrewHMS Scott (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001006003)199613,50063
Coastal Survey VesselsShip NameLaunch DateDisplacement (Tonnes)Total CrewHMS Gleaner (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001006005)1983265HMS Roebuck (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001006002)19851,20046
Multi-Role Survey VesselShip NameLaunch DateDisplacement (Tonnes)Total CrewHMS Echo (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001006004001)20023,50072HMS Enterprise (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001006004002)20023,50072
Sandown Class MinehuntersShip NameLaunch DateDisplacement (Tonnes)Total CrewHMS Walney (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001007008008)199160034HMS Penzance (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001007008005)199760034HMS Pembroke (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001007008004)199760034HMS Grimsby (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001007008003)199860034HMS Bangor (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001007008001)199960034HMS Ramsey (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001007008006)199960034HMS Blyth (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001007008002)200060034HMS Shoreham (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001007008007)200160034
Hunt Class MinehuntersShip NameLaunch DateDisplacement (Tonnes)Total CrewHMS Cattistock (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001007007003)198175045HMS Brocklesby (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001007007002)198275045HMS Middleton (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001007007007)198375045HMS Chiddingfold (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001007007004)198475045HMS Hurworth (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001007007005)198475045HMS Atherstone (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001007007001)198675045HMS Quorn (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001007007008)198875045
Archer Class P2000 Fast Training BoatsShip NameLaunch DateDisplacement (Tonnes)Total CrewHMS Archer (Aberdeen) (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001008008001001)19855411HMS Biter (Manchester) (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h00100100800800100a)19855411HMS Example (Northumbria) (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h00100100800800100b)19855411HMS Explorer (Yorkshire) (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h00100100800800100d)19855411HMS Smiter (Glasgow) (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001008008001005)19855411HMS Blazer (Southampton) (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h00100100800800100c)19885411HMS Charger (Liverpool) (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001008008001006)19885411HMS Exploit (Birmingham) (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001008008001002)19885411HMS Example (Northumbria) (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h00100100800800100b)19885411HMS Puncher (London) (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001008008001009)19885411HMS Raider (Cambridge) (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h00100100800800100e)19985411HMS Ranger (Sussex) (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001008008001008)19885411HMS Tracker (Oxford) (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001008008001004)19985411HMS Trumpeter (Bristol) (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001008008001003)19885411
Cyprus Squadron - Archer Class P2000 Fast Training BoatsShip NameLaunch DateDisplacement (Tonnes)Total CrewHMS Dasher (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h00100100800a004)1988545HMS Pursuer (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h00100100800a005)1988545
Gibraltar Squadron 16m Fast Patrol ClassShip NameLaunch DateDisplacement (Tonnes)Total CrewHMS Sabre (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001008009007)2003245HMS Scimitar (http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.00h001001008009006)2003245




http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.2230



F910 Wielingen (http://www.mil.be/navycomp/units/index.asp?LAN=nl&FILE=unittext&ID=362&PAGE=1&MENU=0)
F911 Westdiep (http://www.mil.be/navycomp/units/index.asp?LAN=nl&FILE=unittext&ID=365&PAGE=1&MENU=0) F930 Leopold I (http://www.mil.be/navycomp/units/index.asp?LAN=nl&ID=1185&MENU=0&PAGE=1) M915 Aster (http://www.mil.be/navycomp/units/index.asp?LAN=nl&FILE=unittext&ID=660&PAGE=1&MENU=0) M916 Bellis (http://www.mil.be/navycomp/units/index.asp?LAN=nl&FILE=unittext&ID=661&PAGE=1&MENU=0) M917 Crocus (http://www.mil.be/navycomp/units/index.asp?LAN=nl&FILE=unittext&ID=683&PAGE=1&MENU=0) M921 Lobelia (http://www.mil.be/navycomp/units/index.asp?LAN=nl&FILE=unittext&ID=670&PAGE=1&MENU=0) M923 Narcis (http://www.mil.be/navycomp/units/index.asp?LAN=nl&FILE=unittext&ID=672&PAGE=1&MENU=0) M924 Primula (http://www.mil.be/navycomp/units/index.asp?LAN=nl&FILE=unittext&ID=673&PAGE=1&MENU=0) A950 Valcke (http://www.mil.be/navycomp/units/index.asp?LAN=nl&FILE=unittext&ID=677&PAGE=1&MENU=0) A960 Godetia (http://www.mil.be/navycomp/units/index.asp?LAN=nl&FILE=unittext&ID=686&PAGE=1&MENU=0) A962 Belgica (http://www.mil.be/navycomp/units/index.asp?LAN=nl&FILE=unittext&ID=669&PAGE=1&MENU=0) A963 Stern (http://www.mil.be/navycomp/units/index.asp?LAN=nl&FILE=unittext&ID=674&PAGE=1&MENU=0) A996 Albatros (http://www.mil.be/navycomp/units/index.asp?LAN=nl&FILE=unittext&ID=685&PAGE=1&MENU=0) P902 Liberation (http://www.mil.be/navycomp/units/index.asp?LAN=nl&FILE=unittext&ID=667&PAGE=1&MENU=0) A958 Zenobe Gramme (http://www.mil.be/navycomp/units/index.asp?LAN=nl&FILE=unittext&ID=676&PAGE=1&MENU=0)

