ARmy Rumour SErvice

I think the point is that Lairbour seem to find the cash when votes are at stake

And there you have the crux of the problem... It isn't just the current mob either, it's applicable to every politician in a 'democracy'.

And much as we all dislike them, it's due to the voters being greedy 'me,me,me' fecks, which is something that not even the ARRSE coup is going to put right.

Note quite Biscuits.

If the glorious arrse revolution finally comes, the greedy fecks at the top of the pile will be us. Lots of luvverly money for defence, none for idle chavs.

OK it's not reasoned debate but coming back to my original post, according to Kevan Jones (soory Brian Jenkins), we all live in a fantasy world anyway.

So that's it then.... Viva la revolution! :D

Thank god, finally found something to do today - off to empty the armskote and ammo bunker!

Ariba, the revolution, she is here!!!

Originally Posted by Biscuits_Brown

I seem to be forever asking this, but does anyone have a sensible and mature suggestion for how the defence budget can successfully and meaningfully be increased?

Probably no need to increase the Defence Budget, just stop spending it on Privatised Contractors, Arms Manufacturers' R&D Gravy Trains, Policy Advisors, Consultants and Researchers. Reduce the number of Admirals and other bigwigs sitting in MOD doing ... very little at all. Spend that money on kit. Real practical kit, not big ships which we don't necessarily need, but which keep all the ex-generals in dividend and directorship income.

Then, sack all the Whitehall Policy Advisors, Monitors, Accountants, Target Setters, Target Changers, Target Trackers, and anyone who cannot describe in one short sentence what their job involves. Spend that on Housing, Hospitals and care for service personnel.


Job done. Can I be Minister of Defence now?

onOne of the main problems with funding is the '3 way split' between the services. Now that the bills need paying for Euorofighter and Nimrod etc it means the Army has to make cuts equally with the others. So its not just the politicians but the 3 chiefs of staff who are after all, just fighting their corner. If we had just one chief instead of the many or at least a strong Defence Sec who could enforce and prioritise (and who could also buy off the shelf overseas - probably American as they have the best kit) then the 30 odd billion defence budget would be adequate....but I guess this will never happen though it seems the obvious solution.

Job done. Can I be Minister of Defence now?

If it were up to me, aye. Although we'd have to talk about whether or not we need those big ships or not.

Unfortunately the guys you want to sack have a bit more clout than me (or indeed most people in the decision making process)

Originally Posted by Biscuits_Brown

Job done. Can I be Minister of Defence now?

If it were up to me, aye. Although we'd have to talk about whether or not we need those big ships or not.

Unfortunately the guys you want to sack have a bit more clout than me (or indeed most people in the decision making process)

OK Ok, we can talk about the big ships. Maybe we need them; you could convince me.

How about we stop all the spending on 'regional assemblies' and 'unitary authorities' and spend that on military housing and healthcare?

And we could channel the 'overseas development' budget into new aircraft, helicopters and other big ticket items, rather than into the pockets of the ex civil servants who made millions when their department was turned into a company.