We need to spend more on armed forces, admits Blair

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by whitecity, Jan 13, 2007.

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. After 10 years of nothing but hot air, what's the betting that the only thing backing these words is NeuArbeit spin...

  2. We need to spend more is worthless.

    We are going to spend more would have meant something.

    Every time this man opens his mouth , he says nothing.
  3. He also said that as the Services are an All-Volunteer force and its members must accept that death or serious injury go with the job!.....Ha Fcuking Ha Ha,........as if no soldiers had noticed that the casualty list keeps growing,and that the contempt from the politicians is rising.

    So,don´t join the Forces and see if the politicians are prepared to sacrifice their children to stop dope heads getting their fix,or oil to keep their subsidised houses warm!

    Tonys´ new Volunteer Army:-

    Attached Files:

    • cf00.jpg
      File size:
      24.1 KB
  4. Yes cheers for that BLiar now why dont you just fukc off you spineless traitor.
  5. What Blair ACTUALLY said is


    There is no mention of need, but a declaration that He wants to fix the covenant which, he acknowledges will mean spending money.

    There is a lack of clarity on the short term, long term phrase but apart from that it seems to me that He is laying down a policy
  6. At last, the lying 2 faced hypocritical cnut admits that the covenant between government and the Forces has been broken. I doubt though, that Mong Brown will stump up any cash if he can possibly avoid it. Far too many gay and lesbian action groups to fund, before he funds the Forces properly.
    Bitter and twisted, who, me?
  7. And, in the words of Jerry Maguire



    A fat lot of good when he'll be gone by September and it'll be somebody else's problem.

    Sven, the Rev Jimmy Jones has some more Kool-Aid for you.
  8. You are quite right, we will have to wait and see whether Brown is willing to pick up the mantle laid down by Blair.
  9. "For our part, in Government, it will mean increased expenditure on equipment, personnel and the conditions of our Armed Forces - not in the short run, but for the long term," he said, adding: "On the part of the military, they need to accept that in a volunteer armed force, conflict and casualty may be part of what they are called upon to face."

    I posted this on another thread and others have picked up on the same qoute here, I think we all fulfill our part of the 'covenant' and taking cas is regretfully acknowledged and accepted. However, Liar-bore has failed to live up to any of its promises.
  10. Sven - you well-know that in political terms 'long term' means a review and 'public consultation' (the second already declared by Browne) that will futher delay any immediate money being invested. As I have stated elsewhere, the British Public do not support the interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan - thus 'Public consultation' will give Gordon Brown the option to cut and run. there will then be no-need to invest in Expeditionary Armed Services.

    The question is what is truly best for this country - Armed Services that can Project British Foreign policy by intervening overseas, or do we become a Home Defence Force concentrating on the internal threat to our security?
  11. Blair... You cheeky c*nt....

    I don’t think there's anyone in HMF who is not aware of or come to that doesn’t accept that in a volunteer armed force, conflict and casualties may be part of what they are called upon to face... That isn’t the issue here. We are prepared to stand up and do our duty, are YOU?

    YOUR duty however as PM, and that of your Government is to ensure that the services you ask to guard these shores, deal with life’s wee problems (fire strikes, floods, clearing up BSE outbreaks etc) and send to war are provided with the best kit money can buy and enough of it, plus enough Personnel needed to ensure that we can do our job properly and with the minimum number of casualties possible. And can deploy with the knowledge that they WILL be SUPPORTED by their Government and not have to deal with the possibility of being hung out to dry by that very same Government.

    It is also YOUR duty as PM, and that of your Government to ensure that any casualties receive the best care going, with money and political embarrassment not being an object in the way of achieving that.

    It is also YOUR duty as PM, and that of your Government to ensure we are NOT deployed on missions/war fighting that have not been politically completely thought through, war-gamed for possible outcomes and/or do not have a fully thought out plan and the means to achieve it in place and ready to go dealing with the after effects. In place that is BEFORE we get the signal to go.

    The citizens of this country also consider it is YOUR duty as PM, and that of your Chancellor, Cabinet and Government to run this Country in a manner that does NOT: Damage our standing in the world. Saddle us with decades of debt. Reduce our industrial base. Destroy the NHS. Allow the education system to become a joke and kids leave school unable to cope with the basics. Allow immigration to run away unchecked and consequently crime to increase to levels this country hasn’t seen since the dark ages. Put the forces back to a position not seen since 1920 (remember what that helped cause?) …. Amongst other things far too numerous to mention.

