A covenant of fairness and equality?

Armed Forces Day was a ‘let them eat cake’ moment from none other than Gordon Brown who originally called it Veterans’ Day. And all done to deflect attention from his appalling handling of the Country’s economy. I, for one, didn’t fall for it and have refused to jump on the bandwagon ever since. As others have said, Armistice Day and Remembrance Sunday are sufficient.
 
Was almost charged with mutiny on an RAAF base. Myself and 2 other Killicks signed and submitted a letter with the intention of protecting our AB's from RAAF bellendry. They were treating guys with 10 years service like recruits. Got hauled in, threatened and withdrew the letter.

Lesson learned. Half an hour later we submitted individual letters. The SNO had a word with the RAAF twats and we were all left alone.
 
I was wounded in the service of my country. I proudly bear the scar on the inside of my right arm. It’s just a single scar about three quarters of an inch long.

I never tell anybody about my sacrifice for my country.

Mainly because it would be f*cking embarrassing to tell them that I cut it on a mess tin handle while bending it to stop it rattling in my pouch on a ten miler.

The cross that some of us bear from doing our bit eh!

I feel your pain. My wounds were in the form of broken bones. No one can see them.

I got a stiff arm across the face playing non contact sport in the gym. An operation to realign my face and a week in hospital i was almost recognisable.
 

philc

LE
RN Ratings joining the service prior to 2006 did not swear an oath of allegiance. Many think they did, and claim as much, but often confuse signing their attestation (contract of employment) or signing the Official Secrets Act with taking an oath.

To be fair, it makes not one jot of difference for those who now do and those of us who never did nor never will.

I must say this has confused me in the past, I have no recollection of saying any oath but many say they did, this is 1980, I thought it was me having forgotten, seems not the case.
 
I must say this has confused me in the past, I have no recollection of saying any oath but many say they did, this is 1980, I thought it was me having forgotten, seems not the case.
JSP 830
8. Oath of allegiance. Whilst the signed declaration made at enlistment is a legal matter, the oath of allegiance15 has an educational, symbolic and solemn purpose. The swearing may be conducted during the first day of training or if considered more appropriate, at another suitable point, at the convenience of the single-Service. Swearing the oath of allegiance is a requirement of the Services for service in Her Majesty’s forces (this is a new provision for the RN because people offering to enter RN service have historically not sworn an oath of allegiance). Swearing the oath of allegiance is viewed as a mark of the individual’s loyalty to the Crown and therefore, their willingness faithfully to serve as a member of the armed forces.
 

philc

LE
I went abroad for 8 years, when I came back the amount of remember veterans stickers on cars and all the other bits and pieces on social media struck me as ghoulish and embarrassing. Whilst I appreciate the gesture and well meaning, it does seem some parts of the population get of on it.

I went to our local AFD for the first time a few years back, it seemed well attended with various regimental association's and sections of local TA, plus stalls selling military tat, no regulars in attendance but I appreciate other towns may have regulars pressganged in.

Maybe concentrate on Navy Weekend in Popmey & Guz, Aldershot Army Day and what ever crab air does. You get jobed for the day, your at your base, barracks or ship and its not such a balls ache.
 

Yokel

LE
Its unlikely to disappear soon, its an opportunity for senior officers to puff out their OJAR.

Surely you mean to appease the old and bold, and to give some middle ranking types an opportunity to impress the CoC at the expense of those who were concentrating on their actual roles.

JSP 830
8. Oath of allegiance. Whilst the signed declaration made at enlistment is a legal matter, the oath of allegiance15 has an educational, symbolic and solemn purpose. The swearing may be conducted during the first day of training or if considered more appropriate, at another suitable point, at the convenience of the single-Service. Swearing the oath of allegiance is a requirement of the Services for service in Her Majesty’s forces (this is a new provision for the RN because people offering to enter RN service have historically not sworn an oath of allegiance). Swearing the oath of allegiance is viewed as a mark of the individual’s loyalty to the Crown and therefore, their willingness faithfully to serve as a member of the armed forces.

Historically, RN percent did not swear an oath as their loyalty to the Crown was never doubted. However, swearing an oath of allegiance was introduced when basic naval training was reviewed by a senior Royal Marine Officer - in 2008 or 2009 I believe.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps AFD needs binning, or replaced with an annual open day at military bases.
I recall an open day in BAOR in the 70s, where a bunch of former Wehrmacht gunners had a whale of a time reenacting gun drills on the ceremonial 25 pounder.
Or another, at a Bundeswehr camp, where the garrison teamed with local shooting clubs to lay on an opportunity for anyone to have a go with assorted weaponry.
Balloons pinned to a sheet of 8x4, a loaded Uzi, and prizes for most popped on full auto.
G3s with a 22 sub calibre liner on a 200m range, and so on.
The public enjoy it, the troops get to show off ( and meet young ladies), and not a busby nor drill in sight.
 
I went abroad for 8 years, when I came back the amount of remember veterans stickers on cars and all the other bits and pieces on social media struck me as ghoulish and embarrassing. Whilst I appreciate the gesture and well meaning, it does seem some parts of the population get of on it.

