Tuesday, 15 September 2009

Tories pinpoint three defence projects for cuts in 'snap Budget'


"George Osborne said today that a Conservative government would deliver a Budget within weeks of an election victory and appeared to hint that three major defence projects could be an early casualty."

It is interesting that these comments come from prospective Chancellor Osborne rather than prospective Defence Secretary Fox.
Some questions for The Times erudite readership:-
Were we to give up our "independent" deterrent, would this lead to the loss of our permanent seat on the UN Security Council?
Would that matter?
Can we retain a nuclear deterrent capability more cheaply with cruise missiles?
Given the devestation which can be delivered very accurately (GPS) with cruise missiles and conventional explosives, why is the "bomb" necessary at all?


There is an under-reported political party whose policy to increase defence spending.

"To stop trying to buy defence on the cheap. UKIP will spend an extra 1% GDP
year on defence – an increase of 40% on current budgets. UKIP believes in
establishing a defence budget which will properly sustain Britain’s defence
commitments. To keep defence costs down by smarter defence procurement,
and with more involvement of British industry wherever possible."

No comments:

Post a Comment