More cuts & More deployments.

Discussion in 'The Intelligence Cell' started by HVM_Boy, Sep 8, 2003.

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 noticed in the papers yestarday rumours that in the same week that Hoon will announce more troops to Iraq, that he's also going to announce cuts on the back of the way war was fought in Iraq - summarised as "Cut back on troop numbers to pay for better kit".

    :?: What the hell is he/the MoD thinking? Yes, of course the guys need better kit, blah de blah, but the forces do a lot more than fight wars? How about fighting fires, keeping the peace, helping in the aftermath of terrorist attacks, and low intensity conflicts where Night Sights and GPSs are bugger all use and what you really need is blokes on the ground!!!

    I know I'm probably preaching to the converted but i have to get it off my chest.

    I feel a letter to The Times coming on.

  2. The Times has become something of a Labour rag recently; very disappointing.
  3. hoon would announce that Jesus was his first cousin iff he thought that it would get some of the pressure off his back as he is used for target practice by tony blairs media office
  4. "Burning candles at both ends" comes to mind :roll:
  5. I know it's a novel idea not in keeping with the fantasy world that Blair lives in, but if we cut back on the number of theatres we are operational in we wouldn't be spending the huge amounts we are on logistics. Not only are we paying for the upkeep of garrisons in the UK but we are pouring huge amounts of funding into places like Boz where the logistic effort keeping the soldiers out there fed, housed, equipped, moved, etc. This would also have the added bonus of aiding retention from the middle-ranking guys who get out because they spend all of their time stagging on in Boz rather than with their families, putting soldiers back in the UK where they can train and develop for promotion (how many soldiers have had their courses denied or postponed because of pressing operational need?) AND raise a bit of morale. The money saved from the logistic support (hiring private transport firms to ship and move thousands of tons of equipment doesn't come cheap as the DLO keep telling us) and the hiden savings from improved retention could then be offset towards keeping force levels the way they should be AND providing decent kit.

    I see the old red peaceniks of the Labour Party haven't lost their commie ways from their days in the protest-politics world of student "ban the bomb" demos.
  6. I spend almost all my time working with politicians and I can assure you that the practicalities of their actions are clearly second to the political and ideological statements they are making. There are no votes in defence but there are in health, schooling, housing, transport etc etc. For a politician cutting defence is an ideological commitment which will release money for the NHS etc. The fact that the army is being asked to do more and more with less and less is just rough luck as far as they're concerned.
    This is compounded by a clear and manifest failure of leadership in the upper echelons of all the Services as senior officers are unwilling to take a firm stand on behalf of their men and women. I don't know where this collective lack of moral fibre originates, but it's serious. The old excuse of "I can do more good by staying in than by resigning" just doesn't wash.
    If the additional commitments to Iraq are indeed threatening the very cohesion of the army then CGS should be penning his resignation letter right now. But I wouldn't hold your breath.
  7. answer simple lose a war taking loads of casualties in the process
    a messed up out of area air borne assault would be ideal crashed and burned hercules full of paras very photogenic :evil: .
    Or B when on when one those politicians come out on a photo
    opptunity get them embroiled in a fire fight and then say sorry cant get you out radios dont work . Till the armed forces fail in a dramatic way
    only the minimum will be spent as iron side says no votes for defence
    P.S. no dig at air borne forces intended just highest profile /risky misson
    i could think off my hat .slaughtering royal marines would work as well
    I guess if another unit got zapped the powers that be would just blame
    lack of training
  8. How does this manifest itself? All they can do is state their case surely?
    Or does there exist an atmosphere of fear of speaking your mind? To each other or the politicians? Your suggestion that there should be a resignation letter would suggest exactly that.

    As if anything the bosses say would stop Bliar in his tracks.
    Just a guess.. but like the rest of you they have to work with the scraps they're thrown...they are experienced soldiers themselves remember..not
    lying manipulative politicians.
  9. I think if you want evidence of this you need look no further than Dr David Kelly...speak your mind and be exposed, spuin, "hung out to dry", victimised, and briefed against.

    I hear what Ironside is saying about politicians, but it brings about 2 points: first if the Armed Forces as a demographic (and I'm incvluding ex-servicemen in this) got together and got political about defence issues like the Veterans Association does in the US (lobbying for pro-Defence decisions), and secondly the public were made more aware of the deficiencies servicemen and women have in their numbers and equipment and the consequences of this and overstretch then maybe the tide would turn. If people understood that tired and overstretched soldiers with insufficient amounts and quality of kit = bodybags then they may start to resist the political desire to prance around the world stage. While Defence might not be seen as a vote winner in lefty circles, foriegn affairs certainly is, and if the Govt wants to export itself the world over then it needs to put the military support into place, and that is the reality it neds to accept.

