TA to expel soldiers who won’t go to war - Sunday Times

Should those who refuse to go on ops be chucked out?

  • Yes

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No there will always be a need for 'Non Operational' TA Soldiers

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0

the_boy_syrup

LE
Book Reviewer
#1
The Territorial Army is to force out thousands of weekend warriors who refuse to go to war. Defence chiefs want to turn the TA into a fully fledged fighting force of about 15,000 soldiers.

Although the target strength requirement of the TA is 42,000, the actual numbers are much lower at about 35,000 and it is haemorrhaging soldiers.

Data from a survey being compiled by King’s College London will be used to work out which members should go.

The Ministry of Defence (MoD) wants to get rid of what it sees as weekend warriors happy to wear the uniform but unwilling to fight, a Whitehall source said.

“The most worrying thing about the planned cuts to the TA is that a lot of those who have been prepared to serve in Iraq or Afghanistan are the ones who are leaving,” a source said.

“They are coming home and saying, ‘That’s it. I’ve done my bit, I’m off’. They are precisely the ones we want to keep.”

The MoD will this week announce the review of all four reserve forces: the TA, the Royal Navy Reserve, the Royal Auxiliary Air Force and the Royal Marines Reserve. A spokesman said it would focus on operations but denied that TA soldiers would be dismissed simply because they would not go to war. Some would still be required for training.

Of the 850 reservists serving on operations abroad, approximately 700 are in the TA, the highest number on overseas operations since the Korean war of the early 1950s. About 3,500 TA members employed in training will not be hit by the cull

A good idea?
If you have to commit to Ops won't the TA die a death anyway?
Is on Op enough? by the time you get your family and work life back together after 6 months away plus training etc could you then commit to a second spell away?

Link
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3559757.ece
 
#2
well if your asked again and again to deploy guess get fucked off is only right. but how many ops is enough ?
unlike the national guard the only thing that retans the ta is personal intrest .Much as I enjoyed being moblised afterwards was a bit shit and not realy anxious to repeat that experince particularly as I cant get any enthuaism for the ops we are going on . :oops: .
If the brown envelope arrived I'd go and the wife would put up with it,but
volunter and I probably wouldn't have a family to come home to.
 
#3
Where do you draw the line ? When my unit was mobilised for a tour it became a composite unit, with part of another which then formed a new unit. Many were disappointed as they could not go. What happens if you get mobilised and fail the medical ? This would have ben an easy option at Chilwell. What about people who join just after the unit has been mobilised with no intention of going, they will not be discovered until the next tour. What about those who join with the intention of going but their personal circumstances change in the meantime ?
 
#4
Part of me thinks this is a good idea there's a lot of dead wood bounty hunter's and people I wouldn't trust with a cap gun in my unit.
However there are quality soldiers who for personal and work reasons cannot mobilise.

It would be a shame to loose them. There are far less members of the TA than the figures show. People who don't attend are kept on strength for the man training day budget
 
#5
the_boy_syrup said:
About 3,500 TA members employed in training will not be hit by the cull
Woopee do.

Yesterday mini polar got a new bike, I bought a camping fridge and then watched Rugby Union. Thinking about watching Leeds Rhino's play Bradford Bulls this week.

Erm, whats this to do with the TA.......... nowt.

Time gentlemen, Time gentlemen, please.
 
#7
As long as the TA soldier turn up for drill nights, weekends and the odd national emergency, then they should be kept.

Those who volunteer to deploy are diamonds, those who are forced are just as good.

If a unit knows there is a soldier only their to earn some pin money and look good in a green suit, then I would suggest they bin them.

Perhaps an annual filter on the CRs? Going from attendance and CR grade. The question should be, "does this soldier put anything in?"

It is all very well saying, well he hasn't,wont,can't deploy. But what if he has a sick kid or similar. A tour away for the TA is a bit step, and the British TA is not as well adapted to such actions as the USNG.

On the otherhand, he may not have deployed. But he has supported all the weekend training camps, serviced vehicles, taught lessons, picked up the work of the guy above him aswell as to the side of him, and that has allowed the TA unit to deploy a group of augmentees.

