Site Updates | First Visit? | Newsletter | Tools & Features | RSS Feeds
Welcome, Guest | Sign In | Register









Forums

Before using the Webcameron forums, please read our Disclaimer & Acceptable Use Policy.

If you think a post is offensive or unsuitable, please Contact Us with the details.


Title: Nimrod crash proves lack of money for defence is costing lives

ONEMARCUS

Search  

Messages: 312
Registration date: 31/05/2007
Added: 04/12/2007 19:35
David in the wake of the BOI report into the crash of the Nimrod in Afghanistan which showed that 14 members of our armed forces who tragically and needlessly died were let down by the RAF by the MOD and by the Government. Will you now make a commitment now to increase defence spending? And if so by how much?

Under Labour the MOD is descending into a mess and if it wasn't for the hard work and professionalism of our forces and the good will of their families it would totally collapse. This situation cannot be allowed to continue and the report into the Nimrod crash made some 14 months after they died proves how under funded our forces really are. The replacement for this aircraft the Nimrod MRA4 should have been in service 4 years ago, but due to under funding and poor management of the project by the MOD and BAES it isn't and this together with the under funding of the maintenance of the present aircraft the Nimrod MRA2 has lead to this tragic accident. I cannot imagine how the families of the men killed in this accident must feel it would be bad enough knowing that your loved one was killed by the enemy to know that they instead died because of the failings of the MOD must really hit them. Our regards must go out to them at this time. Compensation can never cover their loss.

Will someone resign over this? Will you be calling for them to resign?

Lizabeth

Search  

Messages: 1406
Registration date: 12/10/2006
Added: 05/12/2007 11:18
WHATEVER HAPPENS IT WILL SADLY NOT BRING BACK THOSE BRAVE MEN

Roverdc

Search  

Messages: 446
Registration date: 12/03/2007
Added: 05/12/2007 20:13
Given that Blair was trying to get a ministerial aircraft because he knew the RAF planes to be old and unreliable shouldn't both he and Gordon Brown be prosecuted? Rail bosses have been for negligence that led to fatal accidents so how come they are not. Is there one rule for private sector chiefs and a different one for politicians?
Neither can pass the buck to the RAF chiefs as by law they are not allowed to raise the issue of inadequate equipment publicly until after they leave office though they have pushed their luck on this point in saying as much as they did before this particular crash.
The RAF are using the same type of planes I travelled in on my first charter flight and I am now at retiring age and so should these planes be.

Last edited by: Roverdc on 05/12/2007 20:16
ONEMARCUS

Search  

Messages: 312
Registration date: 31/05/2007
Added: 05/12/2007 23:00
Was strange that Liam Fox didn't lead the Conservatives response to yesterdays statement, but the question posed were fitting for the occasion.

Hopeully now the Conservatives will make a committment to ensure Defence funding is increased if they form the next government and push this government to increase it. This is needed to ensure that the penny pintching that lead to the poor maintenance on this aircraft will not continue. Also they must ensure that any public inquiry on this matter is not dragged out, they can take up to 4 years. If this happens here all those involved will have moved on and the Nimrod MR2 will have been replaced by the Nimro MRA4.

No nothing can unfortunately bring these brave men back but not only do their famalies need answers but those who are currently flying in the Nimrod aircrfat and other ageing RAF aircraft need to know this will not happen to them.

Vespasian

Search  

Messages: 622
Registration date: 09/03/2007
Added: 06/12/2007 09:28
Scrap trident - piece of useless junk that is going to eat up just about every penny of the defence budget.

Be great though!! we'll have these cute wee subs with their dinky little missiles that will never be used - won't be able to afford the crews for them though - maybe we could recruit some Poles or Bulgarians to man the ships after all they're cheap!

ONEMARCUS

Search  

Messages: 312
Registration date: 31/05/2007
Added: 06/12/2007 20:30
Trident is many years away the money is needed now not in 10 to 15 years.

Vespasian

Search  

Messages: 622
Registration date: 09/03/2007
Added: 06/12/2007 22:35
Don't get me wrong Marcus I'm very much on your side. Point being is that the services are having to make cuts now in order for the procurment of this hunk of junk to go ahead.

Marcus - you mentioned the MRA4 - let's explore that for a second. In service date is slipping as we speak probably going to be 2012 and here's the thing - how many from the original order are actually going to be flying? 12 from the original 21 order?

Trident and the Vanguard replacements (along with the carrier programmes) their costings start ramping up around 2009 and peak in 2016 and 2022

Do you think that we are going to be able to afford these shinny wee toys?

The military is in a mess - the RAF Chief, for example, hasn't got the guts to come out and smash his fist on the table say "over-stretch" to the MOD!

scrubsupwell

Search  

Messages: 733
Registration date: 18/11/2006
Added: 07/12/2007 21:13
We are really at No 5 in the world league of defence spending behind Russia and slightly ahead of France.

DB's calculations are misleading (on the left), the more accurate and sophisticated (purchasing power method) PPP calculations are on the right.

You have no rights to post to this category
You can view topics and posts in this forum
You can't create topics in this forum
You can't reply to topics in this forum
You can't edit your posts in this forum
You can't delete your posts in this forum
You can't moderate this forum




FAQ | Contact | Sitemap | Privacy Policy | Disclaimer | Imprint | Credits
clementina