British Apathy ?

[Edmund Blackadder]

Why is it that the general public in the UK appear to have become apathetic towards the Armed Forces?

After the recent terrorist attack on the USS Cole in Yemen, all US sportsmen wore black ribbons and a minutes silence was held. This does not happen in the UK. WHY?

US service personnel get preferential rates and military discounts at most shops, hotels etc. whereas over here government rate means the retaillers stick an extra 20% on the price. WHY?

I know the grass always appears greener but I am interested to find out if other coutries trat their armed forces any better (or worse)than we treat ours.

[Ham Phisted]

Agree with all your comments but I think there is another side to this discussion. US Servicemen appear to have greater pride in their military service than us. You only have to look at the number of associations and lobby groups that exist to support current and retired servicemen. I'm currently on exchange in the US and it's apparent that their Servicemen have greater visibility in the community, not just by wearing uniform in public, but by tutoring in schools, fund raising, charity work etc. The USAF was a sponsor of the last Super Bowl! Can you imagine: World Darts Tournament brought to you by the Queen's Glass House Deserters. It isn't that we don't do many of these activities but they are genuinely proud to represent their Unit in everything. The reasons behind our lack of collective pride is moot but, and I know it's corny, they are proud to serve. Perhaps it's their higher visibility which makes it politically acceptable to the public, if not essential, to offer discounts, preferential rates etc. Supporting the military has cross-party acceptability. They are, however, also disgustingly earnest and unquestioning at times.

[Ittle B. Alright]

BRITISH APATHY ?????????????

I'm not going to bother replying to that.

[N Genfire]

Agreed Ham,

Do you feel any esprit de corps? Or at the risk of starting a debate (especially if Marine is watching) are Americans indoctrinated with blind loyalty and not given the chance of individualism as our new PC orientated forces are. I am sure loyalty is leader trust and respect, fighting or collective action organised by the higher networks. If loyalty is not instilled from above then yes people become apathetic, they want to know their actions will be not as an individual but as a collective family group, which comes from communication.
UK forces in my experience (IMHO) accept that death etc happens and handle it with black humour and private conversations, we are not great mourners on the worlds stage as the Americans tend to be, no offence intended, but get on with life and remember comrades lost in private, and once a year at memorial services.

Apathetic, no, private, yes.

Regards N genfire

[MrBernoulli]

I'm afraid that the only time the Brits are happy with their military is when there is a war on......in which they feel that we ARE on the side of good over evil. The Gulf war had them clearly on our side; Kosovo not so clearly; Sierra Leone - they don't give a ****.

I should exclude from the above paragraph those Brits that were around during WW2 because they largely appreciate what we try to achieve and they value what they did to maintain freedom.

The later generations have NO concept of what its like to fight to maintain the values which they take for granted. One only has to look at the "ME, ME, ME, ME" reaction to a poxy little fuel shortage to work that out!

[Edmund Blackadder]

Ham,

Thanks for your prompt reply. Although I am inclined to agree with some of Ns comments regarding indoctrination etc I still have to wonder what is the driving force in the 'proud to serve' attitude. I don't think that the loyalty debate is very relevant here as it is more of an internal issue and not one on which the Joe Public has any opinion.(how we perceive ourselves is another aguement entirely).

More comments please.

Wibble

Ed

[misterploppy]

As an ex-officer I have met a mix of civvies who have had nothing to do with the Services and other ex-servicemen / women. Here's a few rocks in the pond:

Of recent campaigns there is a view that neither Bosnia / Kosovo or Sierra Leone had anything to do with us so why should we pay £X millions to police them / bomb them back into the stone age?

The Armed Forces are now a minor employer in national terms, therefore Joe Public is unlikely to have anyone even in his extended family who is serving.

Of the ex-servicemen I meet, a (small but significant) majority have not left with a positive view of the institution, even some who reached high rank. Many would counsel their sons / daughters against joining. The treatment of Gulf War vets (and the publicity surrounding the Govt's hand-washing) has, I suspect contributed greatly to this.

Joe Public spends around £22Bn annually to fund the mindless bureaucracy of the MoD which, in press report after press report seems to have made an art form of p1ssing it down the drain while fewer and fewer Servicemen & women are more and more overstretched. Joe Public is sick of hearing the same old story.

Socially and culturally, the Armed Forces are seen as so far behind the times as to be increasingly alien to society in UK plc. Jeez, they only stopped being scared witless of gay people in January! As alienation increases, empathy decreases

Civvy Street nowadays is a cold, hard place. Nobody gives Joe Public a hug and a kiss for driving his white van. If you want to go and kill for the Queen, go and do it if you're daft enough, Joe'll pay you for it but don't expect anything more.

