BNP Manifesto GE2010: Defending Britain: BNP Defence Policy

April 28th, 2010 § 3 comments § permalink

The first thing I noticed was that the first policy in the BNPs manifesto is the defence policy. The Conservatives and Labour feature defence in the last sections of their documents, the LibDems have it near the middle, page 57 of 104. Read into that what you will.

Apparently our armed forces are in disarray and they intend to avoid the UK coming close “to the brink of destruction”, as apparently happened twice in the twentieth century, because of not spending enough.

The BNP intends to remove ourselves from collective security arrangements, presumably NATO and the EU and spend all the money that we have on developing and supplying British Weapons for British Soldiers.

The BNP aims to have an independent British military, equipped by British factories in all the essential needs of modern warfare.
Our independent force must include an independent nuclear deterrent and capability. These weapons would remain under British control.

So that’s light, medium and heavy guns that aren’t already British made. Tanks and aeroplanes. Oh, and all the ships, helicoptors, and other heavy machinery that the modern war machine needs. That’s all got to be developed and then made.

Then there’s all the communications gear. Y’know, radios, sat nav (which includes the satellites themselves), radar equipment. The list is endless and it will all have to be paid for by the taxpayer. Is it really necessary to have everything home made? Of course it isn’t.

Our independent force must include an independent nuclear deterrent and capability

I wouldn’t trust these clowns with a spud gun, never mind a big red button labelled ‘In an emergency, PUSH’.
Where is all this money coming from? Develop and make a whole independent arms industry and develop and make a new nuclear weapon. Boy, someone’s gonna have to work some overtime.

Britain must be prepared to launch limited operations where it is necessary to protect our citizens abroad and not be deterred by ‘world opinion’.

and it can.

The Falklands campaign was an obvious example where Britain needed to act, but more recently there were clear grounds to rescue people of British descent from the murderous regime in Zimbabwe

What? Did I just read that right?

… there were clear grounds to rescue people of British descent from the murderous regime in Zimbabwe.

What that statement says is that they BNP are prepared to go into a foreign country and “rescue” citizens of that country based on their colour. Not rescue British ex-pats or holiday-makers but Zimbabweans because some of their relatives might have come from Britain. Would they have checked out the geneology of the people they would rescue? No, of course not. It would’ve been a case of the white man gets on the boat and fuck the rest. I’m surprised They’re not calling for Zimbabwe to be renamed Rhodesia as it used to be.

We shall restore many of the historic regiments, particularly those from Scotland, which were disbanded by the Labour government.

Why? Would it reduce costs or improve the abilities of the forces? I understand that the military is feircely loyal to their regiments, but keeping any structure just for the sake of history when function is more important than form is just plain stupid.

We shall renegotiate our presence in NATO to ensure that we maintain independence and neutrality.

Ah, there it is. I wondered when that would come up. By ‘renegotiate our presence in NATO’ they mean leave NATO. A nation cannot be in NATO and be neutral. We leave NATO we can count on no one to come to our aid.

We will raise spending on defence by one percent over the rate of inflation for the next five years so that our forces may never again be committed to any conflict short of equipment or kit, as has been the case with the shameful deployment in the Tory/Labour war in Afghanistan.

Now, bear in mind what has just been said about an independently kitted British war machine, with nukes and everything, tell me, because I don’t know the figures, just roughly, is that one percent going to cover it? Nah, didn’t think so.

This last subsection in the defence section seems a little out of place. Surely it should be in the Culture, Traditions and Civil Society section?

We will introduce a Community Award Scheme for our young people which will take the form of a compulsory one year period for all school leavers during which they will work in the community as the final element of their education.
This scheme will allow young people to choose between a variety of community service options which might include, for example, caring for the elderly or disabled people, environmental or heritage restoration projects or military training

That’s a nice name for compulsory service, isn’t it. At least the youths will be able to choose what they’re forced to do.

The final choice of direction in this regard will be dictated by the school leaver’s scholastic record, preferences and suitability.

So the bullies get the guns and the bullied wipe arses, huh?

Service in this scheme would entitle each individual to receive something back from the society to which they have learnt to contribute, such as free university education, a properly supported apprenticeship or business training.

Instead of receiving guidance and help when you’re young and need it, you first have to earn it. You have to be taught how to contribute to society. You can’t just contribute in your own way, you have to be taught to BNP contribution way.

