Jeffrey H. Michaels
banner
jmichael424.bsky.social
Jeffrey H. Michaels
@jmichael424.bsky.social
Affiliated with King's College London, Oxford CCW, RAND Europe, and the Hague Centre for Strategic Studies.
If so, they've chosen a rather cryptic way of communicating it. Between the SDR and the Sunday Times story that preceded it, the government seems to prefer the trial balloon approach rather than making a firm commitment.
June 11, 2025 at 1:21 PM
Very much hope you can follow this with a study on the contemporary utility of the bayonet
June 11, 2025 at 1:11 PM
Rather curious use of the word 'expected':

"The externally-led review is expected to recommend that our Armed Forces move to warfighting readiness to deter the growing threats faced by the UK. The report makes 62 recommendations, which the government is expected to accept in full."
June 2, 2025 at 6:24 AM
PS: I'm not sure how feasible this was in any event
December 5, 2024 at 8:53 AM
Always a tricky balance during CW. So much depended on Sov objectives + Sov willingness to initiate nuclear use if they felt opposition too strong. Thus legitimate question of utility of large scale conventional defence but I'd still prefer that option to the alternative.
December 5, 2024 at 8:40 AM
Quite so although sadly never really replaced with anything better. Approach seems to be 'insufficient and lose' rather than 'insufficient and escalate'. Doubtful 'insufficient and replace' ever taken seriously and never properly resourced.
December 5, 2024 at 8:14 AM
So much for the Cold War 'deliberate insufficiency' concept of escalating to nuclear use after the army is expended
December 5, 2024 at 7:35 AM
By South Korean standards at any rate
December 3, 2024 at 7:08 PM