• ARRSE have partnered with Armadillo Merino to bring you an ARRSE exclusive, generous discount offer on their full price range.
    To keep you warm with the best of Merino gear, visit www.armadillomerino.co.uk and use the code: NEWARRSE40 at the checkout to get 40% off!
    This superb deal has been generously offered to us by Armadillo Merino and is valid until midnight on the the 28th of February.

Des gets another smacking

#1
Times article

The Government suffered its second major legal defeat in 24 hours today when a High Court judge rejected an attempt by Des Browne, the Defence Secretary, to ban coroners using from phrases such as "serious failure" in their verdicts on dead soldiers.

In a groundbreaking decision that could have important implications for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, Mr Justice Collins also ruled that sending soldiers out on patrol or into battle with defective equipment could amount to a breach of their human rights.

Well done Mr Justice Collins.
 
#2
Human rights???? We are in tha Armed forces. We don't have any :)

Next thing you know mission command will go. There will be exact descriptions of how every type of manouevre is to be conducted and with what kit and its condition.

We go to war. We fight. People die and get injured. It's sh*t but thats what we signed on the dotted line for.

Next thing you know we will be allowed to strike!!!!
 
Z

Zarathustra

Guest
#3
Kaiser_Soze said:
Human rights???? We are in tha Armed forces. We don't have any :)

Next thing you know mission command will go. There will be exact descriptions of how every type of manouevre is to be conducted and with what kit and its condition.

We go to war. We fight. People die and get injured. It's sh*t but thats what we signed on the dotted line for.

Next thing you know we will be allowed to strike!!!!
But surely it's the fact that people aren't given the correct kit/amount of ammo to do the tasks they're given which would be against human rights.

If people die but have the correct kit etc then it's unfortunate but as you say shit happens.

But if someone dies because they don't have the correct kit or ammunition, then that death might have been avoided.
 
#4
You are right of course. Was just having a rant as one gets fed up of hearing that we never have the right kit and it's always broken.

If anything all blame should fall back on the government for not providing us with the funding to provide ideal conditions to operate as they want us to.

However knowing the MOD.... even if the funding was provided they'd probably just waste it bringing consultants to re image each and every organisation.

Feeling a little cynical today!
 
#5
I can imagine during orders "risk assesments" got your goggles lads, steel toe boots for those mines. Hi viz jackest so you dont shoot each other.

Army be the best be the ISO9001/2001

edited because i did not check for spelling
 
#8
I am imagine durin orders "risk assesments" got your goggles lads, steel toe boots for those mines. Hi viz jackest so you dont shoot each other.

Army be the best be the ISO9001/2001
I know that is tongue in cheek, but what is wrong with having a mindset and process that aims to minimise risk? Surely that is good leadership?
 
#9
The court case seems to have fixated on the death of a Scotish Pte who died of heatstroke. While the death of any servicemen/woman is a sad loss, I don't see how any equipment could have prevented this. I don't know the details of the case but guess what. Deserts are hot.

This case not withstanding, yes we should have human rights the same as everyone else. When you sign on the line though you agree to certain things that may be contrary to them. Pte Smiths death was unfortunate and he should be honoured with every one else that has made the sacrifice, but slagging off the MOD for the fact that poeple get hot is a little counter pro-ductive and typical of a civvy mindset.
 
#10
Well if soldiers are getting hot, with reductions in efficiency and the government's doing nothing about it...well what was the point of all those summer weeks spent sat in a Warrior mock-up at APRE Farnborough?? Apart from being allowed to keep the smock.
 
#11
bobath said:
The court case seems to have fixated on the death of a Scotish Pte who died of heatstroke. While the death of any servicemen/woman is a sad loss, I don't see how any equipment could have prevented this. I don't know the details of the case but guess what. Deserts are hot.
There are a number of cooling systems available, cheap and not heavy that would do the job, I'll post links when I get a moment.
 
#12
Even if they are good enough, and combat robust, thousands of soliders, sailors and airman have gone through and Iraqi summer and not died of heat injury. Should we purchase thousands of sets of body cooling equipment, at the risk of not buying something else, like Ospray, just incase it happens again.

Also, the fault may be his commander not listening to him. Or his own for not drinking enough. Like I said I don't know all the details, and I suspect you don't either.
 
#13
Collins J must be the government's least favourite judge. He has behind him a string of judgements which have embarrassed it in judicial review, particularly on asylum and immigration. It was Collins J who, when dealing with a case under section 5 of the Asylum and Immigration Act which left an Iraqi Khurd shivering and starving under a railway bridge in London because the legislation deprived the man of his ability to work to support himself or to receive any kind of state benefit, drew attention to the callous inhumanity of the government in his judgement.

Collins J has shown himself to be no pushover in doing what judges are employed to do, defending the interests of the underdog against an overmighty executive. He is the closest resemblance there is to a real life John Deed!

It is an open secret that 'blind git Blunkett' hated his guts and prevailed upon the Lord Chancellor to find a way or removing him. That fact alone earns Collins J my personal respect.

I will post the judgement when I can find it but it seems to me to be entirely consistent with the legal principle: sentit commudum sentire debet et onus et e contra - meaning: 'he who takes the benefit also takes the burden' since if soldiers on operations abroad are constrained by the Human Rights Act in their dealings with civilians, then correspondingly, they also have the right to the benefit of it.

I also think, and I could be wrong, that it is a coded signal from the judiciary that despite it's attempts to muzzle the coroners under the counter-terrorism bill shortly to be heard in committee, the judiciary will not be so constrained when it comes to judicial review of the decision on the part of the Home Secretary to issue a gagging certificate.
 
