MoD Combats Urban Myths About Defence And The Armed Forces

#2
I don't believe a word the MOD says, because it's controlled by a New Labour Government.

I am however heartened that they are worried enough to start issuing rebuttals. They must smell blood somewhere in the water.

Edited to add:

Have we always lived in this bizarre Alice-through-the-looking-glass world where there are two versions of "reality?" That is to say the world which officialdom paints versus the one we actually live in? Or has it accelerated to even more bizarre levels under this preposterous regime that a minority of us actually voted for? Just wait for the shiny-arses to start accusing any dissenters of having motives beyond that of simply telling the truth as they experience it. The bit about the 3 PARA case on that site is quite simply hilarious....the APA is independent of Lord Goldsmith's dpeartment? Sorry, I think I just wet myself.

V!
 
#3
They forgot to counter some other statements: 'many service personnel could not vote in the general election due to MoD bungling' and 'Ministers state that waiting time for Iraq medal is 3 months'
 
#6
Who are these clowns trying to fool? while I see huge "positive" responces to Army surveys why is that not reflected here or elsewhere?

No smoke without fire, the MoD are running scared and as directed to by the politicos are trying to put a gloss over this governments disgraceful treatment and abuse of the Army.

Load of rubbish
 
#7
d) introducing silver-lined anti-bacterial underwear

Has anyone actually been issued these?

msr
 
#8
The Army is under strength

As at 01 July 2005 (the most recent available figures) the British Army is 97.5% manned against its target Full Time Trained Strength. Officer manning is at 98.2% of its target. Other ranks are at 97.3% against its target.

Clearly this does not apply to the TA.

msr
 

Fang_Farrier

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
#9
msr said:
d) introducing silver-lined anti-bacterial underwear

Has anyone actually been issued these?

msr
Are they the ones supplimented with the two pencils, one for each nostril?
 

OldSnowy

LE
Moderator
Book Reviewer
#10
I am afraid that to be seen to react like this is obvious evidence of fear or weakness.

I notice nothing there about the Reserves - we obviously don't count, or there are no 'myths' about us worth rebutting. How about (as MSR noted) countering any suggestion that TA strengths are falling? Or that there are roughly 1/4 as many places available each year for TA Recruit Courses as there are people leaving? Or that, once demobilised, TA soldiers are unable to use the Defence Medical Services? Or that I still haven't got my bloody Telic Medal yet, over two years after having qualified?

Not that I'm bitter or anything....

How about a new thread - "Myths that we'd like to see rebutted?"
I offer the first three of my questions above as a starter.
 
F

fozzy

Guest
#11
I don't usually go in for conspiracy theories, but does anyone else find the timing of this report and the Terror Bill vote more than just a little cosy?

On a slow news day this would have been picked up - but Mr Blair's kicking got the frontpages.

I'm also aware that many of the strawmen arguements that the MoD put up are effectively rebuttals to many threads in ARRSE!

So we have them rattled - time to press home the advantage.
 
#12
Hmm, just to tackle the "using own kit" issue!

I don't know anyone who doesn't use some of their own kit! I think issue kit is generally good but could do better and everyone adds to it when they can. Even if its just having to sew elastic to webbing, replace torches with maglites or head mounted etc etc!

The issue kit is about good enough, just but most people adapt it to make it pore personal and "user friendly"?
 
#13
Funny that, but instead of rebutting a number of these 'urban legends', they have actually just confirmed them to be true! :roll:
 
#14
msr said:
The Army is under strength

As at 01 July 2005 (the most recent available figures) the British Army is 97.5% manned against its target Full Time Trained Strength. Officer manning is at 98.2% of its target. Other ranks are at 97.3% against its target.

Clearly this does not apply to the TA.

msr
Yes, interesting that there is no rebuttal of the 6,000 understrength and haemoraging 500 troops per month 'claims'. One has to wonder whether this is simply on oversight. If indeed the Army is now 'One Army', then this is not an answer to the question which the MoD itself;


MoD Oracle said:
The Army is under strength

As at 01 July 2005 (the most recent available figures) the British Army is 97.5% manned against its target Full Time Trained Strength. Officer manning is at 98.2% of its target. Other ranks are at 97.3% against its target.


