General faces mutiny at loss of regiments name

Discussion in 'Infantry' started by Countryman, Dec 17, 2005.

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. From the Telegraph

  2. Some discontents? 'kinell, that's a bit of an understatement, if the entire regimental association is expected to pass a vote of no confidence in their Honorary Colonel... :roll:

  3. If all 54 branches did indeed pass a note of no confidence it would be interesting. No matter how inevitable the decision you would have thought he would have made an effort to deliver it to the stakeholders. I don't know about the LI but in my Regt the Assn Branches help with recruiting on one hand and in helping post service problems for soldiers on the other. They are important and should not be ignored.
  4. Shame - he is a lovely chap.
  5. Seconded! :D
  6. DD,

    Where did you get that postcard from? I have just sent one to my kids; you're not 'hanging around' CrapSpy towers are you?
  7. I feel sorry for the bloke. He's had to toe the line and his own Regimental association is cnuting him off!. I would be gutted if my regiment was sold down the river like this. They should have talked to the blokes, serving and ex-serving, you cant just change the name of a regiment like you can change the name of a pub!
  8. Are we going to see the entire Scottish Regiments following suit? they are going to also lose hundreds of years of their History...
  9. The Queens Own Highlanders amalgamated in 1994 with the Gordons and the title of the new regiment then was 1 Highlanders (Seaforth, Gordons & Camerons). No mention anywhere about the Queens Own Highlanders. We then struggled for many years with the same debate. Gentlemen, when a decision is made by the Government it happens no matter how much we bleat. I say this from bitter experience even after going to HRH Duke of Edinburgh et al. Have a look at the Queens Own Highlanders Site at

    If yopu need any info on what we did to save the name contact the Branch Chairman via the web site.


  10. BuggerAll

    BuggerAll LE Reviewer Book Reviewer


    I can't help feeling that this statement needs challenging. In what way did they 'volunteer' for this, and how exactly is it in thier interest. If he means that they've agread to go along with it - well waht else would he expected them to do? They are in the Army - they do waht they are told to do - to say that that is volunteering is stretching it a bit!
  11. I hate to say it but the old and bold aren't the Regiment, they used to be, but not any more. Most of the serving members across the whole of the Infantry, whilst holding the values of the regiment very close to their hearts, think that a move to IP is progressive and necessary to meet the expectations of today's soldiers. To create extensive opportunities to serve in AI, Mech, UK, Germany, Lt and all that it requires large Regiments. Small small is just not an act of war anymore. The LI, DDLI, RGBWLI and RGJ has seemed bold, forward thinking and canny in putting it together, as in the long run it will make the Rifles a very very attractive Regiment in which to serve. With 3000 short across the Infantry, the Rifles taking the lead will probably pay huge dividends. The Council of Colonels haven't been weak, they have been inspired.

    It would be nice if just for once the old and bold supported the modern regiments in their moves to modernise, to keep the infantry a career of first choice, rather than creating unnecessary friction during what must be a difficult time.

    Flak jacket on, helmet on. in the 'brace brace' position.
  12. Hang on Chancellor, the men in these associations are not stupid and have witnessed amalgamations before. The concern appears to be one of perception that their Colonel did not try hard enough. If he did then he has failed to communicate that to them. If he did not try hard enough then he deserves all he gets. I also think it wrong to state that past soldiers have no part in the current Army. They deserve some respect.
  13. As a 'past soldier', I agree with BirdieN. They deserve respect but I do no know how far they have a part to play in the current Army. It is not the Army they knew if their service ended as recently as ten years ago. The ethos has changed. The nature of service has changed. The individuals have vastly different ideas of what is what. I have a small circle of some ten former WOsI SIB who encompass a hell of a lot of tradition - none of whom is noticeably gaga but we all agree that the Army has changed out of all recognition. Yes - we would like to think we could be involved and would be willing to do so but there is a tremendous gulf (no pun intended) between us and the guys of today.
    As well ask Kipling to write a verse or two on honour and integrity for TCB.
  14. I wondered when this would start.

    Consigning a regimental identity to history will never be comfortable for those who has served under it. But it happened to some fine regimentsin the sixties and it will happen again. And again until we either have a Corps of Infantry or an about face. Which do arrsers think is the more likely?

    I cannot think that the RGJ associations are that enamoured with the prospect either but considering that The Rifles need a smooth transition with all shoulders to the wheel, this intervention just isn't helpful. The one factor which will be guaranteed to impede this inevitable change will be petulant outbursts from those who insist on looking backwards.

    It might make them feel better but it will not help their comrades still in uniform.