‘65,000 Tonnes Of Diplomacy’: London Declares That British Militarism Is Good Militarism

Donate

While the mainstream media and the Western diplomacy continue blaming and shaming China and Russia for their alleged “militarism” and “hostile” actions, members of the US-led bloc continue their push for an escalation of the international situation.

At the Euronaval 2018 naval defense exhibition which started on October 22 in Paris, Steve Allen, assistant chief of staff, carrier strike and aviation with the British Navy, openly refered to the British sole aircaft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth as “65,000 tonnes of diplomacy”.

However, during the speech, the British military official complained that the carrier strike group will not be fully ready until 2020 adding that the wider air wing is still needed for the aircraft carrier. Allen added that the UK is currently seeking to get two carrier strike groups: one led by HMS Queen Elizabeth and another one by HMS Prince of Wales. When they are combat ready, the UK will be capable of keeping at lest one carrier strike group deployed on a constant basis.

HMS Prince of Wales is the second Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carrier. It’s currently under construction. The warship is set to be commissioned in 2020.

The Allen remarks come amid the growing tesions between the US-led bloc, especially the US and the UK, and Russia. Recently, US President Donald Trump officially announced that the US will soon withraw from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty with Russia. Reports also appeared that Washington is planning to abandon New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty with Moscow. Tensions in the diplomatic rhetorics between the sides also reached the pre-war level.

Donate

SouthFront

Do you like this content? Consider helping us!

  • Red Pilled ThoughtCrimes

    It is a really big and convenient target

    • Sinbad2

      I don’t think it has any planes.

      • Red Pilled ThoughtCrimes

        nope, or frigates to help protect it

        • You can call me Al

          Please, shush. I want to defend my Country; but I have nothing – so please shut up for now…. please.

          • Tommy Jensen

            Who needs planes when you can bulldoze all other ships.

          • Promitheas Apollonious

            you are not alone in this inner conflict brother. Solving this problem is easy if you think it the correct way. Forget the politicians and the errand boys of NWO that run our countries and think how much you love your mother land, then in your mind understand all of us may have different motherlands, but that does not make us enemies in order to defend them, on the contrary, we are brothers in arms each fighting the enemy from within the gates.

            The NWO errand boys agenda is to make you the patriot, hate all your country and what it stand for and corrupt the patriot within. Make you see motherland and politicians as one, therefore hate all your country and they stand for. Losing your will to fight against them and by extension for your motherlands freedom, from them. Dont fall in the trap they do not represent our motherlands, we do.

          • You can call me Al

            Cheers mate; I shall take some time thinking about that. I always have and will love my Country, but the insanity that surrounds us all due to the numpties in charge drives me insane with anger.

          • Promitheas Apollonious

            remember when I spoke about brits and english men? Many of us went to Caucasus in the early 2001 some of us lead by our leader that formed us during the war in Cyprus with the turks and until that time in my mind there was no separation about Uk population I used to think them as enemies for what they did with the turks in Cyprus.

            There we been joined by another group of english men lead by a retired SBS major. Both with the same mission. Stopping Soros agents who now are roaming in europe and balkans and ME. Many times during the years we fight there we saved each other ass and that teach me one thing. It them,(globalist mercenaries and armies) and it is us. Patriots who know what is going on and hunted the enemy to stop them before reaching our homelands. There I learned the difference between brits and englishmen by that major who until this day we are more than blood brothers and have cover each others back more than I can remember.

            We manage to clean Caucasus with russian blessing and failed to stop them filling our countries with the scum of the earth. Because of us russia clean the shit they could not themselves as well eliminated all the hot spots created by jesuits and the english outposts in russia as well the rest of the american allegedly human right activists not unlike the famous white helmets in ME.

            It has been a very long fight for many of us but is not over yet only now we dont go to foreign countries each of us chose a territory and we getting who ever want to hear and join us ready for what is coming. Americans think they will fight the russians in europe but what they dont comprehend is us they be fighting and we are ghosts. They understand this the moment they try to go hot. enough said.

          • You can call me Al

            Extremely interesting and in my view accurate comments. Thanks.

          • Red Pilled ThoughtCrimes

            Also Turkey apparently were meant to be contracted to do the servicing on the new F35’s for the next 15 yrs. And USA are refusing to sell Turkey F35’s now because they are buying Russian S-400’s so we dont actually have planes to go with it we can use for the foreseeable future

      • S Melanson

        It is because they are invisible, you know, like the F-35

  • AlexanderAmproz

    What for an waste of money ! ! !

