.. means that anyone who believes that weaponry and armed forces must be cut and cut again in order to produce the so-called 'peace dividend' is a numpty.
History teaches us that being nice to dictators DOES NOT WORK.
George the Third's government tried to pare military spending to the bare bone and - lo and behold - up popped Bonaparte. Result - much harder to win the inevitable Napoleonic Wars with our ground forces at their lowest ever level.
From 1904 at the latest, and possibly right back into the 19th century, The Schlieffen Plan and its predecessors were underway with the objective of massive German expansionism under Kaiser Wilhelm. These preparations were known about yet successive governments reduced UK military spending!
Consequently, when Germany invaded Belgium in 1914 - their military might (navy excepted) was the strongest in the world.
This meant that WW1 probably lasted at least two years longer than it needed to.
Disarmers and appeasers were rife across political parties between WW1 and WW2. Britain's forces were reduced to absurd levels - but this was okay because 'nobody could ever be stupid enough to commence another war after he War To End All Wars."
Unfortunately, this was not explained to Hitler!
Had we been fully armed in 1939 - perhaps we could have avoided Hitler's incursions into Poland in early September and prevented his lebensraum policies being enacted.
Pacifists, appeasers and those who advocate mythical peace dividends may (perhaps?) be well-meaning but are, in practice, a major enemy within!
.jpeg)