Spot on stacker -
every so often some Charlie sits down for a defence review, which involves creating a fantasy world that bears little resemblance to reality, and is then used to determine force structures for the next umpty ump years. Quite often this involves losing capability, such as not needing fighters as enemy bombers will be taken out by missiles, and so forth.
The reduction in capability can provide a welcome cash boost, so handy when you want to prop up a wavering marginal constituency - it tends to have a knock on effect when you get sent at zero notice to recapture the Falklands and by sheer good fortune you haven't quite finished flogging your carriers off.
Once a few such cock ups have been experienced the government, far from learning these stunningly simple lessons, promptly goes and invades a part of the world that has happily swallowed invading armies whole for the past few millenia, attempting to achieve what will be the first ever away match victory in that neck of the woods on a shoestring.
It's the government, start to finish - the FJ v Mud movers, CV v FFG, Landie v, errr, Shank's pony arguments are all symptoms of the underlying issue - if the forces were properly funded for the jobs they are given, or they were only tasked in line with their capabilities, then nobody would have to argue about who got what slice of the pie.