Regimental hypocricy?

[Foxbat]

In a time where the government keeps committing more troops around the world, they cut the numbers and disband regiments. They say that they will use smaller 'special forces' style units. How could they police Southern Iraq with these smaller (more specialised) numbers? The soldiers don't ask the questions - they just do the job and we have to ask the questions for them.

The Black Watch is only one example of gross maltreatment. We ask these people to die for us and then destroy their heritage when they return.

A child can see that what you need is infantry. So they spend billions on sophisticated weaponry.

They say that recruitment is falling so what do they do? Cut the numbers.

And yet amongst all this, they save a Guards regiment for 'ceremonial' duties?
If they were business-like at all, this regiment should have been the first to go. It stinks.

[I, Brian]

I admit, it is all very odd. What originally seemed to start out as a budget efficiency exercise, has long since turned into a reorganisation towards an army based on precision technology.

What amazes me is how overspending by £12 billion on the Eurofighter is somehow okay, when there is no real enemy for the Eurofighter to engage - but how useful are they for peacekeeping?

[Lacedaemonian]

Ah but now we can return likewise with friendly fire of our own!
Perhaps if we have so few soldiers we can have so few wars - even a child can see that. It is an open declaration to the world that we are weak. So be it.