Basically, life now comes down to dosh. You earn your pennies your way and Joe'll earn his pennies his way, what more do you want?

Sad, but i'm afraid these views are increasingly common out here in the 'Real World'. Someone earlier mentioned the fuel crisis. Most people laugh at St Tony's trumped-up 'emergency' in the NHS during the last protest. If troops are used to break any future peaceful protest, I fear further alienation of Joe Public and HM Forces.

Now, if there's a threat at the door, that might be a different matter.

[kbf1]

I have a bit of an insight. As a 2Lt I spent time in a college in the US as part of my degree and played with the ROTC there, and my wife is American.

Americans as a whole earnestly believe that their's is the greatest country on the earth and that every right-tinking person should want to be American (indeed some in my wife's family automatically assumed that I would give up my british citizenship to become an American and live in America and where genuinely shocked to find out I wouldn't). They have a sense of pride in the country, flag, and everything American. In many ways it is a quite nieive view of the world. To them the idea of joining the forces represents being "all-American", in other words the embodyment of every aspect of American pride and culture. Their armed forces are also huge in comparison to ours, so they have a much greater sway on public opinion.

Contrats that with the British. We are cynical, disparaging as a whole, and have a tendancy to sneer at times. We view our armed forces as a necessary extravagance and to promote the ide of service earns little more than derision, let alone respect. The diminishing in public life of uniformed servicemen in the community has added to it becoming almost an underground movement. What we do have that the US don't is a cadet movement that gets young people involved and interested in service life, but sadly that too is chronically underfunded and when cmopeteing with video games and TV just does not attract the numbers of youngster it used to. The net result is we have almost forgotten the services and what we as servicemen stand for. sadly it takes a conflict to remind peopple of the role we play in saving lives as well as resolving conflict.

[Wiley]

Didn’t Kipling say it all over a hundred years ago in his classic poem ‘Tommy Atkins’, where he echoed the sentiments in (Sir) Edmund’s initial post almost to the letter?

The Armed Forces are a bit like the Fire Brigade – perceived by most to be a waste of money until THEIR house is on fire.

I don’t have a copy here, but if someone does and was to post it here, I don’t think the copyright police would get too upset.

[EESDL]

Perhaps it has got something to do with the fact that the UK is one of the few places in the world where you cannot fly your country's flag on your property, without first:

a. Obtaining planning permission.

b. Being accused of being a racist.

c. Obtaining the permission of the thought police.

[RFCC]

Tommy

I went into a public-'ouse to get a pint o' beer,
The publican 'e up an' sez, "We serve no red-coats here."
The girls be'ind the bar they laughed an' giggled fit to die,
I outs into the street again an' to myself sez I:
O it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, go away";
But it's "Thank you, Mister Atkins", when the band begins to play,
The band begins to play, my boys, the band begins to play,
O it's "Thank you, Mister Atkins", when the band begins to play.

I went into a theatre as sober as could be,
They gave a drunk civilian room, but 'adn't none for me;
They sent me to the gallery or round the music-'alls,
But when it comes to fightin', Lord! they'll shove me in the stalls!
For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, wait outside";
But it's "Special train for Atkins" when the trooper's on the tide,
The troopship's on the tide, my boys, the troopship's on the tide,
O it's "Special train for Atkins" when the trooper's on the tide.

Yes, makin' mock o' uniforms that guard you while you sleep
Is cheaper than them uniforms, an' they're starvation cheap;
An' hustlin' drunken soldiers when they're goin' large a bit
Is five times better business than paradin' in full kit.
Then it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, 'ow's yer soul?"
But it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll,
The drums begin to roll, my boys, the drums begin to roll,
O it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll.

We aren't no thin red 'eroes, nor we aren't no blackguards too,
But single men in barricks, most remarkable like you;
An' if sometimes our conduck isn't all your fancy paints,
Why, single men in barricks don't grow into plaster saints;
While it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, fall be'ind",
But it's "Please to walk in front, sir", when there's trouble in the wind,
There's trouble in the wind, my boys, there's trouble in the wind,
O it's "Please to walk in front, sir", when there's trouble in the wind.

You talk o' better food for us, an' schools, an' fires, an' all:
We'll wait for extry rations if you treat us rational.
Don't mess about the cook-room slops, but prove it to our face
The Widow's Uniform is not the soldier-man's disgrace.
For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Chuck him out, the brute!"
But it's "Saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot;
An' it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' anything you please;
An' Tommy ain't a bloomin' fool -- you bet that Tommy sees!

[Wiley]

Thanks, RFCC. That particular Kipling poem is truly timeless.

