Does This BBC Article Compromise Our Troops

#1
Troops Argue Iraq is Unwinnable

My contention is is that despite the veracity of the arguement, the BBC has offered succour to both the insurgents in Iraq and the Taleban in AFG by printing and broadcasting this article. Conversely it has done Your average Tom no favoours whatsoever.
 
#2
Sven said:
Troops Argue Iraq is Unwinnable

My contention is is that despite the veracity of the arguement, the BBC has offered succour to both the insurgents in Iraq and the Taleban in AFG by printing and broadcasting this article. Conversely it has done Your average Tom no favoours whatsoever.
Sven, the Beeb have a track record, to whit their announcemnt before the battle for Goose Green telling the world and its dog that 2 Para were on their way.
 
#3
Sven, it hardly matters, Broon has already decided it is unwinnable and the Chiefs of Staff have all but pulled the plug. I thought Paul Wood presented a very powerful piece on BBC News tonight. It can only help keep the state of our armed forces firmly on the political agenda. It ain't going away.

Think positive, everyone appears to think that Afg is still winnable...
 
#4
I hope that the labour party is going to get absolutely roasted for their abuse of our armed forces and veterans. This article is another step towards that.

Ski.

(I am a civvie)
 
#5
nigegilb said:
Sven, it hardly matters, Broon has already decided it is unwinnable and the Chiefs of Staff have all but pulled the plug. I thought Paul Wood presented a very powerful piece on BBC News tonight. It can only help keep the state of our armed forces firmly on the political agenda. It ain't going away.

Think positive, everyone appears to think that Afg is still winnable...
This wasn't started for just the effect on troops fighting in Iraq though Nige - the Taleban and associated insurgents are also going to take comfort from this piece of reporting.

I also disagree with You about the piece on the News at 10. I thought it whilst it did highlight the way forces personnel think about the lack of support from MoD, it wasn't balanced and made too much of the 600 supposed servicemen who replied.

How did the Beeb ascertain the credibility of the servicemen who replied
 
#7
Sven said:
Troops Argue Iraq is Unwinnable

My contention is is that despite the veracity of the arguement, the BBC has offered succour to both the insurgents in Iraq and the Taleban in AFG by printing and broadcasting this article. Conversely it has done Your average Tom no favoours whatsoever.
Surely it only provides succour and assistance to our enemies if it contains something they don't already know. I buggered if I can find what it is they don't already know!
 
#9
whitecity said:
Sven said:
Troops Argue Iraq is Unwinnable

My contention is is that despite the veracity of the arguement, the BBC has offered succour to both the insurgents in Iraq and the Taleban in AFG by printing and broadcasting this article. Conversely it has done Your average Tom no favoours whatsoever.
Surely it only provides succour and assistance to our enemies if it contains something they don't already know. I buggered if I can find what it is they don't already know!
So Mr Sadr won't use it as propaganda, showing how our troops are running to the press and crying to not be sent to Iraq? (no, that isn't what is happening but it CAN be construed that way and You can bet Your bottom dollar that it is being by the likes of Sadr).
 
#10
To be brutally honest Sven, it doesn't matter which media cnut publishes Gordon "Doddy" Brown's perspective on Iraq. Once he made it known via a myriad of "briefed" and apparently "unbriefed" sources that that was his plan, the moral issues of BBC, ITV or the Country Channel publishing it became academic.

Obviously Gordon needs to be told how to be a war leader, rather than mere custodian of the piggy bank.
 
#12
Sven said:
whitecity said:
Sven said:
Troops Argue Iraq is Unwinnable

My contention is is that despite the veracity of the arguement, the BBC has offered succour to both the insurgents in Iraq and the Taleban in AFG by printing and broadcasting this article. Conversely it has done Your average Tom no favoours whatsoever.
Surely it only provides succour and assistance to our enemies if it contains something they don't already know. I buggered if I can find what it is they don't already know!
So Mr Sadr won't use it as propaganda, showing how our troops are running to the press and crying to not be sent to Iraq? (no, that isn't what is happening but it CAN be construed that way and You can bet Your bottom dollar that it is being by the likes of Sadr).
BANG ON MEDIA help TO THE OTHER SIDE :x
 
#13
Garhwal said:
Sven complaining about aunty beeb? You'd have to live the other side of the pond not to see the irony.
Surely this shows how concerned I am if I feel the need to critisise an institution that I admire.
 
