Developing

Discover Yahoo! With Your Friends

Explore news, videos, and much more based on what your friends are reading and watching. Publish your own activity and retain full control.

To get started, first

YOUR FRIENDS' ACTIVITY

    Fears Defence Cuts Leave Britain 'Ineffective'

    Britain's parliamentary defence committee is warning that it may no longer be possible to conduct operations such as the intervention in Libya last year after severe cuts imposed by a �39bn debt in the Ministry of Defence.

    In a report, Operations In Libya, the defence select committee also raises fears that a large number of surface-to-air missiles held in Muammar Gaddafi's armouries have disappeared and calls on the British Government to try to track them down.

    "We are concerned by reports that large numbers of man-portable surface-to-air missiles, previously in the armament of pro-Gaddafi forces, are missing in Libya," the MPs say.

    "We accept that the Government, the UN and Nato have acknowledged that this is a major concern for security in the region and the wider world.

    "We expect the international community to support and maintain pressure on the new Libyan regime to ensure that these weapons are held securely and safely."

    Since the fall of the Gaddafi regime, Libya has haemorrhaged weapons across its southern borders into lawless areas, where it is feared they have fallen into the hands of terrorists linked to al Qaeda in the Maghreb.

    These not only have included dozens of the "ManPad" surface-to-air missiles, capable of downing an airliner on landing or take-off, but also heavy machine guns and the plastic explosive Semtex.

    At least half a ton of Semtex is reported to be in circulation among violent groups after being stolen from Libya, a Sky source said.

    "We believe the Government will face significantly greater challenges should an operation of similar size be necessary in the future and it will need to be prepared for some difficult decisions on prioritisation," the report said.

    "We consider that Operation Ellamy (The Libyan campaign) raises important questions as to the extent of the United Kingdom's national contingent capability.

    "We urge the Government to review the United Kingdom's capacity to respond to concurrent threats.

    "This work should be conducted as a matter of urgency before the next Strategic Defence and Security Review (in three years' time)."

    The remarks echo concerns raised by admiral Sir Mark Stanhope, the head of the Royal Navy and Sir Stephen Dalton, chief of the the Royal Air Force, who complained of a lack of resources during the campaign.

    In June last year, Sir Mark said: "We might have to request the Government to make some challenging decisions about priorities," at the end of a six-month campaign.

    His remarks, which revealed information to Gaddafi's forces, resulted in a dressing down at Number 10.

    But, after the MoD announced plans to shed 32,000 service personnel and civilians by 2020, debate continues within Whitehall as to how effective the British armed forces - the fourth biggest in the world - will be in the future, even with a budget of �38bn a year.

    This implies an over-reliance on the United States to support Nato missions, the MPs said.

    "For the time being, there will still be a heavy reliance on US command and control functions for future operations. It should be a priority for Nato to examine this.

    "However, while accepting the current economic climate and its implications for defence capabilities, we are concerned that future operations will not be possible if the US is not willing or able to provide capabilities such as unmanned aerial vehicles, intelligence and refuelling aircraft.

    "It should be a priority for Nato to examine this over-reliance on US capabilities and assets.

    "This challenge will be heightened by the US stated intention to shift its military, geographic and strategic focus to the Asia-Pacific region."

    Philip Hammond , the Defence Secretary, responded: "This report highlights the success of our Armed Forces in saving thousands of civilian lives in Libya by taking action against the Gaddafi regime.

    "The Libyan campaign shows that we retain the contingent capability to conduct operations in addition to our commitments in Afghanistan, counter-piracy off the Horn of Africa, Gulf security and standing tasks such as the Falklands and defence of the UK."

