"Britain vows sharp cutbacks in troops and military hardware; Says reductions won’t alter efforts in Afghanistan" by Anthony Faiola , Washington Post / October 20, 2010
LONDON — Washington’s closest ally unveiled its deepest military cuts yesterday since the end of the Cold War, as Britain announced it will withdraw thousands of troops from continental Europe, decommission warships, mothball an entire class of fighter jets, and delay upgrading its nuclear arsenal.
The cutbacks will not affect the war in Afghanistan, where British troops make up the second-largest contingent after the United States. Britain said it will invest in more helicopters and armored vehicles to aid military operations there. By also committing to boost combat-ready special forces, officials here are seeking to reassure the Pentagon that Britain will retain its global role as deputy to Washington’s sheriff.
So they will smartly salute and say "Yes, sir!"
Nevertheless, Britain’s most sweeping military review in more than a decade is set to further diminish this nation’s military might, particularly as a maritime power. For Washington, the moves amount to a tactical scaling down of military ambition by the one European ally consistently willing to back the United States with firepower in international conflicts. And the reductions will be carried out at a time when other NATO members, including Germany, are also making substantial military cuts.
Senior Pentagon officials were largely supportive of Britain’s decisions and expressed confidence that British forces will continue to play a leading role in dealing with problems such as terrorism, the Afghan war, cyberattacks, and nuclear proliferation.
“We are confident that the UK will continue to have the capacity to provide top-tier fighting forces in Afghanistan and other future missions in defense of our shared interests and security,’’ said Geoff Morrell, the Pentagon’s top spokesman....
Oh, yeah, WHAT FUTURE MISSIONS, war-monger?
Prime Minister David Cameron described the cuts as overdue, given that Britain now faces greater threats from cyberwarfare and terrorism than from conventional warfare. But he acknowledged the decision was as much financial as strategic.
Facing a crushing debt load and massive budget deficit, Britain is set to announce today historic cuts in everything from welfare to child-care benefits. Though the defense budget will suffer less than other areas, with an 8 percent reduction in the $60 billion defense budget over the next four years, Cameron called an ax of some sort unavoidable.
Of course.
Cameron insisted, and analysts agreed, that Britain is not surrendering its status as a global military power and will still have the world’s fourth-largest military budget....
Why? So they can do AmeriKa's dirty work?
--more--"
Maybe they do need the help:
"Grounded UK nuclear submarine freed
LONDON—Britain's newest nuclear-powered submarine ran aground off the coast of Scotland Friday but officials say the incident was not serious and no one was injured....
The $1.57 billion vessel, one of Britain's fleet of 11 submarines powered by nuclear reactors and launched in 2007, was undergoing sea trials in Scotland when the accident happened, the Ministry of Defense said....
The submarine is armed with Spearfish torpedoes and Tomahawk cruise missiles. It is powered by a nuclear reactor that will never need refueling during its 25-year operational life, according to the ministry.
--more--"
Look who else has come to the rescue:
"UK, France set 50-year defense pact; Onetime foes seek benefits in joint forces" by John F. Burns, New York Times / November 3, 2010
LONDON — Britain and France signed defense agreements yesterday that promised cooperation far beyond their past alliances, including the creation of a joint expeditionary force, shared use of aircraft carriers, and combined efforts on the safety and effectiveness of their nuclear weapons.
The pacts, the most ambitious military partnership envisaged between two European nations since NATO was founded more than 60 years ago, were signed in London by Prime Minister David Cameron of Britain and President Nicolas Sarkozy of France. Neither leader mentioned Agincourt, Trafalgar, or Waterloo, or French victories that included the Norman Conquest in 1066, although both stirred a brief whiff of the troubled history of Anglo-French relations into the mood of general bonhomie.
The agreements lay the basis for a new force available for deployment at times of international crisis that is expected to involve about 5,000 service members from each nation, with land, sea, and air components, and rotating French and British commanders. The pacts also foresee each nation alternating in putting a single aircraft carrier to sea, with the vessels operating as bases for French, British, and US aircraft in times of need.
The nuclear agreement appeared to have been kept more modest and devised to ensure that France’s “force de frappe’’ and Britain’s similar, submarine-based ballistic missile force remain separate. But the two countries said they would share the costs of many kinds of defense research.
The cooperation pact was set to last 50 years and could transform the way the two countries project force, fight wars, and complement — or in some cases compete with — the United States. At least one goal of the arrangement appeared to be to give the two militaries greater buying power to support the struggling European defense industry....
Oh, this is ALL ABOUT WEAPONS SALES!!!
Previous efforts at military cooperation between the countries have more often faltered than succeeded. In the late 1990s, Tony Blair, then Britain’s prime minister, and Jacques Chirac, then France’s president, promised deeper defense cooperation, but the understanding was undone by differences over the Iraq war. In both countries, there are significant political forces arrayed against anything that smacks of too close a military partnership with the age-old foe....
Britain and France have the biggest defense budgets in Europe, together accounting for more than half of all military spending in the 27-nation European Union....
But citizens of both countries must take social service cuts and austerity measures!
--more--"
Look like you got locked in the trunk, reader.