    • John Whitehot

      the argentinians decimated the british fleets by using some rusty A4 skyhawks armed with iron bombs. yes, unguided iron bombs. not to mention when they started using antiship missiles like exocets.

      besides the illegal sinking of the Belgrano, the RN shown all its limits in the Falklands operations, losing a large number of combatants and non-combatants units to an enemy that had only a small aviation and a couple of ww2 subs in its order of battle (which never really entered combat anyway).

      considering the potential of the soviet navy and naval aviation at the time, for the RN to make an independent similar operation against them (without hiding behind three/four USN carrier task forces) would had been suicidal – whatever Margaret Tatcher may have thought back then.

      • Sinbad2

        Argentina also had Mirage’s, the last true old style fighter, not a computer with wings.

        • John Whitehot

          Yep ive always liked the Mirage designs, both the delta wings ones and the f1. The Rafale anyway, is just a “4.5 gen” upgrade of the delta ones.

        • Nexusfast123

          The pilots were brave and performed well

      • Nexusfast123

        Stupid comment. They did not decimate anything. The ships that were sunk were in the main ‘picket’ ships. Put on the edge of the fleet to take the first hits. Sacrificing assets is a ploy in warfare as the objective is to win the overall battle. They bombed the ships in San Carlos but that was pointless as the land forces were already ashore.

        The old tub Belgrano was a direct threat (5in guns and armor) and was in a pincer movement with their clapped out carrier. The carrier would have also been sunk if they had found it. By the way I’m not fan of Thatcher and the f–king stupid move by the moronic fascist Argentinean generals meant that the cow was reelected.

        • Gary Sellars

          Your comment is the stupid one…. The purpose of a picket ship is to give advance warning of incoming aerial threats, not to “take the first hits”. Ships like the HMS Ardent were not “sacrificed”…

        • John Whitehot

          loads of bullshit that don’t even deserve a second wasted in reply.

          next time the Royal Navy goes out, make sure you go on a ‘picket’ ship, then swim back here and tell they weren’t decimated.

          7 ships lost IS massive losses, especially for the self-claimed “second navy of the world” going against an adversary with practically no assets.

          The old tub Belgrano (your definition) was sunk outside the “no-navigation” areas published by the RN.

          It was murdered in cold blood out of the typical disdainful english and tatchers sense for human life of what they perceived as “indigenous”

        • skinner15

          The Atlantic Conveyor was a ship which the picket lines failed to protect, carried a lot of helicopters to the bottom of the Atlantic with it.
          There were a full party of landing forces on the Galahad when she was struck, typical British planning left them as sitting ducks, and the actual picket ships you mention were top of the line destroyers, which were not meant to take hits, but to stop incoming with their advanced weapons.
          The Belgrano was turning for home port when she was sunk. Thatcher needed an easy hit before the Task Force appeared. It was no threat to anyone, a modern British frigate could have dealt with it, along with the rest of the Argentinian navy.

      • Barba_Papa

        Like Nexusfast said, the Argies didn’t decimate the British fleet. Many of their dumb unguided bombs didn’t even detonate because they dropped them from such low altitude that the bombs couldn’t arm themselves, making them inert pieces of iron. Their fuses needed X number of feet to fall in order to arm, they dropped them even lower. Incredibly brave of the pilots, but not very useful. And the reason of course why they flew so suicidally low of course were the British Sea Harriers, of which they were shitting their pants. As they consistently lost in every dogfight with them.

        The only good weapon the Argies had was the French exocet missile, to which the British lacked good counter measures. But they only had a handful of them. And they couldn’t just use them for any attack, for the real targets the Argies wanted to hit were the two British carriers. As even they realized that sinking one of them would win them the war. And the Belgrano was a perfectly good target to sink, even its own captain admitted it as such. And it basically won the Brits the naval war as afterwards the entire Argentine navy ran for home and no longer came out to play.

