> 2) cannot afford to launch our own air attack without US support (specialist
> support, quantity of tanking etc)
Much as I understand the sentiment here, can I suggest from my purely civvy perspective that you probably don't want to use the ability to act unilaterally as a case in point? Countries throwing their military weight around without international (preferably UN) support is not a concept you're going to get a lot of love for in the current political climate, even if it does mean effectively the same as "we couldn't do Falklands now."
What enervates me about this (as a minority shareholder in UK PLC and therefore with an interest in the cost-effectiveness of its, er, security guards) why defence is so bloody expensive and yet still needs cutting all the time. I mean, one or the other...
P