New General - Poor start!

CGS designate

  • Public apology would be enough.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Resign now

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • What a very silly poll , posted by someone less than informed

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
#21
It's 'incumbent', not 'encumbent'; he was a four star in Kabul in early 2007; you wouldn't have seen him 'sticking his neck out for the troops' because you're not in the Army; and it may be childish but your original post deserved no better. Oh, and you still smell of wee and are talking shite.

Moreover, you're a halfwit, because what we don't need when we have good guys at the top is a bunch of has-beens asking stupid questions that suggest infighting that doesn't exist. Support for senior commanders who are doing a good job, whether called Dannat or Richards, would be more helpful, and make it less easy for politicians to divide and rule. Perhaps as a civilian you've forgoten the benefits of loyalty, upwards as well as down.

Don
 
#22
oldfart said:
Am I the only person that thinks the new CGS Lieutenant-General Sir David Richards is unworthy of his new post when his first action is to accuse his officers and men of defrauding the JPA system or is the principle of innocent before proven guilty no longer applicable in the British Army.

Contrast this wth General Sir Richard Dannatt's outspoken courage over the past few years when he has constantly challenged the politicians to give the Army a better deal.

Looks like the pendulum has swung back to the political toady!
C0ck post.
 
#23
oldfart said:
[quote="Donny"quote]

1. He's not 'the new CGS' and won't be until next summer. I think you'll find that's what "Designate" means.
2. He's not been a Lieutenant General for some time, certainly since he took up his current 4 star post (that means 'General'), as CinC LF. Indeed since February - my mistake.
3. How you can suggest someone with David Richard's recent operational experience is a 'political toady' is beyond me. I fail to see this - I don't recall him sticking his neck out for troops during his tour but I'd be fascinated to hear what you're refering to
4. I'm with PAW. Also, I think you smell of stale wee - do you think you might be suffering Alzheimers and talking out of your arse? Do you not think that's a little childish?

Don
The point was to contrast the present encumbent with the incoming particulalry in respect of the very different press coverage the two have attracted. In an intelligent manner, obviously beyond you. If you're serving I wish you well with your new (in August) boss.[/quote]

I will, having served under him previously. You just listen to the press like the rest of the civilian world :roll:
 
#24
I Think we have been spoiled with Gen Dannatt he has been a great leader both standing up for his troops with the politicians and leading his men in battle. People critisised him for not being media 'savvy' in light of this either the new man at the top is worse with the media or he will be bad news for the troops.

I would be a fool to think that there is no fraud at all but to infere that it is widespread is a slur on the good character of the soldiers who fight in Iraq and Afganistan. Gen Dannatt has worked hard to raise respect for soldiers in general and the new man wants to burst this in one crazy media statement.

Glad i'm leaving!!!!!!
 
#25
I'm not interested in trading childish insults or quibling over a spelling mistake.

I find it remarkable that more people are not offended by the implication (or the priorities demonstrated) of the "leaked" letter that substantial number of servicemen are deliberately defrauding their expense claims.

Yea you're right I'm a has been but in my very limited experience loyalty was founded on trust.
 
#26
oldfart said:
I'm not interested in trading childish insults or quibling over a spelling mistake.

I find it remarkable that more people are not offended by the implication (or the priorities demonstrated) of the "leaked" letter that substantial number of servicemen are deliberately defrauding their expense claims.

Yea you're right I'm a has been but in my very limited experience loyalty was founded on trust.
You may find it remarkable, and that's because you are out of touch with the Army. You don't speak for me, or for anyone else in the Army who hasn't asked you to, and you're doing us no favours. Don't kid yourself that we're grateful for your fearless post because most people who've replied so far seem to agree you're a knob.

Don
 
#27
verticalgyro said:
Exactly the same as the people who used to claim MMA for their leave when they visited their grandma in John O'Groats.
I got some strange looks before JPA and put in a claim for John O'Groats. :)
 
#28
"Out of touch with the Army"?

With a son serving overseas and personal daily contact with servicemen I don't think so. However like most of your responses; based on a lack of knowledge. You don't know me or my service record yet you choose to make assumptions and draw conclusions.

"Don't speak for you or others"? Never did I claim to so not sure why you're taking this line of attack.

Do you realistically want a CGS who is more interested in "petty pilfering of office supplies" that getting the FRES programme sorted out, sorting out the debacle that is the Bowman conversion programme, getting the death trap that Snatch is out of theatre and replaced with something safer, stemming the flood of contractorisation and the down skilling of soldiers, sorting the accommodation.

I'd rather my generals were focussing on something other than a mileage claim that was "sharp practice".
 
#29
oldfart said:
I'm not interested in trading childish insults or quibling over a spelling mistake.

I find it remarkable that more people are not offended by the implication (or the priorities demonstrated) of the "leaked" letter that substantial number of servicemen are deliberately defrauding their expense claims.

Yea you're right I'm a has been but in my very limited experience loyalty was founded on trust.
I hope that wasn't directed at me oldfart.

All I have said I have served with the bloke, and you would rather run a poll than ask opinions of people who may have served with him.
 
#30
oldfart said:
I'm not interested in trading childish insults or quibling over a spelling mistake.
You're in the wrong place then mate.
 
#31
heidtheba said:
I hope that wasn't directed at me oldfart.

All I have said I have served with the bloke, and you would rather run a poll than ask opinions of people who may have served with him.
Absolutely not. I would be interested (and respect) you opinion if you've served with him.

