Letter: In our defence
Like him, I don't believe the public at large has realised the implications of what is being done and the very real dangers we now face.
For a start, the widespread unrest across North Africa and the Middle East was not foreseen and can only be described as a "strategic shock".
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdThe government's response has been to send a frigate in case British citizens need to be evacuated, but in the past an aircraft carrier or assault ship was regarded as more suitable.
Certainly a frigate would be hard-pressed if the numbers needing help reached into the hundreds.
It is also clear that this government does not understand air power. Indeed, a friend has had this confirmed by a junior minister.
During the early 1920s Punch ran a cartoon showing Britannia relaxing on a beach and asking: "What are the wild waves saying?" To which Mr Punch replied: "They are saying that if you want to continue to rule them, you must rules the skies above them as well."
Earlier, in the early 1900s, the then First Sea Lord, Admiral of the Fleet Lord "Jackie" Fisher, warned that the future of warfare at sea would be under the waves and in the air above them.
We all know that the country is in a desperate financial situation, but defence is a form of insurance. It is easily forgotten that conventional forces are also part of the deterrent, and there is a danger that skimping on conventional forces reduces the nuclear threshold. Defence is expensive, but war is much more so, not least because it involves loss of life.
As a Conservative, I am ashamed that the party that was supposed to understand defence has betrayed the nation's trust.
As Mr Kerevan is a member of the SNP, it is worth asking what an independent Scotland could afford. Perhaps four Orion maritime reconnaissance aircraft; three fighter squadrons; four frigates and a couple of infantry brigades at most.
DAVID WRAGG
Stoneyflatts
South Queensferry