#14
Cut and paste so those of us who live under a properly controled media can understand what your all talking about
 
#15
Here You go, A-J

A belief that Iraq is unwinnable, fears that Afghanistan could go the same way and an overwhelming feeling that the government has not looked after the Armed Forces properly in return for the sacrifices they make.

That is what emerges from the answers given by hundreds of servicemen and women in response to the online questionnaire we posted here a few weeks ago. We received nearly 2,000 replies to a set of questions about life in the forces.

Those who contacted us did so in defiance of Queen's Regulations. It is forbidden for members of the Armed Forces to talk to the media unsupervised.

There is a good constitutional reason for that. Britain does not have the kind of politicised military which intervenes to change policy, or governments. But many servicemen and women are deeply worried and so are speaking out.


We are trying to do as much as we can to pay back our service personnel for all that they do for us - that is massively appreciated
Bob Ainsworth
Armed Forces Minister

Behind many of the problems lies the stretch - some would say overstretch - in our forces.

"We don't have the resources to do the tasks we're asked to do," said one RAF man who spoke to us. "We are at complete saturation point. If anything else happens, we won't be able to deal with it."

He was only echoing warnings given by senior officers, such as the head of the Army, General Sir Richard Dannatt.

The government said, however, it was doing all it could to pay back service personnel for their efforts.

Armed Forces Minister Bob Ainsworth said: "I don't believe or accept that we have broken the covenant with our service personnel.

"I spoke to General Dannatt before he left for Afghanistan and he agreed with me on this. There are issues that we have got to address and we are addressing.

"We are trying to do as much as we can to pay back our service personnel for that that they do for us - that is massively appreciated."

Iraq has undoubtedly put a strain on the British military. Many of those who responded to our questionnaire - admittedly a self-selecting group - thought Iraq was unwinnable and that British Forces should not be there.


Iraq is a lost cause
Parachute Regiment officer

"It's getting hotter and hotter. And more soldiers wouldn't help. It's just more target," said one veteran of Basra.

Another wrote: "I am about to do my second tour of Basra. I don't think the public are aware how bad it actually is out there, getting rocket attacks every day and no let up."

One Parachute Regiment officer reflected the anguish that Iraq has caused within the services.

"Iraq is a lost cause," he said. "I don't think we can't achieve much. It is a difficult moral dilemma though. We owe it to the Iraqi people to stabilise their country and secure it for them. But at the same time it is unwinnable."

By contrast, most of the serving personnel who contacted us did think British forces should be in Afghanistan, although they worried about whether this conflict, too, was winnable.

"Iraq and Afghanistan are two completely different theatres," said one lieutenant who spoke to us at length. "The main difference is that people in Afghanistan actually want us there. Unlike Iraq.

"But the longer it takes [for us] to improve the lives of ordinary people in Afghanistan, the worse that situation will get," he added.

One soldier agreed: "We can win in Afghanistan and are winning. We just don't have enough resources to cover all the ground."

Again, we should stress that this was a self-selecting group. But these opinions reflect those you hear at bases here, and in Iraq and Afghanistan.

And the overwhelming view said they felt the military covenant was not being honoured. This is originally an army concept, but it applies to all the forces. It is the deal done between the soldier and the nation: look after me, and I will risk my life for you.

Most of those who answered our questionnaire thought the government was not honouring its side of the bargain.

'Shocking morale'

"The forces are under funded, personnel are leaving in their droves," said one man in response to our questionnaire.

One soldier wrote: "We are under funded by a tight-fisted government who wants to fight wars on the cheap. Young soldiers are dying on a regular basis for less than £50 a day, and yet we are supposed to be grateful for the £2,300 'bonus' we receive at the end of a tour.

"Compare that against an MP's expenses and you'll see why good soldiers are leaving in droves."

nother said: "Life in the armed forces? All you currently read on this matter is true.

"Shocking morale, little done to reduce constant overseas deployments, whilst cutting back our numbers in the middle of two major conflicts, [military] hospitals closed, inquests taking four years, shocking quality of accommodation, poor pay, and 30-minute phone calls a week from theatre.

"Prisoners get the same and we pay tax."

One sailor, just back from Iraq after a six-month tour, wrote: "The armed forces have been cut back year on year. Although the workload has increased enormously, I have never known such a state of apathy and low morale within the armed forces as there is today.

