Fighter jets for the Air Corps?

But neither you or I are constitutional lawyers. So we are not qualified to make that call and that us why being able to bring cases like this are so important.

The whole world already knows that we cannot defend ourselves, we've just released a public report that confirms it. A legal challenge like this won't make us worse off, but may tip the government's hand to make us better.

Worst case scenario is that the court decides that the agreement isn't unconstitutional and we continue with LOA2.

On your last paragraph, that is the exact point I'm making but from a different viewpoint, they legislate within the framework of the constitution and not outside it. Yes we can change the constitution, but we haven't even had official confirmation that the agreement exists, nevermind a decision on it's constitutionality.

The case is important as it will 1 formally confirm whether the agreement exists or not and 2 confirm whether or not it is constitutionally sound. If it is, then it continues and the population is aware of the agreement. If not then it cannot stand and the government is forced to either change the constitution or provide a better ability to defend the country.

you assume there’s enough interest in the British military by their public?

and yet by any margin the British military has declined over the last 14 years of Tories (and really longer with the GWOT)without much public protest or complaint, hell I wonder how many “Joe public” would know about the RFA strike, or the laid up hulls both RN and RFA, or the small size of the RAF, or any of the hundred and one issues they have.

They want to buy votes, spending on defence won’t do that.

And how could we forget Johnny Mercer's take on historical crimes committed by British forces in Northern Ireland….he won't be missed.

Sure we do the exact same here. Our Pay & Pensions bill is about 70% of our defence spend.