Putin is acting in Syria with the blessing of the west. They won't or can't admit openly to this but it's true. Why ? It's because Putin is able to do exactly what the west cannot. That is to use whatever force is necessary to defeat IS. The tragic trade off is that the Kurdish Rebels are also in his sights because that's the reason the Russians are primarily there. To prop up Assad and maintain its foothold in the Middle East. The west will go through the motions of condemning but you can be sure that Obama and Putin have already talked about this.
The world is a very sick place.
This in turn increases support of far right populist parties, many of which receive funding from Russia.
Not seen this claim before. Is it claimed by the same source that Russia funded the Ukrainian far right Nazi party that staged a coup against the elected government thus giving Russia the excuse to invade?
Who is making this claim? Have you got a link?
This is just the very first one in the list of the Google search, which really you could have made yourself...
The Independent is owned by Alexander Lebedev.
I am reluctant to continue this debate over the keyboard because I know it is something (Putin and Russia) that you feel strongly about and when people feel strongly about things keyboard debates can spiral quickly out of control. I refer you to my Abuse Flag count! But you are a poster on here who I have the utmost respect for and I suspect we essentially share the same values and world view.
I often have very lively debates/arguments about all sorts of stuff in Greenwich pubs with ShootersHiilGuru. I know that you know him from your work on the trust. Perhaps in one of your future visits the three of us can meet and discuss this issue over a pint.
Putin is acting in Syria with the blessing of the west. They won't or can't admit openly to this but it's true. Why ? It's because Putin is able to do exactly what the west cannot. That is to use whatever force is necessary to defeat IS. The tragic trade off is that the Kurdish Rebels are also in his sights because that's the reason the Russians are primarily there. To prop up Assad and maintain its foothold in the Middle East. The west will go through the motions of condemning but you can be sure that Obama and Putin have already talked about this.
The world is a very sick place.
This in turn increases support of far right populist parties, many of which receive funding from Russia.
Not seen this claim before. Is it claimed by the same source that Russia funded the Ukrainian far right Nazi party that staged a coup against the elected government thus giving Russia the excuse to invade?
Who is making this claim? Have you got a link?
This is just the very first one in the list of the Google search, which really you could have made yourself...
The Independent is owned by Alexander Lebedev.
I am reluctant to continue this debate over the keyboard because I know it is something (Putin and Russia) that you feel strongly about and when people feel strongly about things keyboard debates can spiral quickly out of control. I refer you to my Abuse Flag count! But you are a poster on here who I have the utmost respect for and I suspect we essentially share the same values and world view.
I often have very lively debates/arguments about all sorts of stuff in Greenwich pubs with ShootersHiilGuru. I know that you know him from your work on the trust. Perhaps in one of your future visits the three of us can meet and discuss this issue over a pint.
I'd be happy to do that of course. Never met SHG in person and always wanted to. Well, the next time I'm over will be for the Trust AGM, on 29th Oct. Hope you'll both be there :-)
As soon as I posted, I knew you were going to bring up Lebedev. But if you just Google "Russia funding far right parties" you can take your pick, including the Economist. They conclude there is scant evidence of actual funding, but go into great detail about the political links between the Kremlin and far with parties across Europe. Meanwhile the small allegedly Czech bank mentioned in the Indy article was much discussed here. I share the fears of many well connected Czechs that key Czech politicians are directly on the Kremlin's payroll. You may still feel that this doesn't affect the safety of your journey to work in London. That's exactly how Putin wants you to feel, of course.
I'm 60 and I can't think of one situation in my lifetime that has turned out better because British military has been involved. So I think we should not get involved in Syria or anywhere else in the Middle East unless there is a clear and unambiguous existential threat to the UK. Our efforts should be focused on peace, humanitarian aid and nothing else.
Naive words, in an ideal world I would agree, but not with extreme terrorism.