I suspect the situation he describes will always be so. And the ones who'll cry the loudest if the shyte ever hits the fan thick enough to cause "them at 'ome" more discomfort than a not full petrol tank will be the very same ones who decry Defence expenditure the loudest and look down their noses at those in khaki, navy blue and light blue.

Look on the bright side. In my days in uniform, during the Vietnam conflict, quite a few of "them at 'ome" in Dununda literally spat on us. I don't think you've had that pleasure in the UK yet.

[Metman]

As a VRT Officer(We deal with the Space Cadets) I have to say that although we have a cracking youth organisation, we do nothing to publicise ourselves either!

The vast majority of cadets on my Squadron(s) have been recruited by their friends. In the 5 years I have been involved with the cadets as an instructor, we've been out in public 3 times. On all those occasions, we've had a large amount of interest, and a good number of new recruits with interest in the Air Force.

The problems we have are: They "Youth Club" mentality - most cadets and parents now see the ATC as a Youth Club rather than a Military Youth Organisation. There is a huge difference in attitudes between those who are interested, and those who want a Youth Club. It's very difficult to teach people who only want to chat to their mates, which puts off the people who are inetested.

Parents are just as bad - most have now had no exposure to the Military, see the Cold War as over, and see no reason for a military. In many cases now, cadets are the only sight most people get of a military uniform.

Staffing - The numbers of staff on an avarage squadron is scarily small. We used to get a fair number of staff from ex-forces, but that no longer seems to be the case. That means few staff members have any real idea what the Military is really like. I worked with the RAF for 4 years which on my squadron has given me a HUGE advantage! Would any of you lot be interested in helping when you leave?

Other factors - Funding obviously; lack of available support from the forces (not so easy to get jollies, section visits, fewer camp spaces, etc now because of increased commitments by you lot; weekend/evening jobs and schoolwork for young people; many more other (apparently) interesting things to do than there used to be! Restrictions on most adventurous activities, meaning they happen less often, and people get bored; The large number of kids who are wrapped in cotton wool or think forces/cadets sounds like "too much hard work."

As we lose potential cadets, you lot lose potential recruits, and less people are exposed to what the military do, meaning most people through ignorance become apathetic.

[Roc]

As an American Air Force Pilot I can vouch that the general population here in the States has a very favourable impression of the Armed Forces. It may stem from all the films, TV shows, and books that glorify our military. You may remember before WWII the US military was smaller than Portugals. I guess because of our Superpower status Americans may feel we are the tip of the spear protecting the rest of the world Etc etc etc so many percieve the military as ready to go to war at any time, hence the adulation. To touch on the point made about Americans feel they have the greatest country in the world, My Father's from Italy and since I was a boy he's told me stories of how great the US is, I grew up in New York City and most of my neighbors were not born in America, every last one expressed how fortunate they were to be in America. So in this environment its no wonder people tend to think this. Its probably because many of these people were refugees or escaping a bad situation in their homeland, So America may seem that much better in comparison. I've travelled round the world myself and there are few places I'd rather live!

[Wee Weasley Welshman]

Come on chaps, lets not make a fuss and all that. Shame about the cadets though - its not a shadow of what it was when I joined on March 3rd 1988... <sigh>

However, at least when you see medals on a British Serviceman or woman you *know* that they mean something deeply important.

Lets not forget here that as a permanent member of the security council, G8, independent nuclear power, 4th largest economy in the world, Commonwealth, expeditionary military history/future, English language, educational/social/cultural leading light we *actually* punch well above our weight and rightly so.

WWW

[bombedup]

Hey, Roc.
You've got a good point about American culture being built on immigrants coming from somewhere they wanted to escape from, so naturally they think America MUST be the best country in the world. Its just a shame that in the year 2000 so few Americans realise the quality of life in much of the rest of the world has caught up with them. (And don't cite high US employment and income levels. Have you seen the cost of health care and state, local and federal taxes lately? Plus, what's a summer afternoon's boat ride along the upper Thames worth?)
Having lived in the US for 16 years (and raised kids there) I love the place and the people, but frankly I'm glad I'm living back in the UK. I don't feel obliged to shout out my patriotism every day of the year. Brits run themselves down, but compared to American insecurity they have a deep sense of who they are in a tight little isle full of history and beauty. I know it sounds corny but when you consider the Brits could just sit back like the Greeks or Italians and rest on the achievements of empire over the last 450 years its actually amazing there's such a huge amount of international dynamism here.
Interesting that the US government makes you give up your US citizenship if you take up another one, whereas the British government assumes its nationals wouldn't dream of not being British, and requires a Brit to actually renounce his citizenship in front of one of Her Majesty's representatives before he loses it.

