Maybe but continued and made worse over last five years by DC & co.

On the subject of defence.
The UK has since 1945 been seen by the US as its number one western military ally. However in recent years it apparent that the UK may still talk the talk but cannot match the words with capability. This was underlined to US by our inability to successfully operate independently in Afghanistan where on several occasion the US had to come to our support. The UK still has some of the best military manpower but in insufficient numbers to do the tasks still expected of them - and poorly /under equipped. Either we want to be among the 'big boys' in which case we must pay the realistic cost or accept that we are now only an average European power and be treated as such on the world stage. Might may not always be right but notice is still taken of those with the biggest stick.

Mediocrity in all things !

Review/reviewing = in government speak 'kicking into the long grass.' In other words excuse for doing nothing now!

This man reached the height in his profession and these people don't leave and not maintain contacts.

It's ridiculous to imply that he doesn't know the defense capabilities of the Falklands or have a worthy opinion on it over a solider serving there.....or indeed you.

People in the MOD are restricted in what they can say so you implying that silence means that these opinions aren't held isn't realistic....Actions will tell us that.

Like I said, I will be happy for MOD actions over this latest development over this next year will prove which one of us is a right plonker.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Of course he got to a high rank when he retired but his knowledge today of what is happening out there is purely HIS opinion and not of what is actually happening today. As you have said things are kept quiet from the general public but even a person like you would not presume we put all the extra manpower and equipment just to let the Argies bomb the runway...that would be a foolhardy thing to do. It was through the Royal marine generals that were out there who had meetings with our government after the war and even now do so, that the contingement they have out including ships aircraft boat squadrons and personel is adequate to "repel boarders". The equipment is of a very high spec and much more than we had when we went there in 1982...I KNOW I was there. I will put a link at the end for you to look at and it might just enlighten you on what it cost in lives and equipment and why we will never ever let it happen again due to the Falklanders voting to stay british.

[Link]

Supported Palace for over 69 years since the age of 7 and have seen all the ups and downs and will probably see many more ups and downs before I go up to the big football club in the sky.

Militarily, we are a very capable nation, and would be quite capable of waging a conventional conflict against most countries our own size.

However, when you're talking about protracted insurgencies and guerrilla conflicts, none of the first world nations really are particually well suited to those, because technology alone won't win them, you need human resources on the ground - Troop Saturation is a necessity. It can't be won technologically, because the enemy is always concealed, and has to be rooted out from a population from which they are almost impossible to identify.

Post 1945, the concept of a nation being capable of militarily occupying another, especially without shared border, has become almost impossible, due initially to tactics of restistance developed by occupied nations during that war, that were then adopted and refined by national liberation movements to resist empires.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]