I'm 60 and I can't think of one situation in my lifetime that has turned out better because British military has been involved. So I think we should not get involved in Syria or anywhere else in the Middle East unless there is a clear and unambiguous existential threat to the UK. Our efforts should be focused on peace, humanitarian aid and nothing else.
Naive words, in an ideal world I would agree, but not with extreme terrorism.
Unless, as I said earlier, there is an existential threat to the uk using military force almost inevitably makes things worse for us. Using the military might not be 'naive' but bolstering the credentials of our leaders wishes to look tough and be at the top table is plain stupid.
Putin is acting in Syria with the blessing of the west. They won't or can't admit openly to this but it's true. Why ? It's because Putin is able to do exactly what the west cannot. That is to use whatever force is necessary to defeat IS. The tragic trade off is that the Kurdish Rebels are also in his sights because that's the reason the Russians are primarily there. To prop up Assad and maintain its foothold in the Middle East. The west will go through the motions of condemning but you can be sure that Obama and Putin have already talked about this.
The world is a very sick place.
This in turn increases support of far right populist parties, many of which receive funding from Russia.
Not seen this claim before. Is it claimed by the same source that Russia funded the Ukrainian far right Nazi party that staged a coup against the elected government thus giving Russia the excuse to invade?
Who is making this claim? Have you got a link?
This is just the very first one in the list of the Google search, which really you could have made yourself...
The Independent is owned by Alexander Lebedev.
I am reluctant to continue this debate over the keyboard because I know it is something (Putin and Russia) that you feel strongly about and when people feel strongly about things keyboard debates can spiral quickly out of control. I refer you to my Abuse Flag count! But you are a poster on here who I have the utmost respect for and I suspect we essentially share the same values and world view.
I often have very lively debates/arguments about all sorts of stuff in Greenwich pubs with ShootersHiilGuru. I know that you know him from your work on the trust. Perhaps in one of your future visits the three of us can meet and discuss this issue over a pint.
I'd be happy to do that of course. Never met SHG in person and always wanted to. Well, the next time I'm over will be for the Trust AGM, on 29th Oct. Hope you'll both be there :-)
As soon as I posted, I knew you were going to bring up Lebedev. But if you just Google "Russia funding far right parties" you can take your pick, including the Economist. They conclude there is scant evidence of actual funding, but go into great detail about the political links between the Kremlin and far with parties across Europe. Meanwhile the small allegedly Czech bank mentioned in the Indy article was much discussed here. I share the fears of many well connected Czechs that key Czech politicians are directly on the Kremlin's payroll. You may still feel that this doesn't affect the safety of your journey to work in London. That's exactly how Putin wants you to feel, of course.
I'm 60 and I can't think of one situation in my lifetime that has turned out better because British military has been involved. So I think we should not get involved in Syria or anywhere else in the Middle East unless there is a clear and unambiguous existential threat to the UK. Our efforts should be focused on peace, humanitarian aid and nothing else.
Naive words, in an ideal world I would agree, but not with extreme terrorism.
Unless, as I said earlier, there is an existential threat to the uk using military force almost inevitably makes things worse for us. Using the military might not be 'naive' but bolstering the credentials of our leaders wishes to look tough and be at the top table is plain stupid.
Im sorry I cant agree, you go in, kick the shit out of them, then do it again and again, until they are no more, make no mistake these people want to do the same to us, no matter how peaceful we think we are. Yes people will die, innocent people will suffer, but if the civilised people of the world do not fight back there will be even more blood shed and murder. Do you really think that extreme terrorists will not blow up an airliner given the chance, no matter how many security checks we put in place its gonna happen again sooner or later, whether we fight back or not. History teaches us about our future, in the 1930's when Hitler was marching across parts of Europe for months, the countries directly effected, wanted and succeeded in suing for peace, common consensus is that more innocent (peaceful) people died then if the other nations had rallied and attacked straight away. Instead we all sat back and look how that turned out. The west must not and will not make the same mistakes ever.
