Army faces biggest cuts since Crimea

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by jaybee2786, Jun 20, 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. Army cuts

    THE Ministry of Defence intends to cut army manpower to its lowest level since the Crimean war.

    Plans to axe three infantry battalions – a total of 1,800 men – are being discussed despite the overstretch caused by the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. This would see the size of the army drop below 100,000 for the first time since the 1850s.

    The army is so desperate to protect funding for Afghanistan that it could offer cuts only in infantry units to meet demands for savings.

    General Sir David Richards, the incoming head of the army, offered to sacrifice The Green Howards, the regiment of General Sir Richard Dannatt, the current head of the army.
    Related Links
    The plan was discussed at a high-level meeting of the army, the navy and the RAF in Whitehall last Tuesday. The defence ministry said this weekend it could not discuss the proposed cuts because next year’s planning round was “ongoing”.

    The RAF proposed the scrapping of Harrier jump jets while the navy proposed axing Type42 destroyers early, and putting back the replacement for its frigates for 20 years.

    “This is the opening move in what could be the bloodiest spending round yet,” a senior defence source said. “All three services will get new defence chiefs over the next two months. This is going to hit them like a speeding train.”

    The infantry units under threat are those that have deployed abroad recently and are not due to go to Afghanistan over the next three or four years, the sources said. One battalion from each of the Yorkshire Regiment, the Mercian Regiment and the Royal Regiment of Scotland will go. The Green Howards are the battalion of the Yorkshire Regiment earmarked for the axe.

    The official “trained manning requirement” of the army is 101,790, so the loss of three battalions, of roughly 1,800 men in total, would take the strength of the army to below 100,000.

    Charles Heyman, a former infantry officer who edits The Armed Forces of the United Kingdom, a military guide, said the proposed cuts were “stark raving mad”.

    He added: “If we were to withdraw from Afghanistan it would be fine but with the government saying operations there will go on for 10 years it is sheer lunacy. It will do severe damage to morale within the infantry and within the wider army.”

    Richards has called for a “ruthless focus” on Afghanistan. He is determined to ensure that the army is seen to be successful to restore its reputation for counter-insurgency, which he believes has been badly damaged in Iraq.
  2. They could contract Afghan out to Blackwater, that'd save shit loads of money
  3. You of course meant Xe
  4. They just don't get do they!!!Im so fcuking angry, in fact that angry i cant even right anymore words.
  5. Well the three battalions mentioned, if this is indeed true, should march on London and prevent it. They've got nothing to lose.
  6. Won't the soilders facing the chop get a choice to join another regiment? If thats the case then they are mergeing units so that more soilders can get out there faster because as said, the ones facing the chop will not be going out for the next 3 or 4 years?

    OR are they just getting rid of the soilders? I thought infantry were always in demand?
  7. Read the article properly.
  8. I did fuckhead.

    "The infantry units under threat are those that have deployed abroad recently and are not due to go to Afghanistan over the next three or four years, the sources said. One battalion from each of the Yorkshire Regiment, the Mercian Regiment and the Royal Regiment of Scotland will go. The Green Howards are the battalion of the Yorkshire Regiment earmarked for the axe."

    It's what i said. there disbanding them because there not due to go out in 3 or 4 years. Don't make sense, infantry is always in demand right?
  9. If true the army are getting it tight , if the raf lose the harrier as good as the typhoon is i am sure the harrier will be missed by the infantry
  10. If the Army is due to 'fall well below the 100, 000 mark' that would indicate they are being cut i.e. gotten rid of, and not merged with another unit.

  11. thats rubbish, it's pretty obvious there wrong. No way would they do something like this when there still recruiting for infantry regiments

    Nice try, but think a little ********.
  12. Okay everyone, I know the outrage bus is boarding, but lets try and put some clarity here.

    PR10 is underway - this is the annual process when the MOD tries to balance its books. As part of this process, a huge range of options is drawn up from across the board - these range from high pain to low pain. High pain are the ones that will never be taken, but low pain means it could be taken on risk.

    What appears to have happened here is that some well meaning idiot has leaked the high pain options out there. I'm calling them an idiot for a good reason - the options process is supposed to be done in house and without leaking to allow the Forces the chance to talk about options that will never be taken - such as some of the ones discussed above. They can be discussed and written off and no one gets emotional or upset. The reason this is done is to ensure that we have a plan to say to Ministers - "well Minister, we can save £X Billion, but to do so would mean scrapping XYZ and no longer buying ABC". The whole point is that they don't get dragged out in public.

    The moment you leak them, then these cuts are in the public domain, and its possible to get a reaction to them - and it makes it suddenly palatable to have a discussion on the issues with a view to taking the option. After all, it may be high pain, but if the papers don't care that much, then the Minister (yes this does come down to Politicians) may think it safe to risk the option and save some money.

    In other words, the muppet that leaked a confidential range of options has just ensured that these are now legitimate targets and not just 'thinkpieces'. Every year people are warned not to leak for the good of their service interests, and every year people do just this and end up damaging their service interests.

    Add to the fact that I have a very strong suspicion that elements of the story are factually incorrect, and it really doesnt' add up to much.
  13. Guys, please, it isn't the NAAFI forum.

    Running down units is time consuming and tricky. The reason these units have been offered up (and I use those words carefully) is that, if the option is taken, it will have the least impact on units deploying on operations in the near future.

    Budget cuts across the Services have already been imposed, with more to come. The meeting that the newspapers are describing is the normal annual round of meetings where the Chiefs try to outdo each other with their attempts to save money. The RAF says we cannot offer any savings except the Red Arrows. The Navy says that it will cut up HMS Victory and sell it for firewood, and the Army says it will cut the Black Watch.

    The Ministers look at the options and impacts and decide which option they will take; farewell the Black Watch! Except.... :D

    I have absolutely no doubt that there will be savings measures somewhere, but these are early days yet!

    To return to my earlier paragraph; if those Bns have just returned from ops, they would not be rostered to return until 2012, say. If the decision was taken to disband them, LAND has at least 18 months to plan and tweak the programme for replacing them - leaving plenty of time to train up the replacement units. In the meantime, the units that have been sacrificed would be run down. 40% of the Toms would leave anyway (natural wastage), 40% would move on posting and the rest would be offered jobs elsewhere, probably in the Bns that wil deploy to AFG in the place of.

  14. For someone who hasn't even joined the Armed Forces yet, you don't half spout a lot of crap. Toddle off to bed, there's a good chap.
  15. Is crap reserved for the armed forces then? How long you been in?