ListNook

BringbackDreamBars Apr 10, 2026 +191

The tabloids will have a field day with this, but to me this seems much more to bring the UK in line with countries like the Baltic States, Sweden, Norway and Singapore where national and civil defence is much more a part of life or at least talked about more.

191

Tunggall Apr 11, 2026 +8

It’s ironic. Here in Singapore, our very first national service ordinance was enacted when we were under British rule, before it was updated to our current form after we gained independence.

8

Cynical_Classicist Apr 11, 2026 +9

Well, we kind of relied on the US, which was a mistake.

9

hacklebear Apr 11, 2026 +1

For what? I know the US relied on us in the middle east, but cant really remember them helping us out a whole bunch in any significant way to be fair.

1

stearrow Apr 11, 2026 +2

So, obviously we received a lot of support for the US via lend lease during the second world war. 3 out of every 4 troops that helped liberate western Europe were American. We also received the largest portion of marshall plan aid after the war. We got $3.2B ($42B in today's money) to help us rebuild after the war. The US also worked with us to help us develop our own nuclear programme. They stitched us up during the Suez crisis but we returned the favour by staying out of Vietnam (even when LBJ offered economic aid if we'd commit troops). We were both f****** around in Iran to secure oil and that massively backfired. During the Falklands conflict Reagan initially asked if Thatcher would be willing to surrender the islands but after she made it clear that wasn't going to happen the US provided lots of weapons/intelligence and even went as far as setting aside an amphibious assault ship to serve as a replacement of one if our carriers was hit. We cooperated in every conflict after that. The US has always maintained a network of bases in Europe including some very large airbases in the UK. The aircraft there have always been factored in when we think about our own air defense even if they've never been called on. We have al long history of cooperating on weapons systems like trident and the F35. Obviously we need to pivot away from the US as they've proven to be an unreliable partner. However, it's not prudent to rewrite history or oversimplify what has been a very long and complex relationship.

2

Ok_Law_2599 Apr 11, 2026 +2

No one is suggesting the US hasn't been a good partner for the UK up until the orange orangutan took over in office. He's merely highlighted that we can't trust this administration, which in turn is great because it means the UK and Europe is taking its own defence more seriously. Maybe when the Democrats get back into office we can start to see that relationship being repaired.

2

SpiritualB0x3 Apr 11, 2026 -1

WW2 or the Cold War?

-1

Jonn_Jonzz_Manhunter Apr 11, 2026 +6

WW2 was 80 years ago, the cold war wasn't even a war The armed conflicts we got involved with were very very much in Americas interests that we assisted in, not the other way around

6

hacklebear Apr 11, 2026 +5

WW2 USA made out like bandits with predatory loans, and only got involved when they got attacked, making them an active participant. So not the best example really, and the cold war, was a series of tensions between the USA and USSR, so lump that in the pile with the middle east.

5

Combat_Orca Apr 11, 2026 +1

What in the Cold War?

1

sansaset Apr 10, 2026 -158

The Baltic states 🤣 which ones are prepared for war??

-158

Software_Dependent Apr 10, 2026 +71

Finland has a well trained military. Why is any of this funny?

71

Alaksande Apr 10, 2026 +51

I’ll never understand why so many grown men care to give their opinion on current events when they’re clearly unserious people Guy’s post history reads like he’s been 18 for a decade

51

jinzokan Apr 10, 2026 +15

You will never understand why stupid people think they're not stupid?

15

EmbarrassedOrchid685 Apr 10, 2026 +17

MAGA culties just love to see the world burn

17

junkyard_robot Apr 10, 2026 +3

They don't think that far ahead. They just like to watch...

3

ZestyChinchilla Apr 11, 2026 +4

Finland isn’t a Baltic state.

4

Software_Dependent Apr 11, 2026 +8

It's next to the Baltic Sea and is a state, good enough for me. Plus I don't think they'll be standing around if the 'Baltic States' get attacked. So whatever you're trying to say is irrelevant.

