Our Defence Secretary should be reduced to the rank of (acting) L/Ccpl

The Right Honourable Michael Fallon MP, our Secretary of State for Defence - God help us! - is a total plonker!  Either that, or he knows the truth of the matter but is happy to lie through his teeth and assume that you, his readers, are fools.  You may judge for yourselves by reading his laughable (or weepable) article in today’s Telegraph.  Here’s an example from his opening remarks: 

When I met the new US Defence Secretary Ash Carter earlier this month, he greeted me with the words "Thank God we're in this together."  

That sentiment put into sharp perspective the pre-Election conjecture over future defence spending.  

The US understands what really matters in today’s unstable world. When the chips are down, the UK will always be at their side.  

It's not hard to see why Secretary Carter sets such great store by the UK’s support. 

Er, no, Sec. of State, when the chips are down we are not always in it together, for example, we ignored the Vietnam ‘chips’, and we frowned upon the American invasion Grenada when it was actually a British territory.  Similarly, the Americans twisted this way and that before reluctantly allowing the British to retake the Falklands and, back in ’56, our WWII ‘ally’, President Eisenhower, threatened to bankrupt us if we took back the Suez Canal – actually, we owe him a big thank you for that one!  And, Sec. of State, when Obama or his equally loony Democrat successor decide to stop all aid to Israel when it is being over-run by IS/Iran, will we be ‘in that together’? 

The fact of the matter is that so far as the American military are concerned, we are rated as an irritating and mostly useless adjunct to anything that have planned.  This arises from our pathetic performances in Iraq and Afghanistan where our dismal strategy laid down by our incompetent generals proved to be woeful and was, alas, only slightly mitigated by the courage of the ‘Toms’ who did their best to implement it.  American irritation swiftly turned to rage when they were subjected to constant hectoring lectures from British brass telling them that when it came to peace-keeping strategies the British knew better than anyone how to do it.

At the political level it is now clear beyond any doubt that Obama and his Party, in so far as they ever think of Britain, despise us for our history.  The only slight use we have for them is to act as their fig leaf so that when they stumble-bum their way into some useless foreign adventure they can use us to hide their embarrassment by claiming that America is not acting alone but with its allies. 

None of that is particularly novel or extraordinary.  That is the way relations work between foreign countries but it is essential that all parties concerned have as clear an idea of the realities as possible.  Hence, it may well be that we must lick-spittle in support of American policies in order to ensure that our nuclear arsenal remains operational.  In my view (writing as an ex-Corporal - but substantive, mind!), it is absolutely critical that our nuclear force be kept right up to date.  I’m not sure of the arrangements, perhaps some of you can advise, but I understand that the actual viability of our missiles depends very much on American input.  If that is the case, then I withdraw my withering criticism of Mr. Fallon who is perhaps acting (in all senses of the word!) the part of an international statesman in the mold of a Talleyrand or a Bismarck or even a Lord Grey . . .  yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeees, quite!

 

Comments

[Whitewall]

Ash Carter is an odd sort for the Obama team. He might actually believe what he told Mr. Fallon. Unfortunately, Carter's boss doesn't share or care a whit. Until the post America post Western Obama is gone, no friend or ally has a friend or ally in America. Believe Obama at your peril. His goal is payback on behalf of the modern Left who have been so wrong about the goodness and benefits of Western Civilization.

[Whitewall]

Come to think on it, it is not just Britain he dislikes, but Europe as a whole and that, by extension, includes the "cousins Down Under". Obama has even gone so far as to leave the Gulf States allies feeling screwed blued and tattooed. And then their is Israel.

[David Duff]

All that is true of Obama who seems to bear almost a personal animus against the 'old allies'. Even so, there are too many people in Britain - especially those who never stop wittering about 'the special relationship' - who fail to realise that international politics is almost entirely based on self-assessments of national interest. The main problem with Obama and his 'apparat' is that they have failed to understand their true self interest.

[JK]

" I’m not sure of the arrangements, perhaps some of you can advise, but I understand that the actual viability of our missiles depends very much on American input."

Just the missiles you be asking?

(As I understand it, hedged, ... the warheads and "associated gear" is BAE & Rolls Royce so ... )

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/products/trident-ii-d5-fleet-ballistic-missile--fbm-.html

[David Duff]

Well then, perhaps it is the codes but I have a feeling that America can, in extremis, stop our nukes from operating.

[JK]

Can't, with certainty say, but I seem to recall there being some thingamjiggery having to do in some way somehow with the Guidance delivery.

Any entity firing one of the things would probably want to be pretty sure where it'd land.

[backofanenvelope]

Thinking along the lines of not wasting a good crisis, perhaps this is the time to gracefully bow out of our relationship with the Americans. We remain a member of NATO and if possible, retain our SLBMs. Obama is changing his country into a Spanish-American country. A sort of gigantic Brazil. We are friendly enough with Brazil, but we don't bomb other countries when they tell us to.

So, we just gently wave farewell.....

[The Jannie]

Quote from a friend who worked with Americans at NATO HQ: "The Americans are great team players - as long as the team is America"

[Andra]

Why don't you Poms get Jeremy Clarkson to run England (or even Lesser Britain) for you?

He's not busy at the moment and will be more fun, at the very least, than the bunch of ratbags you've got now!

[David Duff]

Oh God, Andra, do we really deserve to be run by a thick, minor public school lout with delusions of grandeur like him?

[Cuffleyburgers]

Well David, whoever it is, is likely to thick public school of some stripe, and most definitely with delusions of grandeur.

I don't see the problem personally.

[jimmy glesga]

Clarkson could be a possible Tory candidate in the future maybe PM. He has five years to do it. People who think an automobile is an extension of the penis may vote for him. All he has to do is join the Tories if he has not already done so.