"Unfortunately redundancies are unavoidable due to the size of the defence deficit that this government inherited and the consequent scale of downsizing required in the army," said Defence Secretary Philip Hammond. "We will have smaller armed forces but they will in future be properly equipped and well funded, unlike before. These redundancies will not affect current operations in Afghanistan, where our armed forces continue to fight so bravely on this country's behalf." Defence Mnagement.com
Apparently this reduction in force will be followed by further cuts. IMO what will result will not be a viable force for any sort of serious overseas "work." An overseas deployment requires several "echelons" of troops for sustainability. At any one time, one "echelon" is engaged, one has just returned and another is preparing to go. This strength level will not support that. This strength is less than half that of the USMC.
It is also difficult to see how the post, camp and station structure of the army can be continued without closing many installations. Additionally, the schools structure will be largely devoid of trainees.
Many people in the UK don't want a capable army. That's good because they won't have one except for things like the Brigade of Guards and the Household Cavalry. Prince Harry can fly the helicopter until it wears out.
This is really not funny. A similar process will occur in the US as an inevitable part of debt reduction. pl