I started thinking about this after watching a Mark Felton video on YouTube about how the Royal Navy had "more admirals than ships".
When Cameron made the defense cuts there were fears that the UK would be unable to act abroad
> The numbers of troops which can be used for a deployment overseas would be restricted to 30,000 – one-third less than the size of the Iraq invasion force – and then only for a limited time, during which there would be nothing spare for other military operations. A smaller scale deployment, like that in Afghanistan, would be limited to 6,500
https://www.iiss.org/online-analysis/commentary/2025/12/the-decline-and-fall-of-the-british-army/
> At the end of the Cold War in 1991 the Army had 155,000 troops in four divisions, with nine armoured and four infantry brigades. In 2025 it had 75,000 troops in two divisions, with two armoured and three infantry brigades
With the UK taking a leading role in discussions around providing security for a post-war Ukraine, I'm concerned they don't have the numbers to do anything for any significant length of time. Am I off? What am I missing? How can they get out of this? Do they even need to change tack?
Posted by admiraltarkin
2 Comments
Hey would the Kaiser have invaded Belgium with nukes? I think not
>I started thinking about this after watching a Mark Felton video on YouTube about how the Royal Navy had “more admirals than ships”.
He has some interesting tidbids, but I would strongly caution accepting Mark Felton as a military expert.
More admirals then ships sounds like a good burn, especially to a patriotic Brit. Ukraine has no major surface ships, but they have control of the Black Sea.
Naval Avaiation, Logistics, Training, Inteligence, Communications, Planning, Administration, etc are all criical functions that would require senior officers but not a warship.
The UK needs to figure out what it’s strategic goals are. Does the UK need a British Army capable of sustaining a prolonged expitionary force? There isn’t an empire anymore. The british overseas territories are Gibralter and a bunch of islands scatter around the world which were nominally set up to be coaling stations for the navy Britain no longer has.
Ukraine is an example of how a country without a large fleet can defend their coastline without spending billions of Pounds on warships.
I am not British, so I can’t speak to what the British public wants. Do they want a self defense force than can protect their island? or do they want to spend the money to build and maintain a military that can project power globally?
I’m an Anglophile, so it makes me a bit sad to not think of th Royal Navy as one of the premier sea powers on Earth. However I don’t think many of my British friends are very nationalistic want to pay for a massive military build up.