Comments on: As a business people should

By: Gunrunner

Gunrunner — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 19:19:54 +0000

I might give it serious thought, though we already have our own royals (Kennedy family).

Next week, in London for business and good times. :-)

By: David Betz

David Betz — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 01:42:14 +0000

That is a lovely offer Gunrunner. Wouldn’t it make more sense though for you to come back into the fold? Come on it’s easy, just say: ‘I Gunrunner swear by Almighty God that, on becoming a British citizen, I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, Her Heirs and Successors according to law.’ I mean if you’re willing to pay for the British Army’s kit now you might as well. Wasn’t that what the whole Revolution was about in the first place? :)

By: Gunrunner

Gunrunner — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 00:15:51 +0000

Good comments and observations.

Regarding “But then there is also the armed forces’ credibility. . .in presenting themselves to other militaries. . .”, all I can do from this side of the pond is assure that you guys carry a lot of heft in the credibility department, Basra notwithstanding. Without a doubt, some of the finest fighting men I have ever met were in service to Queen and Country.

So, I say it’s time to come on over to the “dark side” and become the 51st state. At least your warfighters will be kitted out and funded properly, for a change.

By: Patrick Porter

Patrick Porter — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 21:53:57 +0000

only partly in our gift to shape…and dangerous to over-value or obsess about. less worry about it would have helped in a number of crises historically…

By: Kenneth Payne

Kenneth Payne — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 21:50:08 +0000

Tom nails it. Credibility with whom? By doing what? And how would I measure that? Perception by others is important when it comes to strategy – but it’s only partly in our gift to shape.

By: Patrick Porter

Patrick Porter — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 21:47:42 +0000

is the ‘generational commitment’ case still being made somewhere? my impression was that the debate was now about the optimum way/pace/conditions in which to draw down

By: David Betz

David Betz — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 20:40:39 +0000

‘There is no honor in sticking to a conflict where one has lost any hope of achieving strategic interests. ‘

I agree. What seems to me to be happening right now is a redefining of our strategic objectives into a form rather severely attenuated from those which we had at the beginning and therefore possibly manageable inside a couple of years. Miliband is making a speech tonight at MIT which is I expect going to lay out the UK’s exit strategy (in so many words). It’s not a new idea. Declare victory and go. Keep the cash and guns flowing and hope for the best.

By: David Betz

David Betz — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 20:27:08 +0000

‘if we were to consider credibility seriously rather than just as a glib assumption…’

Yes, that’s what I mean. Except that it doesn’t lead me to argue for an accelerated withdrawal. Actually I suppose it depends much on the range we’re talking about. On the one hand you’ve got the ‘it’s a generational commitment’ camp while on the other hand you’ve got the ‘bug out now!’ camp. My position is walk, don’t run.

By: Patrick Porter

Patrick Porter — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 18:27:36 +0000

btw there’s a general point lurking in the excellent post and comments that’s worth making more explicit: if we were to consider credibility seriously rather than just as a glib assumption, that could be an argument for accelerated withdrawal rather than prolonging the war effort. If credibility via one ‘small war’ was a powerful factor in international relations, (which I doubt), a country’s global reputation could be hurt if it were seen as a pitiful giant, steadily bleeding, over-extended and increasingly demoralised in an ill-judged war.

By: Patrick Porter

Patrick Porter — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 16:52:03 +0000

great comments all, and nice that I can’t fully avoid the clamour!