Europe

[Furunculus]

Selectively quoting?
It was the full line, you claimed...we have the second largest official defence budget .....nothing misleading about what I wrote at all .
However your claim was just outright false, which would be a very misleading impression if it wasn't such obvious bollox.

for anyone else that is interested in a masterclass in pointless obfuscation that dodges every relevant issue in the debate with incorrect nit-picking, i give you Tribesman:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showp...7&postcount=61

why?

why should britain let fear of a changing world warp its mentality?

we have the second largest official defence budget

we have the joint fifth largest economy

our trade is split 50/50 between the EU and the rest of the world

we have security alliances with our neighbours and the major anglosphere powers

for what reason does britain need to be a part of a federated EU?

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showp...2&postcount=64

don't you mean 4th , after America China and errrrr.....France.
But don't worry you also spend a smaller proportion of your GDP on defence than France.
What you should be aiming for is defence spending like Ireland , that comes in as 147th in the world .
Or even better go for Icelands approach and spend absolutely nothing

You have the 2nd largest external debt

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showp...4&postcount=65

i'm going by the International Institute for Strategic Studies: The Military Balance 2008 edition, not wikipedia. i did in fact state that in the original post, but i edited out precisely because i knew i could have so much fun with careless nitpickers, and guess who showed up.

and so what? i'm not saying its great, but times are tough you know and we have just had 12 years of labour throwing money up the wall.

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showp...6&postcount=77

So what . Are you disputing the figures from HM treasury and the French dept. of defence?

And before that you had 18 years of the conservatives not only throwing money up the wall but selling off the countries assets for peanuts

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showp...8&postcount=80

Defence spending is a very complex thing Tribesman, and very hard to compare.
Does set of figures X include:
> operational expenses
> attrition replacement
> equipment procurement
> R&D projects
> Intelligence apparatus
Then you must ask yourself if figures for nation Y include the same, and they mostly do not.
For example while the Gendarmerie are under the control of the Interior Ministry I believe they are funded from the Defence budget.
So official figures published from their respective nations have little merit for comparative purposes, which is why i went to the trouble of getting the figures pulished by the IISS in the 2008 publication of The Military Balance.

again, so what? how does that relate to having a vast public debt which derives from annual additional public spending which amounts to £200+ billion each year since 97?

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showp...4&postcount=81

Yeah , new destroyers coming in at 157million over budget wouldn't be in the budget would it.
And you want more of them

somehow this is an adequate response to the issue of how defence budgets can be compared............
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showp...8&postcount=82

ah, the second rule of tribesman debating; obfuscate in a cloud of nonsense the fact that you picked out point to argue about that was totally irrelevant to the argument in question, and was wrong to boot.

[edit] and the third tactic; where you shroud your comment in derisory smileys in a effort to make your point seem so obvious that no one else need look into the matter further. [/edit]

good going.

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showp...5&postcount=83

Wrong?
Look....
No you have the fourth, simple isn't it . And as you stated "official" then the only relevant source is the official defence budget.

It is obvious, there is no need to look any further.
Your country has huge debts.
It cannot pay for the military it already has.
What it is buying is costing more than it allowed for and is getting delivered late.
And you want them to spend more even though they can't afford it, and buy more even though they ain't getting what they already bought??????

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showp...4&postcount=84

the word "official" is there to point out that most military think-tanks believe that china massively under-reports its defence budget, so its not a little bit under or over the UK and france, it is probably about 30% higher, if not even higher.

really Tribesman, you do yourself no favours, as surely i am not the only one to notice that the majority of your debating style is to spout ridiculous and irrelevant nonsense, and smothered in smileys, in the hope that no-one looks to deeply at your 'response'.

you're intelligent enough to debate very well on your own merits, you should try it sometime. :)

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showp...&postcount=101

So if they under-report their budget does that mean its really bigger?
As they are officially 2nd does that mean they are even more second?
That wierd, still puts Britain in 4th not 2nd.

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showp...&postcount=107

So if they under-report their budget does that mean its really bigger?
As they are officially 2nd does that mean they are even more second?

not that anyone would ever accuse you of selectively quoting to create an misleading impression, but yes, that's exactly what i said too:

the word "official" is there to point out that most military think-tanks believe that china massively under-reports its defence budget, so its not a little bit under or over the UK and france, it is probably about 30% higher, if not even higher.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That wierd, still puts Britain in 4th not 2nd.

that is because you still haven't figured out that comparing national figures of what they consider to be their defence spending is not relevant, but i did try:

Defence spending is a very complex thing Tribesman, and very hard to compare.
Does set of figures X include:
> operational expenses
> attrition replacement
> equipment procurement
> R&D projects
> Intelligence apparatus
Then you must ask yourself if figures for nation Y include the same, and they mostly do not.
For example while the Gendarmerie are under the control of the Interior Ministry I believe they are funded from the Defence budget.
So official figures published from their respective nations have little merit for comparative purposes, which is why i went to the trouble of getting the figures pulished by the IISS in the 2008 publication of The Military Balance.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

but to return to the core question; what is the point of your pointless (and incorrect) nit-picking, are you leading somewhere with this?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

truly awesome display there Tribesman.

you are either trolling for fun, or thoroughly deficient of understanding, either way I am happy for you to continue as long as you don't derail the thread, i am having quite enough fun as it is.