Interesting Telegraph article

#1
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2006/06/15/dl1501.xml

The original purpose of the TA was to defend our country - not to fight battles far from home. The Government thought the alteration would go unnoticed, but to many of those willing to give up their time the difference is immense. The change makes it much less attractive to join the Territorials, as the likelihood of being sent to a war zone such as Iraq or Afghanistan is now much higher.

The impact on volunteers' lives and jobs is often too great, resulting in those considering offering their services walking away and those already serving resigning. Yet it is these men and women we would be relying on in a real emergency.

msr
 
#4
Does anyone else think that the Microsoft ad with a guy walking around in a dinosaur mask takes away from the article a bit?
 
#5
Dunno, haven't seens an advert on the internet since moving to Firefox and installing Adblock plus and filterset.g

msr
 
#7
It´s from last Saturday - the same issue of the paper which carried the article about 16,000 TA soldiers´ having quit.

Read the comments on the article, further down the page linked to by msr. Some corkers in there.
 
#8
Dr_Evil said:
It´s from last Saturday - the same issue of the paper which carried the article about 16,000 TA soldiers´ having quit.

Read the comments on the article, further down the page linked to by msr. Some corkers in there.
And some right nobbers...
 

Pob02

War Hero
Book Reviewer
#9
"Modern warfare requires professional soldiers; there is no room for the amateur; and I am afraid, that is exactly what the TA has become - poorly trained, unfit and few, if any, real leadership qualities. If members of the TA wanted to be professional soldiers, they could easy join the Regular Army: clearly, they do not wish to do so. All they want to do, is 'potter around Salisbury Plain' and draw their annual bonus! Personally, I never felt happy when operating side by side with my TA colleagues, they were either rank amateurs, unreliable or suffered from home sickness - not my idea of an effective and efficient Soldier!!
Posted by Desmond on June 15, 2006 7:22 PM"

aarrgh what a f*cking tool! Idiots like this really get on my (very perky , even if I do say so myself) tits.

ARABism to the nth degree.

God sake when will we ever get rid of this kind of attitude? CNUT!!!!!!
 
#10
Pob02 said:
that is exactly what the TA has become - poorly trained, unfit and few, if any, real leadership qualities.
I thought the general consensus was that the TA was moving in the opposite direction? What a fcuking chopper!
 
#11
'The change makes it much less attractive to join the Territorials, as the likelihood of being sent to a war zone such as Iraq or Afghanistan is now much higher.'

Yes - clearly it is far preferable to join an organisation that has no apparent purpose and train for an entirely theoretical job that will never be required, rather than actually have the chance to perform as a soldier of the British Army on operations without making a life-long commitment to the Colours/enduring basic training etc.

Frankly, I can't wait until all those war dodgers in the TA leave and stop whinging and giving rise to articles like this which only damage the TA. There is no Cold War, nobody is going to invade the UK, we don't need a home defence organisation, that was then; this is now. If the TA doesn't go to Iraq/Afghanistan, then we (ie the UK) don't need it. Repetitive articles creating the perception in the eyes of senior officers, ministers and the public that the TA doesn't want to take up this challenge are hugely damaging, and I wish the Telegraph would stop.

My personal experience is of recruiting going up, and of recruits actually being motivated to go on operations.
 
#12
CheekieNorthernMonkie said:
Bet the cnut who thought up of SDR in the 90s is really pleased with himself......
Well it works, numbers come through the door get mobilised.

Pity time and time again TA prove they can do the job, when will someone realise that employ us in crap jobs and we will get pee'd off.

Well thanks to my unit and thanks for the recce's you let me do last with another corps Bde and Units.... seems I might like a G6 position there and leave behind this 2nd rate TA crap.
 
B

benjaminw1

Guest
#13
Dilfor said:
There is no Cold War, nobody is going to invade the UK, we don't need a home defence organisation, that was then; this is now.
Ah the old ten year rule theory...

How do you know that we are not going to need a "home defence organisation" in the next ten years?

Global Warming, mass water loss illegal immigration, disaffected home grown "religious" terrorists, Putin deciding that the Ukraine (and Belorus and Estonia ...) belong to Greater Rus. The EU deciding that the UK cannot be allowed leave...

Stranger (Falklands, Yugoslavia, Iraq, 7/7...) things have happened...
 
#14
[

Ah the old ten year rule theory...

How do you know that we are not going to need a "home defence organisation" in the next ten years?

I don't; but there's a pretty good chance that if we do, there will be sufficent warning to allow for the establishment of a completely new one, or the re-roling of something existing.

