Respect My Authority!!
The BBC reports on the official naming of the first of two absurdly expensive aircraft carriers commissioned by the last Labour Government at the eye watering cost of £6 billion - and that doesn't include the running costs or the hugely expensive warplanes required to make the damn things operational.
Having got by perfectly well for the past 25 years or so without an operational aircraft carrier, the UK now has two of these while elephants which the country cash ill-afford and even if it could no one really knows what purpose they would serve, although the country's First Sea Lord is clearly wetting his pants with silly comments about the ships being a 'national instrument of power and national symbol of authority'.
How pathetic.
Queen names new Royal Navy aircraft carrier in Rosyth
The UK's largest warship marks "a new phase in our naval history", the Queen has said, as the vessel was officially named in her honour at a ceremony at Fife's Rosyth Dockyard.
A bottle of whisky was smashed on the hull of the 65,000-tonne HMS Queen Elizabeth - the first of two new Royal Navy aircraft carriers being built.
The Red Arrows flew over the dockyard before the ship was officially named.
First Sea Lord Admiral George Zambellas said the ship was "fit for a Queen".
"HMS Queen Elizabeth will be a national instrument of power and a national symbol of authority," he said in a speech.
"That means she will be a national icon too, all the while keeping the great in Great Britain and the royal in Royal Navy."
'Inspiration and pride'
Addressing the audience, the Queen said the "innovative and first class" warship, the largest ever to be built in the UK, ushered in an "exciting new era".
"In sponsoring this new aircraft carrier, I believe the Queen Elizabeth will be a source of inspiration and pride for us all," she said.
"May God bless her and all who sail in her."
The Queen was accompanied by the Duke of Edinburgh for the ceremony
The Red Arrows flew over the dockyard before the Queen officially named the ship
The monarch pressed a button to release a bottle of whisky, which smashed against the ship
HMS Queen Elizabeth is the first of two new Royal Navy aircraft carriers being built
About 3,500 people involved in the design and construction of the carrier watched the celebrations, alongside dignitaries and politicians including Prime Minister David Cameron, First Minister Alex Salmond and former prime minister Gordon Brown.
Mr Cameron said it was a "very proud day" for Scotland and the UK, while Mr Salmond said it was a "huge day" for the workers and their families.
Ian Booth, of the Aircraft Carrier Alliance which is overseeing the ship's construction, said it was a "historic occasion".
"The ship truly reflects the very best of British design and ingenuity and we all feel an enormous honour to see Her Majesty name her today," he said in a speech.
A bottle of single malt whisky was smashed to mark the naming of the aircraft carrier, described by the Queen as ''a magnificent achievement''
The Red Arrows fly-past was followed by a procession of three generations of Royal Navy aircraft, including a historic 1950s de Havilland Sea Vixen fighter - the last and only flying aircraft of its kind in the world.
The Queen oversaw the ceremony by pressing a button to release a bottle of Islay malt whisky - suspended at the front of the ship - to smash on to the hull. The whisky was from the Bowmore Distillery, the first distillery the Queen ever visited in an official capacity.
The naming ceremony, a naval tradition dating back thousands of years, marked the first time in more than 15 years that the Queen has christened a Royal Navy warship.
Six shipyards in the UK including Tyne, Rosyth and Appledore have been involved in building parts of the carrier.
More than 10,000 people at more than 100 companies have worked on HMS Queen Elizabeth, which has been beset by construction and design delays.
The estimated cost of the vessel and its sister ship is £6.2bn, well over the initial projected cost of £3.65bn.
The warship is as long as 25 buses and can carry 40 jets and helicopters at a time. It will have a permanent crew of almost 1,600 when it enters service in 2020.
Mr Booth described it as a "floating military city that can deploy aircraft, that can act as a disaster relief centre".
The BBC's Jonathan Beale looks at how to land a fighter jet on a warship
Analysis
Glenn Campbell, BBC Scotland political correspondent
It so happens that the Royal Navy has chosen to name and float its new aircraft carrier on American Independence Day.
Yet this ceremony signals the UK's intention to continue to independently project military power in the world for decades to come.
Albeit that the largest warship ever built in Britain will carry US-made fighter jets.
But one question that arises is: in whose name will HMS Queen Elizabeth and its air crews operate when they come into service in 2020?
Will it be the flagship of the UK as it currently exists or only for England, Wales and Northern Ireland if Scotland chooses its own independence in September's referendum?
The UK government argues that the union offers Scotland greater security as well as greater job prospects for thousands of Scottish defence workers.
The Scottish government believes NATO would guarantee an independent Scotland's defence and that shipyards such as Rosyth and Govan would continue to prosper by winning orders from both the UK and Scottish defence ministries.
The huge choice that Scotland faces looms large at the naming of a very big ship.
Major construction
The carrier has still to be fitted out and floated, to make way for the assembly of its sister ship HMS Prince of Wales.
Assembly of HMS Prince of Wales is set to begin at Rosyth later this year.