        Thing was, at the time the Royal Navy just was not designed for this kind of operation. Which was why it was so vulnerable and still lost significant assets. With the end of Empire it was decreed by Whitehall that from now on the role of the Royal Navy was no longer Brittania rules the waves, everywhere, but to focus on patrolling the Atlantic and anti-submarine warfare come the 3rd Battle of the Atlantic when WW3 would come. That’s why the main role and complement of the carriers was not to carry as much Sea Harriers as possible, but anti-submarine helicopters mostly, with a handful of Sea Harriers to defend against Russian aerial attacks. I doubt that there were any plans to sail a Royal Navy taskforce up to Murmansk. Hell, the whole role of carrier aviation had been under threat from successive British governments since the 1960’s. The Royal Navy even had to call the Invincible class a through deck cruiser as the term aircraft carrier was too dangerous in Whitehall. And the Thatcher government was already trying to get rid of them prior to the Falklands war, with Australia being in the running to buy HMS Invincible. The Falklands war, and the realization that any future war could be more then just the Third Battle of the Atlantic saved British carrier aviation and led us to the extreme opposite today, where the Royal Navy now has two very large carriers, and not much else.

        Because one thing still hasn’t changed very much since the Falklands war. British politicians still don’t like to pay much for its armed forces. So in order to get something new and big, something else has to be sacrificed.

        • John Whitehot

          same bullshit as nexusfast, so the answer for his comment applies.

    • jorge

      No, the billions went to someone pockett, what was destroyed, went out of the circulation or currency, was the missile, don’t make confusion between circulation of money and trips of missiles.

      • AlexanderAmproz

        Nothing has changed or was invented since WW1
        when the Medias owners and weapon dealer was
        corrupting in All the Countries the War Ministers
        to sell the same weapons.
        In France Serge Dassault building the Rafale own
        Le Figaro, a major Newspaper with his Bernard Henri Levy
        favorite Journalist, more war = more business !
        Marcel & Serge Dassault reputation was to have been
        Corrupt specialists !
        =====================================
        https://mises.org/library/merchant-death-basil-zaharoff

        The Merchant of Death: Basil Zaharoff
        08/24/2007John T. Flynn

        If the Lord God Jehovah had not created Basil Zaharoff, some novelist sooner or later would certainly have got around to the job. Indeed, it is by no means certain that Zaharoff, as we have him, is not the joint product of God and the fiction writers.

        Lieutenant Colonel Walter Guinness, member for Bury St.Edmonds, committed the blunder against history of referring to Zaharoff in the House of Commons in 1921 as the “Mystery Man of Europe.” Having fixed upon him that fascinating label, the figure of Zaharoff became thereafter a costumer’s dummy upon which the news caricaturists of Europe draped whatever garments would vindicate his reputation.

        Mysterious indeed he is and still more mysterious he became at the hands of the sensational news portrait painters. The mystery begins with his birth. A French biographer, Roger Menevee? records that he was born in Moughliou, or Mugla, on the Anatolian coast. But a German, Robert Neumann, asserts that Zaharoff, testifying in a London court as a young man, said he was born in the Tatavla or poor section of Constantinople, and he notes that the Mugla nativity is attested by an affidavit of a Greek priest made forty-two years after the event and was based upon memory.

        It was never known with complete certainty to what country he owed allegiance. He was a Greek, born in Turkey, who lived in Paris. His right to the ribbon of the Grand Cross of the Legion of Honor was questioned in the Chamber of Deputies and M. Clemenceau had to assure the Chamber that “M. Zaharoff is a Frenchman.” But also he was throughout his life the guiding genius of a great British armament concern, acted as a British agent, was a Knight of the Bath, known in England as Sir Basil Zaharoff.

        Journalists said he spoke fluently fourteen languages — which is probably an extravagant exaggeration. They reported how he had confided to a written record the story of his life, filling fifty-eight volumes which he ordered to be burned at his death, while others told how he had himself destroyed the record, two days being consumed in reducing it to ashes in the furnace of his Paris home. Extravagant tales were told of his habits, his amours, his dinners, and the exotic dishes brought fresh by plane from immense distances for his table. But, in fact, the reporters and the historians have produced but little about the personal life and affairs of the man. Searching the extensive but empty records, one fails to discover any documents or letters or speeches or records or meetings or conferences or instances in which the man is actually present. Always one hears that he is somewhere in the background, off in the shadows, pulling the strings, supplying the stratagems and the money.

        Yet it is certain that he remains the most considerable figure in that feverish world of the munitions makers that has had so much advertisement since the Great War. Only a few names take first rank among this dubious company — old Alfred Krupp, the cannon king of Essen, the Schneiders of Creusot, Thomas Vickers, the English gun maker of Sheffield, Skoda, du Pont de Nemours, the American powder king, Colt and Winchester and Remington and Maxim. They were all, as Messrs. Englebrecht and Hanighen have called them, “Merchants of Death.” But the mightiest “merchant” among them, the man who played the largest role in the “merchandising” of munitions, the greatest market maker, was Basil Zaharoff.

