Infantry Cut Decision to be delayed?

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Whistleblower, Dec 5, 2004.

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. I have argued long and hard against the logic (or lack of) behind the cuts but if they are to happen then there had better be more balanced judgements than just "mummy mustn't lose her Black Watch". I'm glad Betty is sticking her oar in but this would be a disaster if it came down to favourites.
  2. As this topic drags on, I find myself somewhat confused. I first thought they were planning to get rid of regtlt title and the personnel in the unit. Now I seem to be of opinion that the name will go and the personnel will be redeployed to bring the others up to full strength. Are we due to lose regiments (by name) or regts + asociated personnel? I'm getting a bit old and thick in trying to get the facts behind the furore.
  3. The Torygraph ran a similar story with a leaked Confidential-Management ECAB briefing paper. There will be many more deployments to the sandbox over the next couple of years - the longer these cuts are delayed, the less damage they will do as the "line" that Iraq is shortly to become "stable democracy" becomes untenable.

    Bits in bold are my emphasis.

  4. Lot of smoke and mirrors here. Why can't the politicians and the General Staff just admit they were wrong and that there is a need to keep all of the existing Bns.

    The trend in the Scottish Division prior to all this nausea indicated. recruiting was picking up. Indeed the KOSB and Black Watch had achieved their recruiting goals for 2003-2004, with the others, Royal Scots excepted, not too far behind. There are indications that a determined and imaginative recruiting drive across Scotland would have produced the desired results, but of course a recruiting 'freeze' was initiated.

    The entire debacle is driven by Hoon's desire to save money at the expense of Britain's security not because of poor recruiting.
  5. I've waited a long time for my first post but now it seems appropriate to comment on the 'General Spat' that's hitting the headlines on the eve of the ECAB meeting. Given how much the Generals have been hacking lumps out of each other (and I thought they were mates) is now in the open it has been a real eye opener to see the sort of skulduggery that has been the order of the day at DInf and elsewhere in the run up to this latest tiff.

    It is clear (don't leave stuff in the photocopier) that Kings Div initially tried to warp the proposed reductions by arguing that Queens Div should also take a cut, getting the Kings Div element of DInf's staff to put the Fusiliers in the frame so Kings Div could take over their recruiting areas given that at a recent recruiting conference in Warbore it was noted how Kings Div recruiting in Lancashire in particular was on the floor. But what really raised the blood pressure was the apparent inference (notified by a B2 source) that by having large (though now reducing) numbers of F&C this should be a good reason for Queens Div to get the chop as well because Kings Div had less F&C. (The Lt Div has just as many if not more but they've only 2 regiments and offer little local competition except in Durham.) If anyone would play the race card at a time when we need all the infantry we can get to do the tasks set then this is a strange (and malicious) way to fight a corner. It's quite clear from the recent PWRR Magazine and the Fusiliers' war experience that their F&C can do the business - any comment from the BW?

    There's also the little matter of 'Ruperts'. According to my source in the Factory, people don't exactly fight to get into the Kings Div regiments, either before they arrive or while they are there. A good charismatic member of staff can work wonders but if the profile isn't hot he's got an uphill struggle. A dodgy one can seriously damage a regiment's health…

    Anyway, those who remember 'Options' will hardly be holding their breath. At a time when we need everyone we've got don't expect too much 'wisdom' riding in on the back of stopping the Arms Plot. Oh and don't expect anything 'neutral, impartial' and/or 'carefully considered' from DInf and his staff either. :wink:

    Radio 4, post 0700 hrs, Mon 6 Dec. Be there.

    'When you have lost everything all you have left is experience.'
  6. Only this government with its collection of fools, adulterers and bluffers could decide to cut the Armed Forces to save money in the middle of a war. It's enough to make you weep.
  7. Exactly, they say it is "modernising"!
    Just how so? They never do tell.

    You are correct, there should be no cuts, and a review of recruiting and what is wrong with recruiting presently. They need to start using their brains to fix that, not complain about numbers while sitting on their hands.
  8. At about 7.00 this morning, I watched Dan Snow , described as a Military Historian, on the sofa with the trout Kerpinski.

    Yes, I have gone off her. The entire 5 minutes, and the bits beyond, were nothing but Neue Arbeit Propaganda of the very worst sort.

    The discussion was whether or not the Army would be affected by the cuts.

