Ainsworth "Ambushed" By UK EOD SSGT

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by jumpinjarhead, Oct 4, 2009.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. I guess the hono(u)rable minister's personal security detail was not briefed on this particular threat! :D

    Linky
     
  2. meridian

    meridian LE Good Egg (charities)

    Have we got more to send though?
     
  3. We don't have the money for it
     
  4. More power to the brave Sergeant why havn't we sent sufficient resources?,we do have the T.A. and Reserve Forces .We are at war,why can't they be mobilised?If this is a N.A.T.O. sanctioned and 'active' war where are the German CH53's,Turkish,Greek,Norwegian,French and yes Spanish troops,Aircraft,Helo's etc.If this is not a N.A.T.O. Major Operation why are we there at all,especially when we have the same perogative as the Spanish to simply go home if at risk?
     
  5. All good questions.... :(
     
  6. Thousands have been, both for Iraq and Afghanistan.
     
  7. Same for the US-several killed in last couple of days were National Guard.
     
  8. I for one am all in for mobilisation for the TA, but with a 20% cut in MTD's pretty much across the board, which regular wants to find himself on patrol next to an inadequately trained TA augmentee?? Journos would have a field day if they got wind that there was a troop surge of TA/Reservists who weren't up to the job, even more so than normal :) (thought i'd get in there just before the regs have a pop)

    .............Must stop the flow of Linkwood and go to bed!!
     
  9. G'night!
     
  10. I'd hardly call it an ambush like the Mail does. The Times calls it a 'reply'.

    If you don't want a certain answer then you are probably best not asking the question.

    What the feck did he think the answer was going to be? "Nah sir, we have everything we require?"

    Or he could be getting public backing for asking for more money for more troops.

    "Look Gordon, I know it costs money but otherwise the public wil hate us. No, even more. Only 28% like us now FFS!"

    BTW his little issue with 'r' and 'l' makes it interesting when he mentions the upcoming elections. Much clenched teeth and fighting to keep a straight face. I'd never noticed it before.
     
  11. Just heard this on the news, fair play to the Staffy, hope he doesn't get in the sh1t over it.
     
  12. Andy_S

    Andy_S LE Book Reviewer

    The regular British Army is some 100,000 strong. We also have several 1000s of TA augmentees available, an RM Commando Brigade, the RAF Regt, etc, etc. Why, then, can we maintain only a 9,000 man force in action on the ground?

    No offense to the army, but any other organisation - say, a commercial company - that is only able to deploys one tenth of its staff on its key role would face serious questions from its board of directors.

    Given, also, the fact that in Afghanistan our troops are actually in action, it seems to be not just reasonable but essentialy to strip other forces - eg our garrisons in Germany - of the necessary elements that are so lacking in the theater (eg engineer and helicopter units).

    Yes, I can hear unit commander screaming that they need to maintain their training cycles, their equipment, their personnel, etc, but let us be frank here: we are at WAR. If we triage casualties, let's use the same principle and prioritize the requirments of the army's various different theater deployments.
     
  13. Having 9000 troops in Afghanistan costs x.

    Increasing that number increases x.

    Drawing down elsewhere would not equal that increase.

    This shortfall needs to be paid for.

    We have no money.

    This doesn't take into account harmony guidlines being ripped up. So what? Rip them up and you could find yourself with numbers less than 100,000 and decreasing sharply.
     
  14. oldbaldy

    oldbaldy LE Moderator Good Egg (charities)
    1. Battlefield Tours

    Supposed to be 1 tour ever two years, that takes us to a commitment of 36K.
    Add in all the other commitments and you see the problem
     
  15. Speaking as a civvy going through interview process to join, I hope I can comment on such an emotive issue for you guys. Well done that man and I think all of us back home who are behind you guys out there totally agree with his sentiments. With no military experience, as inded Ainsworth has none, if a soldeir says he needs more men and more equipment, I don't see how, in any consciousness, he can not take those sentiments on board. Does he think he knows better than you guys on the ground? I think perhaps he does and it is that sort of thinking that will have him and his ilk queuing up for their next jobs when they get booted out shortly.