Time to get real about defence cuts.

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Shittypants, Aug 1, 2011.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. How does 50% sound for starters?


    "Even if Britain were to cut its defence spending by 50%, it would remain the ninth largest spender in the world, and through NATO the UK would be allied to countries that collectively account for two-thirds of the world’s defence expenditure (and which would still account for over half of the global total even if they all followed Britain’s example and cut spending by half). It is impossible to say that Britain would not be well defended and could not protect her vital interests. No country would suddenly invade the United Kingdom; terrorism would not suddenly increase; the economy would not collapse. At the same time, many lives would be saved as futile military interventions came to an end. In fact, by doing less and spending less, Britain would probably be more secure, while the British state could repair its public finances and put money back into the pockets of taxpayers. Substantial cuts in the defence budget should be a priority of any future British government."
    Substantial cuts in the defence budget should be a priority | Institute of Economic Affairs
     
  2. If the UK welfare state was cut by just 10%, we could double defence spending....

    Its the post-war welfare state that has utterly destroyed the UK economy - the necessary colossal tax take having driven everyone's cost base to completely uncompetitive levels.