25% spending cuts

[Skids]

The new government has announced that defence spending will be cut by 25% by the end of 2011. Our current commitments are in Afganistan; the anti-piracy operations in the Mediterranean, both sides of Africa, and the Caribbean; the anti-drug trafficking operations also in the Caribbean; facing down the Argentineans in the South Atlantic; and the nuclear deterrant. The defence minister has also said that these cuts will be made ruthlessly and without sentiment (no regard for history or national pride).
So, looks like the money that's left will go the Infantry and Artillery and, as usual, the RAF - for their Chinook helicopters and their over-bloated officer corps who feel the overwhelming need to justify their existence. Everybody else will have to struggle even more than they are now, and many of those units will be disbanded anyway.
Do we really want to cut defence spending by a whole 25%, at the moment?

[Count-A-Strong]

Where would you rather see the cuts made, skids?

[Skids]

I don't deny that there should be defence cuts, especially in the RAF (yes, I hate Crabs), but 25% over the next two years seems a little excessive given our commitments which we're barely meeting as it is.
As an aside, it was also stated that we will be relying more heavily on NATO to provide our security.