8

ZestyChinchilla Apr 11, 2026 +1

Literally all I was saying is what I said — not everything is a veiled implication. The Baltic States are three specific countries — Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania. My point was simply that it’s not a generic term for countries in that general region. And for what it’s worth, a fair bit of my family is Finnish and my father lived there for a long time. I’m well aware of what kind of protections and fortifications Finland has invested in over the decades.

1

Software_Dependent Apr 11, 2026 +1

I was just kicking back against the idiot who was trying to mock the region for being unprepared, when it has been something on their minds for a while. Mentioning Finland was the first example I could think of that has a well prepared military that is bordering Russia (that also has a Baltic coastline).

1

Heizard Apr 10, 2026 -6

Baltic states have very small population and thus armed forces by the numbers. By the time "help" might arrive it might be too late. I can only see them organizing very asymmetric defense with drones. Remember, after Ukraine vets trained versus NATO and wiped entire NATO battalion in just minutes - the opposition very likely capable of similar feats, at least what should be put in to consideration when planing defense.

-6

Software_Dependent Apr 11, 2026 +5

The Finnish military can mobilise over 250000 troops plus more reserves and train extensively in their territory. Historically the Russians have suffered colossal losses by underestimating what they were up against. Poland also has a strong military. I don't know what you mean with 'thus armed forces by the numbers'

5

Inner-Marionberry-25 Apr 11, 2026 +2

But they're much larger states than the Baltics. Generally when people talk about the Baltic states, they're taking about Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, not every country that borders the Baltic. I don't know enough about their military to say, but they are small countries with very little geographic defenses, and have historically been dominated by outside powers

2

Software_Dependent Apr 11, 2026 +2

The three Baltic States have been constructing a defensive line of bunkers, anti tank obstacles and fences as part of being prepared for aggressive actions from Russia. In addition to their own forces, each of the states has high alert status NATO troops from Canada, Germany, UK and additional support from France and other European nations. The area is also covered by air patrols etc and the airspace can be rapidly covered by all the neighboring air forces. They are not just sitting there twiddling their thumbs.

2

NoPhilosopher6111 Apr 11, 2026 +1

It’s hard to translate Russian to English.

1

Healthy-Stage-142 Apr 10, 2026 +22

Lithuania 4% GDP Latvia 3.7% Estonia 3.4% They're currently constructing the Baltic Defense line...

22

ezekiellake Apr 11, 2026 +5

Which ones aren’t? You’re confusing having a big military with a prepared military. They aren’t the same thing. For example, Russia had an immense military, but they weren’t prepared for an actual war and got absolutely decimated by a smaller but prepared opposition.

5

deedee2148 Apr 10, 2026 +17

Sweetie, you couldn't even point to it on a map.

17

Additional_Quiet2600 Apr 10, 2026

They have backup. For instance Sweden has its own military complex.

0

8bitbetween Apr 10, 2026 +60

They need to get on with it. It's clear UK defence requires significant funding. Tell the public what will be required, what will have to be cut or taxes increased and be honest.

60

brg9327 Apr 10, 2026 +41

>Tell the public what will be required, what will have to be cut or taxes increased and be honest. Whichever way they choose, they'll be crucified by the press, the public and their own back benchers. Needs to be done though, I agree.

41

Commercial_Badger_37 Apr 10, 2026 +14

The press need to get behind this. We were unprepared for WWII and we survived by the skin of our teeth to be honest. We should learn from history.

14

Realistic_Money_1952 Apr 11, 2026 +11

I think what is clear across the board is that none of the "western" world is prepared for wwIII...and we are already in it but the press and our governments refuse to admit the facts that are very clear to anyone who is paying attention.

11

Abizuil Apr 11, 2026 +7

> and we are already in it Nah, we are in the gathering storm phase. The world order has large cracks through it and there is regional conflicts in some of the hotter zones but there is no unified world war yet. At this point it can still be averted but it requires the democracies to pull their finger out and put their foot down before the autocracies get enough confidence to play their hand.