The naming of the first of the two ships comes five years after the first metal was cut on the vessel and 33 months after the first section entered the dry dock at Rosyth for assembly.
About 3,500 people involved in the design and construction of the carrier watched the celebrations, alongside dignitaries and politicians including Prime Minister David Cameron, First Minister Alex Salmond and former prime minister Gordon Brown.
Mr Cameron said it was a "very proud day" for Scotland and the UK, while Mr Salmond said it was a "huge day" for the workers and their families.
Ian Booth, of the Aircraft Carrier Alliance which is overseeing the ship's construction, said it was a "historic occasion".
"The ship truly reflects the very best of British design and ingenuity and we all feel an enormous honour to see Her Majesty name her today," he said in a speech.
A bottle of single malt whisky was smashed to mark the naming of the aircraft carrier, described by the Queen as ''a magnificent achievement''
The Red Arrows fly-past was followed by a procession of three generations of Royal Navy aircraft, including a historic 1950s de Havilland Sea Vixen fighter - the last and only flying aircraft of its kind in the world.
The Queen oversaw the ceremony by pressing a button to release a bottle of Islay malt whisky - suspended at the front of the ship - to smash on to the hull. The whisky was from the Bowmore Distillery, the first distillery the Queen ever visited in an official capacity.
The naming ceremony, a naval tradition dating back thousands of years, marked the first time in more than 15 years that the Queen has christened a Royal Navy warship.
Six shipyards in the UK including Tyne, Rosyth and Appledore have been involved in building parts of the carrier.
More than 10,000 people at more than 100 companies have worked on HMS Queen Elizabeth, which has been beset by construction and design delays.
The estimated cost of the vessel and its sister ship is £6.2bn, well over the initial projected cost of £3.65bn.
The warship is as long as 25 buses and can carry 40 jets and helicopters at a time. It will have a permanent crew of almost 1,600 when it enters service in 2020.
Mr Booth described it as a "floating military city that can deploy aircraft, that can act as a disaster relief centre".
The BBC's Jonathan Beale looks at how to land a fighter jet on a warship
Analysis
Glenn Campbell, BBC Scotland political correspondent
It so happens that the Royal Navy has chosen to name and float its new aircraft carrier on American Independence Day.
Yet this ceremony signals the UK's intention to continue to independently project military power in the world for decades to come.
Albeit that the largest warship ever built in Britain will carry US-made fighter jets.
But one question that arises is: in whose name will HMS Queen Elizabeth and its air crews operate when they come into service in 2020?
Will it be the flagship of the UK as it currently exists or only for England, Wales and Northern Ireland if Scotland chooses its own independence in September's referendum?
The UK government argues that the union offers Scotland greater security as well as greater job prospects for thousands of Scottish defence workers.
The Scottish government believes NATO would guarantee an independent Scotland's defence and that shipyards such as Rosyth and Govan would continue to prosper by winning orders from both the UK and Scottish defence ministries.
The huge choice that Scotland faces looms large at the naming of a very big ship.
Major construction
The carrier has still to be fitted out and floated, to make way for the assembly of its sister ship HMS Prince of Wales.
Assembly of HMS Prince of Wales is set to begin at Rosyth later this year.
The naming of the first of the two ships comes five years after the first metal was cut on the vessel and 33 months after the first section entered the dry dock at Rosyth for assembly.
HMS Illustrious sailed under the Forth Rail Bridge on Tuesday night on its way to Rosyth
The aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth has been assembled in Rosyth
Firefighters had to be called to a fire on board the ship last month. It is believed that a small fire had started in one of the vessel's hull compartments.
Fire crews reported only minor damage.
Firefighters had to be called to a fire on board the ship last month. It is believed that a small fire had started in one of the vessel's hull compartments.
Fire crews reported only minor damage.
Defence of the Realm (28 January 2014)
Defence budgets and defence cuts are the talk of the town at the moment - which reminded me of the following extract from Alan Clark's diaries.
For the uninitiated, Alan Clark was a minister in Margaret Thatcher's government - not one of the so-called 'wets' by any means - but he was famously sceptical about the tendency of the military boffins to spend public money on madcap projects.
Ministry of Defence - Tuesday 3 April 1990.
For months I have been resisting expenditure (some hundreds of millions) on a completely unneccessary new piece of Army equipment known by its acronym as ACEATM.
It is a 'sideways firing mine - itself an unlikely, indeed contradictory concept, surely? The idea is that you position one of these incredibly 'intelligent' and expensive devices in the window of a house and when a tank goes past it shoots out at it, 'sideways'.
From the first moment I saw the papers it was clear that this was a complete waste of money., conceived at the height of the Cold war and now totally unnecessary. Trouble is, I'm not really meant to question 'Operational Requirements'. I'm meant to seek and then, by implication, follow advice on anything about which I have doubts. In the nature of things, the advice comes from the same people who drafted the 'Requirements' in the first place.
Finally, after much deferment, a full-scale 'Meeting' was called.
