"Boris Johnson to take aim at MoD over wasted cash..."

The Army is a luxury to an Island nation, it’s nothing but a Home Guard without a Navy and Air Force to project it.

despite the best fervent wishes and fantasies of Land, they are not going to get lots of shiny new heavy metal to refight past glories in far away and not so dusty places. Land clearly didn’t learn its lessons of wars in dusty places - it lost, twice - and polticians are not going to let them play 3rd time lucky.

influence will now be delivered by Her Majesties shiney new BFO War Canoes, stuffed full of rough men in berets and RAF types in their wizzy war planes glaring threateningly from the sea.

the Armies future is much smaller, and much leaner, and it needs to stop with the fantastical plans and deliver itself of a coherent and costed future structure based in reality. The RN and RAF managed it.
Just exactly how do boats & planes win wars in dusty places?
 
How do you determine that there is a surplus of VSOs? Are they seen during the working week on the golf course/trout fishing/shooting? Or are they seen leaving MB at about 2000 most nights?
Whether they are on the golf course or working 20 hour days is irrelevant. Most HQ work is self generating, whole swathes of Staff Officers and civil Servants could be removed and nobody would notice because the departments are simply self perpetuating mutually supporting self licking lolipops.

From an Army perspective we need to accept we do not have multiple Divisions and Brigades but a tiny disfunctional pseudo military organisation that is internally justified by the latest truthspeak and buzzwords generated by the aforementioned HQs.

3 Div is simply capable of single Bde operations but can sustain them because it only has two functioning Brigades which have insufficient support.

1 Div is just an employment home for old duffers who can't wait to retire to their Parish council of some minor commercial management role where they will insist on being addressed as 'Brigadier' even though the in some cases were in charge of a 'Brigade' consisting of single light infantry Bn and anyway everyone, apart from the Parish Council, thinks they are a bit of a knob.

It goes on the whole way down the Army with multiple positions 'commanding' the same individuals and units past it and passed over.
 
He's been on ignore for years. You can't have a genuine debate with him, all you get all uninformed and non evidenced rants. I see he's dropped a 'dumb' on one of my posts, hugely typical, he never adds anything of value.
Simply because your own unjustified self inflated view of yourself brings out the worst in me.
 
we aren’t doing Boots on the ground wars in dusty places.
tried that - failed twice, tunes changed.
What will the ships & planes do?

Bomb the civilians who are being saved from oppressive governments?
Thats been the point of these dusty wars - either saving the good people from bad governments or extremists (either that or to save oil)

The nature of these dusty wars has been complexity, they are not all out invasions.

Note that its also not the decision of an Army to pick what wars they fight. Its chosen by the government. If they pick different types of wars then they will need different types of armed forces.
Plans can fly in and land or bomb.
Boats can sail around and patrol waters, chase other boats, act as water based activity.
Both can support other forces, deliver aid, transport people to or from a location.
Soldiers can adapt and ride in planes, boats, tanks, trucks, walk ..... close in on the enemy, deliver aid to the point its needed, do things there ...
 
What will the ships & planes do?

Bomb the civilians who are being saved from oppressive governments?
Thats been the point of these dusty wars - either saving the good people from bad governments or extremists (either that or to save oil)

The nature of these dusty wars has been complexity, they are not all out invasions.

Note that its also not the decision of an Army to pick what wars they fight. Its chosen by the government. If they pick different types of wars then they will need different types of armed forces.
Plans can fly in and land or bomb.
Boats can sail around and patrol waters, chase other boats, act as water based activity.
Both can support other forces, deliver aid, transport people to or from a location.
Soldiers can adapt and ride in planes, boats, tanks, trucks, walk ..... close in on the enemy, deliver aid to the point its needed, do things there ...
oil is so last years wars
 
we didn’t win in Iraq or Afghanistan with lots of army boots on the ground.
Why?

What would have won Iraq or Afghanistan?
What do you define as winning?
What were the governments goals?
What are the armed forces doing in Iraq and Afghanistan today?
 
Why?

What would have won Iraq or Afghanistan?
What do you define as winning?
What were the governments goals?
What are the armed forces doing in Iraq and Afghanistan today?
don’t fight vanity wars you don’t have to fight.

take away the Army’s ability to fight said wars, PMs won’t send them off to fight them.
 
The Army is a luxury to an Island nation, it’s nothing but a Home Guard without a Navy and Air Force to project it.

despite the best fervent wishes and fantasies of Land, they are not going to get lots of shiny new heavy metal to refight past glories in far away and not so dusty places. Land clearly didn’t learn its lessons of wars in dusty places - it lost, twice - and polticians are not going to let them play 3rd time lucky.

influence will now be delivered by Her Majesties shiney new BFO War Canoes, stuffed full of rough men in berets and RAF types in their wizzy war planes glaring threateningly from the sea.

the Armies future is much smaller, and much leaner, and it needs to stop with the fantastical plans and deliver itself of a coherent and costed future structure based in reality. The RN and RAF managed it.
But Iran is currently laughing at how inept out Navy is - despite it having 7 billion pound worth of ‘war canoes’.
 
influence will now be delivered by Her Majesties shiney new BFO War Canoes, stuffed full of rough men in berets and RAF types in their wizzy war planes glaring threateningly from the sea.
What, all one of them (the other one will be in dry dock) decked out with 24 wizzy war planes. I'm sure the influencees will be suitably impressed. Now back to that smart looking bloke in the red jacket stood out the front of Buck Palace...
 