7

der_k0b0ld Apr 11, 2026 +5

Yeah it is the road to war phase we are in The period you play in every hearts of iron game from 1936 to 39 where everyone scrambles to be ready for the inevitable global fire... It won't be nice but we can all see it at this point, especially now that China starts to move with support for Iran and stronger pressure on Taiwan. Wasn't it the CCP timeline to be ready for the invasion by next year? Those plans are forcing many Asian players to get ready and to prepare the playing field in advance for any advance position possible

5

Jonn_Jonzz_Manhunter Apr 11, 2026 +1

This is why Starmer isn't a bad prime minister in my opinion, he's great at international diplomacy, but pretty average to shite on anything else

1

brg9327 Apr 11, 2026 +1

I'm inclined to agree. He doesn't have a clear vision for his government and the country. But IF he does, he sure as hell can't communicate it to the public. Probably would've been a great foreign secretary though.

1

Direct-Muscle7144 Apr 11, 2026 +6

What needs cutting is benefits to billionaires. And screw corrupt heads.

6

QuirkyWish3081 Apr 11, 2026

I find it wild that they decided not to increase funding against GDP until 2035. Like how thick is that?. We need it now. A global conflict will happen by 2030

0

Nabbylaa Apr 11, 2026 +5

This is a misunderstanding. The funding is being slowly increased and by 2035 will be 3.5% of GDP. It will be more money every year, not just an almost doubling of the budget immediately.

5

dbandit1 Apr 11, 2026 +4

Did you miss the previous government's economic disasters? There's no money.

4

rpf1984 Apr 10, 2026 +46

If you want peace, prepare for war.

46

junkyard_robot Apr 10, 2026 +17

Good fences make good neighbors.

17

LinuxMatthews Apr 11, 2026 +4

You say that but they're doing this by putting money into defence How are we meant to have good fences if we're putting money into people that want to de-fence.

4

mrh322 Apr 11, 2026 +3

Top notch stuff there

3

Majestic-Age-9232 Apr 11, 2026 +2

You know that quote is ironic right?

2

Wrecked-Tum Apr 11, 2026 +2

We're going to build a wall, and Mexico is going to pay for it

2

Unique-Warning7798 Apr 11, 2026 -25

Does this apply for immigration, especially illegal as well as legals who refuse to assimilate?

-25

deadguy00 Apr 11, 2026 +16

Ask the native americans

16

ttttoday_junior Apr 11, 2026 +6

Or the Australian Aboriginals.

6

SpiritualB0x3 Apr 11, 2026

Natives had two whole oceans and didn’t help people to come in.

0

OldLondon Apr 10, 2026 +25

This all makes sense. It’s about things like making sure our energy infrastructure is resilient, as we’ve seen in drone based warfare in the ME and Ukraine where factories and plants are attacked regularly, it’s admitting that we are not ready at all for a war like that. Years and years of underfunding have really fucked our military and with no US support and not being in the EU we really are a bit isolated here

25

BringbackDreamBars Apr 10, 2026 +4

>drone based warfare in the ME and Ukraine I always thought that some of the quadcopters modifcations from Ukraine could have a use in sabotage as well. Its an example of how easy is it to get your hands on stuff like this. The fact that consumer drones can be this easily weaponised is something I hope we are learning from.

4

TheTastiestTaint Apr 10, 2026 +9

I fly fpv, I don't think it's going to be a hobby for long sadly.

9

Jazzlike_Quiet9941 Apr 10, 2026

One of the best defence is not being the US puppet. They're the one who starts most wars on this earth.

0

Yallow_Bonerholder Apr 11, 2026 +1

The EU is not a defence alliance

1

OldLondon Apr 11, 2026 +1

Yea congrats - and? Did I say they were?

1

Yallow_Bonerholder Apr 12, 2026

Well you certainly implied it by mentioning the underfunding of the military and no longer being in the EU in the same sentence.

0

Sethoria34 Apr 10, 2026 +10

I'll stick with just going to work, coming home and playing video games. I'd rather just not know if im getting nuked/invaded then worry for the last 2 mins of my life.

10

QuirkyWish3081 Apr 11, 2026 +5

Same.

5

Additional_Quiet2600 Apr 10, 2026 -8

An ostrich sticks its head in the sand. A human uses agency to affect reality.

-8

Sethoria34 Apr 10, 2026 +9

as a common pleb paying his taxes and just focusing on my own life, i dont wana waste my time on "what if" Like i cant go and change anything, or build a bunker, or grow crops in a nuclear winter. What i can do is carry on, and if i suddenly get a tan and become a shadow against a wall? be rate.

