The Navy should not be sacrificed to prop up the Army’s horses and brass bands

Discussion in 'Royal Navy' started by Dunservin, Oct 12, 2010.

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. From the letters in today's Telegraph: The Navy should not be sacrificed to prop up the Army’s horses and brass bands

    W.r.t. the first letter, I don't want to see the loss of traditions that help maintain the ethos and morale of the Army but times are hard and ships matter more. The RN lost its Display Team and Field Gun Competition years ago.

    If the writer of the second letter is only referring to Afghanistan, he has it slightly wrong in saying: "...The Government’s priority seems to be the maintenance of an Army of more than 100,000 soldiers that cannot deploy more than a tenth of its strength...".

    Our 9,500 personnel in Afghanistan include around 1,000 Naval Service (RN/RM) and 1,000 RAF plus TAs (around 10% of the Army strength in theatre) so Regular Army personnel in Afghanistan must constitute fewer than 7,000 (i.e. less than 7% of their total strength). To be fair, I am prepared to believe that the other 3% are deployed elsewhere in the world.
     
  2. Good point. Incidentally, has anyone heard anything from this lady yet? She's been in post since 1 Dec 2009.