Winco,
We clearly don't agree, but to flesh out my point. Bailing out a security firm is nothing to do with defence business. Unless, that is, the government was counting (naively, stupidly - whatever you fancy) on the security firm for something it considers very important and which it now cannot deliver.
Now we enter the realms of MACA which is a fundemental role of the armed forces. I assume you don't disagree?
I concur absolutely that it shouldn't have been needed in this case. But actually the MACA guidelines point out that planners shouldn't plan on/ count on military help - we're there as the Alamo/ last resort/ back stop CAP.
What I fail to see (and again we disagree) is why someone pinged for extra duties in London for a fortnight should expect recompense when someone given a crash move to Faslane wouldn't.
And yes I know that stacks of boys and girls are in or about to go to, or have just got back from the sand pit. And I too have had my fair share of 'rather cross wife'. It goes with the turf. Doesn't make it any easier to swallow but it's a rule of the game.
Last point and I really do mean it genuinely is we're all human and we all differ significantly. I respect your opinions, just don't share them on this occasion. Eyes out, fly safely.