When I started this thread, I had doubts about whether the Prime Minister would be capable of taking advice from the Service Chiefs. Under a different Government I have the same doubts. Was the public criticism of the First Sea Lord this week acceptable?
We know for a fact that the First Sea Lord's advice was ignored before the SDSR, with respect to the Harrier and the issue of preparing for CVF in the future, and over Nimrod. Of course, some might argue that a career politician who has never worked outside of the Conservative party (he was unable to actually win the election though) is better placed to make judgements about these issues than an experienced naval officer with a background in Submarines who later commanded a carrier during periods of intense operational flying....
There are suggestions the professional advice was ignored when making an open commitment to Libya. Is Call Me Dave really well placed to make judgements - his experience of the real world is rather limited.
Why is the decision making process so flawed?
To really put the cat amongst the pigeons have a look at this ARRSE thread:
UK Armed Forces: Plummeting International Reputation Deserved? Does it Matter?