Hillary Clinton 'worried' by UK defence cuts

[alp227]

Source: The Guardian

The US has made an eleventh hour intervention in the highly charged defence review as Britain's top military brass launched a last ditch attempt to persuade David Cameron to water down the cuts.

Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, and Robert Gates, the defence secretary, both voiced concerns about the planned cuts as the heads of Britain's three armed services marched into No 10 in uniform to express unease about plans to cut the Ministry of Defence budget by 10%.

As the prime minister welcomed General David Petraeus to Downing Street, Washington highlighted concerns that Britain will scale back military spending to the level of weaker Nato members.

In an interview with BBC Parliament's The Record Europe in Brussels, Clinton was asked whether she was worried about the planned cuts in Britain. "It does, and the reason it does is because I think we do have to have an alliance where there is a commitment to the common defence. Nato has been the most successful alliance for defensive purposes in the history of the world I guess, but it has to be maintained. Now, each country has to be able to make its appropriate contributions."

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/oct/14/hillary-clinton-uk-defence-cuts

[villager]

1. "Worried" that a good idea might spread?

One that threatens the corridors of power, and empire?

[TwilightGardener]

2. They've wised up--aren't we starting to feel alone and foolish?

[bemildred]

3. Anything that worries Hillary is worth a serious look. nt

[L0oniX]

4. With us being the country of the war machine, they can cut back because our assholes in charge...

will gladly take up the slack since it means more profit for the MIC at our expense. Over 1 trillion and growing.

[madrchsod]

5. well the germans and the french seem pretty peaceful so.....

who is england going to war with or who is going to war on them?

[unkachuck]

6. "...Britain will scale back military spending..."

"...each country has to be able to make its appropriate contributions."

....Hillary, tell the British to stop using Northern bathroom tissue and start using Scott; that ought to save about 10 percent....

....who the fuck cares....nato is a money wasting seventy-year-old corporate boondoggle....from what boogie-man is nato defending Europe?

[molly77]

7. hillary the hawk

[Ramulux]

8. The tories want to gut the welfare state

but we are totally cool with that as long as they dont make cuts to the ministry of defense. Our priorities are definitely in the right place.

[southmost]

9. HRC as the concern troll

n/t

[bossy22]

10. good, she should be

too many people don't see the strategic importance in "peace time" militaries. With a downgrading of UK military capabilities (one of the strongest in europe) it just puts more on the U.S. People need to start to realize that in this global economy- what happens 5000 miles away can have a great affect on us- and so its in a country's best interest to have a "say". Sadly this say is almost always done best through soft/hard military power.

Also what we must also consider is that peace may actually be due to military power inequality- rather than a reason to reduce military power. Remember, a relatively unknown fact was that the Falklands war was partly initiated based on the 1966 british defense white paper. This assesment of british forces actually reduced the royal navy considerably. Argentina was betting that with a sizably reduced royal navy that britain would be unable to respond to an invasion of the falklands with an adequate force (they were subsequently proven wrong). Now lets pretend the U.S. owned the falklands. Do you think Argentina would have attacked then? Most experts would probably say no, because it would be obvious that the u.s. would muster an overwhelming force that argentina would have no chance for victory.

Remember, that WWI was actually due to a relative weakening in the british and french militaries when compared to their german counterparts- forming a military power parody between the countries.

In conclusion, i'm not advocating specific policies but that we shouldnt blindly cheer such actions without really thinking them through.

[Arugula Latte]

12. Meanwhile, the US is largely circling the drain due to astronomically oversized military spending

We could have a society with a good healthcare, education and infrastructure, but no, we have to flush our $$$ down the gaping maw of military contractors many times over.

[RaleighNCDUer]

13. contrary to your opinion, peace is not merely an interim between wars.

The word you wanted was 'parity' not 'parody'. Parity is an equalization of forces. Parody is the relationship between your post and reality.

[Arugula Latte]

11. Oh Sweet Jebus. This is nuts.

Slash these fucking military budgets to the bone, sez I.