The Army is experiencing a recruitment crisis

Despite the current challenging recruiting environment - high employment, a prosperous and strong economy and Further Education opportunities all compete with the Army for young men and women - the Army Training and Recruiting Agency (ATRA) is currently forecasting that it will achieve 85% of its 2005/06 Field Army target. It is taking action to attract more high quality recruits and to keep retention levels steady.
The statement is true, but it is carefully crafted to tell a truth rather than the truth in rebuttal of the 'urban myth'. The Regular British Army might well be manned to 97.5% of its 'target Full Time Trained Strength'. Back of a fag-packet maths will tell you that that is not the case for 'The British Army', which is, perhaps, a little bit relevant, even if one only considers that, as;

The Defence Select Committee - First Report said:
The TA... [is] ...a vital component of the British Army. The Secretary of State promised the House, when announcing the proposed restructuring of the TA, that it would produce a modern Territorial Army that is more relevant, more useable and more fully integrated into our armed forces and our defence plans... To achieve these goals, the TA will need to be fully manned, properly equipped and above all well-trained.
Defence Select Committee - Conclusion to First Report on SDR - 27 Jan 99
 
E

error_unknown

Guest
#15
It also fails that the trained strength of the army has been steadily reduced in the death by a thousand cuts we have been suffering since "Options for Change/ SDR etc. Even if we were full strength, there are not enough regular troops to go round whatever the alleged percentage of manning, this is pure spin. Add to this the recent spate of defence jobs closure, defence contracts going overseas and we see a pattern emerging. Government policy is usually to deliberately run an industry into the ground prior to privatising it (Look at the rail industry). In this case replace privatisation with European Defence Force. It is only a matter of time before one of our lords and masters states that in the interest of efficiency it would be in our national interest to pool our defence with Europe. As for the kit issues, most of the kit they mention was stuff that soldiers were having to buy in the first place anyway. As for the 3 para issue, who the feck do they think they are kidding? The MOD should be forced to launch a public inquiry into the reasons for that case being proceeded with. Did the 10 million come from the defence budget? I gotta work now but in the immortal words of Arnie.....I'll be back!

ps. High morale?..... That's a good one!
 
#16
The figures in the MoD News article ought to be clarified; the percentages shown do not necessarily reflect the true situation, just the responses of the proportion of the military who were surveyed. Actually, that's not correct either - it reflects the opinions of those who could be arrsed to complete and return the survey.

Reading it again, some of the article is simply drivel:

The defence budget is getting smaller

The 2005/06 Defence budget is £30.9BN, with the 06/07 budget set to be £32.1bn. The 2004 Spending Review increased the Defence budget by 1.4 per cent above inflation per year – a real increase of £3.7bn from 2004/05 to 2007/08. As a result, real terms planned defence spending in 2007/08 will be 7.5 per cent higher than in 1997/98.
They may be spending more, but on what? More external consultants? More risible 'smart' procurement? Redundancy payments to inf soldiers?


The Army is under strength

As at 01 July 2005 (the most recent available figures) the British Army is 97.5% manned against its target Full Time Trained Strength. Officer manning is at 98.2% of its target. Other ranks are at 97.3% against its target.
If it's not 100% manned, then it's understrength. So not a rebuttal of amyth at all, but confirmation that the 'myth' is, in fact, correct. A clearer picture would emerge if we could look at the statistics for specific areas - just how short of doctors is the military, Dr Reid?


The Army is experiencing a recruitment crisis

Despite the current challenging recruiting environment - high employment, a prosperous and strong economy and Further Education opportunities all compete with the Army for young men and women - the Army Training and Recruiting Agency (ATRA) is currently forecasting that it will achieve 85% of its 2005/06 Field Army target. It is taking action to attract more high quality recruits and to keep retention levels steady.
The employment figures indicate that unemployment has risen under Neue Arbeit, so the 'high employment' statement seems a little weak. If the ATRA forecast is that they will only achieve 85% of target, what are the figures for other areas?
 
#17
The Army is under strength

As at 01 July 2005 (the most recent available figures) the British Army is 97.5% manned against its target Full Time Trained Strength. Officer manning is at 98.2% of its target. Other ranks are at 97.3% against its target.
even if it was 100% of the target that is not to say that it wont be under strenght if the target is to low!!!
 
#18
There's a typo in the Gulf War Syndrome bit. Should have read:

"Gulf War Syndrome is a commonly used term, but the consensus of medical opinion, which the MoD supports, is that there are too many different symptoms reported for the ill-health displayed by Gulf Veterans for the illnesses to be characterised as a discrete medical syndrome during the expected lifetime of anyone suffering from it. The MoD has not changed its position."

Tossers.
 
#19
In other news, MoD announces "War is Peace" and "Black is White". Everything is happyhappy joyjoy proles, return to your work.

Lies, lies lies.

I'm off for a cup of tea now, I'm really quite annoyed.
 
#20
"The 2005/06 Defence budget is £30.9BN, with the 06/07 budget set to be £32.1bn. The 2004 Spending Review increased the Defence budget by 1.4 per cent above inflation per year – a real increase of £3.7bn from 2004/05 to 2007/08. As a result, real terms planned defence spending in 2007/08 will be 7.5 per cent higher than in 1997/98. [/quote]

They may be spending more, but on what? More external consultants? More risible 'smart' procurement? Redundancy payments to inf soldiers?"

This might be the case form the raw numbers, but when inflation and spending as a proportion of government spending and GDP are taken into account, you might be surprised to know that we are not as well off as advertised!!
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top