Given the nature of the conflicts which we seem very keen to involve ourselves in recent years are all against very poorly armed/insurgent type foes it might be an idea to (say) take that 100 billion and invest it in ships, planes and soldiers, rather than leasing nukes from the Americans (we don't own any of our own, the weapons themselves remain the property of the US of A, we just build the delivery system), which are totally inappropriate for use against an ex-Shepherd with an AK-47.
All this talk of "being relevant" might look significantly different if we had a large and well equipped army, navy and airforce - rather than sacking most of the sailers, soldiers and aviators, selling their kit and investing in the aforementioned nuclear cock waggling.
Given the nature of the conflicts which we seem very keen to involve ourselves in recent years are all against very poorly armed/insurgent type foes it might be an idea to (say) take that 100 billion and invest it in ships, planes and soldiers, rather than leasing nukes from the Americans (we don't own any of our own, the weapons themselves remain the property of the US of A, we just build the delivery system), which are totally inappropriate for use against an ex-Shepherd with an AK-47.
All this talk of "being relevant" might look significantly different if we had a large and well equipped army, navy and airforce - rather than sacking most of the sailers, soldiers and aviators, selling their kit and investing in the aforementioned nuclear cock waggling.