How to charge Blair

In fairness to Blair a lot of shite logistics was down to the ******* idiots in charge of logistic regiments.
RAOC seems to have done a good job in the Falklands considering the circumstances. GW1 as well with RAOC/RCT. Do you think the shite logistics in GW2 was a result of them being merged into the RLC?
 
RAOC seems to have done a good job in the Falklands considering the circumstances. GW1 as well with RAOC/RCT. Do you think the shite logistics in GW2 was a result of them being merged into the RLC?

I wasn't in the first two so can't compare although I believe the Falklands was close to running out of Ammo.
It's shite logistics because no one really cares (other than the poor sods waiting for kit, while the loggies do a charity event in KAF).
 
I wasn't in the first two so can't compare although I believe the Falklands was close to running out of Ammo.
It's shite logistics because no one really cares (other than the poor sods waiting for kit, while the loggies do a charity event in KAF).
Out of interest how close was the task force to fixing bayonets
due to no more bullets grenades 51mm + 81mm rounds and of course the bigger calibre stuff from cvrts to naval gun support

Can you post a link please or ask some on arrse who were there actually involved


Not a dig or poke just curious
 
Out of interest how close was the task force to fixing bayonets
due to no more bullets grenades 51mm + 81mm rounds and of course the bigger calibre stuff from cvrts to naval gun support

Can you post a link please or ask some on arrse who were there actually involved


Not a dig or poke just curious


As noted by British General Julian Thompson, on the scene in the Falklands, “Surely one of the strangest things in military history is the almost
complete silence upon the problems of supply"

Nearly 40 years later its still ****.
 

As noted by British General Julian Thompson, on the scene in the Falklands, “Surely one of the strangest things in military history is the almost
complete silence upon the problems of supply"

Nearly 40 years later its still ****.


Am stumped that’s pretty much the only comment on the problems

Yes it mentions relocating from offshore ship supply to land based supply dumps

No mention though of teeth arms running
almost dry though. Granted Fal magazines made resupply easier after re orgs.

Thanks for the link though


Back to legally nobbling mr Blair
 
Not for going to war, rather for knowingly and specifically misleading Parliament on this matter and many others.

Still leads the way open for future PMs to get a kick in the balls, so not likely to happen.
 
Still leads the way open for future PMs to get a kick in the balls, so not likely to happen.
Yet Blair stiched Ted Heath up with having to appear in front of the Saville enquiry. Not quite the same thing I know but it could have ended up with recommendations by Saville for Heaths prosecution although he died well before the enquiry ended.
 
Yet Blair stiched Ted Heath up with having to appear in front of the Saville enquiry. Not quite the same thing I know but it could have ended up with recommendations by Saville for Heaths prosecution although he died well before the enquiry ended.
Link and evidence please
 
This post won't be popular, but I'll speak my mind anyway.

I was also sucked in by the claims in 2003 and I fully believed the government and the need to take Saddam out. There was also the prospect of controlling the oil and bringing democracy to the ME as it would placate Israel.

Does anyone remember the weapons inspector David Kelly? How appropriate that he should go and kill himself right on the eve on invasion.


"Kelly's name became known to the media, and he was called to appear on 15 July before the parliamentary Intelligence and Security and Foreign Affairs Select committees. Two days later Kelly was found dead near his home."

By 2006 we still hadn't recovered any WMD. By that point it should have been crystal clear that Iraq was politically correct imperialism. Those who still joined up should have recognised that by 2006 it was no longer a "just" war in the same way as WW2 was. By then we were the bad guys and had lost all our credibility and moral high ground which had served us so well in the Cold War and Balkans.
 
Last edited:
Those who still joined up should have recognised that by 2006 it was no longer a "just" war in the same way as WW2 was. By then we were the bad guys and had lost all our credibility and moral high ground which had served us so well in the Cold War and Balkans.
Do any young men, officers or soldiers bother about all that? They just want to get into the action. Americans and Australians were still volunteering to go to Vietnam even with all the negative publicty in the later stages of the war. British soldiers were going to Australia House in the Strand after their service to enlist directly in the Australian Army many with the express hope of a tour of SVN.
 
Do any young men, officers or soldiers bother about all that? They just want to get into the action. Americans and Australians were still volunteering to go to Vietnam even with all the negative publicty in the later stages of the war. British soldiers were going to Australia House in the Strand after their service to enlist directly in the Australian Army many with the express hope of a tour of SVN.

That's the problem though, young men don't have the foresight or life experience to think about whether what they are doing is morally right. That can lead to dangerous consequences. I'm sure the Wehrmacht thought God was on their side/belt buckle and it must have come as quite a shock to realise they were evil.

The older officers should have known better, but then I suppose they have a mortgage to pay and a pension to think of. Who remembers any of the guys who opposed the war and went to jail over it? Perhaps they were the only ones who were really right and what have they got to show for their stand? Either way, our legacy of being the good guys came to an end at that point, imho.
 
Yet Blair stiched Ted Heath up with having to appear in front of the Saville enquiry. Not quite the same thing I know but it could have ended up with recommendations by Saville for Heaths prosecution although he died well before the enquiry ended.

Care to expand on Ted being prosecuted
 

ipso_facto

On ROPS
On ROPs
The look of a worried man; not.

vlcsnap-2021-04-28-07h49m26s879-1.jpg

Actually it's a little disturbing. I wonder if he's experienced mental health issues since leaving office?
 

Proff3RTR

War Hero

defo
 
Last edited:

Yokel

LE
This post won't be popular, but I'll speak my mind anyway.

I was also sucked in by the claims in 2003 and I fully believed the government and the need to take Saddam out. There was also the prospect of controlling the oil and bringing democracy to the ME as it would placate Israel.

Does anyone remember the weapons inspector Hans Blix? How appropriate that he should go and kill himself right on the eve on invasion.


By 2006 we still hadn't recovered any WMD. By that point it should have been crystal clear that Iraq was politically correct imperialism. Those who still joined up should have recognised that by 2006 it was no longer a "just" war in the same way as WW2 was. By then we were the bad guys and had lost all our credibility and moral high ground which had served us so well in the Cold War and Balkans.

Are you saying that the Iraqis would have been better off under Saddam? Or are you saying that Western forces should have pulled out at the height of the insurgency, and let the various militias and terrorists fight it out amongst themselves?

Saddam was a wicked problem that was never going to end well.
 
There are a few options for prosecuting Mr Blair:

1. A charge of misconduct in public office - this is probably the most credible approach towards prosecuting Blair. According to CPS guidance, the offence occurs when:

  • a public officer acting as such;
  • wilfully neglects to perform his duty and/or wilfully misconducts himself;
  • to such a degree as to amount to an abuse of the public's trust in the office holder;
  • without reasonable excuse or justification.
It would, of course, be for a court to determine whether Blair's conduct fulfilled each requirement of the offence. The offence is punishable by imprisonment for life.

2. The other, more outmoded approach would be to impeach Blair in Parliament. This, however, is potentially even more problematic but, if successful, it could lead to his imprisonment by Parliament itself (for the first time since the Napoleonic Wars). Impeachment - House of Commons Library

There's also misfeasance in public office, but again, it's harder to provide conclusive evidence.

Other than the results.
 
Are you saying that the Iraqis would have been better off under Saddam? Or are you saying that Western forces should have pulled out at the height of the insurgency, and let the various militias and terrorists fight it out amongst themselves?

Saddam was a wicked problem that was never going to end well.

There's a lot of wicked dictators in the world, why was Saddam so special? We could have taken out half of Africa, Asia and the ME if we were serious about bringing democracy to failed states.
 

Latest Threads

Top