9

Ziazan Apr 10, 2026 +2

also, don't really fancy dying fighting for rich politicians egos.

2

Additional_Quiet2600 Apr 10, 2026 -2

You can use your voice. You can do a lot of things. Defeatism and the rejection of agency hurts us all. It takes a lot of people doing things to change the world. I understand the feeling, I just think your position is wrong.

-2

Sethoria34 Apr 10, 2026 +5

I get your takeing it seriously and i appricate it, but having battled anxity/depression and alot of other negative c*** from both internal and external factors? ive learnt not to worry over things i realistically cant change. To quote cypher: Ignorence truly is bliss. we just have different views on it, neither view is right or wrong, just perspectives.

5

Additional_Quiet2600 Apr 10, 2026 +4

I battle the same things my friend. No worries. I understand.

4

Orphasmia Apr 10, 2026 +3

This timeline is so horrific and unfair. It gets so much harder to fight nowadays, yet now is more important than ever

3

Searlichek Apr 10, 2026 -1

Ostriches don't actually stick their heads in the sand.

-1

Additional_Quiet2600 Apr 11, 2026 +1

Yes I know it's just a term.

1

giltirn Apr 11, 2026

It’s the only way to stay sane in this fucked up timeline. Same way humanity survived all the miserable periods of collective trauma in the past - just keep your head down and keep going forward.

0

Longy_LTB Apr 11, 2026 +1

Only reason we survived all the other miserable periods is because nuclear weaponry wasn't widespread. Only takes one loose cannon to pull the trigger and the world ignites.

1

madsdawud Apr 11, 2026 +2

Nice good that they can begin to think about beginning to prepare to prepare a plan that will plan how the UK will prepare nation for war

2

WodenTheWanderer Apr 11, 2026 +4

I just had a stroke reading this

4

Training_Humor_9513 Apr 11, 2026 +2

I hate that in the distance, my house is in that thumbnail photo.

2

TheSn00pster Apr 11, 2026 +2

Trump was funded by gun manufacturers. This plays into their plans. Gg, regards.

2

NoNefariousness5175 Apr 11, 2026 +5

It always ‘preparing’ , ‘considering’ ‘developing’, ‘testing’ , have we actually got anything done.

5

lNFORMATlVE Apr 11, 2026 +4

Yes, but “preparing for war” as a phrase nets the media lots more juicy dollar

4

PabloElHarambe Apr 11, 2026 +5

Probably going to get downvoted for this. But we shouldn’t be getting involved in anything aside from protecting our own country and its direct interests. Have a strong nuclear deterrent, cover the U.K. in SAM sites and have a Navy and airforce that will protect the UK. F*** the rest of it.

5

pogsim Apr 11, 2026 +3

The problem with this is that direct interests includes essential imports, and those end up being affected by geopolitical events.

3

buffayrachel Apr 11, 2026 +2

Unfortunately not what being a part of NATO means

2

PabloElHarambe Apr 11, 2026

NATO IS a defence pact. There’s no requirement or article in NATO that can be used to compel a NATO member to assist in invading another country or topple a regime. The UK just chooses to get involved in these things regularly for its own profit.

0

buffayrachel Apr 11, 2026 +2

No, not invada. But if one nato country id attacked then the others must help defend it

2

jphamlore Apr 10, 2026

A quick web search claims the UK has over a 100 operational nuclear warheads. Who is going to attack them? > Sir Keir Starmer and John Healey, his defence secretary, have promised to lift defence spending to 3.5% of GDP from just over 2% - but not until 2035. > They are also yet to release a crucial 10-year investment plan for the armed forces - which sets out what weapons and capabilities the Ministry of Defence (MoD) will procure ... > The delay means much of the UK's defence industry is in limbo, awaiting the promise of new cash to become a reality. So the UK's plan is for the rest of the world to stop doing anything for 10 years while the UK can conventionally re-arm for a war.