So what do have so far? We’re going to be neutral. We’re going to build and supply everything our forces needs, from nightvision goggles to aircraft carriers, ourselves. It’s going to be paid for by raising spending one percent over inflation for five years and our kids are going to be taught one particular way how to contribute to society.

Already things are all over the place… and this is just the first section.

What a waste of money…

October 30th, 2009 § 3 comments § permalink

This link, courtesy of Luna17, takes you to the billion-dollar-gram on the information is beautiful website, check it out:

Some highlights:

The OPEC climate change fund is only 0.06% of total OPEC earnings

The value  of the Internet Porn Industry is almost as large as the amount of foreign aid given by the World’s Major Nations

The US defence budget is nearly large enough to feed and educate every child on earth for 5 years

The amount of money that the UK government spent on bailing out the banks would have more than covered the entire debt owed by African Nations to the West…..

Part of me, unfortunately, is not very surprised at the sheer scale of waste and inequality.  What is clear is that the necessary resources exist for us to transform the world – we don’t need huge leaps in technology, or to rely on developing countries to grow their economies for the next 50 years  -we need permanent  Redistribution…

The BNP Defence ‘policy’

June 5th, 2009 § 6 comments § permalink

The BNP Defence Policy…

British soldiers’ lives are one of the most valuable assets this nation has, and should only be risked in conflicts in which British interests are directly affected.

This simple and logical core belief is paramount to the British National Party’s defence policy, which demands self-sufficiency for our island nation in all aspects.

‘Self-sufficiency’ in all aspects? How do you propose to go about that then? No country can be self sufficient in everything. In their ‘How the BNP will Rebuild Britains Economy’ they say…

the BNP calls for the selective exclusion of foreign-made goods from British markets and the reduction of foreign imports. We will ensure that our manufactured goods are, wherever possible, produced in British factories, employing British workers.

That’s not quite the same as being self sufficient in all respects, is it? Again, back to the defence policy..

Britain can only be safe if it is able to defend itself without being dependent on any other country. Britain therefore needs to have a credible and independent defence against all threats – and the ability to use this wisely.

How safe do these guys really think we will be if we told other countries ‘Y’know what? We’ll be fine on our own now, thank you very much.’ No more being chumly with the US and their proper big nukes. No more sharing information, having to work it all out for ourselves.
I know that at the moment and every now and again the Americans shoot us down or screw us with or for intel, and that does need to be sorted out I don’t disagree, but wouldn’t it be better to have a flow of information about what ‘the enemy’ is doing and sharing of the burden of flying the aircraft and moving tanks about than to take it all on by yourself? The problem we have at the moment isn’t the sharing and co-operation between countries, it is what those countries are doing and why they are doing it that sticks in the throat.

The policy is…
-Strengthen our conventional forces;
More soldiers. Well, that sorts out the unemployment figures then.

– Retain a genuinely independent nuclear deterrent and produce all our weaponry in Britain;
We haven’t had a genuinely independent nuclear weapon since the sixties. That is going to cost a shit load of money and put us outside a few treaties concerning nuclear weapons which would help us on our way truly self-sufficient. Trident would have to go. All that money we would have to spend developing a nuke that could be spent on hospitals or education…

– Only commit British forces when British national interests are at stake;
What is our interests? Was Iraq in our interest? It could be argued tat it was.

– Preserve and restore our historic County Regiments;
Why? Would it be purely for tradition? Sometimes, with operational requirements traditions have to be given a lower priority. It would be silly, especially when lives are at stake, to just keep doing something the same way just because it’s always been done that way.

– Bring our troops back from Germany and withdraw from NATO, since political developments make both commitments obsolete;
Becoming a pariah state by persuing our own nukes will help with that one.

– Close all foreign military bases on British soil;
Again, that will probably happen anyway when the BNP government stop co-operating and helping all our ex-international buddies.

– Refuse to risk British lives in meddling ‘peacekeeping’ missions in parts of the world where no British interests are at stake;
Again, what constitutes a British interest? Isn’t that attitude a bit, well, shouldn’t we go and help civilians that genuinely need our help?

– Restore national service for our young with the option of civil or military service.
Along with a compulsory citizenship organisation for young people?

And lastly. Independent or not, would you like these people to have their finger on the big red button?

Bloggerheads has a collection of links to the rest of the policies

Where Am I?

You are currently browsing entries tagged with defence at Sim-O.