        It was his melancholy good fortune to come upon the scene when the world went in for arms on an unprecedented scale and it was he who, more than any other man, developed the international market for arms. He did not invent it, to be sure. Old Alfred Krupp had played off Turkish orders against his native Prussia when Zaharoff was a mere fireman in Tatavla. And long before either of them — centuries before — old Andries Bicker, Burgomaster of Amsterdam, had built and supplied and provisioned and even financed a complete navy for Spain when the Spanish king was waging war upon Holland. He then explained to the outraged Dutch that if Holland had not armed the Spanish enemy, the Danes would have done it and reaped the profit.

        But Zaharoff played a leading, if not the leading, role in that strange world comedy of the arms makers leading the double life of chauvinists and internationalists. They gave us the spectacle of Boers mowing down English regiments with Vickers’ pom-poms, Prussian surgeons picking out of Prussian wounded Austrian shrapnel fired by Krupp’s cannon, French poilus massacred by shot poured out of guns made in Le Creusot, English Tommies killed by weapons produced by Armstrong and Vickers, and American ships sent to the bottom by U-boats built on models supplied by American submarine builders. Zaharoff was the master of what one biographer has called the “principle of incitement,”under which war scares were managed, enemies created for nations,airplanes sold to one nation and antiaircraft guns to her neighbors, submarines to one and destroyers to another. He did what the cigarette people did, what the liquor industry, the beauty industry did — created a demand for his merchandise. The armament industry became a game of international politics, the arms salesman a diplomatic provocateur, the munitions magnates of all nations partners in cartels, combines, consolidations; exchanging plans, secrets, patents. He was the greatest of all the salesmen of death, and, as one commentator has observed, if you would see his monument, look about you at the military graveyards of Europe.

        II.

        Zacharias Basileios Zacharias — later to be known as Basil Zaharoff — was born October 6, 1849, apparently in Mugla, near the Turkish capital of Angora. His people were Greeks who had lived in Constantinople, fled to Odessa during the Turkish persecutions in 1821, returned to Mugla, and then, when Basileios was three years old, took up their home again in the Tatavla or poor district of Constantinople. The boy went to school until he was sixteen, when some disaster to his father forced him to go to work. He worked, we are told, as a fireman, a guide, a moneychanger. There is more than a hint that these early years were passed amid rough surroundings and that this impulsive and somewhat lawless boy — like one of our prominent labor racketeers, to use his own explanation of his twisted ethics — suffered from lack of “bringing-up.”

  • Rodney Loder

    When the Prince of Wales and Repulss went down in the same engagement that was the day of the 10 th.of December 1941 Churchill was shocked to his core.

    In 1922 agreement was reached to limit Battle Ship guns to 16 inches, this was like ICBM and Cruise Missile treaties today, totally meaningless, technology leapfrogged Battleships and inbuilt obsolescence continued in politics and shipyards.

    How can there be a totally committed War with Russia China Iran whenntherwwoul by on history to record it ?.

    The only relevant engagements to be considered are limited battles.

    Russia has the advantage for about I estimate 3 years before the West can figure out hypersonic missile flight, it isn’t easy, some say Iran has copied the S-300 and come up with a generic brand, that could have been under licence or maybe they haven’t I don’t know.

    • John Whitehot

      “When the Prince of Wales and Repulss went down..”

      It was at the hands of the Japanese, right?

      While reading some article on the British fleet these days, I was thinking that today’s Japanese navy would probably be able to inflict a decisive defeat on it; this based on no other assumptions than basic readiness. Of course it’s only a speculative exercise, which should also take into account many other factors.

      • Sinbad2

        The first time I went to Yokosuka I was staggered by the number of warships Japan had.
        Pearl Harbor is insignificant compared to Yokosuka. The British navy, about 25 warships, a dozen subs, and the rest are supply, minesweepers etc, the Japanese navy would easily be twice the size of the RN.

      • Rodney Loder

        The Sailors serving in the British Navy are not really on a good wicket, my son is in the Australian Navy and knows all about it, the British Sailors are getting ripped off that’s what they keep to themselves they don’t do exchanges very often that’s why.

        I know everything about Navy stuff.

      • S Melanson

        Japanese dive bombers I believe

    • wwinsti

      I’ll quibble with your projection of 3 years as being waaay too optimistic. The wholesale abandoning of the INF treaty could be an attempt at compensation against hypersonic weapons and what they do to US missile shields, or even as a hedge against not being able to build hypersonics at all. By having intermediate ranged weapons on Russia’s border, NATO does even up the response-times problem created by hypersonics at least, otherwise spot on.