0

AlternativeScratch94 Apr 10, 2026 +10

The fear for western Europe rather than being directly invaded is moreso Russia gaining control over a lot of eastern/central Europe and cutting off western Europe financially. Not that any of that is going to happen soon but it is indeed better to think long term.

10

EliteReaver Apr 10, 2026 +10

If you know Polish people or any ex Soviet country, they would not let Russia take control easily. The war in Ukraine has been ongoing for 4 years, times that by 4x for how long it would take Russia to take control of Poland based on patriotism

10

touristtam Apr 11, 2026 +2

I don't think the parent commenter means direct control from Moscow, but more insidious and gradual degradation of the democratic process to _invite_ a big brother nation to support a pro-russian leader.

2

jphamlore Apr 11, 2026 +6

Within a year, it seems Ukraine will have the capacity to attack Russian industry and infrastructure at will. Russia's toast. The only question left is whether they are willing to wildly escalate before accepting defeat.

6

nathanherts Apr 11, 2026 +2

How so?

2

jphamlore Apr 11, 2026 +2

Ukraine's already hammering Russian refineries with their drones, and drone capabilities and numbers seem to be increasing, for Ukraine, possibly to the millions. If Russia could conventionally escalate just hitting targets in Ukraine, they would have already done so. All Russia has left is to start counterstriking facilities on NATO territory, and there is no indication they have the willingness to do so.

2

antihexafy Apr 11, 2026 +2

Very misleading phrasing. We've already begun the increase, which is expected to FINISH BY 2035. As we speak the government are reviewing all available options so as to hopefully speed up the process.

2

superpandapear Apr 10, 2026 -1

they put out a new preparedness bit on the .gov website aimed at the public a few months ago. community groups have started running "casual" classes on emergency planning for households, the change has been in the wind for a while

-1

MonorailPurple Apr 11, 2026 +5

That’s not new. They do it every decade or so. Heck in the mid 2000s we used to get leaflets in the post about it.

5

geenexotics Apr 11, 2026 +2

Bro the only war that’s happening is a civil war between the people and their governments. You’re screwing every single one of us in every way and people are almost at breaking point

2

Beyond_Blueballs Apr 12, 2026 +1

The UK is such a shitshow, what sort of British person would willingly sign up to their military to get paid f*** all, treated like shit and be thrown under the bus for all sorts of illegal immigrants coming in and ruining their country? I'd ask British people but they're all in Australia.

1

fenland1 Apr 11, 2026

I don't see anyone fighting for Starmer and his cronies. The armed forces detest him and all he stands for: fight for the country in some godforsaken province, while labour politicians sit at home, and then be prosecuted by a state funded labour lawyer for war crimes. Who would do it?

0

antihexafy Apr 11, 2026 +1

So Reform/Green MPs would themselves be fighting? Was Churchill serving during the second world war?

1

Helloimnotimpotant Apr 11, 2026

The UK can’t prepare for a fuel crisis let alone a war !!!

0

creeping-fly349 Apr 11, 2026 +1

If they try conscription im not joining. Regardless of the fact that I probably wouldn't join anyway due to my morals on refusing to fight for politicians and billionaires, no way would i pass the fitness tests and ontop of that likely have ADHD and/or autism. I would most likely be a liability.

1

showmeyourchits Apr 11, 2026 +1

That’s sort of the thing about conscription, there isn’t an option to not join

1

creeping-fly349 Apr 11, 2026 +2

Id rather take the consequence for not joining..

2

Present-Dark-9044 Apr 11, 2026

UK Gov hate us so why would we go fight for them?

0

Kooky_Craft123 Apr 11, 2026 -3

Who in god's name would defend this country when it hates the natives 😂

-3

antihexafy Apr 11, 2026 +2

The natives, most of whom actually come from mainland Europe? 85% of the UK is white, and 97% of that 85% identifies as white British. Not only that, but roughly 77% of all non-whites in the UK were born and raised in the UK, majorly with what the Brit right wing would refer to as 'British values'.

2

Kooky_Craft123 Apr 11, 2026 +1

Ok?

1

antihexafy Apr 11, 2026 +2

Wow. Not exactly trying hard, are you?

