State of the British armed forces

That may have been too simple ? I can't quite get the point.

The problem with spunking enormous sums of money on "defence" quite aside from the dangers of being tempted to use it, is that it commits you bit time to last years model. Something which the US has found out to their very great cost.

There's nerve any cause for complacency. However by the same token you can be a little niggardly now for flexibility later.

I am much less worried about Russia than I am about their UK proxies who are dedicated to ensuring the UK has no capacity for resistance - and they are getting tax breaks.

unless you have the £ and know a private arms dealer etc

You’ve got no idea.

The Tories ran the armed forces down. They cut every single service to the bone. DH was on the redundancy list 3 times, and the package they got was horrendous, fortunately he was kept in but a lot of his colleagues were let go. Since the Labour government got in, DS1 has had the biggest pay rise he’s had in the whole of his career in the army and last year, for the first time in 4 years, more people joined the armed forces than left.

People banging on about us not having enough of this, that and the other and we should get some more have got right on my nerves these past few weeks. We all know it, the Govt know it, but we’re talking about fighter jets, aircraft carriers, frigates and armoured vehicles not Ford Fiestas that you can pick up on AutoTrader. These things take time.

It hasn’t. The damage was done in the preceding 14 years.

a simiple view defcon one on our nuke facility's that would alter the dynamics

Neither Russia nor China are going to invade the UK. They never were. That's not to say they may have some nasty things pointed at us. But that's not invasion.

Also, with the amount of money they have pumped into the UK, they'd much rather it made a positive return. rather than be reduced to hardcore for building.

How? In what specific way has this government made the army’s readiness worse.

just because the media say that iran is winning, does not mean thats the true reason etc

a team of 10 super soldiers vs 100 average joes etc with the right intel and equipment etc the 10 would win

the whole of earth needs a fully upto date military just that instead of fighting each other we need to fight in the galaxies

fair points my original analysis was wrong.

but its not always just numbers but its the power of the weapons, ships, aircraft, etc that matter overall and not to mention the quality of our spooks as there intel is key to it all

Latest Polls on Public Support for Defence Spending (2025 Data)
Public opinion has shifted toward more support since the 1990s/2000s (linked to rising threat perceptions post-Ukraine and other conflicts), but remains split and conditional. Here's the key data:

• Electoral Calculus / Find Out Now Poll (20–21 October 2025, n=2,056 GB adults, weighted representative) — One of the most recent detailed surveys:
• 39% agree we should spend more on defence to fight military threats even if it means higher taxes (24% disagree; 23% neutral; 14% don't know). Net support is positive but modest.
• By party: Conservatives 63%, Reform UK 54%, Labour 41%.
• Only 29% agree if it means cutting spending on social security (strong caution here).
• 45% see some risk of military attack on Britain (only 11% "big risk"; 43% little/no risk).
• 32% think it's likely Britain will be in a war within 5 years.
• But other threats rank higher: global economy (82% some risk), climate change (67% some risk).
• NatCen British Social Attitudes (BSA) Survey (autumn 2024 + spring 2025 follow-up, published June 2025) — Long-running, high-quality tracker:
• 40% support increased spending on military/defence.
• 20% want a reduction (implying ~40% prefer to keep it the same).
• Trend: Up +23 points since 1996, +12 points since 2006; stable since 2016. Heightened threat perceptions (e.g., 90% see Russia as a serious threat to world peace) are driving the rise.
• By party: Reform UK 67%, Conservatives 61% favour increase; Greens 42% favour reduction; Labour split (28% increase vs. 27% decrease).
• Only 9% rank defence as the top priority for extra government spending (NHS/education dominate).
• PwC Forces for Change Report (November 2025, n=3,000 UK adults aged 16+):
• 66% want UK military strength to increase over the next 10 years.
• 67% say the UK's industrial base needs strengthening to support the armed forces.
• 55% want more information on how military money is spent (only 26% feel they get enough now).
• Broader positivity: 72% have positive feelings toward the armed forces (up 11% since 2017); 63% trust the military.
• Other supporting polls (early/mid-2025):
• YouGov (Dec 2024/Feb 2025): 40% say current spending is "too little" (18% "about right"; 13% "too much"). But when framed with trade-offs, only 30% prioritise greater defence spending over public services (35% prefer keeping public services spending even if it limits defence increases).
• Redfield & Wilton (March 2025): 60% support increasing defence spending, even if it means cuts to foreign aid.
• Focal Data/More in Common (May 2025/Sunday Times): Split—36% say current level is "about right"; 26% "too low"; 21% "too high." Plurality (35%) favour increases even with taxes/cuts to health/education, but driven mainly by Con/Reform voters.

Of course they would. The RAOC (as it was then) was on the front line in the Falklands.

Which enemies, out of curiosity ?

The UKs defence needs are not the same as other countries. What with being an island.

Now whether the UK has the capability, capacity, and competence to project power beyond the UK is another matter. But quite how "defensive" that is is another matter.

One of the realities of losing an Empire, is you don't really get to wave your military around anymore. I thought we learned that in 1956 ?