Slashing the Forces will wound our security

sir – It beggars belief that the numbers serving in our Army are forecast to fall to a level which would only fill three quarters of Wembley stadium (report, November 27).

How can any government think this number will be able to protect our country properly in the event of enemy aggression, let alone support our commitment to Nato and our allies? Mike Kelly Camberley, Surrey

sir – Britain’s defence budget would go further in funding day-to-day conventional forces if the renewal and maintenance of our nuclear deterrent capability was funded by the Treasury.

After all, possession of this ultimate insurance is essentially diplomatic. John Barstow Pulborough, West Sussex

sir – On Sunday the Royal Navy changed the guard at Buckingham Palace for the first time. Charles

Moore suggests this is because of Britain’s lack of soldiers (Comment, November 27).

I propose that the Navy are on duty because there is a lack of ships. Andrew J Morrison Bellevigne-en-layon, Maine-et-loire France

sir – Britain’s defence procurement has a very poor record.

In the case of the Royal Navy, vastly unfavourable business agreements have resulted in the delivery of two hugely expensive and unwanted offshore patrol vessels at a time when the Navy is struggling to man and equip its new aircraft carriers.

Examination of the sacred overseas aid budget, and attention to gaining better value for money from procurement, would surely be a better route to savings than cutting our proven and effective amphibious capability. Michael Shuttleworth Hope Valley, Derbyshire