Reading Adam Ingram's statement, picked up and regurgitated by the BBC I am reminded of the scene from the Film 'V for Vendetta' in which during a scene in which government managed news is reported on the state-controlled media, a member of the news team asks the producer: "Do you think people are actually going to believe this shi!t? "Why not", he replies, "Our job is to report the news - it's the government's job to manufacture it!".
Given that the Government have manipulated the laws of evidence to provide for evidence of bad character to determine the issue of guilt in criminal trials of the great unwashed. This odoriferous little Prole sees no reason for not applying the same standard to those who habitually present a picture of reality which is often indistinguishable from that which appears in Lewis Carrol's 'Alice in Wonderland'.
Remember the report published by Global Strategy in June of this year entitled: "Fork in the Road" whose author is Michael Ancram QC MP, a link to which appears on another thread?
This is what he said at page 3 of his report:
"All governments rely too often with surprising connivance by the media on a programme of disinformation perpetrated by politicians, refined by treasury mandarins and loyally articulated in public by serving defence chiefs. It is a blatant and in my view, damaging conspiracy constanty to pretend that our defence capabilties are improving and our objectives are succeeding when the reverse is the case."
Remember the report from March of this year when the Ministry of Defence was 'tumbled' for doing precisely that?
I am rather inclined to take Ingram's statement with a rather large pinch of salt and call into question his motives for making such a statement, a political statement, picked up by the BBC and presented as demonstrable reality. To suggest that all of the problems which so many members of this and other forums as affecting the Army ranging from poor equipment, overstreach, loss of confidence in the chain of command, the treatment of casualties on casevac from operational areas and so on actually do not exist since why would recruiting actually be rising?
I do not want Ingram to give me his subliminal message that things are getting better. I do not accept his assertions. What I actually want before I even consider his statement to be true and accepted by those who have a blind and naive faith in statements issued by authority figures, is actual proof!
Of course recruitment getting better is fine (if true - and i think it has marginally) - but you need to examine both sides of the equation. How are the retention figures? It is only when you add the two together and get the Net Outflow/Inflow that you get the true picture.
As the previous poster says this is still spin - the inference is that because a few more blokes have been recruited all the other problems are not so bad after all - which of course is b~llocks!
I'm pleased with the increased recruitment , regardless of the geographical origins of the recruit. If someone joins the army and makes up for the dwindling numbers with me on ops, who am I to argue? As Whistleblower says though, it's retention that really matters. In some instances I would rather have one soldier who has served 9 years than three soldiers who had served 3 years.
I have a young friend staying for a few days, he is on summer leave, and he has told me that around 100 have left his unit, he is infantry - but there isn't a problem as they have had lots of new recruits.
So it seems there is a retention problem, none of the youngsters want to do more than four years.
there is supposed a deficit of 3000 in the infantry by christmas, more where it not for those class adverts, i am given to understand that the problem is the same as it was after the RM "99.99% need not apply" adverts went out. Many more recruits, just most not reaching the requirements!
I see that the BBC has now corrected its earlier inaccuracy:
As well as their deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan, British troops are sent to Kosovo, Bosnia and Northern Ireland as well as non-operational deployments in areas such as Germany, the Falkland Islands and Cyprus.
That'll be most of the Muslims, all of the Irish Republicans, all fathers of teenage girls living in or near any Garrison town, all of those who went AWOL and still are and any Landlord who's has a pub wrecked by drunken Toms.
This from the United Kingdom 'The Independent' Newspaper for Saturday 19 August 2006, 24 hours after Ingram's 'Gloss' on the recruiting figures had been picked up and put into the public domain, where it still presumably lies. Note how timing is everying with Government spin doctors.
This puts the figures into some form of perspective on the loss/gain balance sheet:
"The MoD put the best gloss possible on its latest recruitment figures, indicating that numbers joining had increased. But the figures also showed that the Army shrank last year by 1,500 soldiers................"
Michael Ancram in his report, stated that all Governments engage in disinformation with the connivance of the media.
Given that the initial 'optimistic' news was given prominance by the BBC on Friday, and was the lead in the BBC radio news bulletins on that day, and that the 'Independent' verson appeared in a small coloumn on it's inside pagers today (Satuday), I wonder what, if any prominance they will be given today, or tommorow.
If the true story is given no prominance, and is simply regarded as 'yesterday's news' are not, it would seem to me that Michael Ancram's assertion is proved correct since there would now be millions of people in this country who have formed the opinion that recruiting has picked up!
There is talk of doubling FRI in the RAF for senior pilots to Â£100,000. SF troops will also get FRI, for those choosing to remain it is probably a matter of time before money will be offered to troops to sign on. Seems obvious to me that troops are underpaid.