I was going to try and make this intelligent, inciteful and well written: then I remembered my litery skills - so will try and keep this simple. The current government has proved time and time again complete inadequacy in providing the armed forces with the equipment, money and political support they need. The armed forces are over-stretched and the Government has failed in its duty of care to not just those currently serving; but those injured, those suffering from PTSD but also those members of the TA who were treated so poorly on return to the UK until outrage caused a change in the way things were dealt with. Any viable political opposition would have had a field day. Yet Liam Fox, and to an extent David Cameron have failed to make a this the scandal that it really is; and have failed consistently to remove all support for the Labour leadership from the rest of the party. There have been accusations of incompetence - anyone can do that. Former army chiefs have attacked the current handling of the armed forces; reports of almost half the Royal Navy being mothballed would have any other country demanding a regime change. Yet the British Public's relationship with the armed forces is not the issue being explored here. Why have the Tory party not capitalised on the poor leadership? Or the underfunding? The lack of true political support? There are, as I see it, two reasons why Liam Fox has failed to bring Des Browne to his knees. The first is that Liam Fox and David Cameron are politcally incompetent. With the Tories doing so well in the polls - despite the "wooly" approach taken by David Cameron, this is not likely. This leaves the second, and more depressing option. That is that the Tory party have no inclination - let alone policy - to reverse the decline in the armed forces. We have not heard any firm promises on budget increases, equipment, pay and support. My suggestion would be that the Tories do not intend to change any way in which the armed forces are run or treated. They will continue to be over-stretched - David Cameron was quoted in the Telegraph on the 26th of January as not ruling out pre-emptive action against Iran using British Troops. What British Troops does he intend to commit to this pre-emptive strike? On what grounds would he strike? The British Army is committed in 28 places around the world - and David Cameron fails to commit to anything. ~200,000 service personel and their families have committed to this country, what about one man in power?. Why my obsession with this word "commit"? Well, because every time this word has left Tony Blair's mouth the armed forces have either been sent half way round the world - or it has just been Tony desperately clinging to a legacy that is either not his, or does not exist (think middle east peace process). So is there any hope for the armed forces? The Liberal Democrats? I think not... The people get the government they deserve, change will only happen with the strong, vocal support of the public.