Tim

@john4brexit Carney’s was right in the middle of it, & I’m sure has more insight than he’s shared so far. More importantly, the expression on BoJo & Gove’s faces at the Referendum result just about said it all; both were playing party power games, neither expected to win, both were horrified.

Brexit vote was ‘dangerous bluff’, says Mark Carney - The Telegraph - A constant danger to our nation state, Carney is a classic globalist who tried to undermine Brexit AND still is. Also a terrible gov of the BoE apple.news/AC6J6HTJmQ3iUO…

@HoyasFan07 Placating Trump is a fools errand. He demands loyalty but will never show it. One way or another, he won’t be in charge for much longer. But forecasting successors and their potential policy shifts is just like watching Soviet successions in the 1970s.

The Polish Air Force does operate other fighters, but the F35A is far more capable than them. So there would be capability advantages from operating more F35s. Additionally - and arguably as important - it would be viewed positively in Washington. Especially Trump.

This is a good development. Though Poland should strongly consider increasing its F35A acquisition from 32 to 48+. For comparison, Finland, a fellow frontline state that also prioritizes land power over sea power, is acquiring 64 F35As. theaviationist.com/2026/05/25/fir…

@HoyasFan07 Small front line states must spend wisely to get the biggest bang for their buck, & minimise risk from dependencies. F35 cost per flight hour is very high, & a big part of its value is intel from sensor analysis that might be suddenly withdrawn when defending against Russia.

@AntiTrumpCanada Well one Donald feigned bone spurs to avoid fighting for his country.

400,000 dead Americans at Arlington. Fuckface somehow heard: “This would be a good moment to joke about how few dead soldiers were named Donald.” This utterly vile, self-obsessed asshole turns a sombre event into a fucking stand-up routine about himself.

@McFaul The reality is that we collectively resource deterrence or war. There’s no 3rd option. @PutinsPuppet breaking alliances & commitments that have kept a balance of power for decades does not put America first & failure to bring Iran to heal raises questions about standing alone.

Very bad sign. Trump continues to disrupt longstanding American foreign policies that are disruptive and destabilizing. Avoiding war over Taiwan is a paramount US national interest. Maintaining deterrence helps to keep the peace.

@CrewkerneMan Burnham, Streeting & Rayner are just three career politicians that between them have achieved a total of sod all & will be a step backwards. If Labour’s head-hunting past talent to bring back to Westminster, it should start by replacing ‘the wrong’ Miliband with the right one.

Personally, I’m not worried whether Andy Burnham wins in Makerfield and eventually tries to become Prime Minister. Kemi Badenoch can take him on, and beat him.

@DrChrisParry Presumably it means that firefighting training is based on what was learnt from this ships loss. Only a lunatic would train sailors to use a procedure that had already failed.

Why is RN firefighting training today based on this event? The fires were not contained and the ship sank.

@Scaramucci No, you’re missing the point. The objective of the US military industrial complex is not delivering capability. It’s delivering profit. To do that it buys political support & Congressmen spend like drunken sailors on the nations credit card because that’s in their interests.

The world’s largest military budget has produced an industrial base that cannot sustain a serious war. How is that possible? Because the system is not designed to produce military capability. It is designed to produce contracts. The five largest defense contractors employ roughly a thousand lobbyists in Washington. They distribute their suppliers across forty-five states deliberately, so no senator can ever vote to cancel a program without firing his own constituents. And here we are. The current leadership will keep fiddling on this as they see our apathy as permission.

@nleaney @nicholadrummond @gwcollinge Aeralis had partners on board, for both development & manufacture across Europe. Sadly, the British govt has behaved like a rabbit in the headlights, as threats have risen & kit wore out. It seems to have forgotten that we either invest in deterrence or war; there’s option 3.

@TimNorthants @nicholadrummond @gwcollinge Perhaps if they could have formed a capable consortium to take their concept forward it might have offered something more viable

The Boeing / Saab T-7 Red Hawk is in pole position to replace the RAF’s ageing Hawk trainer. Conceived as 5th / 6th generation training aircraft with fully digitised architecture, it would be ideal for training both F-35 and Tempest crews. A tie-up with BAE Systems will include UK assembly. And, of course, a certain aerobatic team could use it.

