trish, sorry to disappoint you, but I'm just an average British citizen tapping away on MN, as I suspect you are too. I've never been involved in the military though some of my best friends have.
You asked: We are defending purely by having the armed forces. Have you thought about what would happen if we didnt have any at all?
Gecko did not say that s/he didn't want any armed forces at all. In fact, as I quoted, s/he alluded to the good sense of having a "standing army and a naval and raf force who patrol our borders"
His/her point was (apologies Gecko if I've misread you) that the conflicts in which the UK has been involved in recent years have involved our armed forces on foreign soil. Not on British soil. Thus attacking rather than defending.
Yes, some countries have military agreements with others, though the ones I can think of off the top of my head have never been required. The UK could have chosen to do the same. Obviously we are not a neutral country, therefore I'm EXTREMELY glad that we have tremendously brave and bright individuals working in the intelligence services and the special forces minimising the risk of terrorist attack against us. But the huge majority of individuals in our armed forces are not involved in this type of activity, which is the activity that is truly defending Britain.
Again, what are you scared of? What do you think genuinely represents a threat to Britain today? A terrorist releasing anthrax on the tube (fair enough) or the Taliban army invading our shores?
Of course I want Britain to be defended from the former - many of my loved ones live in London (the place most likely to be attacked by terrorists). I do not believe that Britain needs to be defended from the latter.