BBC reports 1 in 5 soldiers unfit to fight

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by lostmatelot, Jan 12, 2010.

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. According to an article on the BBC news site, "Almost 5,000 soldiers and officers - or one in five army infantry personnel - are unfit for frontline combat duties, figures from the Ministry of Defence show"

    Does anyone know how that compares to a peacetime figure? Or what the state is with non infantry units.
    Sounds like the Opposition are trying to make the government look crap. Which, in fairness, they are.

    Edited to make (marginally) more sensible remarks now that I have actually read the article and realised they weren't suggesting, as I first thought, that 5000 men made up 20% of the whole British Army.
  2. Lies, damned lies and statistics.

    From what the BBC reports - there seems to be some distortion of the facts.

    The 5,000 seems to be across the whole of the Army not just the Infantry as implied. It includes pregnant, compassionate and under 18s so hardly equates to 20% of manned strength.

    Not good enough - show again

  3. Surely this fact is wrong as well? Or is it a misprint?

  4. Andy_S

    Andy_S LE Book Reviewer

    That last issue - that 19 (of, I believe, 38 btns in the army) - are understrength seems perfectly feasible.

    Inf btns are traditionally understrength and have needed to be beefed up to 'war footing' when sent on major operations. Moreover:
    The infantry take the bulk of casualties in Afghan, meaning many, many are in rehab;
    Infantry companies are routinely detached from their parent btns and added to battegroups as augmentating units, or to serve as OMLTs
    Individual soldiers and officers are also being taken away from parent btns and rotated through Afghan as needs on the ground dictate
  5. in_the_cheapseats

    in_the_cheapseats LE Moderator

    We kind of got on to this debate on the Amputee Bn thread a while ago.

    Look at the info about hearing loss in returning troops and the % figures (the 1 in 5 comment) given in this answer may suddenly become a little more believable because, frankly, from what I have heard, it is accurate.

    Whether the 5000 figure is correct is another matter as it would increase the % of sick infantry. If it is and I'd like to see the source, the figures becomes really worrying.
  6. too fat to fight. lol

    this figure cant be right - unless we are counting the RLC in this
  7. Does this figure include those temporarily downgraded or on sick leave for minor operations or just long term biff chits??
  8. is that the same RLC that are boxing champions, football champions, rugby runners up, dominate nordic skiing and triathlon, have several olympic track and field and winter athletes in the ranks...or another RLC?

    Yes we have a lot of fat (and sometimes useless) cu'nts in our corps, but we are nearly 20% of the Army in one capbadge...from the Inf Bns i've worked with, if you replicated the Bn demographics to 20% of the Army i think that you would see very similar results!
  9. It also seems that the effect of hearing loss is being assessed more significantly than in the past.. WHAT???

    I don't know if they have raised the standard of the hearing test or reduced what you can do with a hearing loss, but more people seem to be being caught with this than in the past. The limit is being applied to both REMFS and front liners these days.

    Mind you, by not supplying active hearing protection unitil very recently, what would you expect...? I would think any sustained fire fight without ear defenders would have an effect. Yet another case of slamming the door after the horse has bolted...!
  10. Is that a bite there Danny?

    And mokaroux - lol? What are we on Facebook now?

    Nice to see a post more related to military matters though. I suspect the figures cant be far wrong. Although I'd say the figures relate to people that are DG, on sick or maternity leave etc - and not necessarily non-deployable. But since this is the media, and as eluded to earlier in the thread, an opportunity to have a swipe from the opposition maybe?
  11. Say again, over?
  12. a nibble...i never bite off more than i can chew!
  13. The beeb article also says:

    Really? In the 90's he commanded a unit disbanded in the 50's?

    Or am I being a pedant?
  14. I don't think 5000 infantry soldiers being unfit to fight is far off. It's not only people with injuries from combat (serious or otherwise) but sporing injuries, injuries from exercises, injuries from other stuff such as car accidents.

    The article didn't make it clear if it was 5000 people who were P7 HO or combination of everyone who is downgraded for however long and what level.
  15. 5000...?. Are there really that many MT and Storemen in afganistan.