BRITAIN, recently described as a second rank nation by its former prime minister, John Major, has just increased its defence budget by £16.5 billion. This is retail therapy for neo-cons.
In justifying this extraordinary outlay Boris Johnson says the defence of the realm is paramount. Yet, Britain was last invaded 80 years ago when Germany occupied the Channel Islands for five years. The second-last time was in 1797, when French troops fought the British Army at Fishguard on the Pembrokeshire Coast.
Invading and looting other countries though, has been one of Britain’s most enduring pastimes. A 2012 study of the history of 200 nations found that 90% of them had been invaded by Britain. Among those considered either to be too remote or not sufficiently rich in natural resources to plunder are Tajikistan, Guatemala and the Marshall Islands in the Pacific Ocean.
Tony Blair, now a global peace envoy, involved Britain in seven military actions during his time as Prime Minister.
So how can the UK Government justify the extra £16.5bn when it’s really other nations who need defending from us?
READ MORE: 'This is totally inappropriate': Campaigners slam Tories' £16.5bn military boost
Let’s start with Brexit. Now obviously, having hoodwinked the population of England into thinking the UK is best when waging war (remember Agincourt, Trafalgar, and Waterloo) you don’t want to be known merely for having a sufficiency of chlorinated chicken.
Some ill-equipped small republic is in for a damn good thrashing some time very soon. Margaret Thatcher invaded Argentinian territory to revive her flagging fortunes in 1982 and Blair invented a dossier to help Haliburton gather in the spoils of war in the Gulf. It’s a fail-safe strategy: wreck the joint then get the owners to pay for the damage.
The Government is expected to cut the UK’s overseas aid budget to help fund its new military shopping expedition. This makes perfect sense from a strategic perspective. By leaving unstable regions even more exposed to the predations of warlords and dictators you create the conditions for even more chaos and with it the prospect of another lucrative military engagement. Case made.
Some of this expenditure will be used to create a National Cyber Force to conduct offensive operations against fake news. Fun fact: this means you and me.
READ MORE: Boris Johnson insists £16.5bn military cash boost will strengthen the Union
Presumably this won’t be operational until the Downing Street IT unit constructs a blocking device, else there would be red flags going up all over the shop with every communique issued by the Johnson administration.
Earlier this year, Dominic Cummings wrote that military procurement “has continued to squander billions of pounds, enriching some of the worst corporate looters and corrupting public life via the revolving door of officials/lobbyists”. It seems he might have paid with his job for that one.
As our armed forces are now even better-equipped to wreak more geopolitical havoc expect another generation of children in the usual regions to go without food and shelter.
At home, the Government refused to fund free school meals for our own poor children and to extend the £20 uplift to Universal Credit. Perhaps Boris Johnson thinks that children in other countries shouldn’t be treated any better.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel