From the letters in today's Telegraph: The Navy should not be sacrificed to prop up the Armys horses and brass bands W.r.t. the first letter, I don't want to see the loss of traditions that help maintain the ethos and morale of the Army but times are hard and ships matter more. The RN lost its Display Team and Field Gun Competition years ago. If the writer of the second letter is only referring to Afghanistan, he has it slightly wrong in saying: "...The Governments priority seems to be the maintenance of an Army of more than 100,000 soldiers that cannot deploy more than a tenth of its strength...". Our 9,500 personnel in Afghanistan include around 1,000 Naval Service (RN/RM) and 1,000 RAF plus TAs (around 10% of the Army strength in theatre) so Regular Army personnel in Afghanistan must constitute fewer than 7,000 (i.e. less than 7% of their total strength). To be fair, I am prepared to believe that the other 3% are deployed elsewhere in the world.