Interesting Telegraph article

Discussion in 'Army Reserve' started by msr, Jun 19, 2006.

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. msr

    msr LE

    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
     
  2. Someone's been reading arrse...
     
  3. Bet the cnut who thought up of SDR in the 90s is really pleased with himself......
     
  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. msr

    msr LE

    Dunno, haven't seens an advert on the internet since moving to Firefox and installing Adblock plus and filterset.g

    msr
     
  6. Was that not printed before? I seem to recall reading that verbatim recently.
     
  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. msr

    msr LE

    And some right nobbers...
     
  9. Pob02

    Pob02 War Hero Book Reviewer

    "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. 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. 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.
     
  13. 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. We could always play the Bush card... I believe he owes us one or two favours.