     
    • Paul The Other One  •  3 months ago
      So it takes a parliamentary select committee to come up with the same conclusion as anybody with half a brain knew before the last round of defense cuts.
      Why couldn't they voice their concerns before our country's defenses were obliterated, so that it could have been prevented?
      • PAUL 3 months ago
        Failure to provide adequate defences for the country should been seen as an act of treason. They destroyed and scrapped the carriers really fast. They seem intent on destroying this nations capabilities for some nefarious reason.
      • John 3 months ago
        Wasn't it the last Govt who scrapped the carriers so the new ones could be built in mr browns constituency.
      • Kzinti Occupation Force 3 months ago
        Paul - good point, well made.
    • Toppa  •  London, England  •  3 months ago
      How much do these enquiries cost? I could have told them our forces are stretched to breaking point for free.
      Our forces should be protecting our borders, not everyone elses. Regime change in Libya has cost us dearly, as has Iraq and Afghanistan. Now Hague is wanting to send equipment to Syria, why?
      If small armies of men with machine guns, grenades, etc, were roaming our streets and firing indiscriminately, we too would have the troops fighting running battles, we cannot fight for every country wanting regime changes, these are internal affairs, and the killing is 'not' one sided!
      • Adam C 3 months ago
        WHY!!?? Do you not turn on the news??! People are dying in Syria because of a corrupt and evil government leader. If you and your family were under attack from missile strikes etc would you not want help from a country such as ours?? Or would you be happy to see your mum/dad get blown up in the street and you cant collect the body because of government snipers shooting at you.
        Please tell me if that's OK? We as a country need to get involved in Syria if diplomacy fails to help the many civilians who don't want to be bombarded with missiles and bullets.
      • Toppa 3 months ago
        Oh please!
        There are two sides to every story, I am certainly not saying Assad is a wonderful dictator, but neither is Cameron and his sidekick Clegg, however if armed militia were roaming around our streets shooting at military I would be right behind Cameron and his sidekick for fighting back, you cannot have anarchy on the streets, or we would all be doomed.
        You cannot insist on regime change, via the bullet, and then cry foul play when youy opposition fights back.
        This is 'not' our business, we have enough problems of our own, our military is stretched too far, and should not be used to prop up foreign coups, and we certainly should not be in Afghanistan, and should 'never' have been in Iraq, or Libya!
      • A Yahoo! User 3 months ago
        cost probally more than £8.000.000 it cost to let Harry The Red Knapp of the hook
    • tom horse  •  3 months ago
      so what they're saying is that as a result of Brit intervention in Libya there is now weapons and explosives in the hands of terrorists that might well use them against our Armed Forces?
      • steven 3 months ago
        No i am sure the weapons are in safe hands,after all the people of the middle east all love us.Besides letting only Gaddafi hold the weapons was dangerous,better shared amongst thousands of other people.
      • Neil 3 months ago
        I seem to remember that the yanks supplied weapons and training to the freedom fighters in Afghanistan during the Russian occupation......I wonder what happened to them Didn't Bin Laden used to be one of them? I wonder how many future Terrorists have been spawned and armed out of the present conflicts in Iraq Afghanistan Libya etc. And more to the point how many are now in our country waiting for a chance to have a go. Still nevermind eh yanks? lets take on Iran next
      • R.P. Murphy 3 months ago
        Neil, this happens because governments don't decide on wars, banking cartels do. They arm both sides and get them both into debt. That is the aim. Control through debt. These people do not care who wins wars or how many die. They only care about sovereign debts so that they can provide themselves with a continual source of income. Then large multinationals win large contracts to re-build infrastructure, causing maore debt.
        Freedom, democracy, stability ... these are all lies peddled to the population in order to get them to comply.
        War is nothing more than a racket. And a very profitable one at that.
    • Steve  •  Leicester, England  •  3 months ago
      WELL SIMPLE ANSWER TO THIS IS,BRING ALL OUR TROOPS HOME LET THEM PROTECT OUR SEA AND BORDER,GIVE THEM THE RIGHT TO DO BORDER CONTROL.IMMIGRATION,AS THE LOT WE HAVE AT PRESENT CANT DO IT,WE NEED OUR TROOPS HERE PROTECTING I MEAN WE HAVE A KNOW TERRORIST BEING RELEASED IN A COUPLE OF DAYS,AND OUR POLICE CANT CATCH COLDS SO I SAY BRING EVERY ONE OF OUR TROOPS AND GIVE THEM THE JOB OF PROTECTING OUR COUNTRY FROM WITHIN THEY HAVE ALL THE SKILLS WE NEED,EG BORDER CONTROL,INTELLIGENCE,BRAVERY,AND COMMON SENSE
      • A Yahoo! User 3 months ago
        and at the same time we can install a military government until someone gets elected that will put our people first for a change
      • Magic Lemur 3 months ago
        Maybe we could even get them to educate people in the ways of the Caps Lock key :-p
      • Neil 3 months ago
        I dunno But sometimes i feel like shouting too well said Steve
    • Nobody of Importance  •  Newcastle Upon Tyne, England  •  3 months ago
      Great idea, pick fights with most of the Middle East then cut defences til we couldn't stop a punch up in a phone box.
    • jenny lane  •  Worcester, England  •  3 months ago
      The forces budget could be cut, if our government stopped sending them to fight everyone elses wars.
      • WingDings 3 months ago
        Oh Jenny, you're so old fashioned. Soldiers fight for the arms industry, not for the country, hence no 'war' is "everyone 'elses".
      • Neil 3 months ago
        Your right wingdings the arms Industry is owned by the rich who tell the government whom to fight whilst selling arms to all
      • sam 3 months ago
        Any military needs conflicts to help it stay current. You simply can't have a professional army and not have the skill and experience deteriorate with a lack of real engagements. Everyone in the military knows what they signed up for, it is a different mindset from a civilian mind. I know this from experience in the family. Even a war is a holiday to these guys, an experience to be remembered forever, the last thing the soldiers, sailors and airmen think about it getting killed. (Of course I generalise) When you are walking down the street, do you think about dying? For the most part neither do these guys.

        It is a touchy subject, and I don't like the idea of getting our noses into every bad country going, but would you walk past an old lady getting attacked in the street? I liken this to the state of many countries, the world over, where millions are killed by the hand of the government. Iraq may not have been a great success in retrospect, but why, if we are indeed the 'good guys', should we stand around doing nothing? As long as the Armed forces are a fighting force, we should intervene wherever, and whenever we get the opportunity.