He wont win medals, he wont win acolades, but he has done the job and contributed to the fighting capability of the Army.
 
#8
chocolate_frog said:
As long as the TA soldier turn up for drill nights, weekends and the odd national emergency, then they should be kept.
But that won't be the case will it, if the figures are correct we are facing a 66% reduction. If we assume that will effect all ranks(/slots) equally, a large number of SNCO's will be leaving the TA (as more posts in this group are filled with regular attenders).

Suppose its time to start speculating on who gets culled?? Not the AMS, nor the Infantry, not the Regional Bde Close Support Signal Squadrons.
 
#9
A cynic might say that the Establishment figures are being lowered to match the actual numbers of TA soldiers actually serving but our Government wouldn't do a thing like that, would it?
 

OldSnowy

LE
Moderator
Book Reviewer
#10
Having been pretty closely involved in all of this, I can safely say - the STimes story is utter bollox. There is a review coming, that's been on the cards for ages, but as for kicking out those who won't mobilise? What will happen to the Homeland Defence bit, then? It would disappear - and that's an area they're looking to expand!
 
#11
papamike_9 said:
Part of me thinks this is a good idea there's a lot of dead wood bounty hunter's and people I wouldn't trust with a cap gun in my unit.
However there are quality soldiers who for personal and work reasons cannot mobilise.

It would be a shame to loose them. There are far less members of the TA than the figures show. People who don't attend are kept on strength for the man training day budget
I think anyone who is in,or has been in the TA knows exactly the sort of wasters who should be culled
 
#12
Detmold_Drunk said:
papamike_9 said:
Part of me thinks this is a good idea there's a lot of dead wood bounty hunter's and people I wouldn't trust with a cap gun in my unit.
However there are quality soldiers who for personal and work reasons cannot mobilise.

It would be a shame to loose them. There are far less members of the TA than the figures show. People who don't attend are kept on strength for the man training day budget
I think anyone who is in,or has been in the TA knows exactly the sort of wasters who should be culled
Well said that man !
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
#13
blobmeister said:
It's the same as refusing to soldier for us, we normally serve a custodial sentence and hoofed out. KICK THE SHITEBAGS OUT!!
I'm sorry but until they do it properly those that are willing to go should be allowed and if the TA has any interest in keeping them afterwards should make the tours more rewarding and interesting. Why volunteer to stag on in a sangar as an NCO or an Ops room as a SNCO because the unit you are with thinks 10 years in the TA isnt enough. Stop the digging and slagging and use those that volunteer properly ie in the roles thay have trained for and they will see some benefit for all those thursday evenings in green baggy skin.
If the crap hit the fan properly every man and his dog even us old med discharge lads would turn up some of us well armed already but to go on princess tony's adventures?
I think not! :x
 
#14
ugly said:
blobmeister said:
It's the same as refusing to soldier for us, we normally serve a custodial sentence and hoofed out. KICK THE SHITEBAGS OUT!!
I'm sorry but until they do it properly those that are willing to go should be allowed and if the TA has any interest in keeping them afterwards should make the tours more rewarding and interesting. Why volunteer to stag on in a sangar as an NCO or an Ops room as a SNCO because the unit you are with thinks 10 years in the TA isnt enough. Stop the digging and slagging and use those that volunteer properly ie in the roles thay have trained for and they will see some benefit for all those thursday evenings in green baggy skin.
If the crap hit the fan properly every man and his dog even us old med discharge lads would turn up some of us well armed already but to go on princess tony's adventures?
I think not! :x

What he said, except for the well armed bit(obviously i don't have anything illegally kept since i left )
 
#15
Hand over some jobs to the TA?

Cyprus, Falklands?

There have been 3 (IIRC) Sqns sent to Bosnia who were entirely TA units (well close enough for government work :p ). And they all did very well.

I always wondered why they didn't make the 97 or 98 (Bosnia) Sqn a permanent fixture on the R Sigs Orbat and just fill it with TA (and the odd Reg) augmentees. Certainly made sense to me, no messy handovers, etc.
 