[Overstretch]

And just to add insult to injury Tony Bliar and his cronies are about to make things worse by ordering British forces to strike break any future petrol blockade. Now Joe Public will not remember us as war fighting heroes but as strike breakers delivering petrol in a protest against high fuel taxes that most of us probably support!!! Thats going to go down really well with Joe - NOT!!!

[kbf1]

Metman, While this is a bit off topic (but seeing as you brought it up) you are in fact quite right. I have an ACF unit in my TA centre which I ran for a while alongside the TA troop. I found the adult instructors were on the whole commited, but many were people who had made nothing of their lives and used the ACF as a means of exercising some form of authority over others, namely teenagers. Some of the supposed officers themselves were total no-marks in the army often doing 3 years as a private and then years later taking an ACF commission enter the land of dilusion and actually try and throw weight around on TA and regular soldiers and officers. Sad really, but there you go. Kids are really more switched on than most adults take them for and see through all of this posturing. Unless the adult staff are any good and are focussed on the kids in questions, I am afraid Metman, you won't make muchg progress. You are very right about public exposure though. May I suggest a "friendly offensive" PR tactic and build up a list of contacts from your Dep Lord Lt to newspapers, school teachers/heads, and anyone else who cares to listen. Keep in regular contact even if nothing is going on, and get them involved. Annual prize givings are a bonus, and if a photographer from your local news paper gets interested because the DLL is there, all the better. Good look with it, I enjoyed the time I spent with the cadets and in time may well go back and do some more.

[L J R]

The Kiwis paid respects for a young Army chap that was killed on duty in operations in East Timor recently. The International Rugby crowd paid tribute before the game. The incident was front page news etc.. The PM was openly upset but proud to be a Kiwi. So for a small country, they appeared patriotic. Good on ‘em and condolences to the family of the chap that was killed.

I agree with the sentiment about the yanks, but some other countries do have a heart that extends to the military, even though the military (especially in the New Zealand’s case) is having the heart ripped out of it. (Cancellation of an F-16 order, no more money on P3 capability [interesting for a South Pacific 'power'], no more upgrades to the A4s, [a jet that will soon be bulldozed off the end of the tarmac - poor lads].

[reynoldsno1]

As a former member of both the British and NZ forces I can confirm that the NZ forces are held in much higher regard by the public than in the UK.

However, this higher profile can be conributed to a major difference between the two countries -mainly the security issue. UK forces personnel appear to have adopted a much lower profile due to the risks of being targetted by terroist activity, and I believe this has a lot to do with the perceived "apathy" in that country.

[Metman]

Cheers KBF - I'll see where I get to with the press! My old squadron didnt have a particularly good relationship with them for some reason!

ACF seem to work on a completely different level to the ATC. I would never dream of becoming part of an ACF unit - I tend to think the ATC are far more intelligent http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/tongue.gif

Youre right about kids being a lot more switched on that most people imagine. I think that is one reason we need to make them aware of what the military really do - might get rid of some of this apathy in later life! Whether they go into the forces or not, they have at least have an appreciation for what you do.

[Pontius the Non-Pilate]

Overstretch -
ref strikebreaking, you should try West Lothian, Wales, and other coalmining areas. Troops were sent in, bayonets fixed, to break miners' strikes before WWII. Some of the older people in these areas still remember it......

[Talking Radalt]

Refence earlier comments about "military discount"....I have a friend who works for a well known global telecommunications company and they get discount which would make your eyes pop. I'm not talking the poxy 5% offered to Squaddies or whatever, I mean upwards of 25% off all prices in most high street stores, airlines, restaurants, everywhere. And why? Because their bosses stick up for them and say to all the high street stores, who couldn't function without telephones,
"Sure, we'll do you a cheap national business contract, if you give us X% discount for our staff".
The bottom line is, the Military has nothing to bargain with in order to improve our lot in life. We offer no product or service to Joe Public and that's why he couldn't care less. Until we are, literally, lined up at the White Cliffs repelling borders, we will remain a financial waste of time to the only-too-ignorant tax payer.

[This message has been edited by Talking Radalt (edited 27 October 2000).]

[This message has been edited by Talking Radalt (edited 27 October 2000).]

[Vortex_Generator]

Just a small point Wee WW. When DO you ever see medals on a British Service person these days? We don't even wear the ribbons on any everyday uniform. Surely they should be a visible indication of our service and commitment to our country, not something we get to show to our mates in the mess at the odd formal function! Apathy and lack of pride?

