UK at war within 1000 days

[HumbleStumble]

Wes Streeting has said Britain must be ready for war in 1,000 days. This combined with the advice to stockpile while you can is highly inflammatory and worrying. AIBU to think that if there is a specific threat he should be specific? If it's a nuclear threat then he should say. We are lucky to have access to what is effectively a bunker but what can you do if you live in a bedsit in the London borough of suburbia?

I reckon it is the 50% of the population that lack sufficient comprehension and critical thinking skills to understand the news.

Perhaps that might require a different thread, rather than derailing this one.

I through lived the Cold War. This is heading to Cold War 2.0 but, as with Cold War 1.0, there will be no physical combat. As our stuff is more dependent on the internet and, obviously, electrical supply, there may be interruption in the supply of stuff. We can cope until we can’t cope. And then it will get intermittently uncomfortable. Get a buffer of food in. Nothing insane or unaffordable. As a kid in the 70s, I remember power cuts as an exciting game. My late mum remembered it differently.

A lot of what I have read lately has talked about the peace dividend that we have been spending, generally described as diverted to social spending. The US contribution to Nato which was far higher that Europe’s and that globalisation works because goods transported by sea have been able to do so with more safety due to the US navy often being the ones patrolling sea ways. Now the US seems keen to change its relationship with us and therefore we need to consider what the implications of that are and how we need to act and organise in future. It’s a general conversation really as the implications are multifaceted.

What religion or ideology is responsible for most of the terrorist attacks here in the last 20-25 years? This is readily available information.

Labour won't still be in power in a 1000 days time. If there is war we will need someone of stature to run the country, not the Manchester mayor.

Wish Ukraine would bomb these tedious arseholes again.

'Now the US seems keen to change its relationship with us and therefore we need to consider what the implications of that are and how we need to act and organise in future.'

Well, yes, the US relationship with the rest of the world has changed under Trump. I really, really want to know what Putin's got on him. Because it's summat big and probably very embarrassing. For Trump to use the world as collateral to stop Putin releasing whatever information he has is megalomania in the extreme.

I think it is a sensible thing to say.
The UK and the West as a whole have become complacent to the idea of threats. For decades we have had the USA to look after us. And have spent minimally on our security of any sort. The one thing I agree with Trump was when he moaned to Europe about coughing up more for our security.
We should.
It is not inflammatory. It is responsive to countries who are not our friends.

The threat is cyber hacking and cutting power and internet cables on the ocean bed.
So he means we have to be prepared for power and internet cuts. That's it. No need for any bunkers unless you have access to your own generator and satellite in there.

From what you can glean the relationship with Putin and Trump stems from his first marriage and Ivana’s father. On Wikipedia it explains.

Read it again. He used the ‘not simply… but also…’ construction so he was saying that Russian tanks rolling across our borders were indeed a threat. So he did misspeak.

Who?

Thank goodness Michael Gove introduced education reform that has seen the reading and writing skills of young people improve. Because it's pretty clear from OP and other comments that comprehension in the wider community is somewhat lacking.

Either that or OP is being disingenuous.

Wes has NOT said we will be at war in 1000 days for goodness sake.

A threat from who? Putin/Russia who can’t even beat Ukraine?

I don’t think US presidents after Trump are going to put less pressure on re:other countries defence spending. Plenty of US presidents before Trump complained about it so I don’t see any reason why they would roll back on that side of things post-Trump even if relationships with the US stabilise in other areas.

On the op headlines are cheap, they get people worried, what they’ll need to do is fund defence more.

Not Reform, obviously. My cat has more stature than Farage. As well as being considerably more intelligent.

1000 days? Best check those BBE dates on those tins then.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amphibious_warfare

You really might want to consider taking your unpleasant views elsewhere. No religion advocates for terrorism.

It's isn't Ukraine in isolation, it's Ukraine being propped up with an enormous amount of logistical, financial, materiel, intelligence, and technical support from most of Europe and beyond.

Without that Ukraine would have collapsed in weeks even considering the amateurish misadventures of the Russian military.

The reality is not so much Ukraine comfortably holding off Russia as it is Russia still managing to prosecute a war against most of the rest of the Democratic world, only it's taking place entirely in Ukraine and it's overwhelmingly Ukrainian lives paying the price.

Once this is resolved, all Russia has to do to completely destroy NATO as a going concern is snip off and hold a small part of Estonia or Latvia, and then they'll be free to do the same to practically any other European Nation near their border as they have to Ukraine, only chances are that nation, Finland for example, is going to be far less able to resist Russian aggression simply because it's nowhere near the size of Ukraine and poses nothing like the same logistical issues.

This is why it's of utmost importance to ensure Russia loses this current fight. It isn't just about protecting Ukraine, it's also about diminishing Putin to the point whereby even his own supporters lose confidence and would not countenance another military misadventure.

During WW2, ten times as many Europeans died from lack of food than from being bombed. Yet people fear bombs far more than malnutrition or hunger.

I think the chances of bombings are very small in the UK, but if we do go to war the chances of food shortages are significant.

How exactly are we supposed to prepare? 12 litres of water, tinned meat and some cash is not going to help in a cyber attack. If all our systems go down we'll be fucked. They've spent billions on tech and AI if that can't protect us nothing we can do will make any difference. Good luck using electric cars when Armageddon comes.

The last successful amphibious invasion of the UK took place in the 11th century. No tanks back then. It hasn't happened since because it's a practical impossibility. The UK only survived the conflict with Nazi Germany because it is an island, and in 1940 the Nazis had total and unhindered control of all the nearest land masses to the UK, so if they were unable to do it then, there is absolutely no prospect of Russia being able to do anything similar when their nearest launch point is 1500km away.