Has the Royal Navy damaged its brand?

Has the Royal Navy damaged its brand?

  • Yes 400 years of tradition tarnished

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • It will make good again the next big sea battle...errr.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No it saved the world from America attacking Iran

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No just cull the Senior Ranks and sack some juniors

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Surrendering then Apologizing is still one better than the French

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No its launched the Media careers of the hostages.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No the Navy is now a Political entity which truthfully represents the UK

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Yes and why fund a failing brand for new Carriers

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Royal what?

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
the_matelot said:
EX_STAB said:
FNUSNU said:
A couple of inflatables with 15 rifles v Iranian gunboats with HMGs and RPGs. Can't blame the personnel involved, should have had air cover (as the water wasn't deep enough for the ship apparently).
This has been stated frequently but I just don't get it. Does the Cornwall really have a greater draught than the merchantman they were searching? Seems unlikely.
Cornwall displaces 4500 tonnes.Some of these dhows are no bigger than 40 tonnes.

A lot of the time, if the fcukers are trying to hide, they'll cut and run to Iranian TTW and run the risk of being boarded by the IRGCN and having everything confiscated rather than be stopped by a coalition vessel.

Cornwall's main task in the NAG was to protect the oil terminals (KAOT & ABOT) from attack by insurgents. Several matelots (USN) have been killed over the past couple of years doing exactly this.

The RIBs would've been deployed on 'Blue Light' patrols. A lot of vessels carrying out patrols in the NAG have been fitted with crew served weapons to counteract the threat from asymmetric warfare.

However, do you really want to be the person who starts a new conflict by opening up on the minigun at a target who knows that we've got to abide by certain ROE?

Let's face it-the UK government has got previous for not exactly being supportive of UK Forces who have decided to use deadly force...
Thanks Matelot. The vessel in question appears to be fairly large:


Is the dredged channel just too narrow to want to get a warship restricted in rather than being too shallow?
 
Ex,

I haven't got a clue mate-not my part of ship! :D

But the Type 22 would've stayed close to the oil terminals as that's deemed to be the priority for CTF158.
 
the_matelot said:
Let's face it-the UK government has got previous for not exactly being supportive of UK Forces who have decided to use deadly force...
Bang on the money there Matelot.

You reap what you sow, too many courts martial and reputations tarnsihed drives a fear of being the only man without a seat when the music stops.

It won't be That Cnut Des Browne (TCDB has a ring to it - non?) for sure, anything stronger than firm language would have him reaching for the DPP hotline.
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
The Poll at the top of this thread is false.

There should be a single option of "NO" to the question. Never mind trying to be clever and dress it up with No - but or Yes - but.

The real answer is NO. I would rather have the Royal Navy backing me up than any other in the world.

Edit to say:
I could maybe have written the last sentence slightly differently :oops:
 
Auld-Yin said:
The Poll at the top of this thread is false.

There should be a single option of "NO" to the question. Never mind trying to be clever and dress it up with No - but or Yes - but.

The real answer is NO. I would rather have the Royal Navy backing me up than any other in the world.

Edit to say:
I could maybe have written the last sentence slightly differently :oops:
Sorry Auld-Yin you are quite correct, but I wanted to put it into language that media types scanning ARRSE would immediately understand, hence ‘Brand’ instead of Tradition.
 
Auld-Yin said:
The Poll at the top of this thread is false.

There should be a single option of "NO" to the question. Never mind trying to be clever and dress it up with No - but or Yes - but.

The real answer is NO. I would rather have the Royal Navy backing me up than any other in the world.

Edit to say:
I could maybe have written the last sentence slightly differently :oops:
Well, absolutely. Unless of course there's any kind of credible air threat within 500 miles. In which case the current RN would be well and truly shafted.
 
Royal Navy brand? Don't tell me that you can get the Crab-air range of leisure wear in dark blue as well?
 
Cuddles said:
Royal Navy brand? Don't tell me that you can get the Crab-air range of leisure wear in dark blue as well?
Nooooo Cuddles, remember when some New Labour initiative decided that the name ‘Royal Mail’ was not ‘groovy’ enough ‘daddyo’ for all those ‘hep cats’ running ‘tings’. And they had the brilliant IDEA* to re-brand it Consignor or something, for the Modern Age, like, yeah?

This is simply an attempt to neuter the Royal Navy so that they can be absorbed into DFID under Hillary Ben (proper mans name that, must be good in bar fights), The DFID Aid Aquatic Facilitation Service (so much more right on than the stuffy old ‘Royal Navy’!) will then tour the World apologizing on behalf New Labour for just about everything that our ancestors ever did.

Its what you deserve.