What are these so called Western "values" you purport to be defending. And what in Russian values do you not agree with?
Circa 1980 we could all see clearly the terrible enemy (to what was once Western Values) that is Communism. And the scourge was destroyed. But the Soviet bloc has gone and a very strong Nation State in Russia has emerged while the EU bloc has now emerged and European Nation States have gone - in all but name.
It would be interesting to explore what "being British" means at this juncture too. I am sure a Russian in 2015 has a very clear sense of nationhood and identity and what values he is defending.
What are these so called Western "values" you purport to be defending. And what in Russian values do you not agree with?
Circa 1980 we could all see clearly the terrible enemy (to what was once Western Values) that is Communism. And the scourge was destroyed. But the Soviet bloc has gone and a very strong Nation State in Russia has emerged while the EU bloc has now emerged and European Nation States have gone - in all but name.
It would be interesting to explore what "being British" means at this juncture too. I am sure a Russian in 2015 has a very clear sense of nationhood and identity and what values he is defending.
Sorry , were you aiming your remarks at me specifically? (if so, best to use the quote button)
Any nation that consumes per head 13.5 litres of pure alcohol a year deserves a certain amount of respect. In the same way one respects a cobra
Well I don't know how the cobra population is doing, but Russia is drinking itself to death. The life expectancy of the Russian male is just 64 years. Add to that the declining birthrate and the exodus of many of its most talented young people, you might think a better analogy would be with a very old bear that got into your tent and swigged your cans of beer.
Syria is a great finishing school for Russia's military. Some time soon they're going to be squaring off against NATO troops. I'm very pessimistic about how things are going to turn out in Europe.
Any nation that consumes per head 13.5 litres of pure alcohol a year deserves a certain amount of respect. In the same way one respects a cobra
Well I don't know how the cobra population is doing, but Russia is drinking itself to death. The life expectancy of the Russian male is just 64 years. Add to that the declining birthrate and the exodus of many of its most talented young people, you might think a better analogy would be with a very old bear that got into your tent and swigged your cans of beer.
People living longer and having more babies certainly won't cause us any problems.
Syria is a great finishing school for Russia's military. Some time soon they're going to be squaring off against NATO troops. I'm very pessimistic about how things are going to turn out in Europe.
Syria is a great finishing school for Russia's military. Some time soon they're going to be squaring off against NATO troops. I'm very pessimistic about how things are going to turn out in Europe.
Thank goodness Tony trained our Army boys up in Afghan and Iraq, before cleverly starting the decline in numbers from 102,000 down to 82,000 by 2020, about the time the Russians will start stamping their feet and rattling their sabres. There are more hairdressers in the UK than military personnel.
Incidentally 3 to 4 times as many Brits went to Syria to join ISIS (400 to 500) than joined the TA (170) in 2014
Luckily though, Blair commissioned a second, unnecessary Aircraft Carrier (HMS Prince of Wales) at a cost of £3 billion, yes, thats right £3 billion, before dumping us into financial oblivion but obscene personal wealth, which is most probably going to be put straight into mothballs.
Still Costa Rica dont have an Army and they are doing fine.....
What are these so called Western "values" you purport to be defending. And what in Russian values do you not agree with?
Circa 1980 we could all see clearly the terrible enemy (to what was once Western Values) that is Communism. And the scourge was destroyed. But the Soviet bloc has gone and a very strong Nation State in Russia has emerged while the EU bloc has now emerged and European Nation States have gone - in all but name.
It would be interesting to explore what "being British" means at this juncture too. I am sure a Russian in 2015 has a very clear sense of nationhood and identity and what values he is defending.
Are these the Russian "values" to which you refer?