@NavyLookout @HMSPWLS That may well be. It’s still a silly name and the UK is still not resourcing it sensibly.

@TimNorthants @HMSPWLS Exercise Dynamic Mongoose is an annual NATO exercise that has been running for years

.@HMSPWLS on NATO ASW exercise Dynamic Mongoose 2026 in the Norwegian Sea. Carrying pocket size airgroup of 2 x Merlin and 2 x Wildcats due to demands on aircraft elsewhere. Photo: MoD/PO Phot Chris Sellars

@GOP__Ls That’s what happens when a multiple bankrupt is elected President.

🚨Trump is now single handedly responsible for 27.7% of the national debt. This is dramatically more than any President in American history.

@Paul_Hatchwell @gwcollinge Yes. @UKLabour choosing the wrong Miliband 15y ago had a big impact. If it’s head-hunting leadership talent to get into Westminster, as heaven knows it needs to, it should start there not with Burnham.

We need to rejoin the Single Market as soon as possible. This relatively uncontroversial step would end our disastrous economic isolation while we look towards a referendum on rejoining the EU and regaining our political influence in Europe.

@pegge49 @TBrit90 Drone tech is forcing a Navy rethink. Maybe big/complex ships have had their day. River Class avail. >300d/y. Flower Class Corvettes were half their disp. Tribal Class Destroyers not much bigger & nearly twice as fast. Maybe more smaller simpler & drone equipped is the future.

@TimNorthants @TBrit90 The difference would have been that the RN wouldn't be trying to drag life out of the utterly worn out T23's...

Considering the continuing glacial pace of HMS Glasgow, it's beyond frustrating to remember that when its development phase begin in 2015, it was expected the ship would be delivered in 2023. Now at best we can hope for sea trials by the end of 2026 year, but more likely in 2027.

@pegge49 @TBrit90 Well 1 T23 perhaps. If the T26 wasn’t tied up broken and waiting to be fixed and if there was crew to keep it at sea.

@jaglancy No idea what the justification for this might be, but with existential threats we need to priorities both spending on the military and spending by the military to address real defence capability gaps.

@nleaney @nicholadrummond @gwcollinge That’s right. Good concept though; designed to address the next generation of military aircraft that will evolve fast as the air force transitions to a hybrid manned/unmanned model. The Hawk has already been in service a lot longer than its successor will be.

But that’s all they had. Even TSR2 had a flying prototype. That cost in the region of £10-12B in today’s money and then the project was scrapped because of the expected final costs. A new British designed and constructed aircraft for the Red Arrows would have been great, but not at any cost and in any case, to meet the timelines, they’d need to have started way before 2020 when the Hawk ceased production.

@JamesCooper_94 @ColinRossCRoss @nicholadrummond Yep. But capability to indigenously produce what Europe needs won’t come about if we keep buying from America. In some cases we have no choice; we have two STOVL carriers, there’s only one STOVL jet, & no likelihood of another. In others we have to invest to get capability.

@TimNorthants @ColinRossCRoss @nicholadrummond Europe has no equivalent to C-17, CH-47 or RC-135. A400M was still on the drawing board when we bought C-17 A320MPA will be 20 years too late E-7 yes we should’ve gone with Saab, and as for Apache, it’s replacing Tiger in 🇦🇺 service and 🇩🇪 retiring theirs soon So a mixed bag 🤷🏼‍♂️

@TheDeafTribe @DrChrisParry Well, it’s very simple. We either fund deterrence or we fund war. That’s it; no political fantasy can create a third option. One costs 5%GDP ongoing, and the other an awful lot more. Since we haven’t spent 5%GDP for nearly 40y there’s a big catch-up cost & lead-time.

@DrChrisParry This is the point that I think the Conservatives considered. Why have a massive and very expensive defence force when there are no actual punch-ups in sight? So, whammo they have decimated the fighting forces and the question is, can we defend ourselves?

£350, 000 a day to provide a platform for 4 helicopters in a littoral environment?

@DrChrisParry It must cost more than that, surely? Capital value of over £3.5bn, around 700 crew, at least 200t fuel per day. That’s without using any weapons or launching aircraft Is deployment really only costed at £350k/d?