[S Potter Esq]

Just on the US citizenship point, US citizens can become UK citizens without renouncing their US citizenship (check the US Embassy web site). Generally whether you keep your old citizenship when you take another depends on whether the oath you swear on taking the new is considered to renounce your old citizenship and also on whether your old country allows dual nationality. In the US case, you can have dual nationality if your new country's oath does not renounce your US citizenship. Japan, OTOH, considers taking another nationality in any event as renouncing Japanese nationality.

US nationality can also be renounced by swearing before a Judge (IIRC) and is usually done for tax reasons.




------------------
S. Potter, Esq
"Gentlemen! You can't fight in here! This is the WAR ROOM!"

[360vision]

Apathy! You need a change of scene mate!!!

You are not speaking for everyone here i trust. We, of the British Forces, as a whole and not as individuals, do our job with pride. Yes we may grumble from time to time but the reason we do not hold such a high regard with Joe Public is one of security rather than apathy. The recent expeditions of her Majesty's Armed forces to Bosnia, Kosovo and Sierra Leonne have done nothing but prove our professionalism in getting the job done. You look at the cost of the battle but what of the lives saved through our intervention. We are employed to do a job and if that job entails war then so be it!! I for one was proud to serve and upon reenlistment i will complete my 22 years with the knowledge that I have done some good with my life and not been a selfish individual. I may not be comissioned but i do know the difference between right and wrong without being brainwashed and I also know that, when we are needed, we will conduct ourselves with the dignity and courage that makes us British. Yes, there are still some of us out there!!!!! God Save The Queen!!!

[Talking Radalt]

You mentuion you'll be proud to have served and done some good with your life. In who's opinion? Joe Public's? These days, they are all the exact type of selfish individual you mention so your pride is wasted mate! A few weeks ago I returned from a well known South Atlantic posting, and the taxi driver who took me home from the station couldn't even remember where they were!

[This message has been edited by Talking Radalt (edited 28 October 2000).]

[Roc]

Bombedup,

I had to laugh when you mentioned American insecurity..Exactly what are Americans insecure about? In my experience, whenever I travelled abroad I'd be assaulted by the locals with some anti-American Bul@sh#t. I'd be enjoying a drink and some guy/girl would start raving about how Americans think this or that or we should leave etc etc..I really think the insecurity is more from the other side, even your posts have an "America isnt so great" aspect to them. Americans on the other hand tend to view Europeans in a very favorable light in most regards, If you want to sell anything to an American just tell them it came from Europe. However in the political relm we tend not to follow you...60% tax rates $4.00/gallon gas..big government..although many are trying..

[Edmund Blackadder]

Gents,

To try and move this thread along then, a further question. Is there anything we can do, either as a service or as individuals to change the publics perception of us ? I for one think we are p**s poor at PR. All you journos out there, any ideas from the other side of the fence so to speak ?

Wibble

Ed

[This message has been edited by Edmund Blackadder (edited 29 October 2000).]

[Edmund Blackadder]

360,

You seem to have missed the point old chap! It is the publics apathy we are discussind here not ours (however I do agree with your sentiments).

Toodle pip

ED

[Talking Radalt]

This is chicken & eggs stuff I feel.
1. We are not a proud Military force and do little to express ourselves because:
2. The public we serve seem unaware of our existence and thus disinterested because:
3. Goto 1.

[bombedup]

Roc.
Just to clear up my point about US insecurity...In my view self confident, secure people don't feel any need to wear their nationality on their sleeves or rub their competitors nose in it when they win (like the US golf team did with the Europeans in the Ryder Cup final last year).
I take your point about gas prices, however. The Brits pay far too much tax for fuel (however, how you discourage people from unclogging an overcrowded road system and get them back onto public transport beats me).
As for public apathy about the UK military.... Priority has got to be to get the unforms back on the streets. Terrorism? The first uniformed soldier to be killed or injured by terrorist attack would certainly destroy the Irish peace process, at the very least (and start a nationalist-nationalist civil war?. On balance the likelihood of that happening is far lower than the certainty of long-term erosion in public understanding of the serviceman and woman. Second is to allow service personnel - officers and other ranks - to talk to the media on the record. Like they do in the US, where they're a lot more open than the Brits are.
Building walls around ourselves can keep the nasty press out, but they can also act as a prison keeping us in.

[1.3VStall]

When I was a mere stripling of 14 I pulled on the hairy blue (remember those?) uniform of the Air Training Corps for the first time. I knew at that moment that I just had to join the RAF; nothing else would do.

Just over 30 years later, after repeated applications for redundancy (finally successful), I just had too leave the RAF; nothing else would do.