"If you want to become an Islamic radical and have yourself circumcised, I invite you to come to Moscow," Putin said. "I would recommend that he who does the surgery does it so you'll have nothing growing back, afterward," he added. This was said by Putin to a French journalist. Other Russian values include state sponsored murder (Litvinenko) in another country's capital city, invading other countries (Georgia and Ukraine), corruption, jailing Estonian border guards, flying long range bombers carrying nuclear bombs down the English Channel, jailing opposition politicians on trumped up charges, jailing feminist protestors (Pussy Riot) and then there's the notorious anti-gay laws.
Syria is a great finishing school for Russia's military. Some time soon they're going to be squaring off against NATO troops. I'm very pessimistic about how things are going to turn out in Europe.
Thank goodness Tony trained our Army boys up in Afghan and Iraq, before cleverly starting the decline in numbers from 102,000 down to 82,000 by 2020, about the time the Russians will start stamping their feet and rattling their sabres. There are more hairdressers in the UK than military personnel.
Incidentally 3 to 4 times as many Brits went to Syria to join ISIS (400 to 500) than joined the TA (170) in 2014
Luckily though, Blair commissioned a second, unnecessary Aircraft Carrier (HMS Prince of Wales) at a cost of £3 billion, yes, thats right £3 billion, before dumping us into financial oblivion but obscene personal wealth, which is most probably going to be put straight into mothballs.
Still Costa Rica dont have an Army and they are doing fine.....
Not going to get into an argument about it but I think you will find the cuts in numbers of armed servicemen has accelerated under Cameron.
Syria is a great finishing school for Russia's military. Some time soon they're going to be squaring off against NATO troops. I'm very pessimistic about how things are going to turn out in Europe.
Thank goodness Tony trained our Army boys up in Afghan and Iraq, before cleverly starting the decline in numbers from 102,000 down to 82,000 by 2020, about the time the Russians will start stamping their feet and rattling their sabres. There are more hairdressers in the UK than military personnel.
Incidentally 3 to 4 times as many Brits went to Syria to join ISIS (400 to 500) than joined the TA (170) in 2014
Luckily though, Blair commissioned a second, unnecessary Aircraft Carrier (HMS Prince of Wales) at a cost of £3 billion, yes, thats right £3 billion, before dumping us into financial oblivion but obscene personal wealth, which is most probably going to be put straight into mothballs.
Still Costa Rica dont have an Army and they are doing fine.....
Not going to get into an argument about it but I think you will find the cuts in numbers of armed servicemen has accelerated under Cameron.
No, it has continued fairly steadily, but saying Cameron is as bad as Blair is missing the point.
£3billion buys a lot of hospitals though, which is pretty much unarguable
Syria is a great finishing school for Russia's military. Some time soon they're going to be squaring off against NATO troops. I'm very pessimistic about how things are going to turn out in Europe.
Thank goodness Tony trained our Army boys up in Afghan and Iraq, before cleverly starting the decline in numbers from 102,000 down to 82,000 by 2020, about the time the Russians will start stamping their feet and rattling their sabres. There are more hairdressers in the UK than military personnel.
Incidentally 3 to 4 times as many Brits went to Syria to join ISIS (400 to 500) than joined the TA (170) in 2014
Luckily though, Blair commissioned a second, unnecessary Aircraft Carrier (HMS Prince of Wales) at a cost of £3 billion, yes, thats right £3 billion, before dumping us into financial oblivion but obscene personal wealth, which is most probably going to be put straight into mothballs.
Still Costa Rica dont have an Army and they are doing fine.....
Not going to get into an argument about it but I think you will find the cuts in numbers of armed servicemen has accelerated under Cameron.
No, it has continued fairly steadily, but saying Cameron is as bad as Blair is missing the point.
£3billion buys a lot of hospitals though, which is pretty much unarguable
Syria is a great finishing school for Russia's military. Some time soon they're going to be squaring off against NATO troops. I'm very pessimistic about how things are going to turn out in Europe.