#14
armchair_jihad said:
bobath said:
The court case seems to have fixated on the death of a Scotish Pte who died of heatstroke. While the death of any servicemen/woman is a sad loss, I don't see how any equipment could have prevented this. I don't know the details of the case but guess what. Deserts are hot.
There are a number of cooling systems available, cheap and not heavy that would do the job, I'll post links when I get a moment.
Like this one:
http://www.jt-solutions.com/index1.html
Body Armour Cool Pack

Saw it mentioned in a transport Police rag.


Cool Zone's Body Armour Cool Pack are effective under tactical body armour and stab vests. They allow for safe body cooling which works in conjunction with the body armour of vest they are worn below. This allows the wearer to remain comfortable for longer periods of time, without any of the side effects of general discomfort or heat stress.



The cool packs are available in three sizes, can be energized quickly and are easily inserted and removed from vests.
 
#15
If a soldier gets to rely on such equipment and then has the equipment removed (for instance in a multi day observation task where there is no resupply) doesn't this reduce His effectiveness?

Also, was the soldier concerned denied rehydration facilities?
 
#16
Recce19 said:
armchair_jihad said:
bobath said:
The court case seems to have fixated on the death of a Scotish Pte who died of heatstroke. While the death of any servicemen/woman is a sad loss, I don't see how any equipment could have prevented this. I don't know the details of the case but guess what. Deserts are hot.
There are a number of cooling systems available, cheap and not heavy that would do the job, I'll post links when I get a moment.
Like this one:
http://www.jt-solutions.com/index1.html
Body Armour Cool Pack

Saw it mentioned in a transport Police rag.


Cool Zone's Body Armour Cool Pack are effective under tactical body armour and stab vests. They allow for safe body cooling which works in conjunction with the body armour of vest they are worn below. This allows the wearer to remain comfortable for longer periods of time, without any of the side effects of general discomfort or heat stress.



The cool packs are available in three sizes, can be energized quickly and are easily inserted and removed from vests.
Thats the stuff, so on the back of an envelope, twenty thousand sets would cost approx £1.1 million with bulk discount - which rather less than Main Building spent on Chairs and Plasma screens recently. So why were none bought? And will a load be bought now as the lawyers circle the MoD's rotting carcass....

I'm going to buy a few as a test and send them out to freinds and family in the sandy places to give an evaluation. I'll let everyone know how they get on.
 
#18
I see a lot of ill-informed so-called opinion in the press about judges from journos who should know better. Whilst there is a lot of (deserved) comment and criticism on this site on the government for getting the forces into two wars then hanging them out to dry and trying to walk away from them, it should also not be forgotten that Judges and Magistrates do not make the law, they APPLY it. As has been commented many times on this site, there has been an avalanche of new laws since New Liarbour got in, much of it in haste and consequently poorly written. It is not the fault of the judiciary when they have to interpret poorly written and frequently contradictory law, it is the fault of those that wrote it.
 
#19
This is a perpetual issue and I don't think the forces have ever had the 'right' kit; whatever the right kit is?

Sometimes our requirements are so demanding industry do not have the answers (Early Bowman, FRES initially (C130 mobility), FIST?). Sometimes, they're not interested if there isn't enough profit in it (yes they are there to make money) and even if you threw shed loads of cash at a problem, they wouldn't necessarily deliver. One example I know of is a particular (fairly cheap) innovative product (not telling for OPSEC reasons) that is only manufactured by one company in another country who at best is ambivalent towards the UK. The US have bought up their entire production run for several months - so even if we had the cash, it wouldn't make a blind bit of difference.

That said, the MoD procurement system needs levelling and building back from scratch, properly resourced and by people who know what they're doing. Having spent a (mercifully) short time in DLO / now DE&S, I’ve seen bureaucracy and cr*p that would make you weep. It is not possible to purely blame it on the 'civvies' - there are, shamefully, some military who have carved a comfortable little niche for themselves and a nice 9-5 existence. Now, there are some good, competent eggs amongst the civil servants but there are some complete mongs too - risk aversion and slavish adherence to process seem to be common traits. It can be a monumentally painful process to get even the simplest, low value bit of kit in service; we best not get onto public contracts regulations (incidentally, it's a bit rich that ministers criticise the MoD but have imposed ridiculous public contracting regs on us).

That said, it wasn't a particularly winning strategy to go through a complete overhaul of the acquisition system and major mergers (DLO / DPA) whilst paring back manpower and conducting 2 x major operations. But, at least the corporate image has had due attention.

Hey ho, back to FLC shortly so things are looking up. Rant over.
 
#20
Sven said:
If a soldier gets to rely on such equipment and then has the equipment removed (for instance in a multi day observation task where there is no resupply) doesn't this reduce His effectiveness?

Also, was the soldier concerned denied rehydration facilities?
The British soldier is king of improvisation, adaptation and over coming the issue, they have done this al there lives why change.

I think in honesty to a certain degree most folk in the Armed forces are satisfied, (this does not mean they are ecstatic just satisfied) that is they joined up with some expectation that it maybe hard and the may have to work in situations likely to be unpleasant.

I think the key thing in respect to soldiers rights etc is the fact people sorry that is too higher of a word, but Scum who have no self respect for themselves or others are held higher in society by others (or the system allows them to be)

Now answering part of your question, if a situation has arisen where there is no logistics to take the fight to the enemy WTF are we doing there in the first place!!

So we understand the Soldiers sailors and airmen (and women) are willing put the spineless politicians who site back in luxury for days deciding what there toys should do for them today..

Its not a political issue it’s a conscience issue with these politicians, they are only interested in themselves and nobody else but themselves (liabour,cuntservative, and the wishy washy self liberated)
 

Latest Threads

New Posts