Is he just a victim of the media? Is he going to look out for interests of the Army or his own career? There's little doubt that current CGS has blown his chance at top job given some of his public statements. Will his successor take such risks? Is he a leader or an adminstrator?
 
#32
What a load of bollocks. If people are defrauding the system that's an issue that Gen Richards should point out in an internal memo. What are you saying? That people in the army are beyond criticism?
 
#33
oldfart said:
heidtheba said:
I hope that wasn't directed at me oldfart.

All I have said I have served with the bloke, and you would rather run a poll than ask opinions of people who may have served with him.
Absolutely not. I would be interested (and respect) you opinion if you've served with him.

Is he just a victim of the media? Is he going to look out for interests of the Army or his own career? There's little doubt that current CGS has blown his chance at top job given some of his public statements. Will his successor take such risks? Is he a leader or an adminstrator?
Again, in the post he so recently filled, I dont think the question dignifies an answer.

And my bold, (I will cut and paste) I dont think the question dignifies an answer.
 
#34
Temple said:
What a load of balls. If people are defrauding the system that's an issue that Gen Richards should point out in an internal memo. What are you saying? That people in the army are beyond criticism?
Not at all but a statement like "I am becoming concerned over the prevalence of fraudulent behaviour as well as what I can at best describe as 'sharp practice' and at worst dishonesty."

Implies that it is widespread and what I am saying is there are surely higher priorities for CinC Land and ultimately CGS to be concerned with. Expenses are an issue for an RO1 tucked away in a corner of Land not the boss.
 
#36
oldfart said:
"Out of touch with the Army"?

With a son serving overseas and personal daily contact with servicemen I don't think so. However like most of your responses; based on a lack of knowledge. You don't know me or my service record yet you choose to make assumptions and draw conclusions.

"Don't speak for you or others"? Never did I claim to so not sure why you're taking this line of attack.

Do you realistically want a CGS who is more interested in "petty pilfering of office supplies" that getting the FRES programme sorted out, sorting out the debacle that is the Bowman conversion programme, getting the death trap that Snatch is out of theatre and replaced with something safer, stemming the flood of contractorisation and the down skilling of soldiers, sorting the accommodation.

I'd rather my generals were focussing on something other than a mileage claim that was "sharp practice".
Not only do I not know you or your service record (just as you have no idea of mine), but I actually don't care: I am happy to be gratuitously offensive to anyone, retired officers and warrant officers included, who writes crap. That applies particularly when the writing is about people I believe are doing as good a job as they can to put right some of the Army's legacy from the previous generation (which, I guess, would be yours: jolly well done). And accusing me of making assumptions and drawing conclusions about you is just a tad rich given your first post and the assumptions and conclusions that are implicit within it.

I can see what Gen David Richards is doing for the Army, even if you can't or won't. How, exactly, are you helping me and others who are in today's Army by whining and posturing about how 'in-touch' with us you are, in an internet forum?

Love to chat more but I'm off to bed. Some of us have to fight the Queen's enemies tomorrow.

Don
 
#37
Would this be General Sir David Richards, and would this be something written well over a year ago in another post and which has only now been leaked?
Nice try Jim30

The Sunday Times article makes clear that the letter was written last week, as indeed does the date on the actual letter, and the most depressing thing about this whole debate is that there are so many of you who seem to think it is OK to defraud the system. His letter makes clear that the random checks have turned up far too much fiddling. As for him writing the letter, it is called discipline and enforcing it in a way that uses good management skills is as he says "the stuff of command".

You can read the letter from a link to the Sunday Times piece here:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article5213612.ece

And given some of the comments here, some of you need to. He did not for instance say, as per western's claim, that it is

Even sadder that he implies that it would be rare for an officer to make such a claim.
As you will see from the letter western and indeed from the Sunday Times piece that is very far from what he said.

As for Dannatt, fine words butter no parsnips. If he has his way, there will continue to be far too few troops in Afghanistan to do the job, further damaging the British Army's reputation. Richards on the other hand has made his views clear.
 
#38
As a soldier from the 70's, 80's and 90's I like many others attended loads of quite lengthy career courses. I'm thinking Brecon, Warminster, Lulworth etc. Now I would normally just have a travel warrant or MMA for the journey at the start of the course and the journey at the end. That I think was probably about the size of my claim.

My question is: With the advent of JPA are there other allowances being claimed by soldiers, that would have been available to me, that I probably did not know about/or would have received short shrift If I had tried to claim them.

I suspect missed meals and stuff like that would have been a regular occurrence. multiply that by a battalion of 600 men, and the bill rises.

He is of course absolutely right to enforce discipline, but if more soldiers are now rightfully claiming what they are entitled too, its obvious that the amount of fraudulent claims will also increase.

The bottom line is, the money spiders are unhappy that the little pot of cash available for claims and previously underspent every financial year, is now being used by those who really do need it.
 
#39
Two words Kingo's and JPA.

Now that is a licence for a cashpoint.

Yes I am HR administrator. Fcuk being the FSA there.
 
#40
Over reaction to a minor issue..

This was an internal memo ffs, you can bet just about every General has called his command's integrity into question privately, not least of all the Iron Duke himself, not like the good General has called the british army of today "the scum of the earth".. They would be naive as feck not to.

The points raised in this thread about claiming being easier are valid ones, but abusing there is a point.. all he was trying to do is minimise abuse of the system, I just can't see the problem with that.

This is just a good example of how much the press can make a story out of a ball-achingly boring and totally inconclusive story.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top