Proposal to axe four battalions triggers internal fight in A

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by MrPVRd, Nov 8, 2004.

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. Times Monday

     
  2. Another kick in the teeth for the BW after losing 3 of their guys :evil:
     
  3. Find this odd, just over 10 years ago the TA element of the regiment had enough coys to form a 3 TA Bn (3WFR - 7 coys + HQ and 4 WFR 5/6 coys + HQ). Normally the number of TA bn's was the same as the number of regular bns, so doesn't this indicate that the WFRs is a large county regt?

    Also I remember it being hard to get into to reg bn (many had to join Staffs or Cheshires), so why has it changed? The TA and regs may have been well manned because of the miners strike. Also the LI recruit in Herefordshire even thou WFR is the county regt (succesor to 36 Foot)
     
  4. I thought historically , RGJ had always had a sizeable Commonwealth contingent , which is probably why they remain unaffected?

    Is there any mention of Regiments that are well manned getting another Coy or Five? :D
     
  5. PTP, Never lose sight of the fact that, despite the window-dressing, this is Treasury-driven and being applied to show cuts in manpower costs. Even the arms'-plot argument is smoke and mirrors. Warrior battalions already spend five or six years in one location - tours aside.

    The chance of anyone getting an extra company's about the same as that of Yasser Teatowel miraculously coming back to life. :D
     
  6. Claymore you trying to say that Yasser "Its my round" Arafat is really "dead" and not "stable" as the French would have us all believe. Shame on you Sir.
     
  7. Far be it from me to claim Brigadier Jamie is speaking S**te, but how did the highlanders get into the hit list as they are the strongest numerical Battalion in Scotlandbar none

    Sorry to rant, just emerged from hibernation and noticed it.
     
  8. It is puzzling as to why the Highlanders are under threat. RGJ is unlikely to be affected, as they have 2 Regular Bns already, as do the LI, PWRR etc.
    The crying shame as I see it here is that the poor old RGBW (or M4 Corridoor Fusilliers - whichever you choose) which is already a composite of three regiments in its own right, is about to become amalgamated again.
    RGBWWHF (RoyalGloucesterBerkshireWiltshireWelshHighlandFusilliers) anyone?
     
  9. Why must these regiments be amalgamated into these huge souless four or five battalion monstrosities? Have these ever been regiments that big except during a major war? If they want multi- battalion regiments wouldn't it be more flexible to form closely related pairs of single battalion regiments into one two battalion regiment, retaining the individual identities but combining the admin and allowing free movement two.
    The whole thing seems to be geared to produce the biggest outcry about the amalgamations so that the really important factor, the de facto cuts is hidden. Added to this it always appears that after a round of cuts recruitment actually drops so that the new formations are just as undermanned as the pre-cut regiments.
    It also occurs to me that even if the battalions in thse new regiments remain at fixed locations the personnel are going to have to move round on a regular basis or they will become stagnant. Foreign deployments would become full of those cast into outer darkness while home battalions are full of "trusties" . So if the people will still have to move they will be disrupted as regularly as they are now, won't they?
     
  10. :cry: :wink: :D