    • jorge

      Rodney, the nightmare is even worst, the russians haven’t dare nothing in Syria, they are only simply able to do it.

      • Rodney Loder

        Let Allah rescue whomever He will, I only hope Allah rescues me, everything is dangerous, but I could go to Syria and unite Islam against israel, that way Allah could have a well earned break from looking out for us, people don’t want that because I’m a Stalinist but that’s someone else’s problum not ours because we Commies are mates with Allah and we hasn’t got anything to worry about anyway.

        • jorge

          Lol.

  • Merijn

    I wonder how long it will take for this boat to sink after it is hit by a Kh-47M2 Kinzhal or two….

  • hvaiallverden

    Yup, they still live in some obscure 1700s century alternative reality, like Black Adder, to be more precise.
    The Brits are obsolite and backward, since the 70s the decline is obvious, the facts is, they have nothing compared to just Russia, stone age tech and if it even works is another matter, I have my doubts, the only real power is the Imperial banana republic, and they are as far I can judge, never mind this stuipid childish holloweed nonsense about Star-wars like weapons, pimped to and created for sucking the tits of your own Gov, whom happens to love war, but the truth is, you are decades behind and I think you will remind there, since you have over streatched and is in decline.
    Font even have the manufacturing base your self to go to an mayor war, you gave that to China.
    Within an decade, I guess, an Goose, flying anywhere on this planet can be shoot down with an high speed intercontinental missle, fired from the home land, you dont need high altitute crafts, when everything can be shoot down incl into deep space.
    But never the less, drones or not, bttle field are still won by foot and will stay that way for as far I can imagine even into the distant future unless we of course happens to hang the bankers in the mean time.
    Its to late wankees, this dath ratlings is just pathetic whimping and displaying something that was, but is not here anymore, Brits, the wise way is cooperation, Russia can obliterate you within an half hour, and what could you do, huh, Brits, but hey, lving in the outer rims of the Islands, like the Hebrids, Shetlands, etc, you my not even notice, they are gone.

    Its an peculiare situation where we have missiles that goes so fast, the stopping them with conventional means is just an wet dream, even if the systems programs is jacked up, the physics isnt moving anything faster, because its not or nowhere good enough, an 12.7 is like pissing against an elephant coming against you in full speed, yeah, piss higher, it may blind it.

    The even dumber thing is the hype of ramping up and flushing INF down the drain, and if that came as an surpirce I wounder what rocl have you been under, we are dealing with wankees after all, the Pirates on Potomac, in the Distric of Criminals in the banana republic UssA, ( the Union of Socialistic Scumbags of Amrikkka ), whoms whims is changing faster then dipers on an new born.
    Yea, now they have desided that over killing the planet 50 times isnt enough, so we build weapons to make it certain we can double that, and somehow thi “briliant” strategy is the newest hit in Trumpstan, and the TrumpTards are extatic, more wars, more cash, yeah, even little Norway is just mumbling, to make shure bizzenizze goes as usual.

    Not oftern is the raw stench of stunning hypicrasy so obvious as it has been this last weeks.
    The only good thiing is the steady self imposed decline of the MSM.
    Good riddance.

    peace

  • Tommy Jensen

    65000 tonnes of freedom!

  • jorge

    The good coionialist is an colonialist eliminated, disappeared, vaporized. You, the colonialists, you are going to be all good, no doubt!

  • Sinbad2

    I think it should be renamed, to Queen’s Corgi, because it is a bit of a dog, woof woof.

  • Nexusfast123

    Floating money pit…useless in a war. Probably spend more time helping after disasters. As soon as it becomes obvious that the JSF is a dud it will have no air-arm.

  • gustavo

    Good,, big carriers are big target, much much easier to sink them.

  • Bob

    ‘65,000 tonnes of diplomacy’ is UK hyperbole for a colossal screw-up. The revised long term warplane contingent for this vessel is twelve F-35B’s – slowly bought a couple at a time – leaving a vast amount of below deck redundant hangar space. Or as one RN Officer put it – the revised bare minimum of F-35B’s the UK can actually afford – so that the deck is not embarrassingly empty in photos. Oh, and then there is the issue of the complete lack of sufficient RN protection force. Which finally brings us to newest RN proposal that US Marine aviation are allocated use of this vessel in the short to medium term as a platform for their aircraft….