I went to our local AFD for the first time a few years back, it seemed well attended with various regimental association's and sections of local TA, plus stalls selling military tat, no regulars in attendance but I appreciate other towns may have regulars pressganged in.

Maybe concentrate on Navy Weekend in Popmey & Guz, Aldershot Army Day and what ever crab air does. You get jobed for the day, your at your base, barracks or ship and its not such a balls ache.

A lot of that nonsense was influenced by the American adulation of its armed forces and not (entirely healthy) obeisance and unctuous exaggerated gratitude towards veterans.

I dislike it on a lot of levels. At best it shows poor taste.
 
**** that shit, I'm a hero, Id demand that my military pension be tax free, but it already is because I dont live in the UK plus I should get any future jubilee medals.

Hmmm... I live in the USA still pay UK tax on my Army pension and Old Age pension...you're talking out of your miserable hoop again Stacks old boy!

Surely the 'Covenant', was designed to ensure our Armed Forces personnel were treated fairly.... decent pay, decent accommodation, nutritious food, decent recreational facilities, weapons and equipment on a par with those of our potential enemies, well trained Leaders with integrity and humanity, given realistic training for war?
Add to all that skilled care if wounded, injured, in the course of one's duties, decent aftercare for them on leaving.
Throw in a decent pension commensurate with length of service.

A long time ago, although the pay left a bit to be desired (as I'm sure it still does), food and accommodation was free, food was nutritious and provided by a Corps trained and dedicated to ensuring reasonably high standards were maintained...and answerable to a Commanding officer if it wasn't, there were decent recreational facilities in peacetime barracks, military hospitals where personnel sick and wounded/injured received the best of treatment, our equipment and weapons were on a par with that of our potential enemies.
Frequent inspections to ensure safety and standards of hygiene were maintained.

Now, it seems, soldiers are forgotten about, paying through the nose for unimaginative food served up by civilian contractors given that contract because they tendered the lowest bid, living in quarters falling in around them isolated from society....soldiers discovered in a barrack room dead for several weeks through lack of regular inspections. No more military hospitals, weapons and equipment undergoing a constant metamorphosis...never quite suitable for the job in hand.
Veterans in need having to rely on charitable organisations.

I'd say the Covenant isn't working...in fact it was, and is, a PR sham... over the decades the Army has regressed to conditions comparable to those existing prior to the Crimean War, tucked away from the public eye, largely forgotten about (except in times of war and crisis)...at least that's how it seems to a Veteran who still parades, proudly, when he can on Regimental Days and Remembrance Sunday in suit, medals and glengarry and still contributes to his Regimental Association to help former members of the Regiment in need.

But what do I know, a veteran of several diverse campaigns, and a sneered at Cold War Warrior?
 
Last edited:
Armed Forces Day was a ‘let them eat cake’ moment from none other than Gordon Brown who originally called it Veterans’ Day. And all done to deflect attention from his appalling handling of the Country’s economy. I, for one, didn’t fall for it and have refused to jump on the bandwagon ever since. As others have said, Armistice Day and Remembrance Sunday are sufficient.

Absolutely agree Q!
 
Hmmm... I live in the USA still pay UK tax on my Army pension and Old Age pension...you're talking out of your miserable hoop again Stacks old boy!
Its you talking out of your hoop, my military pension is about 12100 a year as Im abroad my wages dont put me over the threshold.



Surely the 'Covenant', was designed to ensure our Armed Forces personnel were treated fairly.... decent pay, decent accommodation, nutritious food, decent recreational facilities, weapons and equipment on a par with those of our potential enemies, well trained Leaders with integrity and humanity, given realistic training for war?

Errr no, that should be standard.


Add to all that skilled care if wounded, injured, in the course of one's duties, decent aftercare for them on leaving.
Throw in a decent pension commensurate with length of service.

That should also be standard.


A long time ago, although the pay left a bit to be desired (as I'm sure it still does), food and accommodation was free, food was nutritious and provided by a Corps trained and dedicated to ensuring reasonably high standards were maintained...and answerable to a Commanding officer if it wasn't, there were decent recreational facilities in peacetime barracks, military hospitals where personnel sick and wounded/injured received the best of treatment, our equipment and weapons were on a par with that of our potential enemies.

Back in the day when this was all fields, the equipment was crap, the singlie accommodation was crap, the food was decent but only because they got the money from missed meals.

Now, it seems, soldiers are forgotten about, paying through the nose for unimaginative food served up by civilian contractors given that contract because they tendered the lowest bid, living in quarters falling in around them isolated from society. No more military hospitals, weapons and equipment undergoing a constant metamorphosis...never quite suitable for the job in hand.
Veterans in need having to rely on charitable organisations.
Paying through the nose? I think not.


I'd say the Covenant isn't working...in fact it was, and is, a PR sham... over the decades the Army has regressed to conditions comparable to those existing prior to the Crimean War, tucked away from the public eye, largely forgotten about (except in times of war and crisis)...at least that's how it seems to a Veteran who still parades, proudly, when he can on Regimental Days and Remembrance Sunday in suit, medals and glengarry and still contributes to his Regimental Association to help former members of the Regiment in need.