*IDEA is a New labour Trade Mark, all rights reserved
 
ah AJ I see...but surely a cool britannia brand for the Navy would be something like "Maritimo" or "Shipshape"? or possibly given their new found mateyness with the media, "Wavelength" or given LS turney's embonpoint, "Bandwidth". Actually I like the last one, Admirals could then say quite truthfully that the reason sh1t like this happens to our dark blue colleagues is that there is "insufficient bandwidth".
 
well,I for one are glad that the lads and lasses,from Cook's Tours,are safe and sound,and that those nasty men from iran are now on a tailoring course,and showing that there is no ill-will the wardroom of hms cornwall is funding it.Now isn't that nice.The trouble with you big brutal men in the army,with your ripping muscles and bulging genitals,you have forgotten that the world has changed,we no longer hurt people or call them nasty names,but shower them with kisses and flowers,I'm even asking the MoD for a picture of Faye Turney walking around in her knickers I know it'll turn me on,now get with it soldiers and join the party.
 

growler

War Hero
Whatever happened to the signing of the official secrets act that I used to have to do each year?
 
Under the Freedom of Information Act, the Official Secrets Bill has been torn up as it didn't fit the new IDEA of open Govenment.

Open Govenment is where they tell you every little, pointless thing that you don't care about but keep the big stuff a secret in case it makes them look bad.
 
There are some good, thoughtful posts on this thread!

I don't think the Royal Navy has been damaged by this as, for the moment, the shit appears to be running uphill (a little worrying but all the more welcome...).

The overwhelming view of my civilian friends is that the sailors were not correctly advised by the MOD - and have been thrown to the media wolves. My military friends and colleagues tend towards the opinion that the sailors have sold their souls to the devil.

So, I don't think the brand has been damaged but I wouldn't want to be the idiot that next tries to take on the Royal Navy or the Royal Marines, as there is a (smallish) score to be settled. LOL!

Litotes
 

sashmancat

Swinger
Well done to those Service personnel for making some money. The MOD expect service personnel just to have their wages and nothing else. If given the chance to pay off a morgage early who would'nt jump at the chance. Take a look at Johnson Beharry who made a mint after winning the V.C and nothing was said about it. Ex generals like general debillier have made a mint out of selling there stories as have all those ex SAS guys. It does'nt matter if your serving or not, Service personnel should be allowed to earn extra cash when they can.Fair dues to them all.
 

OldSnowy

LE
Book Reviewer
Yes, they certainly have - Nationally and, more importantly (as they are after all meant to be there to work with/against other Navies) internationally.

If you don't believe me, or if you think I'm being unwarrantably rude to the Senior Service, check out some of the foreign press. It's a fact, a sad fact, that the RN have done themselves an amazing amount of damage over this whole affair.
 

sashmancat

Swinger
Theres no royalty. if i had the chance to pay off my morgage early instead of scrimping for the next 20 years and paying bloody tax on tour (tour bonus might cover a Ptes Tax but thats about it) You got to take what you can off this mob never mind the press.
 
Yes the brand has been damaged. But I think it is only a temporary thing. (although, wasn't it the Navy who commisioned some of those terrible recruitment adds?) But I think this is something they will recover from... this is just a small f()ck up in the grand scheme of things, and some people have supported the move, so maybe we could even try to think positivly that all publicity is good publicity.
 
A few points...

Military personnel who are supposed to be at risk of being captured are supposed to have done T.Q.

In my day, all you were allowed to divulge was name, rank, number and date of birth. (My dog tags also had C of E on them). You weren't allowed to give any other info or put your signature to anything. In the field, you were supposed to go clean, without any personal papers that could give the enemy additional info or any lever they could use to get under your skin. Examples were shown of how the most innocuous remark that you made could be used against you via careful film editing. Ipods hadn't been invented then, BUT CARRYING ONE ON DUTY WOULD HAVE BEEN STRONGLY DISENCOURAGED VIA SIZE 9 BOOT IF NECESSARY!!

It stands out a mile from the Iranian footage that no-one in that boarding party had done T.Q. at all. Perhaps the Senior Service should have a re-think about this if they continue putting boarding parties on vessels in disputed waters?

This has been a total fcuk up from the top right to the bottom. In my day senior politicians would at least have had enough honour to resign. This New Labour lot will dig their nails in and hang onto their precious jobs for dear life. No doubt the Captain of H.M.S. Cornwall will be promoted to Rear Admiral before too long.

It should be noted that if things had got messy, and that boarding party had come back injured and traumatised, they would have been rapidly dumped by their country and booted out on their @rses with a medical discharge. They would probably have been un-employable in civvy street, and there would have been none of the special medical and psychiatric care laid on that they would have so desperately needed.

I can't see any of that Carry on film boarding party remaining in the service for long. Shelf stacking at TESCO will probably be about it. They probably need their 30 pieces of silver.

SLR (Not to be confused with SLR Boy).
 

Shamus

Old-Salt
Some years ago when addressing a selection course of about 200 all service personnel, from paras, marines, infantry, etc to RAF and RN, I asked the ques how many have done any CAC or R 2 I training? About 10 put up their hands - frightening! I don't suppose things have changed that much. Some of the RN personnel looked partic shaken by what was prob fairly mild and civilised treatment, clearly unprepared. Time the senior commanders spent some money on this!!
 

Latest Threads

Top