Thank goodness Tony trained our Army boys up in Afghan and Iraq, before cleverly starting the decline in numbers from 102,000 down to 82,000 by 2020, about the time the Russians will start stamping their feet and rattling their sabres. There are more hairdressers in the UK than military personnel.
Incidentally 3 to 4 times as many Brits went to Syria to join ISIS (400 to 500) than joined the TA (170) in 2014
Luckily though, Blair commissioned a second, unnecessary Aircraft Carrier (HMS Prince of Wales) at a cost of £3 billion, yes, thats right £3 billion, before dumping us into financial oblivion but obscene personal wealth, which is most probably going to be put straight into mothballs.
Still Costa Rica dont have an Army and they are doing fine.....
Not going to get into an argument about it but I think you will find the cuts in numbers of armed servicemen has accelerated under Cameron.
No, it has continued fairly steadily, but saying Cameron is as bad as Blair is missing the point.
£3billion buys a lot of hospitals though, which is pretty much unarguable
Except it is. The last Labour Govt. committed us to £65bn expenditure, mostly under PFI, to build around 100 hospitals. So on that basis, these days £3bn would build maybe four hospitals rather than a lot. But would get nowhere near paying off the outstanding interest per annum for the last lot.
Syria is a great finishing school for Russia's military. Some time soon they're going to be squaring off against NATO troops. I'm very pessimistic about how things are going to turn out in Europe.
Thank goodness Tony trained our Army boys up in Afghan and Iraq, before cleverly starting the decline in numbers from 102,000 down to 82,000 by 2020, about the time the Russians will start stamping their feet and rattling their sabres. There are more hairdressers in the UK than military personnel.
Incidentally 3 to 4 times as many Brits went to Syria to join ISIS (400 to 500) than joined the TA (170) in 2014
Luckily though, Blair commissioned a second, unnecessary Aircraft Carrier (HMS Prince of Wales) at a cost of £3 billion, yes, thats right £3 billion, before dumping us into financial oblivion but obscene personal wealth, which is most probably going to be put straight into mothballs.
Still Costa Rica dont have an Army and they are doing fine.....
Not going to get into an argument about it but I think you will find the cuts in numbers of armed servicemen has accelerated under Cameron.
No, it has continued fairly steadily, but saying Cameron is as bad as Blair is missing the point.
£3billion buys a lot of hospitals though, which is pretty much unarguable
Except it is. The last Labour Govt. committed us to £65bn expenditure, mostly under PFI, to build around 100 hospitals. So on that basis, these days £3bn would build maybe four hospitals rather than a lot. But would get nowhere near paying off the outstanding interest per annum for the last lot.
Are you seriously saying spunking £3billion was a good decision that has no influence on our country nearly a decade later?
Syria is a great finishing school for Russia's military. Some time soon they're going to be squaring off against NATO troops. I'm very pessimistic about how things are going to turn out in Europe.
Thank goodness Tony trained our Army boys up in Afghan and Iraq, before cleverly starting the decline in numbers from 102,000 down to 82,000 by 2020, about the time the Russians will start stamping their feet and rattling their sabres. There are more hairdressers in the UK than military personnel.
Incidentally 3 to 4 times as many Brits went to Syria to join ISIS (400 to 500) than joined the TA (170) in 2014
Luckily though, Blair commissioned a second, unnecessary Aircraft Carrier (HMS Prince of Wales) at a cost of £3 billion, yes, thats right £3 billion, before dumping us into financial oblivion but obscene personal wealth, which is most probably going to be put straight into mothballs.
Still Costa Rica dont have an Army and they are doing fine.....
Not going to get into an argument about it but I think you will find the cuts in numbers of armed servicemen has accelerated under Cameron.
No, it has continued fairly steadily, but saying Cameron is as bad as Blair is missing the point.
£3billion buys a lot of hospitals though, which is pretty much unarguable
Syria is a great finishing school for Russia's military. Some time soon they're going to be squaring off against NATO troops. I'm very pessimistic about how things are going to turn out in Europe.
