Figures reveal cost of new aircraft carriers decision

14 Sep 2010

Quote by essex34m
Fair point, well presented.
I had looked at simple fatalities, which showed the Finns to have lost less troops than Russia.

But going back to the original point and looking at these two factions........
The Finns were the best infantry and had the best tactics. Yet they still lost. A shame really, but being selfish I am glad they did as Britain was just about to send troops to aid the Finns. Thankfully we never went to war with the Russians.
Dave_Notts

14 Sep 2010

In answer to the original post
As a lifelong pacifist I find myself in a dilemma in that it's against my beliefs to prepare for agression BUT......the economic shambles that exists makes the subsequent boost to the economy pretty important.
Thinking longer term.....without this investment.....and assuming some of the dire forecasts for the economy could prove accurate....I'm also fearful that riots ....or worse.....could be the end result if such investments are NOT made.
As it seems unlikely that this present government are likely to invest in such projects to the scale where it would have a significant impact on any strife.......Where do I go to follow my principles???

14 Sep 2010

Quote by Dave__Notts

Fair point, well presented.
I had looked at simple fatalities, which showed the Finns to have lost less troops than Russia.

But going back to the original point and looking at these two factions........
The Finns were the best infantry and had the best tactics. Yet they still lost. A shame really, but being selfish I am glad they did as Britain was just about to send troops to aid the Finns. Thankfully we never went to war with the Russians.Dave_Notts
Ah, but what if, in 1939 Mr A Hitler had been real clever and said to Joe Stalin, "we'll both invade Poland together on 1st Sept"............then Hitler didn't !!!
Imagine if the Soviet Army had stormed into Poland, would Britain and France have declared war on the USSR? Then Mr Hitler could have come in on our side !!
John

14 Sep 2010

Quote by Geordiecpl2001

Fair point, well presented.
I had looked at simple fatalities, which showed the Finns to have lost less troops than Russia.

But going back to the original point and looking at these two factions........
The Finns were the best infantry and had the best tactics. Yet they still lost. A shame really, but being selfish I am glad they did as Britain was just about to send troops to aid the Finns. Thankfully we never went to war with the Russians.Dave_Notts
Ah, but what if, in 1939 Mr A Hitler had been real clever and said to Joe Stalin, "we'll both invade Poland together on 1st Sept"............then Hitler didn't !!!
Imagine if the Soviet Army had stormed into Poland, would Britain and France have declared war on the USSR? Then Mr Hitler could have come in on our side !!
John
The one thing that makes me wonder is why did we declare war on Germany who invaded from the west on 1st September but did not declare war on Russia who invaded from the east on 17th September 1939.
Dave_Notts

15 Sep 2010

Quote by Dave__Notts

Fair point, well presented.
I had looked at simple fatalities, which showed the Finns to have lost less troops than Russia.

But going back to the original point and looking at these two factions........
The Finns were the best infantry and had the best tactics. Yet they still lost. A shame really, but being selfish I am glad they did as Britain was just about to send troops to aid the Finns. Thankfully we never went to war with the Russians.Dave_Notts
Ah, but what if, in 1939 Mr A Hitler had been real clever and said to Joe Stalin, "we'll both invade Poland together on 1st Sept"............then Hitler didn't !!!
Imagine if the Soviet Army had stormed into Poland, would Britain and France have declared war on the USSR? Then Mr Hitler could have come in on our side !!
John
The one thing that makes me wonder is why did we declare war on Germany who invaded from the west on 1st September but did not declare war on Russia who invaded from the east on 17th September 1939.
Dave_Notts
Because by 17th September Polish collapse was a fait accompli so Stalin could argue he was only securing his Eastern Border.

15 Sep 2010

Quote by awayman

Fair point, well presented.
I had looked at simple fatalities, which showed the Finns to have lost less troops than Russia.

But going back to the original point and looking at these two factions........
The Finns were the best infantry and had the best tactics. Yet they still lost. A shame really, but being selfish I am glad they did as Britain was just about to send troops to aid the Finns. Thankfully we never went to war with the Russians.Dave_Notts
Ah, but what if, in 1939 Mr A Hitler had been real clever and said to Joe Stalin, "we'll both invade Poland together on 1st Sept"............then Hitler didn't !!!
Imagine if the Soviet Army had stormed into Poland, would Britain and France have declared war on the USSR? Then Mr Hitler could have come in on our side !!
John
The one thing that makes me wonder is why did we declare war on Germany who invaded from the west on 1st September but did not declare war on Russia who invaded from the east on 17th September 1939.
Dave_Notts
Because by 17th September Polish collapse was a fait accompli so Stalin could argue he was only securing his Eastern Border.
That was the excuse the British Gov came up with to explain it away from the link up there ^^^^^.
We know now and they did then this was not true.........so why didn't they?
Gutless? Or knew they could never take on the USSR?
Dave_Notts

15 Sep 2010

Speed of defence review 'could put operations at risk'