Andrew Marr show BBC1 Now

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Pararegtom, Aug 2, 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. Pararegtom

    Pararegtom LE Book Reviewer

    Gen Jackson on BBC1. slaggintg off govt, Bloody good stuff
     
  2. Pity he was not so forthright with his views when he was serving! When this very point was just put to him, he quite easily swerved it.
     
  3. He's obviously doing it for publicity. If he cared that much he'd have made his feelings known whilst serving.

    He did save a Para battalion though so well done Jacko. :)
     
  4. Jackson is not being critical of the government and thank god too.

    You do NOT pick a fight with the democratically elected government no matter how emotional you feel about the issues. Dannatt in my opinion was well within the line, not beyond it, but the CGS has a responsibility to make the Army's case via Whitehall not the AM show.

    This is Britain for heaven's sake, I think Labour are as disgraceful as the next man but I don't want the military to take on the government, that is why the CDS had to step in and rebuke Dannatt publicly to rebalance the escalating constitutional issue.
     
  5. Pity it didn't go so well for the rest of us.
     
  6. At least Steph Flowers asked a couple of real questions, unlike that New Labour flunky Marr
     
  7.  
  8. Is that not the point of democracy?

    Regardless of your position all members outside the government should be critical of the governments actions, particularly if those actions are damaging that sector.
     
  9. No it is not the point of democracy. Public scrutiny is conducted by public bodies, parliamentary select committees, the electorate, not members of the civil service, Crown employees, armed forces etc.

    Teachers, nurses etc and trade unionists aren't crown employees. When you effectively have the defenders of the constitution (armed forces) disrupting the democratically-elected Executive, then you have a constitutional crisis and we become an unstable power; no better than Zimbabwe.

    Military chiefs should NOT remain reticent, but publicly they are there to uphold the policies of the incumbent government elected by 'us' the people, the CGS and the CDS have a lot of influence and he knows it behind the cameras, so that is why this was seen as an anti-Labour outburst not a genuine concern for troops. He was right in my view sure, but you really need to be careful on this.
     
  10. We have a government unfit to govern. We are already unstable.

    Personally id be happy if the reverend did a Raoul Salan.
     
  11. Who are we to judge the 'fitness' of the government as gospel? Clearly the British people deemed Labour the choice of their politics in 2005, and as such those working for the government ought to respect that. The outcome of the next election, overdue by convention by 3 months sure, will bring us a new era of politics where we can judge the present government.
     
  12. seaweed

    seaweed LE Book Reviewer

    There's a difference between challenging Govt policy (i.e. whether we should or should not be engaged in such and such a place) and drawing attention to difficulties in loyally following Govt policy because of being under-resourced, with the risk of failure or of having to be bailed out by the US (and hence Govt embarrassment) if that continues.

    We were in the same mess in 1945 with the British Pacific Fleet, which managed to do most of the job but only just, and which had to rely on US help in all manner of ways.
     
  13. 'a new era of politics'

    a tory party with a rich history of defence cuts.

    Who are we?

    Apparently the only people left who care about the security of the realm?

    As for who the British people vote for, the British 'people' dont know their arrsehole from their elbow.

    They are to busy watching hollyoaks.
     
  14. Men are dying because of the indifference to the military on the part of Labour and more specifically Brown, but the military should never go public on it. As Jock said, the army will always want more, and we may know it needs more, but use a bit of common sense in the approach to pressuring the govt.

    Folk in the military should know how sensitive the relationship between the Army and the Labour Party is. The Army has the potential to hugely embarras Labour, to shave off a couple of opinion poll points and shake it's 'competency' esteem, but it will ALWAYS be an unwise war to wage.

    Politics has a long memory, and in 9/10 years when the Labour Party crush Cameron and co, they will remember it was the Army that damaged them last time in office and what goes around comes around.

    Make recommendations, pull a few strings (MPs, media, Tory HQ etc) but don't go public against the government.
     
  15. What?

    Are you saying that there are no bounds to criticise the Govt of the day? We have EVERY right to call the Govt when it is doing wrong, acting wrong and fouling everything wrong?

    As you quite rightly pointed out, this IS the UK, and we have a long history of taking the Govt of the day to task.

    To do anything else is meek and cowardly.