In those intervening years I had enjoyed a (moderately) succesful and fulfilling career. I had travelled to many places I wouldn't otherwise have seen. I had made many friends (and lost some too early). I had met and married my wife and had children. And for most of the time I had had fun - an essential ingredient of a happy working life.

I was tremendously proud of our Service's heritage and reputation and I am not ashamed, nor too macho to admit that there were more than a few occasions when my eyes became moist with emotion.

So what changed that fired up space cadet into a cynical old f@rt?

Just reading some of the posts on the Military Pilots' Forum brings it all back. A few examples:

Being constantly expected to achieve more with less resources.

The appalling procurement process which gives us (eventually) kit that doesn't work.

Being consistently mismanaged and then having to try and defend the obvious failings of higher authority to subordinates (is that a PC word these days?).

Anally retentive scribblies taking great delight in applying the "not entitled" syndrome - especially when you had been really b*ggered about, or had really put yourself out for the service.

Observing the "part-time" air force, which worked less hours and less hard than the front line.

But probably the biggest single factor that pushed me over the edge was seeing the lack of leadership and moral fibre of their Airships, supported by their sycophantic, truth filtering aides and assistants.

I am still proud of the RAF and its ongoing achievements, but as a Service I grieve for it. Indeed, I feel desperately sorry for those of you who, by reading your posts, are clearly becoming as disillusioned as I became.

But to return to the original subject, IMHO people are not particularly apathetic towards the RAF. From the outside looking in Joe sees fleetingly on the news the various theatres of operation and the successes of the RAF. However, in the longer term he probably remembers such foot shootings as Peter Harding/Lady Buck, Sandy Wilson/carpets and the Chinook saga. He also reads regular reports from both the NAO and the Commons Select Committee showing just how much of the Defence Budget is wasted, in particular on RAF weapons systems. As someone pointed out earlier on this thread, the RAF has never been much good at PR.

As a mate once said to me "The best decision I ever made in my life was to join the RAF and the second best decison was to leave".

Sad but true!

[Brakes...beer]

Like 1.3VStall, I largely enjoyed my time in, for 8 yrs in the Nineties. But we underestimate our image outside. Apart from the usual right-on cretins at university, most of the strangers (other wedding guests, taxi drivers, hitch-hikers, plumbers etc) that you have decent conversations with are fascinated by and slightly in awe of the Services' reputation. People do remember the big events like the Gulf (and they admire Peter Harding), although if nothing much had happened since WW2 the modern Services would now be viewed less favourably.

BTW, as a former anally-retentive blunty tw@t (I do so love this forum), might I put a word in for my old brothers-in-ink? 90% try to be flexible when they can, they are doing a ****ty, boring job hidebound by rules, and they don't all go home at 5. The bottom line is that any public organisation is going to breed bureaucracy and is going to be run by the Treasury. I hated the pointless nature of a lot of my work; you wouldn't believe how good it now feels driving to work each day to fly (on an SAC's salary).

[This message has been edited by Brakes...beer (edited 31 October 2000).]

[Vortex_Generator]

1.3VStall,
I am humbled by your perspicacity and frightened by the lack of it in those who lead us. The "lack of leadership and moral fibre of their Airships, supported by their sycophantic, truth filtering aides and assistants" is such a bullseye. I only wish that those who count could see the truth of it!

[1.3VStall]

VG, thanks for the compliment.

Perhaps I should have become a journo when I left?

On second thoughts, perhaps not!

[67Wing]

Ask not what your air force can do for you etc.
I don't think we will ever get a perfect leader at the top, they are human after all - but I wonder if part of the problem is that we are too quick to blame others for our own lack of leadership. I remember being at Valley when morale was rock bottom and everyone from the sqn boss to the junior instructors were whinging and threatening to leave in a grump mostly because they could get a better deal elsewhere. Most if not all of the staff mates blamed the poor morale of their students on senior RAF leadership! There were exceptions though but they suffered from bar banter.

[Jackonicko]

Some-one was foolish enough to ask what the journos think! As a working journo, may I make the following observations.

1) The Forces, generally, are held in higher regard than at any time since the Second World War. There was less opposition to Desert Storm than to Corporate or Musketeer. The unilateralist left have np appeal whatever any more. Even Labour stood on a 'pro-defence' ticket. (You could argue that their subsequent record might prove that this was cynical electioneering, though IMHO they've done no worse than the previous Govt, with Front Line First and Options).

I don't think that apathy is the problem. But there are problems of perception. The Forces are sometimes perceived as being socially conservative and 'out-of-step' with society as a whole when it comes to human rights, gay rights, etc. (And the answer, IMHO isn't to get in step but to explain why the task of the forces necessitates a particular ethos, and why civilian standards should not always apply).