When managing limited resources (ie defence budgets), risk have to be taken as large amounts of redundancy/contingency are not available (and never has been for GB). This is a pretty manageable risk, compared to many. And anyway, if we did need any urgent home defence, we've got all those Typhoons doing very little at huge expense.
 
#15
benjaminw1 said:
Dilfor said:
There is no Cold War, nobody is going to invade the UK, we don't need a home defence organisation, that was then; this is now.
Ah the old ten year rule theory...

How do you know that we are not going to need a "home defence organisation" in the next ten years?

Global Warming, mass water loss illegal immigration, disaffected home grown "religious" terrorists, Putin deciding that the Ukraine (and Belorus and Estonia ...) belong to Greater Rus. The EU deciding that the UK cannot be allowed leave...

Stranger (Falklands, Yugoslavia, Iraq, 7/7...) things have happened...
We could always play the Bush card... I believe he owes us one or two favours.
 
B

benjaminw1

Guest
#17
I don't; but there's a pretty good chance that if we do, there will be sufficent warning to allow for the establishment of a completely new one, or the re-roling of something existing.

When managing limited resources (ie defence budgets), risk have to be taken as large amounts of redundancy/contingency are not available (and never has been for GB). This is a pretty manageable risk, compared to many. And anyway, if we did need any urgent home defence, we've got all those Typhoons doing very little at huge expense.
So how long is that then?

Considering; buying kit, recruiting, training, building TACs etc, etc.

5 to 10 years?

Like to see a Typhoon do a VCP...

And anyway how much does basic inf type bods on the ground cost? B. all in the scheme of things.

Bring back the HSF
 
#18
Oh God, this is like Defence Assumptions for GCSE failures.

The Typhoon reference was a joke.

So, unfortunately, is a home defence role for the Territorial Army.

We haven't been invaded since 1066. The British Army has always defended the UK's interests across the globe. Occasionally, that has meant close to home in continental Europe, often it has been further afield. At the moment, it is further afield. The TA is part of the British Army. If you want to be a British soldier, you must be prepared to defend the UK's interest wherever the Queen sends you. This has been the case since RFA 96 to which virtually all (all?) TA members are subject (although the original officer take-up was appallingly low).

On this thread there are people trying to justify arguing for a job for the TA that no-one in Defence thinks is needed, whereas on other threads people are complaining that the TA does not get the resources (from Defence) that it needs to train. Are the two possibly related?

Modernise or die. The TA always like to lecture Regulars on how the civilian world is far more cut-throat than their cosy world of Army employment. Well, if the TA were a private company, some people here would like to see it producing betamax VCRs.
 
#19
Dilfor said:
Oh God, this is like Defence Assumptions for GCSE failures.
Thanks for descending from the lofty heights of intellectual excellence to toy with us.

Dilfor said:
On this thread there are people trying to justify arguing for a job for the TA that no-one in Defence thinks is needed, whereas on other threads people are complaining that the TA does not get the resources (from Defence) that it needs to train. Are the two possibly related?
No. Are your parents possibly a tad too closely related? The following has already been explained to you.

Dr_Evil on another thread said:
BS and I, and others, have suggested cheap and effective ways of lightening the load whilst maintaining or even enhancing training standards and professionalism, in order to preserve the TA as an effective fighting force - one which is capable of performing all three of its tasks:

(a) being a reserve for major war;
(b) supporting the regular Army on enduring ops; and
(c) special tasks such as CCRF.
Ask your chums at the MoD what the TA's current (in your terms, modern) tasks are: they should confirm what I have just written. What I, for one, have been calling for is the resources to do our allocated tasks.

Dilfor said:
Modernise or die.
Right you are.

Dilfor said:
The TA always like to lecture Regulars on how the civilian world is far more cut-throat than their cosy world of Army employment. Well, if the TA were a private company, some people here would like to see it producing betamax VCRs.
If the TA were a private company, providing temps (sometimes at very short notice) it would be charging the MoD for its services the same storming rates as the MoD has wasted on paying consultants to come up with "solutions" that fck the Army.

Perhaps your Betamax pals are hankering after a dream world of their own: one in which the TA is scrapped and the money saved (£400 million or so a year, at a guess) ploughed back into the defence budget. In the real world, that money would be used to buy more hospital administrators.
 
#20
I'd like to know where I can find the "Cold War dinosaurs" and "war dodgers" everyone keeps telling me are in the TA. In my little corner of the TA anyone remotely matching those descriptions left a long, long time ago. And those that do remember the old days are working flat out trying to keep the whole under-resourced, over-stretched, under-funded and under-recruited mess from collapsing.

But it's easier to insult those raising concerns than address issues - a more cultured way of stuffing ones fingers in ones ears and shouting "La la la I can't hear you".
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top