Fat chance

This should not be in contempt of things going on a Osnabrueck. We have had public reports that prosecution considers that any direction to work them hard should have been refused as illegal.
Take this attitude to Hour 1 of Day 1 of British effort in Iraq Two. What would have happened if a CO - whose private conviction was that of the millions who marched against the war - formed up at HQ and said it was illegal? Not much doubt of IA. Review that action today - was it still illegal, did the jncos dressed up today have any better information?
Just to add a little more - extracted from leader in today's D/Telegraph (My emphasis)
Nor should anyone suppose that the Army is covering its back with a trial of its own ordering. The board of officers sitting at Osnabruck constitutes a powerful jury whose verdict can be relied on.

To which there is this to add. When the appropriate time comes to consider matters arising from this trial, ministers, as well as Sir Mike Jackson, have some serious thinking to do. Our soldiers are in Iraq to implement political decisions in which they took no part. Ultimate responsibility for their physical and mental welfare lies heavily with the Government that took those decisions.

We are free to say now that this is a government that takes services rendered by an ever-shrinking Army far too lightly. It makes heavy demands, but gives little back.

Pressure from the Treasury to reduce the defence budget is remorseless. If we want an Army to do what ours does, then we must take its general welfare more seriously and constantly remind a government, so nervous politically of boosting anything military, where its duty lies.

Similar threads

Latest Threads