Twitxy Saved

Iain Ballantyne

Verified account This account is verified. Learn more

@IBallantyn

Editor @WarshipsIFR Author 'Martin's Eyes' (out now), 'Hunter Killers', 'Killing the Bismarck' & 'The Deadly Trade' + more. Rep @PFDAgents Warships Pod host.
iainballantyne.com Joined April 2015
1.8K Following 5.8K Followers 30K Posts

Latest posts 5

Pinned post

Iain Ballantyne Verified account @IBallantyn
Fact: these Germans found lurking in the woods were easily captured by a nervous American soldier. Fiction (partly based on fact): British war crimes investigator Captain Eric Wise is after one that got away into the forests of southern Austria. But when found, Eric's quarry gets the drop on him...

‘Before I settle on what to do with you, let’s have a few more drinks. Let’s tell our stories - and if I like yours...’ The German paused to grin arrogantly and then added: ‘Maybe I’ll let you live.’

The epic story with all its twists and turns unfolds in my novel 'Martin's Eyes' @chiselbury

Available from Amazon amazon.co.uk/Martins-Eyes-I…

For more info check out the publisher's page chiselbury.co.uk/product/martin…
5 replies 3 reposts 34 likes 172K views View on X
Iain Ballantyne Verified account @IBallantyn
Meet the new Frank Drebbin (apologies to Leslie Nielsen)...
The Telegraph Verified account @Telegraph Nov 1
John Healey has admitted his plan to increase the defence budget to 3 per cent of GDP is a “target”, raising concerns it will not be reached by the end of the decade.

The Chancellor said on Sunday that Britain would “look to” hit a “target date” of spending 3 per cent of GDP in 2030, but declined to set out a firm “commitment” ⤵️
telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/…
View quoted post on X
3 replies 3 reposts 16 likes 813 views View on X
Iain Ballantyne Verified account @IBallantyn
Are you being ironic @nicholadrummond ? With respect, no we don't have Navy First, clearly (and have not since at least 2003). As it shows, we have a National Strategic Nuclear Deterrent Policy First - and the SSNs are intrinsic to protecting the nuclear deterrent, with at least three SSNs needed on that duty all the time (tho' the bulk of the money goes to the current and future strategic deterrent in one form or another). And btw there will not be 12 AUKUS SSNs. That is a fantasy. Never happen. Nine (the original desire) if you are lucky, but more like six or seven, and even that may be doubtful.

If the nuclear deterrent could survive and be effective launched from land or the air, then would you say it's Army First or RAF First? It is something the RN does for the nation - it is a political strategic weapon and so, imho, should not be funded as part of the Defence budget per se.

It creates a dreadful mindset in defence uneducated politicians who neglect conventional deterrent. They must think the nuclear option is a first resort rather than the last.

So, take the nuclear enterprise, including the boats (SSBNs and some SSNs) and the support infrastructure, out of this calculation and we have an RAF First, Army Second and Navy Third Policy (which is what this pie chart shows). It should be Navy First, RAF Second and Army Third (but all of them bigger and more capable than the current shambles is producing). We can agree is not a wise thing to let our current front line military decay into a malfunctioning mess - something yesterday's budget has reinforced while notionally boosting defence some time around 2030. Faith in governments to perform defence of the UK properly is gone tbh.
Nicholas Drummond Verified account @nicholadrummond Oct 28
This pie chart shows the split in defence expenditure between the three services. The yellow area also includes 12 AUKUS submarines within the Defence Nuclear Enterprise. Please don't say we need a Navy First strategy – we already have one.
View quoted post on X