A Navy the Size of Belgiums

A navy the size of Belgiums! ... but how many Belgiums?

When did navy brass calling for more money for the navy become news?

I'm not an expert on the navy but are some questions about the government's tendency to involved the armed forces in lots and lots of wars while simultaneously trying to cut spending.

Camilla, do you think we should endeavour to have a navy to match that of China or Russia? What should the role for a British navy really be? Will there even be a United Kingdom with a single navy in ten years' time? The kind of argument you make is so anachronistic I can hardly credit it; it reminds me of my great grandfather lamenting the fact that the guardsmen were more widely spaced on The Mall due to lack of manpower during state occasions. What do we really need? Well, perhaps, just perhaps the English need some fishing protection vessels (although the fish are pretty much as extinct as the fishermen) & perhaps some frigates to disturb the cocaine trade if prohibition is your bag! The projection of British power around the world should be a thing of the past. Let's have shipyards by all means; let's build quality ecological civilian vessels for coastal, North Sea and Atlantic voyages, no more. Best thing for the RN would be to turn it into an artificial reef!

In fact I would prefer that we had no armed forces; I do not expect that we will face any greater threat to our freedom from without than we already do from within. The idea that we could in any event mount an effective defence against one of the world's 1st rank powers is risible. Why is it that the UK must spend more on defence than countries like the Netherlands, or the Scandinavian states? I do not imagine that interfering with the drugs trade is the best way to go; time and again prohibition has been seen to fail & the seizure of for example of 3 tons of cocaine on the high seas just puts the price up and increases the incentive to smuggle successfully. It is not a question of wishing that the UK were not involved in projecting its power around the world, it is, for me, that it is entirely wrong and misguided. The whirlwind we reap from our imperial adventures is reason enough not to embark upon global military interventions. I imagine that if Scotland became independent it would maintain a minimal military; Eire already does so. My preference would be for England to adopt an entirely non-militaristic stance in the world and for the English people to enjoy the benefits not just of peace, but of peaceful industry and of the respect granted to nations like Norway for the pacific role they play in world affairs. Now, of course, I propose that we would all be better off in a world without nation states, but as long as we are stuck with the ridiculous notion of the nation state I would prefer them to wield the smallest sticks possible. I am not naive about the nature of the world. I believe that for a small group of islands in the North Atlantic to pretend to the status of major power is truly naive.

The size of the British economy means nothing to me. Norwegians in general enjoy a standard of living far above that of the average Briton. That is the important measure. Norway has used its oil reserves sensibly, the UK squandered its own oil boom paying for, amongst other things the unemployment caused by Thatcher. I also could not care less about NATO and I don't see why we should put a military alliance above our happiness. Better by far to become less reliant on imports than to have a huge navy to defend the sea lanes and better by far to pay more attention to creating a just society at home than to play the great power as if Palmerston were still the Prime Minister.

Norway ain't all that. Beer costs something like ten pounds a pint and suicide is all but the national sport.

The real problem is that we insist in Britain in voting in politicians who wish to be players on the world stage without paying for it. As someone who served 23 years in the Royal Air Force I watched as the number of personnel dwindled from 113,000 to around 35,000. I got more campaign medals in my last 10 years of service than my father did in 31. We don't need a massive military arm: the politicians are just unwilling to give it up, insisting on sending the Army to get blown up in Iraq, Afghanistan and probably very shortly Iran - only to be given second rate treatment in NHS hospitals where their mates are asked not to visit in uniform. You will find, outside of the top brass, (who have prospective Knighthoods to ensure), most personnel think there is no problem with having a smaller military, they just wish people would stop trying to get a gallon out of a pint pot.

Yes I watched BBF, and the long Johns military/political stuff has always been spot on: it used to make me laugh when I was still serving; if only as an alternative to crying in my beer.