    The Trout Kerpinski kept banging on as many times as she could get it in, that the cuts would improve Army efficiency , and Dan Snow was there to add "gravitas" to the view.

    My question is this.

    Does Dan Snow have ANY Military experience. Yes I know he writes a few books, and presents "History for chavs and those who ain't got the Hitler channel on cable" but has he ever served?

    Because his comments were laughable, but exactly what the Government wants put out there.

    "Northern Ireland Peace Dividend"????

    Dan, What the F*ck are you banging on about?

    The IRA has NOT stopped it's racketeering, drugs and booze and fags smuggling operations. Now why do you suppose they are still raising money as fast as they can? Has NORAID closed down? No?

    We are going to lose a Battalion with the most experience in the Province. There is something wrong, and sinister with this picture Mr. Snow, no?

    Lots of talk of "More efficient" "Streamlined" "Cap badges will still exist" "more deployable" etc, all delivered by a man who as far as I'm aware, hasn't done a day in uniform, and seemed to have not a clue for Regimental pride, and why this is important to us.

    I can only presume that Mark Urban was unavailable. :evil:
  9. Saw the later bit, where they wheeled on a retired admiral, who gave the party line...

    and more worryingly kept going on about finding a "new way"...securing the middle ground... having a medium solution that could cater to all environments" - it started to sound like one of B liars speaches from 1997 when he was talking about the "3rd (turd) way".

    Basically this is all about the treasury clawing in as much money as it can to balance the books and ensure that MP's and their hangers on can continue to get large salaries and pay rises at the expense of the countries defence.

    It in no way takes into account the lessons learned from Iraq or Afghanistan, or for that matter any conflict the British Armed Forces have been involved in...

    This review does not address the need for improved investment in training and equipment, as all it promises is either kit that has been due for many a long year or stuff that won't see the light of day for 10 - 15 years (FRES!).

    The review fundamentally damages the armed forces, their recruitment, retention and capabilities to conduct their current tempo of operations. The large regiment concept whilst fine for single capbadge regiments or corps will be unwealdy and divisive for multibadge abominations - just look at what happened to the TA inf units after the last set of cuts - hardly an example I would want to recreate.
  10. Protest threat over merger of regiments

  11. You forgot to add the bit about paying for Grasping Gordon's recent '£25 for every chav' announcement, which is no more than a cynical Neue Arbeit ploy to buy the votes of the hard of thinking.
  12. This'll go down like a ton of hot snot!

    Blair has 'stepped in to save his local regiment'
    By Michael Smith, Defence Correspondent
    (Filed: 06/12/2004)

    Army chiefs will decide today which four historic infantry regiments are to be scrapped amid suggestions that Tony Blair has stepped in to save the unit that recruits in his constituency.

    The Royal Regiment of Fusiliers fears that it will be axed because intense lobbying by "Labour MPs concerned about the effect on their seats" has saved the Green Howards, which recruits in Sedgefield, Mr Blair's constituency, and Darlington, that of Alan Milburn, his election supremo.

    The Fusiliers, one of the large multi-battalion regiments the major reorganisation of the army is designed to create, would then lose one of its two battalions and be merged with another regiment.

    The decision on how to cut three of the four infantry battalions has effectively already been made. The Executive Committee of the Army Board will decide today on the fourth battalion.

    In a letter to the Daily Telegraph today, Lt-Col Andrew Larpent, who commanded 3 Bn, the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers during the 1991 Gulf War blames "emotion and political pressure" for the decision that only one Scottish regiment should be axed.
  13. I mentioned this in another thread, but I still believe that the real issue is the ending of the arms plot moves. i.e. once the music stops you are where you are - for good!

    The main effect is that we have to go to the large regiments to make the infantry sustainable. If the Black Watch are in Edinburgh at that point for example that is where they stay.

    Who would want to join them then? STSR can shout and scream all they like, but if the regiment is saved and ends up in a duff posting, it will just get diluted as trickle posting takes effect and all the compassionate cases and long term sick get posted there from the higher readiness battalions.

    OK, the hackle will remain and all the history will be preserved, great, but what sort of future?

    So the cry has to be to justify the arms plot moves that give soldiers the variation of role and that keeps the concept of the single battalion regiment possible.

    Ah, but that takes cash...
  14. Good point about how many Infantry per capital head - England 54 million population, therefore able to supply more than Scotlands 3 million population.