Quote Originally Posted by Boohugh View Post
Problem is it probably won't get resolved until there is a Defence Review, which won't happen until after the election. Personally, I'm fairly happy to see some senior armed forces members finally come out and say they have basically been underfunded for some time. Makes a mockery of Brown's claim he has always fully supported the armed forces (all the more damning with Hoon's recent revelations in the Iraq enquiry).
It's an interesting and important discussion to be sure. You can only really prepare for what you already have experience of dealing with, and the last thing you worked on will always appear the most likely future task to respond to.

This argument is as much about what the UK armed forces are asked to do, a demand itself based on an appreciation (educated guess) of what the response the most likely next engagement(s) will require.

it's kind of another no-win situation. To retain absolute flexibility, you would hold off investing and only do so on proper evaluation of needs -but have no short term response capability. Equally, to fully commit to a single type of warfare, e.g. COIN in Afghanistan would leave you under-prepared for a conflict with a more industrialised opponent (with MBTs, air-power etc).

I'm glad I don't have to make that call!

Quote Originally Posted by Boohugh View Post
Is that a 'Yes, Minister' reference?
indeed, it's a timeless programme