British Battleships to head for Middle East

Perverse isnt it that this region is called "The holy land"

The Middle East has been beset with strife for years, having oil in vast quantities doesnt help. These countries are racked with social and economic problems, and it doesnt help when the religious element in these countries wield so much power, the ayatollahs and mullahs in Iran for example.

Religion, a wonderful thing, has been corrupted for man's own special needs. There is a lot of fear and aggression out there, some of it undoubtedly caused by the West in quest of their own self interest and greed. Things will undoubtedly get worse before they get better.

One thing I keep thinking is that Mankind is always telling us to celebrate the diversity and difference between religions, races, etc, yes that is important, and it should be celebrated. However wouldnt it be more important and rewarding to celebrate the similarities we share, and to foster a strengthened kinship to our fellow humans, who our brothers and sisters?

personally i'd love to see some British Battleships... considering our last one was broken up 40 years ago...

I served in the Navy for 8 years, and hate it when all ships are referrred to as Battleships, now 'lusty (HMS Illustrious to you guys ;D) Is a Strike Carrier,

And Bulwark is a Marine Carrier (*cough*) Amphibious Assault Ship.

I suspect that these two are there merely to 'fly-the-flag', Considering that 'Lusty isn't fully worked up to strength yet after her refit, and Bulwark is still 'wet behind the ears'.

If Israel did fire on a RN Warship, then things would definately heat up. But remember, we have the best navy in the world no-matter what people say.

I believe those two ships were selected because, 'Lusty can sink ships and attack the shore being an Aircraft Carrier, and Bulwark can pick up survivors/land troops ashore. But our armed forces are stretched as it is, i don't think a third front is a wise decision on the part of our government...

Cheers,
~ Matloughe

yeah most people say that, lol.

You have to remember Belfast is a pre-WWII Cruiser (Mid-Sized Ship) The only real difference between Belfast and more modern ships are the water tight doors.

Modern water tight doors are 18'' above the floor, and the doors on Belfast are 21'' from the floor. I know the amount of bruised legs i got for not raising my feet high enough over the door is unimagineable, lol.

Steel and Flesh do not mix, ;D

Cheers,
~ Matloughe

P.S. Being in the Navy is where my Screename actually comes from. Ask any one who's been in the Fleet at any time.

Looking at the gun placements on the front of Belfast made me aware of how powerful the guns really are. Plus looking at the on-board dentist I wouldn't really fancy living down there for a few months.


A question matloughe, the stairs were really f**king steep on HMS Belfast.. It took me 5 minutes to get up and down them...how do you get around that if you're in a battle? cause surely those 5 minutes could mean a life?

I'm sure that once you're used to them you'd get up and down a lot quicker. especially when you really needed to!

I went on a (decommissioned) Royal Navy submarine once. The doorways in the bulkheads are so small that they have a bar above, the idea being that you hold on to that and sort of swing your legs through. Needless to say I made a right hash of it (being 6 feet tall didn't help).

I actually find this news story quite reassuring - if I got stuck in some warzone somewhere I'd want the navy to rescue me!

Heh heh. It's not all getting killed! There are some very stagnant views of the army. Never the less, this day was heavily based on singing the army's praises and it was biased. Based it al on recruitment all the way. They showed us all the guns, just didnt tell us the consequences, for example!

[/quote]Belfast's guns are only 9" i believe, so not very powerful. the biggest guns the Royal Navy ever had was 16[/quote]

Belfast's guns are 6" not 9" and biggest guns the Royal Navy ever had was 18" on the Battlecruiser HMS Furious.