But what do I know, a veteran of several diverse campaigns, and a sneered at Cold War Warrior?

The covenant is supposed to ensure soldiers are not at a disadvantage because of their service. Its not supposed to be about making the job or normal standards any better.
 
Its you talking out of your hoop, my military pension is about 12100 a year as Im abroad my wages dont put me over the threshold.





Errr no, that should be standard.




That should also be standard.




Back in the day when this was all fields, the equipment was crap, the singlie accommodation was crap, the food was decent but only because they got the money from missed meals.


Paying through the nose? I think not.




The covenant is supposed to ensure soldiers are not at a disadvantage because of their service. Its not supposed to be about making the job or normal standards any better.


I beg to disagree... we have a duty of care...an important part of leadership at every level from Lance Corporal right up to Prime Minister!
 
I thought this was the Armed Forces Covenant

MoD Publication

The organisation itself

The Armed Forces Covenant An Enduring Covenant Between The People of the United Kingdom Her Majesty’s Government – and – All those who serve or have served in the Armed Forces of the Crown And their Families

The first duty of Government is the defence of the realm. Our Armed Forces fulfil that responsibility on behalf of the Government, sacrificing some civilian freedoms, facing danger and, sometimes, suffering serious injury or death as a result of their duty. Families also play a vital role in supporting the operational effectiveness of our Armed Forces. In return, the whole nation has a moral obligation to the members of the Naval Service, the Army and the Royal Air Force, together with their families.

They deserve our respect and support, and fair treatment. Those who serve in the Armed Forces, whether regular or Reserve, those who have served in the past, and their families, should face no disadvantage compared to other citizens in the provision of public and commercial services.

Special consideration is appropriate in some cases, especially for those who have given most such as the injured and the bereaved.

This obligation involves the whole of society: it includes voluntary and charitable bodies, private organisations, and the actions of individuals in supporting the Armed Forces. Recognising those who have performed military duty unites the country and demonstrates the value of their contribution. This has no greater expression than in upholding this Covenant
 
I beg to disagree... we have a duty of care...an important part of leadership at every level from Lance Corporal right up to Prime Minister!
Duty of care isn't supposed the covenant.

Decent accommodation should be a standard feature, nothing to do with the covenant.
A proper use would be helping a soldier who is posted and can't get his kid into a local school. He has bee disadvantaged due to his service.
 
Last edited:
Duty of care isn't supposed the covenant.

Decent accommodation should be a standard feature, nothing to do with the covenant.
A proper use would be helping a soldier who is posted and can't get his kid into a local school. He has be disadvantaged due to his service.

I was under the impression that was the purpose of the Military Covenant - to ensure serving personnel aren't disadvantaged by the nature of the lifestyle - e.g. being able to get kids into local schools following last minute assignment moves.

Was I incorrect in this belief and it is instead something else?
 
A lot of that nonsense was influenced by the American adulation of its armed forces and not (entirely healthy) obeisance and unctuous exaggerated gratitude towards veterans.

I dislike it on a lot of levels. At best it shows poor taste.
A lot is, I think, due to the recent tendency for every minority to scream "Look at me!" on every occassion possible. It ties in with no mark " influencers", social media etc where everyone and his dog claims fame over obscurity.
Most veterans, since at least WW1, simply got on with life, raised families, worked, retired and died, all with barely a ripple of attention from the media.
 
A lot is, I think, due to the recent tendency for every minority to scream "Look at me!" on every occassion possible. It ties in with no mark " influencers", social media etc where everyone and his dog claims fame over obscurity.
Most veterans, since at least WW1, simply got on with life, raised families, worked, retired and died, all with barely a ripple of attention from the media.
Something I've seen on social media is a profusion of crap, overly sentimental creatives that invariably include the words 'band of brothers', 'heroes' 'sacrifice', 'wounds' and 'PTSD'. It's cringeworthy.

On the 'band of brothers' theme: I've noticed several times that when a cold war relic eats, drinks and smokes himself to death, there is a flurry of social media posts with images of upended rifles with helmets on top, poppies, and embarrassing sentimental doggerel. Blokes who didn't know him, or who didn't like him in life, solemnly parade for the funeral as though he'd been killed in action next to them.

All very unhealthy. Social media is not a good thing.
 
I was under the impression that was the purpose of the Military Covenant - to ensure serving personnel aren't disadvantaged by the nature of the lifestyle - e.g. being able to get kids into local schools following last minute assignment moves.

Was I incorrect in this belief and it is instead something else?
That what it is, other people seem to think it means treating people at a basic standard.
 
I must say this has confused me in the past, I have no recollection of saying any oath but many say they did, this is 1980, I thought it was me having forgotten, seems not the case.
The peculiar thing is the reason for it's introduction has no basis on factual need. It was introduced on the whim of one person's opinion.

The 2006 Armed Forces Act occurred before the HMS Cornwall (Iranian hostages debacle) and had nothing to do with oaths or loyalty in the inquiry aftermath.
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top