• The post you are reporting:
   
  There is a confusion in my mind as to what is meant by 'defence' when being discussed in the media.
  
  To me, the following would come under defence:
  
  Trident, to defend against nuclear threats.
  Defence of the UK against conventional external military threats.
  Sufficient forces in (or rapidly deployable to) the Falklands and other dependencies to defend them until such time as the inhabitants wish to become independent.
  A sufficient standing army, navy and air force to allow the above to take place.
  
  Domestic terrorism is a matter for the police, not the military.
  
  The other adventures in the Middle East and elsewhere are not defence but the pursuit of foreign policy by military means, and their costs should be met by the foreign affairs budget. Otherwise the costs of those adventures threaten to get out of hand, cause diversion of finite resources from the home front and prejudice the (more important) defence of our homeland. We are seeing this now. If it had not been for the two gulf wars and Afghanistan, Trident would be affordable without further discussion.
  
  PG.

Report Post

Your Name

Reason