What, all one of them (the other one will be in dry dock) decked out with 24 wizzy war planes. I'm sure the influencees will be suitably impressed. Now back to that smart looking bloke in the red jacket stood out the front of Buck Palace...
actually, 24 F-35’s comfortably overmatches most of the worlds air forces.
BTW, it can carry 40 if duffing up the natives.


And its that old strategic mobility thing again..
A land Air Force has to defend its entire territory, a carrier can deliver a strike at a time and place of it’s choosing and achieve local air superiority.
 
BoJo and Cummings vs. the MoD/FCO blob.

The latter will win all day, every day.
I'm not so sure, a few years ago VSO's tried playing politics by cutting the TA training budget in an attempt to embarrass the politicians over spending cuts, that didn't work out well for the regular army.........
 
I'm not so sure, a few years ago VSO's tried playing politics by cutting the TA training budget in an attempt to embarrass the politicians over spending cuts, that didn't work out well for the regular army.........
Army =/= blob

Blob includes, but not limited to, retired VSOs (of various ilks), industries, opinion column writers, bits of CS, lethargy, knowledge that regardless of decision the PM won't actually see this through.

The last one is the killer - unless there is a Cabinet Office Delivery Unit laser focused on ensuring every decision made is actually implemented, the grinding dreariness of the MoD will just ignore the direction given...
 
. . . . Blob includes, but not limited to, retired VSOs (of various ilks), industries, opinion column writers, bits of CS, lethargy, knowledge that regardless of decision the PM won't actually see this through.

The last one is the killer - unless there is a Cabinet Office Delivery Unit laser focused on ensuring every decision made is actually implemented, the grinding dreariness of the MoD will just ignore the direction given...
For a decisive, immediate, permanent, major cut in defence expenditure, you need to identify something as did the pratt Denis Healey, when he was SoS for Defence . . . :( .

Denis Winston Healey, Baron Healey,[1] CH, MBE, PC, FRSL (30 August 1917 – 3 October 2015), was a British Labour Party politician who served as Secretary of State for Defence from 1964 to 1970, Chancellor of the Exchequer from 1974 to 1979 and Deputy Leader of the Labour Party from 1980 to 1983.

He wanted our aircraft carriers permanently withdrawn . . . and to ensure that they would never - again - put-to-sea, it is understood he instructed the main “electrical-wiring-loom” circuits, be cut!!

Defence Secretary
Following Labour's victory in the 1964 general election, Healey served as Secretary of State for Defence under Prime Minister Harold Wilson. He was responsible for 450,000 uniformed servicemen and women, and for 406,000 civil servants stationed around the globe. He was best known for his economising, liquidating most of Britain's military role outside of Europe, and cancelling expensive projects . . . .
. . . The cause was not a fiscal crisis but rather a decision to shift money and priorities to the domestic budget and maintain a commitment to NATO.[13] He cut defence expenditure, scrapping the carrier HMS Centaur and the reconstructed HMS Victorious in 1967, cancelling the proposed CVA-01 fleet-carrier replacement and, just before Labour's defeat in 1970, downgrading HMS Hermes to a commando carrier. He cancelled the fifth planned Polaris submarine. He also cancelled the production of the Hawker Siddeley P.1154 and HS 681 aircraft and, more controversially, both the production of the BAC TSR-2 and subsequent purchase of the F-111 in lieu. Of the scrapped Royal Navy carriers, Healey commented that to most ordinary seamen they were just "floating slums"[14] and "too vulnerable".[15]

He continued postwar Conservative governments' reliance on strategic and tactical nuclear deterrence for the Navy, RAF and West Germany and supported the sale of advanced arms abroad, including to regimes such as those in Iran, Libya, Chile, and apartheid South Africa, to which he supplied nuclear-capable Buccaneer S.2 strike bombers and approved a repeat order. This brought him into serious conflict with Wilson, who had, initially, also supported the policy. Healey later said he had made the wrong decision on selling arms to South Africa.[12]

In January 1968, a few weeks after the devaluation of the pound, Wilson and Healey announced that the two large British fleet carriers HMS Ark Royal and HMS Eagle would be scrapped in 1972. They also announced that British troops would be withdrawn in 1971 from major military bases in South East Asia, "East of Aden", primarily in Malaysia and Singapore[16][17] as well as the Persian Gulf and the Maldives. However the next Prime Minister Edward Heath sought to reverse this policy, and the forces were not fully withdrawn until 1976
.
"
In January 1968, a few weeks after the devaluation of the pound, Wilson and Healey announced that the two large British fleet carriers HMS Ark Royal and HMS Eagle would be scrapped in 1972"
 
World PCSO, surely.
This in spades.

The UK needs to understand that it is not a world policemen, or even a world PCSO. It never has been and never will be.

Armed Forces for the future UK.

Navy - To protect UK shores from hostile invasion.

RAF - To back up the RN in the protection of UK shores from hostile invasion.

Army - Last line of Defence for UK shores.

World Policemen or PCSO's - Where, when and who is stumping up the dosh.

The alternative is to maintain the Status Quo - Review and cut. Review and cut, until there is next to nothing left to cut.
 
This in spades.

The UK needs to understand that it is not a world policemen, or even a world PCSO. It never has been and never will be.

Armed Forces for the future UK.

Navy - To protect UK shores from hostile invasion.

RAF - To back up the RN in the protection of UK shores from hostile invasion.

Army - Last line of Defence for UK shores.

World Policemen or PCSO's - Where, when and who is stumping up the dosh.

The alternative is to maintain the Status Quo - Review and cut. Review and cut, until there is next to nothing left to cut.
So withdraw from NATO? Abandon the defence of overseas territories? No capability to escort UK flagged vessels?
 
Last edited:

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top