'You leave them behind, you see, to slow up the enemy's advance.'
'What advance?'
'Well, er, his advance, Minister.'
'What enemy?'
'The Warsaw Pact, Minister'
'The warsaw pact no longer exists. It's disintegrated.'
'In villages, in built-up areas,' shouted somebody else, also in uniform. Why the fuck are these people in uniform? It's not allowed. Just to intimidate me, they think.
'O thought the first rule in deploying armour was to avoid built-up areas?'
'Roads, Minister. Choke points.'
'what happens if a truck goes past. That would be a waste, wouldn't it? How does it know not to shoot?'
'Well it knows, Minister. It's programmed with all the Warsaw Pact silhouettes.'
'Warsaw Pact?'
'There's a l;ot f Russian stuff Out of Area now, you know.'
'I do know.'
'It's next generation, Minister. A very intelligent sensor.'
'Better programme it to recognise all the French stuff, then.'
'Ha-ha, Minister. Oh, ha-ha.'
What can one do? Nothing. I can block this spastic weapon, and make them cross, and complaining. But about them I can do nothing.
I want to fire the whole lot. Instantly. Out, out. No 'District' commands, no golden bowlers, nothing. Out. There are so many good, tough keen young officers who aren't full of shit. How can we bring them on, before they get dissillusioned, or conventionalised by the sytem? If I could, I'd do what Stalin did to Tukhachevsky*.
* The purges of the Red Army in 1938-9 when three-quarters of all officers of field rank and above were put to firing squads.
Now I'm pretty sure Alan Clark wouldn't have sent anyone to the firing squad - but you do get a sense of the deep frustration felt by politicians in trying to deal with the insatiable demands of their military advisers.
The last Labour government could have done with someone like Alan Clark - in considering whether or not to build two new, incredibly expensive, aircraft carriers - which are likely to become the military equivalent of 'white elephants' if and when they finally come into service.
The present government could do with someone like Alan Clark on board as well - to explain that an 'independent' nuclear deterrent in the shape of Trident is a complete fiction, the wrong priority for British armed forces - and a terrible waste of money to boot.
Tilting at Windmills (19 October 2010)
In the famous book Don Quixote, the eponymous Spanish hero makes a prize fool of himself - by declaring his intention to do battle with a band of giants he sees in the distance.Sancho Panza - his loyal servant and companion - saves Don Quixote from his own stupidity.
By pointing out that the 'giants' are actually windmills and pose no threat to the gallant knight - or anyone else for that matter.But it seems as if the spirit of Don Quixote is alive and well - among present day politicians - as far as defence policy goes.
First of all they place orders for two new aircraft carriers - that no one needs or wants.Later it becomes clear that there are not enough aircraft to operate these hulking behemoths successfully - to fly on and off in sufficient numbers - to bomb some real or imaginary enemy into submission - in some far-flung foreign land.
The previous Labour government commissioned the two aircraft carriers - and the coalition government seems to have little choice by to continue with the project - because they are too costly to cancel.But Lord Guthrie, former chief of Defence Staff, says that the Royal Navy will regret pushing for both vessels because of the costs.
"I think they are a bad use of money but they may have been impossible to cancel", Lord Guthrie explained. "I would not be surprised if the Royal Navy doesn't come to rue the day that they fought for two expensive aircraft carriers."Spending vast sums of money on these vanity projects is a terrible waste - of all the other countries in Europe - only France is bonkers enough to pour public money down the drain in this way - and they have a reputation as 'cheese-eating, surrender monkeys' .
What's plain as the nose on your face - is that politicians have got their priorities all wrong.
Because two new aircraft carriers is just about the last thing the country needs - at the present time.
By pointing out that the 'giants' are actually windmills and pose no threat to the gallant knight - or anyone else for that matter.But it seems as if the spirit of Don Quixote is alive and well - among present day politicians - as far as defence policy goes.
First of all they place orders for two new aircraft carriers - that no one needs or wants.Later it becomes clear that there are not enough aircraft to operate these hulking behemoths successfully - to fly on and off in sufficient numbers - to bomb some real or imaginary enemy into submission - in some far-flung foreign land.
The previous Labour government commissioned the two aircraft carriers - and the coalition government seems to have little choice by to continue with the project - because they are too costly to cancel.But Lord Guthrie, former chief of Defence Staff, says that the Royal Navy will regret pushing for both vessels because of the costs.
"I think they are a bad use of money but they may have been impossible to cancel", Lord Guthrie explained. "I would not be surprised if the Royal Navy doesn't come to rue the day that they fought for two expensive aircraft carriers."Spending vast sums of money on these vanity projects is a terrible waste - of all the other countries in Europe - only France is bonkers enough to pour public money down the drain in this way - and they have a reputation as 'cheese-eating, surrender monkeys' .
What's plain as the nose on your face - is that politicians have got their priorities all wrong.
Because two new aircraft carriers is just about the last thing the country needs - at the present time.
