More money for defence?
The call by Britain’s defence chief of staff and many MPs for increased defence spending (26 January) exposes a lack of rational thinking with regard to the country’s security needs. The military need adversaries, as they have a vested interest in larger defence budgets. MPs fear losing votes if they don’t support the demands of military leaders. Government ministers still have Aneurin Bevan’s horror of going naked into the conference chamber and they want phallic symbols like Trident with which to swagger on the world stage.
While there is still life in the democratic process, the UK shall not be going to war alone with Russia, so there is no reason to lose sleep worrying that it could not match their military capabilities.
The UK should put the emphasis in the next defence review on improving the security of computer systems and accept that more troops and aircraft are not relevant to this. The review should also attempt to analyse the psychology and motives of the Russian leadership as they see their proud country surrounded by so many US military bases.
In the same issue, the photo of president Vladimir Putin immersing his body in freezing water is a reminder to our political leaders of one way of promoting clear, rational thinking.
Graham Davey
Bristol, UK
• The call for more British defence spending is completely ridiculous. Since the unification of Germany, Nato’s armed forces have moved up to the Russian frontier. Your story is quite clear: “Few, if any, US or western European military chiefs believe a Russian invasion of the Baltic states or eastern Europe is likely in the near future”.
But if any country is in a position to feel threatened, it is Russia, with US and Nato forces all over the place. It is hardly surprising that Russia may be increasing its defence capabilities, but the accent is on defence, not aggression. Their action in defence of Syria is more likely to establish peace in the Middle East than to threaten anyone. And Russia, under the present situation, would almost certainly defend Iran if it were attacked.
Jordan Bishop
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Football’s global dichotomy
In your 26 January article Today Manchester, tomorrow the world, the final page hints at how corruption, both in football as a business and on the field of play, can occur when the owners are state sponsors having near unlimited wealth and thus, no barrier to entry. The dichotomy between many football teams that are run as near family businesses, and global audiences of 500 million plus, is made clear.
Once corruption comes in and is seen to come in, the “beautiful game” as we know it will cease to exist, and will become the same as the once great sport of wrestling – nobody will take the game seriously. A major disconnect will occur if the status quo of state sponsors is allowed to continue.
Stephen Banks
Birmingham, UK
British-English in the US
While applauding Emma Brockes (26 January) for trying to retain some of her British English while living in a land of dominating Americanisms, her bottom line of hanging on to her long “a” in “bath” is not an exclusive identifier for British English. “Barth” only characterises the southern English accent (London, Oxbridge etc). The short “a” is typical of the oft-overlooked substantial part of the country, where there is a city locally pronounced “Bath” and another that is not called “Newcarstle”.
Avoiding slipping from the British long “a” (“barth”) to the rather similar American long “a” (“baath”) and ignoring the fact that British northerners have “baths” (which is a more hygienic way of saying that “northerners don’t have bathes”), is not a very strong statement for British English anyway.
Keith Thompson
Hamilton, New Zealand
Disney’s idea of death
Danny Leigh’s article Death wears Mickey Mouse ears (19 January) resonated strongly with me. As Leigh says, “Bambi blew the whistle on mortality for kids for ever.” Indeed, what a shock for a five-year-old to imagine losing his mother. The forest fire sequence in Bambi was a further source of anxiety; a child, identifying with talking animals, can feel his whole world threatened.
Leigh’s main point is to reveal a contradiction in western culture: “we have implicitly subcontracted the awful business of telling kids about death”. While I’m not sure this is a fair conclusion, Leigh’s treatment of Bambi is unfortunately one-dimensional. Yes, Bambi taught us about death, but it also taught us that childhood has an end, and the admirable way out of our vulnerable dependence is to eventually become our own parents.
John Geffroy
Las Vegas, New Mexico, US
Briefly
• I note that in Guy Lodge’s profile of actor Meryl Streep (26 January), he mentions that her new film The Post is “her first-ever collaboration” with director Steven Spielberg. It is not. She played the Blue Mecha in his 2001 film, AI (Artificial Intelligence).
Richard Orlando
Westmount, Quebec, Canada
• Send letters for publication to weekly.letters@theguardian.com. Please include a full postal address and a reference to the article. We may edit letters. Submission and publication of all letters is subject to our terms and conditions.
.png?w=600)
