Posted on 06/15/2011 7:37:48 AM PDT by george76
As senior Naval officers back First Sea Lord Admiral Sir Mark Stanhope's criticisms of the ability of the Navy to fight in Libya, Commander John Muxworthy, who sailed to the Falklands with the Royal Navy Task Force, looks at the ignominious end of a symbol of the once-mighty British fleet.
The image is a poignant symbol of Britain’s rapid decline as a maritime power. With her metallic carcass exposed, the once mighty aircraft carrier HMS Invincible languishes in a Turkish port, being broken up for scrap. The ship was once the pride of the Royal Navy, a hero of the Falklands War and a veteran of other conflicts from Iraq to Yugoslavia.
But now, as Britain’s naval heritage is obliterated by an irresponsible Coalition Government, she faces an utterly degrading end.
What makes the image all the more shaming is how it reflects the profound concerns of First Sea Lord Admiral Sir Mark Stanhope, who said this week that Britain’s defences will be at risk if the war in Libya drags on, because our naval fleet can operate there for only another 90 days before it has to make serious cuts in firepower elsewhere.
HMS Invincible, launched in 1977, may have been coming to the end of her life, though with a refit she could have stayed in service for years to come. But her demise is part of a wider pattern of brutal defence cuts that have left Britain dangerously vulnerable. When I joined the Navy in 1960, we had 12 aircraft carriers, along with 30 cruisers and 150 frigates and destroyers.
Today, we have just 19 frigates, no major warships, and a single aircraft carrier, Illustrious, which can carry only helicopters and has no deck for fixed wing-aircraft.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Preservation Attempts (1990-2002)It was designated as a National Historic Landmark on 29 June 1990.[2] The ship spent most of the 1990s tied to a dock in New Orleans. The private groups attempting to preserve her as a memorial were unable to pay creditors, so, on 10 September 1999, the ship was auctioned off by the U.S. Marshals Service to Sabe Marine Salvage. Its designation as a National Historic Landmark was withdrawn on 7 August 2001. Scrapping of the hulk was completed in 2002. Her island, a small stub of metal and glass, was preserved and is on exhibit at the National Naval Aviation Museum aboard NAS Pensacola in Florida since 2007, the last relic of over 100 light and escort carriers of World War II.
You left off the </sarc> tag.
The EU, and GB military has been a paper tiger for years. You implicitly but completely rely on U.S. Military might to keep you from being overrun (by whom is a different thread).
The plain text of the article speaks to the issue.
OR, you can start spending the % of GDP on the military the US does. Or even a teeny tiny fraction thereof.
>>If they ever do get some F-35’s, what are they going to do with them?<<
Use them as multi-million dollar paperweights. You roll them onto the tarmac and they can hold down a ream or so.
That is certainly what the US will do, assuming any can possibly be actually deployed given the massive mission creep they have experienced.
Is there a website for the NNAM at Pensacola..like to see a pic of the restored bridge..
Man they aren’t fooling around there. She’s only been in the breakers yard since April from what I could find.
Click on pic for past Navair pings.
Post or FReepmail me if you wish to be enlisted in or discharged from the Navair Pinglist.
The only requirement for inclusion in the Navair Pinglist is an interest in Naval Aviation.
This is a medium to low volume pinglist.
Tearing something apart goes ten times the speed of building it.
Check this country’s economy for the econ version of that theorem.
‘The EU, and GB military has been a paper tiger for years.’
Britain has the fourth highest military spending in the world. You confuse dilution of British power (due to end of empire, military cuts and other financial and political reasons) with us being a paper tiger. Britain may not have the military power it once had, but we still punch well above our military weight and to say we are a paper tiger reliant on America is a nonsense and hyperbole.
How can we be a paper tiger when we are your biggest ally, be it the Gulf, Iraq, Afghanistan, Bosnia?. Think of the men and machines brought to bear in those conflicts. Second only to the US. Were we a paper tiger needing US help in 1982?.
And in 2011, who is leading the NATO op in Libya?. Who has just sent five more ships there?. Who has a Royal Navy Cougar Taskforce sitting in the Eastern Med waiting to reinforce that operation?.
‘You implicitly but completely rely on U.S. Military might to keep you from being overrun (by whom is a different thread).’
Drivel. Take every last US plane and soldier out of Britain tonight and we can defend ourselves perfectly fine. And neither are we reliant on American support for any operation beyond our borders. Another myth, once held even by too many British, let alone Americans. Dont get me wrong, I am happy when you are at our side in war, but dont think we actually ‘need’ you in that way.
And I will give the tiresome and woefully ignorant allusion to dhimmitude the contempt it deserves.
You seem to have a lack of knowledge of what Britain can still bring to the military table, if I am being frank.
However, I don't think its really fair to lump the UK in with the rest of the EU so dismissively. Over the decades since WW2 our defence spending, % of GDP, while not as great as that of the US, has certainly been substantially higher than that of any of the other European powers, and we have consistently used our armed forces in conjunction with, and in support of, the US far more than any of them.
Sad to see a proud fighting ship end up like that.
Mike
We can always sell them CV-67 as a stopgap. I’m sure it can handle Harriers. :-)
Various posters are making interesting comments. From a little Internet searching I find that in 2011, the U.K.’s defense spending (total) is running almost 2.96% of GDP, and in 1985 it was running almost 5.28% of GDP.
http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/downchart_ukgs.php?chart=30-total&view=1&year=&state=UK
Other, sources give slightly lower figures, for example, Wikipedia shows the U.K. in 2010 at 2.7% of the 2009 GDP, while the U.S. is currently at 4.7%.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures
This source shows the UK at 2.5%...
http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/AboutDefence/Organisation/KeyFactsAboutDefence/DefenceSpending.htm
However, there may be another way to look at it. I enjoy alternate history and speculation now and then, so, let’s assume:
The UK, in 2011, for whatever reasons, decides it needs to install a gov’t to its liking in Libya. It has minimal to no assistance from the U.S. or other NATO allies.
Libya never unloaded it’s WMD’s. (Dubya didn’t scare them enough in 2002-2003, perhaps?) Perhaps it will use them through 3rd parties.
At the same time, Argentina sees it’s new chance in the Falklands. And, the Scottish National Party (now a majority in Scotland) pushes through legislation for a referendum on Independence from the UK.
How does this play out? Obviously, the UK “can” defeat Libya and Argentina at the same time. But will it? What happens to UK support of the US in other places? What is the cost to the UK? And will some additional party take advantage of the situation?
Alternately, one can speculate that Libya did not actually turn over ALL it’s WMD’s...
We are after all sort of looking at the argument, “Where would the UK be without the US?”
I'm sure it can. But the problem is that GB already decommissioned all of their Harriers as well. :-(
My prayers are with you, my cousins across the pond.
Thank you.
And America and Americans are a great country and peoples and will survive four years of Obama.
Thank you for the encouraging word. Please God, let it be so.
Thank you for the encouraging word. Please God, let it be so.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.