2

EveryLine2443 Apr 10, 2026 -12

Send the refugees in first 🙏

-12

Kooky_Craft123 Apr 11, 2026

Dinghy Naval Squadron Unit 12

0

google257 Apr 10, 2026 -30

Who the hell would want to fight for the UK at this point?

-30

ii-_- Apr 11, 2026 +3

Very easy to say that in peacetime, when your family is getting bombed and the nation genuinely needs you guarantee you won't be saying that

3

lNFORMATlVE Apr 11, 2026 +1

Exactly. Easy to say when you’re not down the modern equivalent of an Anderson shelter every other night

1

google257 Apr 11, 2026 -1

Okay well let me say it another way. Who’s going to bomb the Uk?

-1

antihexafy Apr 11, 2026 +1

Russia, Belarus, China, America, possibly Hungary. Hell, maybe even North Korea. Obviously ranged from most-to-least-likely, assuming said bombing ever even occurs.

1

AvailableCap4127 Apr 10, 2026 -17

Politicians, tired of hearing about youth unemployment, stagnation, high rents, lack of housing. Hearing how Russia managed to sort these things by lowering their population significantly, they have a new plan.

-17

ii-_- Apr 11, 2026

That's a pretty wacky angle on this but sure

0

AvailableCap4127 Apr 11, 2026

What’s wacky about it? Britain has the biggest deterrent against someone attacking us. Very expensive nuclear subs with warheads. Despite Trump, we also have a very good relationship with the US and Europe. Who is going to attack us? On the other hand, we have a raft of problems at home. It’s easier to just continue to distract by saying war war war, than it is in dealing with the problems. Trumps ratings were rock bottom, people constantly going on about Epstein, so he attacks Iran so people focus on that. He’s that much of an idiot he didn’t think through the consequences. No one is attacking Britain. We are one of the biggest war mongers on the planet alongside Russia and the US.

0

ii-_- Apr 11, 2026

Who is going to attack us? Dude, what planet are you on? We're being attacked right now, every single day! War has changed, we're not waiting on "the enemy" to try and invade us from Calais. We're in constant hybrid warfare. Under sea cables getting destroyed, people getting murdered on our soil from poisoning, regular encroachments on our airspace, cyber attacks. And to compare us to Russia in terms of war mongering is actually laughable, you must be a troll. I would argue we enter conflicts with good intention and reason for the majority of the time (yes before you say it, obviously Iraq was a grave mistake). We're supporting Ukraine because we're a sovereign nation is getting invaded, we bombed Syria / Iraq because a murderous cult (ISIS) existed, I could go on but generally there are legitimate reasons. And actually we didn't get involved with Iran because it's unjustified and illegal - kinda proves that we're not as bad as the US doesn't it... objectively.

0

AvailableCap4127 Apr 11, 2026 +1

And yet a genocide happened in Palestine, an estimated 75,000-100,000 civilians dead. What action did we take? we helped stop any kind of retaliation. It’s a joke you think we are the good guys that need to defend ourselves. We commit and help others commit atrocities when it suits.

1

ii-_- Apr 11, 2026

Absolutely that is terrible, add it to the list of awful things we've done. But you still cannot compare us to Russia. And you've conveniently ignored the rest of my valid points. I never even said we're the good guys, I'm saying usually there's a good reason we get involved with conflicts and it's typically legal too.

0

AvailableCap4127 Apr 11, 2026

Notwithstanding Iraq, Iraq 2? Afghanistan? I mean surely the reason we went into Afghanistan still exists? Those horrible Taliban mistreating their own people, particularly women. Except when it no longer suits, we forget about it. You’re in the UK so again you see the Chagos Island drama. Why do we even have a military base there? To strike countries halfway around the world. An area of the world we should have no interest in. We burned our bridges in colonising half the countries in the region, it’s time to stop threatening them and leave them to it. We are the biggest warmonger outside of Russia and the US. Who has invaded more in the past 30 years?

0

Maj0rTh0mas Apr 11, 2026 +1

We went into Afghanistan because Al Qaeda used it as a base and their government wouldn't cooperate when the US wanted Bin Laden extradited. The only colonies we have left are voluntarily British Overseas Territories. We aren't using them to threaten anyone. Iraq war 1? Do you mean The Gulf War? That was because Iraq invaded Kuwait and they asked for help.