    As for the CDS/CGS, give them time to respond and see what happens. Of course we don't know what goes on behind the scenes in Main Bldg, but I can see this meeting some resistence. At least we can take comfort that they are not all spineless wonders (and it took an outgoing Naval CDS to say this!):

    Admiral Sir Michael Boyce link
  10. As always the powers that be will argue the toss and then probaly lose anyway.... and we the unwilling led by the unknowing will continue to do everything with nothing wherever we are sent!! Tour intervals will continue to become more frequent, and the suggestion of a Pads Patch in Banja Luka was tabled 2 years ago. With the drawdown of BFG continuing we need to send the troops somewhere, or is Blair seriously considering phase 4 of that wonderful redundancy plan?
  11. Hoon may go on about getting us 'new kit' in exchange for 'people' and that may wash with most members of the voting public, who, let's face it, are only concerned with issues which directly affect them, NHS, Schools, etc. But what he hasn't said and what will probably never be said by him or his cronies, is that 'new kit' doesn't 'patrol'. Living breathing, eating, farting, fighting soldiers do. And they also hold ground. Stealth helicopters etc, don't hold ground, nor does any computerised piece of 'Gucci', he may promise us. On the up side, 'Gucci' kit doesn't have a wife and two kids to explain why it is being deployed yet again, with no 18 month break in between (as promised a little while ago........or was that just in my unit?). But it will take several men to get it to where it's going, set it up and operate it. They won't do that without protection though. That's down to other human resources, not another 'Gucci' and those resources will be patrolling as part of that protection.

    The same man who 'patrols' needs supporting. I believe that the ratio may still be 3:1. This figure may be used as justification in cutting the logistic element of our forces, but I've yet to see a computer driving a DROPS truck, knocking up an egg banjo or helping move you to your area.

    I'm at a complete loss with these c*nts. As for the 'Staff'.......well, their pensions are safe and lets face amount of cuts in Defence spending will ever see them signing on.

    Now I may never make General (thanks for the support lads, but I think the writing is on the wall), but even I can see that people are going to start leaving shortly due to the amount of deployments they are now getting (Op TELIC 1 now getting ready to re deploy on Op TELIC 3 etc.). As numbers dwindle (and we're running out of TA because they've been f*cked about as well), those who are left, will bear the brunt of the forthcoming deployments which this f*cking Government will continually volunteer us for.

    I suppose we could look on the bright side though..........we might be deployed more frequently.......but at least we'll have 'Gucci' kit to take with us!

    Lets hope that the UN gets around to helping soon eh?
  12. MA,

    Agree totallywith what you are saying. The issue with the statements about the new kit is the fact that the Army was promised the exact same kit when SDR and the last round of cuts was taking place - there is bugger all new here.

    Also gucci kit requires batteries - what happens when they run out?? The improved kit will help things, but it should never be used as a replacement for having soldiers on the ground.

    The Government couldn't give a toss about what happens to the armed forces and would probably be happy to see them slaughtered in various parts of the world - especially if it can make them look big on the international stage and maybe get rid of a few of theose "Horrid forces types". Bastards the lot of them
  13. Anyone know when the last senior officer resigned over a matter of principle? I think it may have been as far back as Aden.

    There was a Brigadier a couple of years ago who quit over the homosexuality issue but lets face it, his departure didn't cause much of a ripple.

    Then there was the CDS and the Spanish senora and the RAF bloke with the outrageously expensive curtains but I suspect they resigned over the 'getting caught' principle.

    So come on chaps! Is there a precedent here?
  14. Why should a senior officer resign in protest?! Waste of all that experience!
    They've worked hard for many years in their careers just as all you guys have, and no doubt are doing their best to state the case for more funding from the government. Resignations of these men are not what's would no doubt be rewitten somehow as a personal weakness... the Government and media are rather good at arranging that. :twisted:

    Your bosses need to work together, in agreement and be united and back each other up completely even at the risk of their removal.
    They have to fight the armed forces corner strongly.
    THAT would have to be effective.
    It would require integrity and comradeship and courage mind...but looking at their CV's there should be plenty of that there.
    Come on bosses! Kick up a stink with the governement TOGETHER..and if one gets booted. ALL resign. You know it makes sense. :D

    Jake why don't you do a BBC news story on the dangers to this nation of the current underfunding of the army?
    It's true and it's newsworthy....ahh so that'll be a no then. :roll:

    (If I'm found in a field..i didn't do it!) :lol:
  15. Unfortunately a lot of their experience is in some ways out of date + most of the senior ranks in the MOD have forgotten what it is to be soldiers, sailors or airmen and are now, for better or worse politicians in their own right.

    As to them working together - this would be lovely to see, but due to interservice rivalry it would come a cropper at one level or another. For some resigning in protest would be the most noble and effective way of highlighting the underfunding, short falls in kit and man power that the forces are suffering. Sad, but true......

    As to the press getting on the case re kit and overstretch - they did for a while at the start of TELIC 1, but got bored with it as it wasn't sexy enough.....gits :evil: