Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by msr, Sep 1, 2004.
The heart of the site is the forum area, including:
The thread about re-vamping the TA is being discussed.
Thanks MSR, listening in now
Now trying to get through , but the lines are jammed
I don't think the right point came across in the show. Jeremy Vine and some of the callers seemed to think that Reservists can say no when called up, and that that is what was happening. As far as I am aware, about 95% of people go without complaining.
Whereas, the problem that the Govt (or at least this "Senior Officer") are putting across is that they are expecting serving TA soldiers to volunteer for service abroad, ie Iraq, as part of their normal time in the TA without calling them up.
Programme just came back as fatally skewed
Especially with the comment on the first reply "I'm at university, and all I can see of the TA here, is a uniformed drinking club that get muddy at weekends"
Well that fcuked it.
Mind you "Bob" from Manchester got some good fire down, but didn't talk about what happens to the self employed and contractors sacrificing their livelihoods in some cases to serve in Iraq.
Then they went straight to Wayne fcuking Rooney , with some tit bawling it was the worst thing to happen since the assasination of JFK.
FFS GET A LIFE YOU CLOWN.
Their discussion board is even more skewed - opening line "out of 41,000 TA soldiers, 32,000 have refused to be deployed abroad"
i listened to the debate on the radio and as a serving soldier who has worked with TA and reservists recently on operations all i will say is thank you for the support. If there are any in your number however(and i dont think there are from what i have seen) who think you are the last line for an invasion i do think they should hand there kit in. In my mind you are a part time force to aid the full time army. You are getting used a hell of a lot more these days and there are problems that should be addressed with the full time army but when all said and done we are alll the same army.
That is utter crap. No one from my regiment refused to go when the brown envelope thudded on the doormat. I suppose it makes great headlines though.
I had a great time on Telic 2 - glad I went and met some cracking people Regular and TA. I'd gladly serve with any of them again and I hope they would with me
That line about 32,000 out of 41,000 guys refusing is obviously wrong, so why are they being allowed to say it.
It puts the TA in a bad light and might affect recruiting. Am I being naive when I ask why the government don't do anything about it?
It nevers ceases to amaze me just how BLOODY LAZY journalists are. I have posted a reply in that BBC forum (under another name, as some damned impostor has already pinched my moniker) which corrects that completely bogus figure USING INFO PUBLICLY AVAILABLE BY GOOGLING.
Such lack of professionalism would get me sacked from both my civvie and my weekend warrior jobs. Makes me so mad! Grrrr. Roar! Woof. Woof.
Just waiting to see if the moderators will let it appear. I have tried correcting BBC mistakes before and my posts have not been allowed through, even though I held back from slagging their lazy journos off.
Maybe the figures you found on google were not sensational enough for the BBC? or maybe they were just too much like the truth?
Thinking hard about it, I don't personally know anybody who appealed against their call-up (of course, it does happen for completely legitimate reasons), though I do know of several whose employers - including, ironically, the MOD - successfully appealed, which is a completely different kettle of fish. This example of slack, lazy journalism really should be corrected: can I suggest some concerted emailing/letter-writing to the BBC and other news media so that they realise they are spouting shite.
I used to hound them day and night ovet that Irish Prpogandist for the PLO 'Hurler' Guerin. She practically carried an AK for a microphone!!
Well Koolkullin has certainly corrected the false impression given by 'Senior army officer' well done but not overdone.
I think we'd have to go back to the 'Ever Readies' in the 60's to find such wholesale call up of reserves as has happened under these pratts. I believe Ever Readies had quite different terms of engagement. It was probably too expensive which is why the concept was culled.
What everyone is missing here is that the country shouldn't have to call up so many reserves to fight what is essentially a police action. The regular army should be large enough to do it with maybe some specialised reserve assistance, loggies, translators, pr people etc. Alternatively, we should keep our noses out.
Perhaps 'Senior army officer' would like to contribute to the debate on Arrse? Then we could see his credentials for making such an offhand and insulting comment. Probably a retired Colonel in the 42nd Beancounting Quills sat in the cellar of the Old War Office building.
Just read some of the idiotic posts made on that thread after mine, though. Seems like there is little point in educating the masses if they already have a view fed to them by the BBC.
Weeeeeell, I dunno how reliable they really are. After all, they're taken from the House of Commons Defence Select Committee report and an interview with Gen Sir Mike Jackson!
Separate names with a comma.