One Army? - Fcuk Off!

Discussion in 'Army Reserve' started by MrTracey, Oct 11, 2009.

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. One Army Concept?

    Reserve of First Choice?

    Army - Regular AND Territorial?

    http://www.rusi.org/research/militarysciences/uk/commentary/ref:C4A4201DDDE238/

    http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/career_and_jobs/article6209989.ece
    see last para - recession proof?

    http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/PeopleInDefence/partTimeButFullTimeResponsibilityTheUksReserves.htm

    So? 'One Army' when it suits you, and not 'One Army' when it doesn't.

    Hypocrisy and self aggrandisement by the hierarchy of the Army of such monumental proportions, it beggars belief.
     
  2. as manning levels increase our need for reservists will no doubt naturally drop

    isnt that obvious?
     
  3. Someone's tired.
     
  4. Join the Regular Army then, Simples.
     
  5. Ah stop your whining. you only have to put up with it every Thursday night and two weekends a month.
     
  6. 'Did', not 'have'.
     
  7. What absolute b*llocks being posted here. I consider it entirely fair to be pretty seriously aggrieved by an organisation that dumps its "reserve of first choice" quite so callously. Not to mention celebrating the TA last year!

    For those, BiPolar, who mention manning levels-absolutely need may drop, but that doesn't mean you don't need a reserve force! Shaving off the odd regiment in the name of re-structuring can be a necessity, but shutting down the TA for 6 months?

    That said, we are yet to hear clear and official direction from CoC, so I'll wait out before making judgement..
     

  8. The Army has always depended on a reserve by some name or another.

    Before the 1908 Territorial force being raised there was the militia and Local volunteer corps.

    No Reserve no fresh men. Having just read all 17 pages of the RIP thread it would appear that last years celebrations are swiftly ignored by the money men.
     
  9. so you would prefer keeping the ta fully manned and paid and equipped? whereas I like the mothballing idea it frees up more kit and logistics for those who need it.
     
  10. If you truly believe that a single penny "saved" from closing down the TA for 6 months will be spent on the Regular Forces then you Sir, are a cünt of the first water.... (and a twát).
     
  11. I've already mentioned in the other thread that £20 million saved won't last a week in AFG.
     
  12. Now now gentlemen, don't feed the trolls :wink:
     
  13. Especially considering 19 million will go towards those on benefits and the failing NHS.
     
  14. Go and have a look at doctrine, current or otherwise, all operations, offensive, defensive, enabling or support should have a reserve and once that reserve is committed, you replace it. If you truely think that the £20M savings from putting the reserve on hold, will go to entirely support current ops, then you are sadly misguided, as well as misinformed. :x
     
  15. BP,

    That's not at all what I said, we were already on such reduced training as to make it laughable, now we risk losing the soldiers and unit cohesion that we had built up so effectively in the name of penny pinching. It will cost immeasurably more when they are needed once more. Certainly it isn't a case of if, but when. What's more soldiers aren't (evidently) just objects you can put into storage like so many Challengers or rifles. They are fit, keen young (and some not so young) men and women who nag me constantly about the possibility of getting on courses, of going on tours, of helping the unit.

    That is what you risk losing. That and the experience of many years service in the TA that Seniors will take with them when they get sick and tired of the bull.