    IMHO…. Tony Blair, you, your Chancellor and Government have failed in all of your duties to this country.

    To be honest the ONLY thing you have done since coming to power of any real use to the Country was to hand interest rate control to the Bank of England. I look forward to the second, that being your resignation closely followed by a General Election and us being able to kick out what has to be the most incompetent Government this country has had since the Romans.
  12. Well said Snapper, the sad thing is that the 'war' is unpopular and nobody will sign up to more cash for the cause because the money has to come from somewhere, usually the pockets of taxpayers. The Forces aren't the only ones suffering the same problems, just ask the Police, NHS, teachers and Firemen. Admitting that there is a problem is great but will he actaully resolve the problems....I don't think so, how many Labour polocies and initiatives have produced the results they claimed,´tough on crime', 'education education education'.....blah blah blah...I've seen no change in the past 10 years. Bliar....you're a hopeless charlatan who's finally been seen for what you are, do the decent thing and Fcuk off!
  13. Sven - The problem is that its bliar who has broken the 'covenent' or deal in the first place, and funding in the forcesits is not a brand new issue, Iraq has been going on for 4 year, and Iraq over 5 years, and he's had the military on the go for nearly 10 years, so there has been plenty of opportunity to do this, and it isnt up the Brown, Blair is still the PM, so if he wants the monney sorted, he gets it sorted!

    He is saying this as a back covering exercise of biblical proportions, when HMF take a kicking in one area or another, or cant even deploy, he wants to be able to say in his memoirs 'well I did warn them'......

    Its like a chef making a dish, and then 2 minutes before it comes out of the oven telling the junior chefs, 'you dont want to make it like that'...

    Some humility or being contrite might give him some much needed credibility, but at which point in the last couple of weeks has he said 'sorry - I got this wrong, I need put it right' before he starts stating the obvious.

  14. Having gone to Plymouth to hear the Prime Minister on Friday, I read Saturday's newspaper reports, largely concentrating on his ludicrous and scarcely surprising attempts to justify Iraq, with dismay. The real story out of that speech was the lack of any short-term extra funding for defence and the effective confirmation of the stories about cuts to the navy.

    I'm sorry I dont see any lack of clarity here. "Not in the short-run" is as clear as it can be and I would be interested to know what possible relevance there could be in a promise of long-term money from a man who is only making this speech for show as part of his "legacy tour" before departing a la Beckham to the States to make sure he doesnt go short of funding in the long-term.

    This is astonishing in the bare-faced cheek with which it seeks to distort the statistics. As Mike Rose pointed out on ITV West Country the night before Blair's speech, defence spending was running at around 2.5% of GDP until 2001 when strangely at this time of crisis it fell to 2.1%. Ah yes but add in the costs of the wars and it is 2.5% says Blair.

    So Prime Minister, all this guff about the cost of the war not falling on the defence budget was complete nonsense. You decided to fight two expensive wars and took the money off the defence budget to do so?

    But as I said "in the ten years prior to 1997 [when I took over], it fell by over a quarter."

    Er that would be because the Cold War came to an end Tony and we werent spuriously adding in the cost of two of the wars you decided to fight while cutting the money going to the forces at the same time.

    The correct statement to make here would be: "There has been a lot of publicity about reported cuts to the Royal Navy, the reports are not true."

    At least he was honest enough not to do that.
  15. Pick up the mantle? Sven, what are you talking about? This is politics and the real life of our country. Would you rather see something happen than in ooh say three years tut disapprovingly and say "Well Gordon missed a clear hint there back in January 07..."?

    Tony is merely setting up "Ah but did you see what I said in January 07" defensive positions, so he can spin his way out of any criticisms in the next few years, when he will be riding his "I am Sir tony and this is my auto-biography - when it or I ope my lips let no dog bark!" show-pony.

    The fact is we haven't got a clue what thegovernment plans to do but our instincts, in a triumph of experience over optimisim tell us its going to be poor. Neither gordon nor Tony has a clue about what is needed and are wrapped in cotton wool as far as the effects of their policy is concerned. I particularly like the anecdote where CDS was told by gordon that "You think I know nothing about the Army" to which he replied "No chancellor, I know you know nothing about the Army."

    A bit like Sven and his naive belief in the well-meaning attitude of Blair and Brown...