Micky

Exactly - so why do you want to have ground forces that are capable only of operating at home...???!!!! Edit: Sorry - did you mean only Naval interests are the world over by the use of 'our'?

So in short, a UK defence force. Smaller Army, Navy and Air Force, confined to the shores of UK territories, with commitments to no other countries. You could - but a highly, highly dangerous strategy. We would have no military allies - we would have to be solely self sufficient in the whole of the defence arena. Don't forget this is not just about providing manpower to the 3 forces, but also equipment, resources, R & D, production and above all military expertise. If we adopted this route, probably one of the most reverred set of military forces would decay within years. We would find ourselves miles behind countries who remain in strong allegiance with each other - in short, our Armd Forces would decay to the point of probably being unfit for purpose. Even to defend just our own UK shores, god forbid any support to British dependancies. Ultimately, going it alone, is...... don't know - really wouldn't want to try it.

But if that is the case - why not configure our Air Force and Navy in the same manner - let them patrol only our shores and airspace.

I don't actually want to get into any protracted debate on this, but fwiw - my views, and some are quite radical. Many have posted that the death penalty is not an effective detterent. I don't care, I don't even think it's relevant, it's like saying any prison custodial sentence is not a deterent. Is an ASBO or Tag a deterrent - no, probably not. So why (in part) do I agree with Alpine? Simply becuase I want a form of punishment that fits the crime and I want justice (you can call it revenge too if you like - I wouldn't argue against it). I know that if any heinous crime were committed against any of my children or family, I would want the very, very worst for the perpertrator(s). A man in a Manchester street is enjoying a night out, a complete stranger walks up to him and shoots him in the head for no apparent reason. If the stranger is found guilty (without doubt) then he should be taken back to the street and shot in the head. I care not if he is a drug addict, if he comes from a poor background or whatever - the basis of right from wrong is known to all. So in short, I agree with Alpine - there is a place for the death penalty. I agree with Delldays & Turkish - use when there is no doubt (selective). I agree with Duckhunter - current sentencing policy for serious crimes are pathetic. And just to add to the controversy, once fair trial has been conducted, I would allow the victims to decide the ultimate fate of the perpertrator. If they want to forgive and grant clemency - fair play, if not then sobeit.

Granted they do. So if you take the Army out of this particular conflict - how much more fire power will you in the RN and RAF have to provide. I'm not knocking any of the services commitments or role, far from it. By the very nature of most modern conflicts, it is obvious that the Army will bear the brunt of committment in terms of numbers required on the front line. Do you really believe that it would be better that we withdraw our ground forces to a wholey home guard role, while expecting our navy and airforce to remain fully committed? Would it make your life (or that of the RAF) that much easier operating purely with foriegn nationals on the ground with no experience of UK force doctrine? When I think about it, Alpines plan would've made my 25+ years probably a whole lot easier, but seriously if you think it would work, you'd just as well go the whole hog, get rid of the Regular Army altogeather and perhaps let the TA take over.

I can (sort of) understand you point - but most of this is quite idealistic in the grand scheme of things. What people tend to forget is that we need NATO as much as NATO needs us. Yes we do appear to give a whole lot more than we take, but as you have pointed out - we are an island and as such, in major conflict we would be quite vulnerable. Look back at the last war - without US intervention, who knows. Interservice rivalry will always exist, it was only a couple of years ago that amalgamation of the RAF into the Army (or even the Navy..!) was being being seriously considered - probably none of the 3 services wants such drastic action. As for your tactics, of providing air or naval power only - well, having 'been there, seen it and etc etc...', it wont (and shouldn't) happen. What you are extensively saying is that we decline to join you at the sharp end. With the expertise that we have in both our RAF and Navy, we can (and do) win superiority in many hostile areas, but if you don't put troops on the ground you only have that advantage for as long as the shells are falling or the fighters are flying. Without committing to ground troops our resolve to being part of NATO (or any other defence force) would be, quite rightly, severely questioned. Slashing the Army in half, and basing your global commitment to air and sea power only is fine, so long as when the shyte hits the fan either here in the UK or one of it's protectorates you don't expect too much outside assistance.

