I wish that journalists would research a bit before publishing sensationalism and become known as FAKE-NEWS, a tag that is not desired among decent people. Yesterday, there was an article in one of the British newspapers that “a pair of Royal Navy helicopters touched down on the four-acre flight deck of the ‘Big Lizzie’ (my word, what an insulting name but whatever), the Royal Navy’s £3.1 billion supercarrier.” Now I understand patriotism. Today is the 4th of July, my late wife’s country’s Independence Day and there cannot be a more patriotic woman than she in life. And I see the irony from whom they gained their independence too, the Brits, and then I read the above article. I wrote about the Queen Elizabeth carriers in Code Name Ghost, a book on maritime reconnaissance using quiet diesel-electric submarines and I revealed the new Chinese Naval Base at Walfish Bay, in Namibia, hidden and disguised as a container port. For the sake of posterity, let me quote to make my point, there is nothing “supercarrier” about the Queen Elizabeth Class, nothing: -
... The Royal Navy once led the way with aircraft carriers as the British Army did with tanks and Special Forces, and then lost it, completely, because of the turds in Whitehall rather giving themselves pay hikes instead of taking care of Her Majesty’s Forces (we call politicians of all inclinations “turds” in GMJ Books, they float in what they talk, GMJ). They would give money, serious amounts, hundreds of millions of pounds, to countries like India. Never mind that India stated flatly that they don’t need nor want the handouts, the country has its own space program, and yet, every year, same story. It is insane to say the least and mark my word, nothing will be done to stop the madness. There is nothing like a turd grinning for the cameras whilst wasting taxpayer money. The new Queen Elizabeth carriers are not true carriers in the American and French mode, they will operate and fly the Lockheed Martin F-35B, a Short Take-Off and Vertical Landing (STOVL) aircraft. This is an airplane that cannot dogfight, has very limited range and weapon loads and is not stealthy to begin with (see Code Name Lucy, the Chinese Navy’s Aegis destroyers can track and shoot down the F-22 & F-35 at 200 plus miles if not more, Angelique). Sea Harriers would have made a much better choice, at least they were British and able to dogfight with the best but so it is, bad policy decisions designed to make the UK look bad.
It gets worse, I am sorry to say. In 2016, the fighting strength of the Royal Navy was a pathetic 24 ships, none of these were major vessels and to put this into perspective, the US Navy, always depending on their cousins to help out in whatever war they stumble into, has sixteen ships available for every single one that the Brits can bring to the fight. Truly, the Royal Navy is now seen as a joke by First World Countries, their likely enemy. There is no strategic reserve left, a major problem. Let me explain why in terms that we can all understand, a turd too - when the new Astute attack submarine, HMS Ambush collided with a merchant vessel close to Gibraltar her sail was badly damaged. Because of that she had to be withdrawn from patrols for repairs. Right? That one vessel being removed operationally meant an enormous (this is a crazy figure) 15% combat strength for the Royal Navy being gone, just like that. How in the world is that even possible? Fifteen percent gone with one warship out of commission? Oh my word, wake up! But sadly, it gets even worse.
In 2012, the Royal Navy stopped all permanent counter-piracy patrols off Somalia - leaving the US Navy to take their place. They had to admit defeat, they just could not continue anymore despite being the best fighting sailors known to man. Have no doubts, the US lads and other navies had a lot to say about allies not bringing their fair share to the party. We often read of NATO members not paying or spending 2% of their budgets on their militaries, and the UK does spend 2% but look where the money is going. This is like the kettle calling the pot black, the money is spent wrongly and in crap. The logical result now is that there is no way that the Royal Navy can prevent Argentina from retaking the Falklands. It is known to everyone that in 2016 the Royal Navy withdrew from the South Atlantic, after 34 years of starvation funds and few replacements they were broken. It is, notwithstanding my comments on enjoying their problems in life, extremely worrying to fair-minded men. I ask again, how is this even possible? You give money to countries disliking you whilst back at the ranch you are falling apart completely.