More serious is the impression of bungling, from the serious to the trivial. Over-spending on procurement, an inability to get equipment into service, guns that don't shoot, bombs that miss, radios that don't work, soldiers being taken hostage by drug-crazed guerrillas en route to a football match, Girly Nimrod pilots, Sandy's Carpets (weren't they curtains?), Harding's shag-fest, etc.

Some might think that the answer would be to tighten things up and try to prevent the leaks, but IMHO this would be impossible, and ultimately self-defeating.

The forces (as opposed to the Party Political Minister and Ministry of Defence) can only emerge with an enhanced reputation if the public are presented with the fundamental point (that the high-calibre, high-quality, unrivalled people in the Armed Forces are being expected to do too much with too little, and that years of neglect and under-funding must be put right). But hand-in-hand with any such explanation, the Public will want to know how vast sums of money translate into such an appalling situation, and it must be explained how money is wasted and squandered in procurement, and how certain contractors get away with murder, never having to pay for their mistakes, and being allowed to charge monopolistic prices for shabby products.

But this won't happen, because each individual service has a PR organisation which is
a) dominated by civil servants, and
b) entirely directed from the centre, from Whitehall, where the needs and interests of the service are secondary to the broad aim of presenting Government defence policy in the best possible light.

Prune helps a great deal, by making it easier for the informed journo to confirm what he hears, to provide clues as to what to look for, and to give a convenient explanation for where uncomfortable facts may have been gleaned, thereby protecting sources.

I don't know if it would help for serving officers to be allowed to go 'on the record' - it would be too career-stopping for many to want to try. What would help would be if people could be less nervous about talking to us off the record. There are trustworthy journos, who protect the identities of their sources - and some of them are even pulling in the same direction.

Apologies for the over-long post!

[This message has been edited by Jackonicko (edited 01 November 2000).]

[Edmund Blackadder]

Jacko,

Please don't apoplogise old chap its all very interesting. Do you ever get the chance to put these points directly to the leadership and if so what if any is their reply?

Ed

[Start Cx]

Jackonicko

Nice to know someone is listening. Shame that there aren't more people like you taking any notice....

[This message has been edited by Start Cx (edited 01 November 2000).]

[Jackonicko]

I know that there are some very sound, right-thinking One-Stars and One-Star next stops, who fight hard and cleverly to protect the RAF's corner, and to look after their subordinates. And I'm reliably told that there are some great two-star mates, too. There are obviously a number of Whitehall Warriors, but almost by definition I have nothing to do with them. Generally though, I think the RAF is very well served by much of its upper management echelons. I'm personally dismayed by Tim Jenner's premature departure, however.

The problem is that those appointed to officially deal with the likes of me (eg DCC/DPR) tend to play it very much by the MoD/Civil Service Book, and would have me Persona Non Grata for ever for what I write and say, if they knew who I was.

[This message has been edited by Jackonicko (edited 01 November 2000).]

[jumpseater]

In reply to eddies original question, my 4 year old daughter loves wearing her poppy, I hope she never gets tired of it.

[Edmund Blackadder]

Jump,

Thanks for your post it has cheered me up on what was a pretty s****y day.

Jacko

Yet again you make sense. I have to say that many senior guys have good intentions its just that sometimes they don't always get told all the facts. This thread on the whole is encouraging in as much as there have been a lot of positve thoughts. If we could only be more proactive in dealing with the public/press and instead of always being on the defensive we may be able to get back to the days when the RAF was seen as great way of life. As has been said before, no kid ever dreamed of being an accountant.

toodle pip

Ed

[Jackonicko]

The ability to tell the difference between the value of two (hostile) column inches in the Mirror and six (supportive) pages in step-ladder and egg-sandwiches monthly might also help!

[Suit]

Jackonicko says, on journo's and joe public;

"..and some of them are even pulling in the same direction.."

and

"...that the high calibre, high quality, unrivalled people in the armed forces are being expected to do too much with too little.."

A journo who is pulling in the same direction as the armed forces, and publically expresses such high regard for them, is not actually practicing journalism but is indulging in promoting the armed forces.

There is an almost total lack of quality unbiased factual reporting of the armed forces in general and the RAF in particular,in the UK press. The tabloids indulge in sensationalist and inaccurate nonsense, the broadsheets tend to be more concerned with their particular political bias, and the aviation monthly rags are very narrow minded spotter biased publications that get far too emotionally involved with their subject matter.

Articles tend to make unreasoned assumptions from which all subsequent logic flows on autopilot. As an example,every reduction in the number of front line squadron numbers is seen as an emotional threat to the very existence of the RAF and rendering it incapable of carrying out even the most basic tasks.