        Just now realising that you are one of those 'cut the armed forces we are at peace' people, Jenny, judging by your statement, I feel my argument will fall on deaf ears. But know this: After both world wars the UK government felt it a good idea to shrink the armed forces down to relatively nothing. And they regretted that soon enough. The same can be said for the present. The cold war is over, the new war could be just around the corner.

        Do you really want to become what essentially would become a maritime Switzerland? Are you really one of these people that doesn't care for history and would allow a once GREAT nation to slip into becoming a majorly defensive entity, in a world where, for a lot of countries, force is the only thing they reason with. Allowing our politicians to cut the armed forces into a defensive stance, will mean they will drastically overdo it and we will be left with Arthur Lowe and his band of merry men protecting our interests. Even now the Armed forces aren't where they should be Funding wise.
    • CHRIS  •  3 months ago
      You can't cut cut cut and still be at the top of the 'game' government has got it all wrong
    • Dr Bob  •  Ilford, England  •  3 months ago
      and now the argies are start to play up again.

      Where is the Ark Royal and the Harriers?
    • From Luddite Lodge  •  Reading, England  •  3 months ago
      £39 billion black hole, why don't we take the £34 billion from HS2, plus the foreign aid we give to India and Paistan and plug the hole from that.
    • Pistolshooter  •  Edinburgh, Scotland  •  3 months ago
      Perhaps,just perhaps, our Government will start to look at the role of the UK in/on this plannet?
      Empires come and go (ours has gone) so look at the history of these past empires.
      Time for a reapraisal. Lets have a National Defence Force (actually to defend the UK) lets use the TA as a homeland defence force not to back up overseas adventures.
      Dont hold your breath!
      Perhaps it's time the civilians learned "skill at arms",and bought guns least we find ourselves "expected" to defend these shores with a bayonet on a stick. (yes,it happened - speak to those who lived in 1939)
    • John L  •  Madrid, Spain  •  3 months ago
      This has been said since the last review. They are building aircraft carriers that have no aircraft to carry because they've scrapped our only carrier capable jet. The logic fails me. This parliamentary defence committee is a waste of time and money. Cameron won't listen to the CDS so he's not going to pay any heed to a committee. Saving money is all very well but it defies reason when you've spent trillions over the past 10 years fighting a war that you can't win. When the Taliban seize power again in 2014 the whole campaign will have been for nothing. A massive waste of lives and money. Still at least the King's Troop have somewhere new to polish their shiny parts!!!!
    • Martin  •  Milton Keynes, England  •  3 months ago
      another einstein moment by some government tea boy ,that cost thousands to come up with , somthing every man in the street can have told him for nothing .
    • tim  •  3 months ago
      Spend the nation's wealth on the nation not on wars. The Swiss does it.
    • Ian  •  London, England  •  3 months ago
      How can we even think of policing the world when we are cutting back on our armed forces but its easily solved, cut all of the overseas aid, most of the countries we give it to are fighting against us and 2 of them,India and China dont need it, and then plough this money back in to building up our armed forces. Dont forget this is for our defence and protection as well.
    • Dave  •  Sheffield, England  •  3 months ago
      What a mess these income protected idiots in the MOD and Govt have put us in. Or are e going to send another load of our soldiers and OUR MONEY to some #$%$ regime along with Overseas Aid to keep #$%$ regimes inpower, whilst our [politicians get fatter and richer and even more out of touch.
    • JOHN  •  London, England  •  3 months ago
      What I cannot understand is that, in spite of the redundances being imposed on the services, they are still putting adverts on TV and in the papers for new recruits. It's a mad world!
    • fed up with politicians  •  Reading, England  •  3 months ago
      You can thank the Labour Party for this vast budget overspend exacerbated by the ineffective Defence Procurment Department. Yet another public service department totally unfit for purpose. We still have to pay for two Aircraft Carriers at a cost of billions which will not have men to man them or aircraft to fly from them. We need to realise that Britain is not a world power any longer and should use it's armed forces to look after our own interests. Bring troops home from Afganistan and other ares where we are not welcomed and if we are to cut numbers start with the over manned MOD and MPs, followed by councillors at county and town level.
    • Reginald  •  Oxford, England  •  3 months ago
      As an Ex Serviceman I am disgusted, at the way TROOPS have been treated, since the first
      Iraq war. And the lack knowledge any who have been in Westminster in the last 15yrs, of what is needed to defend and Island like Britain
      Commonwealth Help, Getting involved in OTHER's Wars ,Use to make us look powerful caring.. Now look at us, 75% of those, we beat at WAR are telling US what we must do and NOT DO !
    • chubbs  •  3 months ago
      Never mind the stuff that went missing in Libya what about the billions of dollars worth of stuff that went missing in Iraq and Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, there also got to be a lot go missing in Afghanistan as well
    • walloj  •  Manchester, England  •  3 months ago
      no longer great britain the rest of the world know this that is why they coming here in vast numbers when the country is completeiy done in they will all piss off again we could not even defend the isle of wight now