State of defence

I expect many people will have been as disturbed as I was by a letter (18 March) from Thomas R Burgess, which reveals the naked truth about the Nationalist world view.

He states that “Uncle Sam will ride to our rescue” to take the place of the defence forces the SNP will not be able to afford. 
Really? I rather think the Americans should be asked about this. He describes the British forces’ situation during the 1960s and 1970s and highlights the shortages they had to cope with.

That is, no doubt, true. However, our forces, compared with others in Nato, were right up to the mark. Dutch soldiers went home for the weekend. Other nations’ troops were often conscripts, as in the case of the French Army. The British were infinitely better trained and disciplined than any of them.

He criticises British armoured vehicles, but I was amazed to find that the Belgians were still using Second World War Sherman tanks in 1968.

Mr Burgess’s criticism of British defence shows that he does not understand that defence is a matter of sleight of hand. Do you want your enemy to think you are more powerful than you are, or not?

This, however, is a sin in his eyes. Thank goodness he has not been in charge of the Ministry of Defence, is all I can say.

He criticises the equipment British soldiers had to use, yet that has always been the case, whichever period of history you look at, whether it be a boatload of left boots delivered to the 
Crimea, or the often rotten 
rations sold to the Royal Navy during its many conflicts in the 18th and 19th centuries.

Mr Burgess demonises those south of the Border and, if the SNP wins the referendum, he describes the English as “our only potential enemy” who will be “on the banks of the Tweed”. He should hang his head in shame!

Andrew HN Gray

Craiglea Drive

Edinburgh