Thank goodness Tony trained our Army boys up in Afghan and Iraq, before cleverly starting the decline in numbers from 102,000 down to 82,000 by 2020, about the time the Russians will start stamping their feet and rattling their sabres. There are more hairdressers in the UK than military personnel.
Incidentally 3 to 4 times as many Brits went to Syria to join ISIS (400 to 500) than joined the TA (170) in 2014
Luckily though, Blair commissioned a second, unnecessary Aircraft Carrier (HMS Prince of Wales) at a cost of £3 billion, yes, thats right £3 billion, before dumping us into financial oblivion but obscene personal wealth, which is most probably going to be put straight into mothballs.
Still Costa Rica dont have an Army and they are doing fine.....
Not going to get into an argument about it but I think you will find the cuts in numbers of armed servicemen has accelerated under Cameron.
No, it has continued fairly steadily, but saying Cameron is as bad as Blair is missing the point.
£3billion buys a lot of hospitals though, which is pretty much unarguable
Missing your point perhaps. Not mine.
Care to elucidate what your point actually is?
Certainly. You opened you post (above) by stating that, and I paraphrase that "Tony" started the decline in numbers (troops) from 102k down to 82 k by 1920. You conveniently forget to add that The Cameron government have had plenty of opportunity to stop or reverse that decline but have not. Blaming Blair seems a little rich.
Syria is a great finishing school for Russia's military. Some time soon they're going to be squaring off against NATO troops. I'm very pessimistic about how things are going to turn out in Europe.
Thank goodness Tony trained our Army boys up in Afghan and Iraq, before cleverly starting the decline in numbers from 102,000 down to 82,000 by 2020, about the time the Russians will start stamping their feet and rattling their sabres. There are more hairdressers in the UK than military personnel.
Incidentally 3 to 4 times as many Brits went to Syria to join ISIS (400 to 500) than joined the TA (170) in 2014
Luckily though, Blair commissioned a second, unnecessary Aircraft Carrier (HMS Prince of Wales) at a cost of £3 billion, yes, thats right £3 billion, before dumping us into financial oblivion but obscene personal wealth, which is most probably going to be put straight into mothballs.
Still Costa Rica dont have an Army and they are doing fine.....
Not going to get into an argument about it but I think you will find the cuts in numbers of armed servicemen has accelerated under Cameron.
No, it has continued fairly steadily, but saying Cameron is as bad as Blair is missing the point.
£3billion buys a lot of hospitals though, which is pretty much unarguable
Except it is. The last Labour Govt. committed us to £65bn expenditure, mostly under PFI, to build around 100 hospitals. So on that basis, these days £3bn would build maybe four hospitals rather than a lot. But would get nowhere near paying off the outstanding interest per annum for the last lot.
Are you seriously saying spunking £3billion was a good decision that has no influence on our country nearly a decade later?
No. I'm saying £3bn doesn't build a "lot" of hospitals.
Syria is a great finishing school for Russia's military. Some time soon they're going to be squaring off against NATO troops. I'm very pessimistic about how things are going to turn out in Europe.
Thank goodness Tony trained our Army boys up in Afghan and Iraq, before cleverly starting the decline in numbers from 102,000 down to 82,000 by 2020, about the time the Russians will start stamping their feet and rattling their sabres. There are more hairdressers in the UK than military personnel.
Incidentally 3 to 4 times as many Brits went to Syria to join ISIS (400 to 500) than joined the TA (170) in 2014
Luckily though, Blair commissioned a second, unnecessary Aircraft Carrier (HMS Prince of Wales) at a cost of £3 billion, yes, thats right £3 billion, before dumping us into financial oblivion but obscene personal wealth, which is most probably going to be put straight into mothballs.
Still Costa Rica dont have an Army and they are doing fine.....
Not going to get into an argument about it but I think you will find the cuts in numbers of armed servicemen has accelerated under Cameron.
