"The armed forces are stretched, but not overstretched"

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by visitingrock, Aug 10, 2006.

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. Stolen from E-Goat (thanks Shiney Arse). Thought I would post it on here as no one seems to have picked up on it yet.

    A short news bite between the breaking news of a terrorist plot being discovered etc etc:

    Web Page Name

    In response to a Joint Defence Committe statement that reported that our troops in the Middle East and desperately under equiped, our illustrious Defence Secretary is quoting across the news channels that "the armed forces are stretched, but not overstretched". What is there a difference?.

    I accept that there are times on operations when we are going to work unbelivebly long hours, sometimes to the point of collapse, as that is the nature of warfare. However, at what point did working your arse off for 6 months non-stop, with crap outdated eqiupment that all leads to increased stress on familiy life and stability become the accepted norm?

    To quote Shiney Arse on E-Goat (because I am too lazy to reword it!)

  2. Just think how much these tits get paid to come up with a statement of the obvious.
  3. I note in today's news they have decided the old Saxon is no good for Ops as if they put extra armour on it ti topples over.

    Solution? Dig out the old 432 series and send them out again. The last one rolled off the conveyor belt in 1971 so the youngest in service is 35 years old.

    When are they going to give the guys decent kit?

    Probably when Nelson gets his eye back........ :roll:
  4. I saw this too on teletext...

    And was thinking what a bugger the DS was. Of course the army is never overstretched, 'coz it's British and it'll fight and fight and fight with nothing but its bare hands 'till it colapses... but never admit defeat. 'Can Do' is what makes it a great army, but bugger me... it's losing too many of its best men to civie street because you can't keep sending them on non-stop tours.

    Send the DS to Iraq for 6 months, then Afganistan with 2 weeks notice, then the Falklands... and then ask him or his wife if he feels overstretched... or just a little stretched. Or better still just put him on the rack instead.

  5. No no no! The impending deployment of the all new FV430 vehicle fleet seems to have been confused with those awful rattly tincans on tracks that we all hated. Nothing could be further from the TRUTH*. Instead, the all new FV430s will be amazingly powerful, well armed and armoured battlefield platforms which will take the place of FRES and will eventually replace Challenger 2, Warrior, CVR(T), SNATCH, Apache, Chinook and Tornado. I foresee a bright new dawn...

    *Truth TM, an MOD supplied alternate reality.
  6. You can bugger off!!
  7. This does seem to be the solution of choice for a few forces throughout the world, at the moment there is a firm over here in Germany working their arrses off doing major refits on M113s which basically includes sawing them in half inserting 1m extra in length plus 1 extra roadwheel, uparmouring and changing the engine, they also do armed and NBC versions. This is being done for the Bundeswehr and others. Seems we aren't the only ones going for the cheap option.
    For those who can read boxhead:
  8. http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-13536963,00.html

    What an arrogant little man - "we are stretched, not overstretched". What the hell does he know about being overstretched - does he genuinely believe his own spin or is it that good old Gen Jacko has told him all is hunky dory and that the chaps are managing just fine?
  9. Yesterdays kit today at tomorrows prices.

    The MoD DNews organisation is akin to the Propoganda Ministry of the Third Reich.

    Fact - we buy equipment to statisfy the needs of the single services - hence ships and aircraft that nobody needs or can realistically ever see a use for. Armour for B vehicles has been a requirement for years and our adults are responsible for ensuring that we never got what we needed. the fact that we have a 430 that will be over 60 years old - accepted that it has been reengineered - is amazing. Our generals should hang their heads in shame. And yes - I have signed off!!
  10. I can tell you don't mean that "ds"... what's your name and number? 'coz I bet the DS will need someone to carry his hats! and I might still know someone who can pull strings and fiddle with things and...
  11. What is required is WALT TECHNOLOGY!......

    2 432's 1 CVR(T) and you could be riding about in one of these.....

    It even has a jacuzzi.

  12. untallguy

    untallguy Old-Salt Reviewer Book Reviewer

    Having just caught this on the lunchtime news, it was reported that the Defence Select Committee had launched a pretty severe attack on the Government (especially when you consider that of 14 members, 8 are Labour MPs).

    It criticised the Govt on:

    Overstretch - a statement of the obvious, perhaps, but the more it's said, the more people will start to realise it.

    Ill-equipped forces - notably SH (ie lack of) and lack of light armour for role (especially in Iraq).

    Pay(!) - not mentioned much on news.

    These are three fairly key areas for the Armed Forces and I would be interested in seeing the full report (not on HoC website yet) and what recommendations there are.
  13. Details of the Report (and it's URL) can be found here on Hackle's excellent thread on the report. Please feel free to add/comment on the thread and report.