Scottish regiments will not be saved

Discussion in 'Infantry' started by RCSignals, Dec 13, 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. 12 Dec - Sun. Herald - Scot Regiments not saved

    Scottish regiments will not be saved

    THE British Army will learn this week that emotional last-minute attempts to block plans to amalgamate Scotland’s regiments have failed.
    Defence secretary Geoff Hoon will announce immediately after Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday that a new Scottish super-regiment, to be named the Royal Regiment of Scotland, will be created.

    The super-regiment will comprise five battalions. To appease campaigners and to ease accusations that morale will suffer, battalions will be named after the old titles of the historic Scottish regiments, although the new regiment will have a common cap badge and identity.

    Hoon is expected to tell the Commons that the changes are being brought in to reflect changes in the world order and that new inter national security challenges have driven the need for Britain to adapt militarily.

    The changes have been pushed through by the army board’s executive committee despite reports that Prime Minister Tony Blair had wanted to keep the existing structure.

    It is understood that if Blair had pressed his point, many of the army’s senior officers, including chief of the general staff, General Sir Michael Jackson, would have resigned.

    The Sunday Herald has learned that senior army officers have expressed serious concerns at other aspects of Hoon’s announcement. They fear that a cut in the number of battalions will seriously reduce the armed forces’ ability meet its current obligations and meet any new threats.

    This view was echoed last night by retired general Lord Guthrie, who said the army was “dangerously small and over-committed”. The former chief of both general and defence staff said: “If you have too small an army you can’t react.”

    At a recent meeting in London, it is understood that senior officers had said that the reduction had been forced through by Treasury cutbacks and they were not in favour.

    Downing Street last night said it was “aware of what has been recommended” and that Number 10 would have no further involvement.
  2. Hang on just one cotton-picking minute.

    I thought the Celestial Eminence said Downing Street weren't involved at all,and this was a purely Army/ECAB process and decision?

    Can somone,somewhere,preferably someone who isn't that worried about his peerage/New Years Honour tell us the damn truth for a change?

    I must have accidentally taken an extra thick pill, but could someone, somewhere explain to me,how less soldiers to cover more theatres makes us more efficient and capable?

    Could someone please explain, exactly how this breathtaking feat of quantum physics is going to work?

    Can someone please take the time, to explain to Mr.Thicky here,just how a brazen defiance of the laws of logistics, Mathematics , Geo-politics and the unknown (X) Factor somehow means less = more.

    To the best of my knowledge, the last individual to successfully attempt this miraculous feat, ended up nailed to a cross for his pains.

    Have we got some really wonderful new whizzy Force-Multiplying kit, that we've not been told about? Is there something we're about to deploy, that can do the job of Four trained bayonet technicians?

    Disturbed minds want to know.


    Confused of Talibanistan Minor.
  4. NOPE!!

    It's got me too....... :?