1

AvailableCap4127 Apr 11, 2026 +1

I said notwithstanding Iraq. The war where Saddam remained in power, until we went in again after 9/11, who Iraq had nothing to do with. Remind me, which country was it that Bin Laden was found and executed in by the Americans? Oh that’s right it was Pakistan. I don’t remember having to go to war with Pakistan for that one…

1

Maj0rTh0mas Apr 12, 2026 +2

Thanks for clarifying. Where I'm from what you are calling the Iraq war we call the Gulf War and what you call Iraq 2 we call the Iraq war so it was confusing. Pakistan was pretending to be an American ally which probably helped. I don't think the Americans had any bases in Afghanistan before 9/11 so a full scale invasion may have been necessary but I agree the mission creep of nation building was in hindsight a waste of time. Either way the UK wasn't to blame for the war in Afghanistan because the US triggered article 5 of the NATO treaty.

2

Bostonpeterock77 Apr 10, 2026 -37

What war? They have a war brewing within their own country.

-37

MonorailPurple Apr 11, 2026 +7

We do? News to me.

7

ii-_- Apr 11, 2026 +1

Where abouts please? I want to see it

1

NutsyFlamingo Apr 10, 2026 -7

I mean never published the old plan but sure

-7

Brilliant_Version344 Apr 10, 2026 +5

It’s just updating the one that the uk had since Cold War which was was first developed after ww1 and the government scrapped it at the end of the Cold War

5

NutsyFlamingo Apr 10, 2026

Oh I know.. sorry if cynical but been a land war in Europe for years now, defense production firms waiting for funding to start manufacturing based on last years announcement of increased intentions of spending.. and a bit of spin here (to me) based on wanting to put out press to seem doing something. It just never ends the announcement of intention to do begin meetings to consider something new going forward

0

StephenHunterUK Apr 10, 2026 +2

A lot of the old War Books have been released to the UK National Archives and are available to see there. Some bits are redacted though for national security reasons. The rehearsals were extensive - local council emergency planning officers were involved as well. It all got very political in the 1980s, with Labour councils in particular refusing to attend the exercises because of opposition to nuclear weapons more generally.

2

NutsyFlamingo Apr 10, 2026 +1

Yes I’m fairly aware of the task at hand. Just get tired of the gov timing these announcements of plans when other stuff to do.

1

Typingdude3 Apr 10, 2026 -6

With who exactly? The China-Russia-Iran axis, or the US?

-6

SoggyWotsits Apr 11, 2026 -1

It’s always the head of the armed forces who says things like this, to get everyone on board with more taxes to fund it. I’m not against it, but we need to have a serious shakeup of the way this country is run. Welfare payments are now exceeding income tax revenue for the first time. It’s also pretty embarrassing when the US can end people around the moon and back quicker than we can get one ship to Cyprus.

-1

Tumtitums Apr 11, 2026 -2

No its not . If it was sent recruitment would be increasing. The army barracks near me are still rarely used compare to 50 years ago

-2

ii-_- Apr 11, 2026 +3

Yes it is. You can't measure a country's preparedness on what's going on down the road from you.

3

mywifesoldestchild Apr 10, 2026 -29

The UK is joining the fight to prevent the release of the Epstein files???

-29

Minimum-Act-3030 Apr 10, 2026 -22

As an Indian whose grandfather went hunting with the British in Lahore quite frequently and spoke well about their bravery despite eventually coming to hate them when the rising tides of nationalism spread across the country, I wonder whether the British forces will still be able to make any difference or whether they are as incompetent as America.

-22

Admiral_Ackbar_1325 Apr 10, 2026 +6

Are you alleging American political incompetence, military incompetence, or both?

6

antihexafy Apr 11, 2026 +1

The former, which is heavily leaking into the latter due to several unilateral (dictator-esque) decisions made by tRump.

1

ii-_- Apr 11, 2026 +2

Comparing the UK to what is going on in the US is laughable, the UK is nowhere near as incompetent and dangerous.

2

UK preparing new plan to ready nation for war

💬 Send a Message

139 Comments