No, it has continued fairly steadily, but saying Cameron is as bad as Blair is missing the point.
£3billion buys a lot of hospitals though, which is pretty much unarguable
Missing your point perhaps. Not mine.
Care to elucidate what your point actually is?
Certainly. You opened you post (above) by stating that, and I paraphrase that "Tony" started the decline in numbers (troops) from 102k down to 82 k by 1920. You conveniently forget to add that The Cameron government have had plenty of opportunity to stop or reverse that decline but have not. Blaming Blair seems a little rich.
So is my point true or not? Please feel free to use facts to support your idea that my point that Bliar started the decline in Army numbers. Forgetting crap that follows is great for you but separate from my point. Edit OK I get it now. You think that any criticism of that self serving lying shit Blair means that I must support Cameron. Maybe you need to look at that.
Comments
Iraq and Afghanistan haven't been an unqualified success but you really don't see any positives from the engagements listed above?
As soon as I posted, I knew you were going to bring up Lebedev. But if you just Google "Russia funding far right parties" you can take your pick, including the Economist. They conclude there is scant evidence of actual funding, but go into great detail about the political links between the Kremlin and far with parties across Europe. Meanwhile the small allegedly Czech bank mentioned in the Indy article was much discussed here. I share the fears of many well connected Czechs that key Czech politicians are directly on the Kremlin's payroll. You may still feel that this doesn't affect the safety of your journey to work in London. That's exactly how Putin wants you to feel, of course.
We need to stop trying to be policemen of the world - if they want to fight themselves back into the middle ages then let them get on with it.
Using the military might not be 'naive' but bolstering the credentials of our leaders wishes to look tough and be at the top table is plain stupid.
History teaches us about our future, in the 1930's when Hitler was marching across parts of Europe for months, the countries directly effected, wanted and succeeded in suing for peace, common consensus is that more innocent (peaceful) people died then if the other nations had rallied and attacked straight away.
Instead we all sat back and look how that turned out. The west must not and will not make the same mistakes ever.
What are these so called Western "values" you purport to be defending. And what in Russian values do you not agree with?
Circa 1980 we could all see clearly the terrible enemy (to what was once Western Values) that is Communism. And the scourge was destroyed. But the Soviet bloc has gone and a very strong Nation State in Russia has emerged while the EU bloc has now emerged and European Nation States have gone - in all but name.
It would be interesting to explore what "being British" means at this juncture too. I am sure a Russian in 2015 has a very clear sense of nationhood and identity and what values he is defending.
Incidentally 3 to 4 times as many Brits went to Syria to join ISIS (400 to 500) than joined the TA (170) in 2014
Luckily though, Blair commissioned a second, unnecessary Aircraft Carrier (HMS Prince of Wales) at a cost of £3 billion, yes, thats right £3 billion, before dumping us into financial oblivion but obscene personal wealth, which is most probably going to be put straight into mothballs.
Still Costa Rica dont have an Army and they are doing fine.....
"If you want to become an Islamic radical and have yourself circumcised, I invite you to come to Moscow," Putin said. "I would recommend that he who does the surgery does it so you'll have nothing growing back, afterward," he added. This was said by Putin to a French journalist. Other Russian values include state sponsored murder (Litvinenko) in another country's capital city, invading other countries (Georgia and Ukraine), corruption, jailing Estonian border guards, flying long range bombers carrying nuclear bombs down the English Channel, jailing opposition politicians on trumped up charges, jailing feminist protestors (Pussy Riot) and then there's the notorious anti-gay laws.
£3billion buys a lot of hospitals though, which is pretty much unarguable
Please feel free to use facts to support your idea that my point that Bliar started the decline in Army numbers.
Forgetting crap that follows is great for you but separate from my point.
Edit
OK I get it now.
You think that any criticism of that self serving lying shit Blair means that I must support Cameron.
Maybe you need to look at that.