I disagree with Alpine - to an extent. As somebody who served in the Army for over 25 years and who still works with the Army - there is absolutely no way that it can be termed as anywhere near 'excessive', given current operational commitments. Perhaps if we disassociate ourself from world affairs and renege most of our NATO commitments (as other national forces do), we may be left with a UK defence force that could be termed excessive. Operational tours of duty are now more frequent than at any time since the last world war, soldiers are spending more and more time on both Operational training and deployment in operational theatres. This is affecting both morale and retention rates. With all due respect to our other arms and services, who do a fukin great job, many of the Army personnel are literally in the front line - exposed to very real danger every day. I work largely in Germany, during my last visit before Xmas I came across one young soldier who had recently been casevaced from Afghanistan having only been in theatre for 2 weeks and was caught in a double IED blast. Luckily he sustained only minor shrapnel injuries, although who knows of the mental scars. Our Armed Forces are stretched, make no mistake about it - but believe me - the Army certainly is no better off than either the RN or RAF.

Only two, god Im getting old.... Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk

Adam Laallaana http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teletubbies

Vital words, could, meaning may, but then again may not. A day or so, maybe tomorrow, maybe never. Personally I think it's time for: http://uk.linkedin.com/pub/marc-jackson/6/168/467 Has all the attributes, connections and business nounce to sort PFC out. Does distressed business, does football clubs, does Russians - surprised nobody has checked him out.

I believe they were used in the context that any poster who failed to agree with the orginators own view point; should be shot is a (shows the intellect of) goldfish As I said before, rude and offensive. Possibly it is just culmination of continued such comments which when aggregated makes the overall effect worse. Either way, for me it's pretty needless.

That must be some hangover.... I think that was Jon not Neil. Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk

I have to say that he always appears very defensive to me, nothing and nobody connected with LFC can be, or are, in the wrong. Perhaps that is a good trait, I don't know, but I do know that it does not endear me to him one bit. Great player, no doubt, but can't be done with the guy now.

I was going to post yesterday but thought it unworthwhile. I wrote a list: Queens Shot Moron Cock A goldfish Idiot Just some of the labels / ideas that were bandied about yesterday, just because some posters had differing views to others. It's very offensive and pretty much puts me off wanting to interact here anymore. Very good post btw.

Somebody on here recently said that we, the fans, over-analyse every detail of the club, can you believe that...!!!!????

But we is top of the league after our worst run in a year - yes, still top of the league. The turning point today - RL's sending off - which your man did his oscar impression to bring about. After that yes, you were in the game. If this gives you cause to gloat feel free - we is still, even now as I look, top of the league.

I am for real. Yet another poster who wants to comment on what I have not said. I did not say: NA has done nothing to prove himself so far. In fact reading your post, I did not say any of the things that you say I did. But I remain the moron allegedley. Thanks for replying to my post though, and quoting what I didn't say. Nice one.

You is very good at writing things that other people did not say. I said none of the things that you have in your one line response - none. Go on - tell me why I am beyond words - I'm intriqued. Or, you could go and read some of my other posts where I explain my reasoning and express my continued support for NA. Whatever though.

I agree Rog - but expectations have now changed - don't you want promotion?

Why laugh, Geof is exactly right. I'll give NA the benefit of the doubt, but he needs to deliver, so do the players. Talking up the 'positives' after a defeat is toutamount to making excuses. We need to get back to winning ways quickly - don't see anything to laugh about really.

So long as he delivers. It's very easy to pick out the positives, managers are paid to do so - look at SK at Blackburn, been doing it for ages. The difficult bit, is looking at the negatives and putting them right. Yes we had some bad luck by the sound of things, but teams that win titles do so by overcoming their bad luck - not capitulating 3 nil.

I think you'll find that's rather a simplistic view. It might have contributed, but we should have been more professional.

Problem is RL is the best striker in this league - therefore very difficult to replace.

Well I think it's fairly obvious now that we have major problems - the bus has not stalled, it is stuck in reverse.