There is a fascinating historical perspective here. We are reminded of Hitler’s unbalanced Kriegsmarine of 1939… where the capital ships were not built as planned, thus making sure that those existing were fed piecemeal into the action and suffer defeat time and time. The problem is this, the Queen Elizabeth aircraft carriers will only have 12 to 24 F-35Bs on them simply because Whitehall bought only a total of 48 such aircraft where the ships could have carried 50 each. Logic thus would have demanded at least 150 aircraft to be bought or manufactured to ensure that some are spare etc. Thus, and this should shock you, the operational Queen Elizabeth aircraft carrier steaming out to meet the enemy has less than half her designed allocation of aircraft on board or if a full load, then only one carrier can be operational, the other one is without fighter protection, lol. This is because that what is available, the miserable 48 F-35Bs, are split between the two ships and because training must carry on, maintenance etc., almost certainly only 12 F-35B aircraft will be on such a carrier where there should have been four times more by design. I hope that you get the picture. A US carrier, for instance, will never leave harbour without 60 to 90 aircraft on board and in a carrier group of 3 - 4 destroyers and guided missile cruisers, a nuclear submarine or two, and several supply ships because the carrier alone is extremely vulnerable. Unless you have layered defences around the carrier, other ships spreading out and adding much needed defensive and offensive firepower, the attackers will get that carrier every single time as is proven in war.
The new carriers cannot even claim quantity because her main offensive and defensive weapon, the F-35 fighter, is in its totality a failure of design concept, that aircraft will lose any fight against a Fourth-Generation aircraft. What is more, the Queen Elizabeths will never be able to keep up with the Yanks, being diesel powered, not nuclear and short ranged. They are further, this is interesting, in the same size and category as the much-ridiculed current Russian and Chinese carriers (Supercarriers eh? Wake up! GMJ). For some reason, the Russian and Chinese carriers are seen as the joke though. It puzzled me, there is no doubt who will win the dogfights if such a clash ever takes place, the Sukhois will destroy the F-35B easily, it is proven in tests, and then what? How long before the aircraft carriers are sunk? It is mess created entirely by the British turds. ... (From Code Name Ghost).
Another point, ask yourself why a carrier type of warship exist – offensive only, to bring the war to another country’s shores. They are not used for defending your own shores. Accordingly, you may say with certainty that any country wanting and maintaining carriers are looking for places to attack as we have seen since the 1940s the US Navy doing. I am reminded of what the British hero said once: “We should not be able to agree here in attacking countries which have not molested us because we dislike their totalitarian form of government. I do not know if there is more freedom Stalin’s Russia or Franco’s Spain. I have no intension to seek a quarrel with either of them.” Winston S Churchill in a letter to US President FD Roosevelt, wanting to attack Fascist Spain in 1944
Que Vadis Vietnam? Iraq? Somalia? Libya? Syria and more than 60 other sovereign nations destabilised by the CIA since 1948? What the hell went wrong with the United States? None of this was in the name of freedom but greed and arrogance! Just terrible leadership since Mr Eisenhower warned on the Merchants of Death. How many more must die? Where are your values you were once so famous for?
Do you know that when the South African Navy’s new frigates, and they are deadly, stealthy and often written into my books, were ordered from Germany, Nelson Mandela refused to have cruise missiles fitted to them although they were designed to have such weapons? His reason? Offensive weapons, no need for them. You can learn a lot from the type of weapons a country invests in. But if you wish to worry about something, start wondering why China is building their own carriers and by the way, they have all the escort ships needed and one on one, better in technology than what either the US or NATO can field. Yes, research, the US Navy’s dominance is long not assured anymore – see also Code Name Lucy for the Roosevelt-Dreadnought Principle, an assessment so severe that no US based media group wanted to publish it.
George M James is a pseudo name for the author and used for security reasons and the safety of his family. He is an expert on counterterrorism and counterinsurgency operations in sub-Saharan Africa, a military historian and published author of 47 books. In the GMJ Series, you will learn about Covert Operations, Special Forces techniques, current political analyses and military history not known outside the select few. Because of the contents and startling disclosures inside GMJ Books, some authorities call them “dangerous fiction.” Yet, every GMJ Book is based on historical fact and often what is revealed in a GMJ Book is published by the mainstream media a short while later. Many of the GMJ Books are used as training material by Police Forces (SWAT) across the world. Each GMJ Book has a large element of the truth inside it, they are well researched. They are not only good reading material but also a warning against that what is not known to the public. The GMJ Books may very well change the way you look at counterterrorism and espionage for the better. George M James’s books, both under his real name and as GMJ, are widely read among military veterans of many nations, most find them very agreeable to their conservative views.