"I, like many, am just counting the days until I qualify for my pension and can leave the demoralised and destitute armed forces."

'Close to failing'

There were other concerns, in particular the number of casualties and how they are treated back in the UK.

One serviceman wrote: "For every fatality, there are many 'broken' soldiers who have suffered hideous injuries. If the sheer scale of those injuries was made common knowledge, the public would be shocked and disgusted."

He went on: "The government prefers to evade that issue. The armed forces are being asked to provide more and more with less and less. The system is extremely close to failing."

Much of what was said to us, in response to our questionnaire is also being said by senior officers, occasionally in public.

Members of the armed forces are not saying they will not go to Iraq and Afghanistan, that they will not do their duty.

But this group who contacted us, and many others, are warning that because the armed forces are so reliable, it is easy to take them for granted.

The overwhelming view is that the armed forces cannot go on like this indefinitely.
 
#17
We shouldn't have been there in the first place. The Armed forces were a political pawn on Bush's chess board. Occasionally Bush let Blair take a turn.
Lets get our folk back!
 
#18
Sven, Relax it is not just the BBC, I was told by a snr E European Officer that the UK general public neither support operations in IZ or AFG. Given the guys position, I would not be surpirsed if the Government in question pulls it forces out.

He refused to accept that Civ Pop in teh UK belive that AFG winnable and he quoted the S. Times article suggesting that only 10 per cent were in favour of teh AFG campaign, and that AFG will be Brown's IZ.

The point is that our centre of gravity, is the will of the people (well our politicains), we live in a Democracy so the Taliban and Insurgents in Iraq have a significant advantage in terms of winning the Strategic battle in both theatres.

To counter this, IMHO it is imperative that we disengage from IZ fast, bugger the spinning of victory or not. Deploy more troops and more importantly the 1st Regt FCO and 1st Btln DfiD. We probably need 3 FCO and 2 DfiD people for every solider/policeman in AFG now. This will demonstarte what Brown has already said, that AFG is winnable and that it si more than a simple military operation. If the FCO and DfiD don't like it they can lump it, they sat in Cabinet and agreed to our expansion of AFG as much as teh MOD did. Application of the correct resources in proportion to the problem is the only solution.
 
#19
Sven said:
Garhwal said:
Sven complaining about aunty beeb? You'd have to live the other side of the pond not to see the irony.
Surely this shows how concerned I am if I feel the need to critisise an institution that I admire.
Sven, it pains me to agree with you, but at least I respect the fact that you're sincere. Sorry you had to have this rude introduction to the real world. The BBC used to be an admirable institution - but it threw that reputation away a long time ago. It's only now that people are beginning - thanks to this sort of reporting - to finally wake up to the fact.
 

Biped

LE
Book Reviewer
#20
Bambi said:
Sven said:
Garhwal said:
Sven complaining about aunty beeb? You'd have to live the other side of the pond not to see the irony.
Surely this shows how concerned I am if I feel the need to critisise an institution that I admire.
Sven, it pains me to agree with you, but at least I respect the fact that you're sincere. Sorry you had to have this rude introduction to the real world. The BBC used to be an admirable institution - but it threw that reputation away a long time ago. It's only now that people are beginning - thanks to this sort of reporting - to finally wake up to the fact.
Total agreement. When people in 'spin city' started threatening the BBC with license fee cuts unless they played ball with the Labliar gobment, that was the end of the road, because the Beeb rolled over.

In respect of this article, they are right on the button. The answer might seem to be to instigate a comprehensive spending increase to address the myriad issues facing the armed forces due to the swinging (and continued) spending cuts and deal with the retention AND recruitment. Broones answer however, will be to pull us out and leave the whole thing a failure rather than spend the money needed.

My prediction: He'll pull us out of Iraq, he won't properly support ops in Afghan, and he'll carry on being a tightfisted piece of shoit.

This anti-British, anti-forces, pro-communist, pro-IRA, pro-republican, pro-EU gobment will not be satisfied until they have truly nailed the Armed Forces and the country they protect, and left it wide open to anyone who fancies a pop.

As far as opsec goes, I can imagine talbanis and Iraqis seeing that Beeb and saying "ha ha, tell us something we don't already know infidels!"
 

Latest Threads

Top