http://www.mil.be/navycomp/index.asp?LAN=nl

[Atlantic Friend]

rofl
Wow. Only last month it was the size of the Dutch army. :)

Next time it will be the size of Luxembourg's navy. I guess the key word of the article was "roughly", which means the Royal Navy will be any size from the US Navy's to Switzerland's.

I agree, that's a very weak way to make a point.

[Kaapeli]

Starting a war over a minor border incident possibly resulting in thousands of dead would surely have been a cunning political response. Damn those lefties always trying to negotiate first.

[SBL]

^Sometimes a swift punch in the teeth sends the right message- "Dont Tread On Me". And firing shots doesn't always result in war. It'd still be an incident one way or the other, but perhaps with Britain under the microscope instead of Iran.

Just saying.

[Atlantic Friend]

Anyway the basic sentimental appeal of the article is weak. It is opposing a fantasy of what it was like 60 years ago to nowaday's gritty reality. What would Winston do if he had been threatened by Iran like Blair is ? But in Winston's days, Iran was not the regional power it is currently.

In Winston's days, a similar situation would have seen British sailors captured by, say, Nationalist Spain. Or Fascist Italy, maybe. And I'm pretty sure what good ol' Winston would have done first, would have been to use his head before ordering the Royal Navy's battlewagons to shell the port of Vigo or La Spezia.

[Dakota435]

Anyway the basic sentimental appeal of the article is weak. It is opposing a fantasy of what it was like 60 years ago to nowaday's gritty reality. What would Winston do if he had been threatened by Iran like Blair is ? But in Winston's days, Iran was not the regional power it is currently.

In Winston's days, a similar situation would have seen British sailors captured by, say, Nationalist Spain. Or Fascist Italy, maybe. And I'm pretty sure what good ol' Winston would have done first, would have been to use his head before ordering the Royal Navy's battlewagons to shell the port of Vigo or La Spezia.

"Two months ago, Britain announced that almost half its fleet of 44 warships will be mothballed due to defense budget cuts."

This is not true?

[Atlantic Friend]

"Two months ago, Britain announced that almost half its fleet of 44 warships will be mothballed due to defense budget cuts."

This is not true?

That isn't exactly the issue. Mothballed ships can be reactivated in times of crisis, for a thing. As another poster has shown, the Royal Navy is NOT going to be "roughly" the size of Belgium's either.

The author starts with a fact, and then it's all sentimental tripe and dubious arguments.

[Dakota435]

That isn't exactly the issue. Mothballed ships can be reactivated in times of crisis, for a thing. As another poster has shown, the Royal Navy is NOT going to be "roughly" the size of Belgium's either.

Yes they can just be brought into service, crewed and all in a couple days eh?

Mothballed assets are absolutely useless in a crisis until the crisis it over.

[Atlantic Friend]

Yes they can just be brought into service, crewed and all in a couple days eh?

Mothballed assets are absolutely useless in a crisis until the crisis it over.

You might remember non-mothballed assets also need a lot of time to move around and organize to face a crisis. That'w why you use intel, and eventually diplomacy to buy some time.

My point is, Britain is not destroying these ships. It may face lower readiness and greater delays, but it still retain the capacity to react over a crisis. If you are thinking about a lightning, sudden crisis, then it's the kind of crisis that would surprise any nation even with zero mothballed ships.

Again, the point is not saying that the Royal Navy can put as many ships to sea than it could in 1940, or that it even could in 2000. Budget reductions are part of that gritty reality I was mentioning in an earlier post. Opposing fantasy about how great things were when Winston was First Lord of the Admiralty is nice, but hardly productive. And obfuscating the issue with shaky comparisons doesn't help solve the problem either.

[ltrowley]

this article is nothing but ridiculous jingoism written so investment bankers can grumble over it in a pub drinking john smiths and tapping a fruit machine.

[DeltaWhisky58]

This article is pointless and the thread is going nowhere fast.