Latest Moan From You and Me 2025

As ever @pete, it depends on who's flying the plane and who it's targetting as well as whether it breaks UK law to supplythoseparts and, it seems, it does.

Not a lot of ethics in arms dealing or their use in many parts of the world so it is essential that governments have some control over them.

 

Yes it probably is illegal, but what are you going to do about it, the case is after the fact, the parts have been used and Palestinians will have died.
All the court can do is say it shouldn't have happened and don't do it again.

 

@NigelJ The govt can and should refuse the export licenses needed to send arms out of the UK. It can allso step up ports security and Customs staff and equipment to check the correct paperwork is present and for identifying goods being smuggled out without a license but that means investing.......

 

You are quite right they should; they don't though and they won't either.
By the way can you remember the fiasco of the Iraqi "supergun" .

 

I just never answer the door unless I recognize the person that's there - I've got a plain glass pane in the door, with a net curtain behind it, so I can see who's there but they can't see me, and then I can decide whether to open the door or not.
With delivery people I can see if they've got a parcel, and then I will open the door, but not to anyone else.

 

As the saying goes "Two 'wrongs' don't make a right" but who supplied the munitions Hamas (or whoever) use against Israel?

 

You mean like how they expertly stop the army of small boats containing weapons of mass disruption :D

 

Isn't it a flotilla or armada when talking about boats.
In the case I believe you are referring to: it would be up to the French to issue the licences and enforce them.

 

I think it's more a convoy.
With a French escort.

 

I overheard one of my allotment neighbours yesterday talking about labour and the boats. If you looked at him you would think he was a mild mannered octogenarian but the air was very blue. I'm not really a swearer so it was an education to here at least 5 f's and a c, in only one sentance.
The gist of his observation was that "if we could stop f'ing Hitler then why can't we keep the f'ing illegals from our coastline."

He also had a fair bit to say about Monty don and how it was his fault the new allotmenteers gave up quickly, "they watch f'in Monty don and they think it's easy, but he has a team of f'in gardeners".

 

@Thevictorian He's right about MD but I don't think you can use the same methods on immigrants as were used against the Nazis and that means govts have to be a)well informed about why there are so many, b) who's aiding and abetting and making money form people trafficking and c) have the imagination and courage to come up with an all round solution for a, b and c and stop tinkering at the egdes.

 

He has a point I won't tell you which part I believe.
Maybe both.

 

If it is an F35, the US retains control of it's software/systems and that is why Canada has put an order for 88 of them on hold. The US is supposed also provide updates/upgrades when needed.

So in the end, the components may be provided from different places but the brain is controlled by an untrustworthy country. We can't trust them. Their word is worthless.

 

I'd much prefer us to produce our own aircraft and not buy US stuff, but the development costs are way above anything a single European country can do these days.

Equally if you do produce any military equipment it really needs exports to make it profitable.

Just ask anyone involved in the Falklands years ago, did they expect to get attacked by French munitions, yes, they knew what they were up against.

 

That's why Airbus was created @pete. Joint venture between France, Germany, Spain and the UK. It builds military as well as commercial craft.

If you look at losses in Afghanistan there will be US, UK and allied forces killed by US military gear as the CIA and co were arming and funding the Taliban after Russia's invasion.