#16
I was attached to 1A&SH in Bosnia, they had a TA bunch with them and what a bunch they turned out to be..how many RTU'd? Argylls won't be doing that again!!
 
#17
This is a pointless thread in light of
'Intelligent mobilisation'
Now correct me if i'm wrong , but only those troops fit for requirement are 'allowed' to 'volunteer' for mobilisation?

Surely on any unit there will be individuals who (through no fault of their own) fall outside current/operational requirements?
Think on, how many units have ration assassins on strength who probably are never called to augment the Reg units?
Should the Govt/MOD kick them out for not going on op tours?
Bloody poor if they did
It'd make training weekends that much more cr@p and lose the TA valuable trained soldiers also.
imho
 
#18
chocolate_frog said:
As long as the TA soldier turn up for drill nights, weekends and the odd national emergency, then they should be kept.

Those who volunteer to deploy are diamonds, those who are forced are just as good.

If a unit knows there is a soldier only their to earn some pin money and look good in a green suit, then I would suggest they bin them.

Perhaps an annual filter on the CRs? Going from attendance and CR grade. The question should be, "does this soldier put anything in?"

It is all very well saying, well he hasn't,wont,can't deploy. But what if he has a sick kid or similar. A tour away for the TA is a bit step, and the British TA is not as well adapted to such actions as the USNG.

On the otherhand, he may not have deployed. But he has supported all the weekend training camps, serviced vehicles, taught lessons, picked up the work of the guy above him aswell as to the side of him, and that has allowed the TA unit to deploy a group of augmentees.

He wont win medals, he wont win acolades, but he has done the job and contributed to the fighting capability of the Army.
Completely agree.

Let's not forget the role of the TA as stated above.

Homeland defence and disaster relief. Bolstering regular forces abraod is not the aim of the TA and threatening to kick someone out because he/she is not willing to sacrifice their civilian carrer / marriage is absolute nonsense.

Quite simply most reservists are not in a convenenient position to deploy but then again they did not walk into the recruiting office like we did and say 'I pledge everything to the Queen' (shortened somewhat).

Punishing the TA because regular recruitment is at rock bottom will produce even less TA at a time when we need them most.
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
#19
blobmeister said:
I was attached to 1A&SH in Bosnia, they had a TA bunch with them and what a bunch they turned out to be..how many RTU'd? Argylls won't be doing that again!!
Bosnia even at its height was still a different game when held up against the sandpits. RTU is a luxury that they probably wouldnt have now and was it a wholesale mobilisation of an attached company?
If so then the blame lies with the pre tour training which cant be scrimped on. I was shocked on Joining the TA after being a reg and seeing lads barely out of basic doing senior soldier skills courses when they could even march properly. Not saying that drill is the be all and end all of army life but the basic training is very basic and units should be training these chaps up before unleashing them on the Regular Army who dont need to teach a bloke how to fill in a range card or put out arc markers for a six month tour!
Perhaps the TA needs to be 6 weeks of training in one hit like the Aussies seem to manage!
 
#20
chocolate_frog said:
Hand over some jobs to the TA?

Cyprus, Falklands?

There have been 3 (IIRC) Sqns sent to Bosnia who were entirely TA units (well close enough for government work :p ). And they all did very well.

I always wondered why they didn't make the 97 or 98 (Bosnia) Sqn a permanent fixture on the R Sigs Orbat and just fill it with TA (and the odd Reg) augmentees. Certainly made sense to me, no messy handovers, etc.

How is giving Cyprus and the Falklands to the TA going to improve things ?

TA soldiers don't do tours becuase of time away not how hot it is, I will tell for a fact if I was compulsary mobilised I would want to be in a FOB in the Afgan, not sat on a runway in Stanley and I am possitive 99% of other TA tyes would agree. Its like the Cyprus sunshine tour idea with the TA, nice idea but again if I have to drag my body away from my family, take the loss in busniess and possibly put my mortage in peril I would rather do it on a two way range than a topless beach





Haaaang on did I say that right
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top