Not over stretched just understaffed - more spin

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by machiavelli, Dec 13, 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. R4 this morning.
    Apparently we are not overstretched but merely understaffed. What a great piece of Bliar spin.

    Is it me or are the MOD sounding more and more like the US DOD as they bury their head in the sand over more and more unfavourable reports.

    The line from MOD was that commanders on the ground are not complaining about the lack of troops. That must show a callous disregard for real politik. Could you imagine a CO or Bde Commander turning around and saying "i'm afraid we cannot deploy due to lack of manpower". - Never as the higher you go the more you are concerned about your career - the less likely you are to rock the boat.

    Anyway i'm glad because understaffing is so much easier to deal with than overstretch. (Sorry its early i have had no coffee and the sarcasm chip just started)
  2. I heard it too, but to be fair as the Army is now smaller than any time since 1850 or so (with no Empire troops to draw on either) if say another 10 battalions were added and retention improved by pay parity with the Police and Fire service, stretch would be slackened somewhat.
  3. Didn't one of the factors that the pay review body take into account used to be the comparison with civvy wages for the job done? That must have gone out of the window years ago as there is no way army trades pay as much as their civvy equivilent in most cases.
  4. I think the new formula they use is factoring in 'hidden benefits' i.e. a office drone in some Gordon Brown created non job will take home say 30k of which he spends approx 16k maintaining a secret life as a Walt / computer game hero or 'town hard man'.

    Your average Tom draws down considerable less BUT does have built in opportunities to look 'ally', take 'warry' snaps of himself and his mates etc thus his real income is equal if not superior to the standard issue office Walt.

    Plus the Tom can opt for a genuine thousand yard stare and an increasingly fashionable range of mental and physical ailments.
  5. Nice bit of orwellian doublespeak going on here.

    "Overstretched" is a term that's normally applied to the Armed Forces, (Army in particular), and generates concern in the electorate. Conjures up all sorts of unpleasant images of a Thinning Red Line, and we can't have that, can we?

    "Understaffed" is a civvy term that most people subconsciously equate with something like: "Geoff in accounts is off sick, so the account department is understaffed". It means that the accounts department might have to work a bit harder for a little while, but it's not really that serious.

    I'll bet there's an HMG memo been produced recently telling everybody to use the new terminology. :evil: Exactly the same attitude that resulted in the infamous "Good day to bury Bad News" memo. :x

    F%&$£*g B>:{&Uds!
  6. cpunk

    cpunk LE Moderator

    Strange that... maybe it's because units on ops are being brought up to strength by taking people out of units which are supposedly in their training cycle, and by TA mobilisees? So everything's alright then.
  7. Maybe i'm just too cynical but surely the British Public is not that guillible to fall for the "rebranding" policy.

    CM your comment about a "good day to release bad news" has made me think. Whats going on in Ipswich is terrible but the suspicious among us might wonder why this report has been released this week !!!
  8. The conclusions of a 2005 report into the UK's ability to respond to terrorist incidents in the UK conducted by Southampton and St Andrews Universities:

    The Role of the UK Armed Forces

    a. The government should desist from making cutbacks in the armed forces, particularly in the infantry, which play such a vital role in counter-terrorism and counter-insurgency operations. We have concluded, on the basis of overwhelming evidence, that our armed forces are already facing severe overstretch. Moreover, further cutbacks would have serious implications for our ability to respond to a major emergency at home if our forces are filling gaps elsewhere.
  9. I hope not mate, but you can bet that's the real reason for the choice of words. If there's one thing Neue Arbeit think they're good at, it's manipulating the perceptions of the public.
  10. The so called "cycle" has never really existed. The cylce now is PDT, Pre tour leave, OPs, R&R, Ops, Post tour leave, PDT!

    Is Mobilisees a word? :D :D If it is it's a good one :wink:
  11. Well the press is very much on side on this matter, daily Neu Arbeit drones are made to look foolish, incompetant and corrupt, I doubt if the media will let up.
  12. ...crossing fingers now...

    I wonder what the next bit of doublespeak will be?

    "Permanent Sick Leave" instead of Medical Discharge.

    "Industrial Accident" instead of Shot by the Enemy.

    "High Staff Turnover" instead of Recruitment and Retention problems.

    "Competition" instead of "Enemy"

    Any more for any more?
  13. The JPA system cannot deal with the PVR rate in the last few weeks. The surge in voluntary outflow will not start hitting hard for another year to 18 months. The denial of overstretch from MoD, Air Marshals and Generals has a limited shelf life. In a matter of months it will be clear to everyone that UK Armed Forces are in crisis. No amount of revisionism by the likes of Jackson and no amount of trendy Liabour speak will be able to deny that we cannot continue fighting 2 medium scale wars. Those Chiefs of Staff involved in the original decision making should be expunged along with their political masters for firstly creating this whole situation and secondly for continuing to deny it.
  14. spike7451

    spike7451 RIP

    From todays Daily Express;

    Forces 'can cope with commitments'

    Defence officials have insisted that Britain's armed forces could cope with their commitments after a committee of MPs warned about the risks of undermanning.

    With major deployments in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Balkans, and forces working in a total of 28 countries, the services are operating "in insufficient numbers and without all the equipment they need", said the House of Commons Defence Committee.

    In a report published on Wednesday, the committee stopped short of branding the armed forces "overstretched", but warned that the level of commitments was impacting on morale, training and readiness to deploy on new missions.

    The Chief of General Staff, General Sir Richard Dannatt, was "reflecting a view widely held in the armed services" when he said that the military covenant between service personnel and the Government could be undermined if current levels of commitment were maintained, the committee said.

    The report - looking at the Ministry of Defence's Annual Report for 2005-06 - also called on the MoD to produce evidence to support its assessment that it is "on course" to achieve objectives in Iraq and Afghanistan. The MoD has declined to release its analysis for security reasons.

    The committee noted that more than one in five - 20.2% - of regular forces are now undertaking operations or military tasks, up from 18% in 2005.

    All three services are breaching "harmony" guidelines designed to ensure personnel get recuperation and training time in between active deployments.

    The MoD's own report acknowledged that the current level of deployments had impacted on its ability to provide training, with 14% of planned exercises cancelled in 2005-06.

    "Whether UK armed forces are stretched or overstretched is a matter for continued debate," the MPs said in their report. "What is certain is that they are operating in challenging conditions in insufficient numbers and without all the equipment they need.

    But the MoD said that despite the pressure of operations, the military could cope. "The MoD is keenly aware of the burdens which operations place on our people and, although the current level of operational activity is higher than planned, it is sustainable," the statement said.

  15. well governments now just see the Military as an cash reassignment fund, because some morally the military is questionable to some, i.e it causes arguements, they think they can get away with it. You guys provide security to our buissness who make more because of you. The military should then have its budget increased proportionally to the protection you provide and then you protect our buissness better and our buissness makes even more. It's not a defence force, is a means of protecting power against people with conflicting interests and security to our own interests and the sooner parliament realises this the better. We need the military to maintain our position we can no longer rely on the US for support, the war on terror is the war that will end their dominance and the chinese will take over, we need to make preparations to maintain our position and stop the gradual downfall of british prominance, its probably
    now or never and we must rise to the challenge.

    im not a nationalist, i like most people, i just want my country to survive as a powerfull nation if not in the top spot