What is never seen is an objective look at just what we need military airpower to do for this country in the 21st Century, why is a total of 18 front line fast jet squadrons a concern,is it merely because we used to have 30? Because they are over committed to out of area peace keeping/making/enforcing operations that have more to do with political kudos and posturing than any national purpose or need? If we didn't have these operations to commit them to, would we need any at all? Who are we threatened by now?

Hhmmm......I seem to be wandering way off target and losing lock. I just feel that there is virtually no objective thought provoking coverage of the Royal Air Force ANYWHERE these days

Sorry if I quote you jackonicko, this is not meant as a personal dig, honest!


If the suit fits......................

------------------
If the suit fits.........

[Cacciatore]

Getting back to the original question, maybe the armed forces of a country where primary schools start the day with their national flag flying and singing the national anthem have a head start when it comes to being appreciated.

[Jackonicko]

`'A journo who is pulling in the same direction as the armed forces, and publically expresses such high regard for them, is not actually practicing journalism but is indulging in promoting the armed forces."

Well I'll be blowed, there really is no pleasing some people. I criticise where appropriate, and praise where appropriate, and now I'm just a PR-prat. Thanks a £ucking bunch. I thought I was an unbiased but broadly sympathetic 'honest broker'. And I have no party political bias when I'm writing for Dailies/Sundays or for the aviation press, and nor do many of my specialised defence colleagues.

And incidentally, the rags for which you express such contempt are doing more for raising the profile of the forces, and doing more to point out where and when the politicians are pulling the wool than you are doing. And objections to an 18-squadron fast jet force may not be 'purely emotional' - they patently aren't sufficient to fulfill the peacetime requirements laid out in SDR, and if they aren't sufficient for that, they certainly aren't adequate for (god forbid) a real war. And one of those, BTW, could happen far more quickly than we could ever re-equip to meet the threat.

An angry JN!

[This message has been edited by Jackonicko (edited 03 November 2000).]

[Suit]

I don't want pleasing by journos I just want them to be objective and slightly more intellectual than at present.

If you think there is no political bias or slant in pieces written for the broadsheets then you truly do not understand the agenda of, for example, the Daily Torygraph.

The aviation rags do NOT raise the profile of the forces to the general public! They are preaching to a miniscule, already converted minority of the population, to whom the serial number and colour scheme of the aircraft is far more important than it's relevance to the defence needs of the UK in the 21st century.

I am afraid that you have no idea how much I am doing to raise the profile of the RAF as you do not know who I am.

I wasn't objecting to an 18 Squadron fast jet force, I was a part of it when it was significantly larger. The number of Squadrons then was totally irrelevant to total war and is even more so now.

We will never again have to "re-equip to meet the threat." That is an old fashioned concept that was rendered totally obsolete decades ago and is even more irrelevant in the global multi-national, ecologically threatened and resource driven age in to which we are plunging head long.

The nuclear age rendered mass conventional conflict unthinkable between large power blocks and super states. The information age will have a similar effect on all levels and stratas of society on this planet.

Besides, if you are getting all hot under the collar over a force level of 18 Squadrons, consider this; 8 Jag and F3 Squadrons will be replaced by 7 Eurofighter Squadron's. 3 GR7 and 2 SHAR FA2 Squadrons will be replaced by 4 FCBA Squadron's, and does anyone think that the current 7 GR4 Squadrons will be replaced by anything like 7 FOAS Units?

The times they are a changing................

You being "an angry JN" leaves me entirely unmoved, I was talking about journalism per se, not just you.

------------------
If the suit fits.........

[This message has been edited by Suit (edited 03 November 2000).]

[Jackonicko]

1) You don't want pleasing by journos, you just want them to be objective? Or perhaps just to agree with you, I begin to wonder?

2) You need to read more carefully, I didn't say that there wasn't political bias in the broadsheets, just that much recent defence coverage has been non-party political, and that mine always is! I'd also like to stick up for the better tabloids, who sometimes surprise me by doing the defence job better than the broadsheets. Not often, admittedly, but regularly enough to make claims of sensationalist nonsense seem like an unnecessarily crude stereotype.

3) You say that "The aviation rags do NOT raise the profile of the forces to the general public! They are preaching to a miniscule, already converted minority of the population, to whom the serial number and colour scheme of the aircraft is far more important than it's relevance to the defence needs of the UK in the 21st century."
Your attitude is a) uninformed b) offensive and c) crudely stereotypical.
They have a useful role in keeping people informed. Where do you think the stories about scrapping EF's internal cannon, the proposed radical fleet option, etc. first appeared? Where were they carried in the greatest depth? Whose journalists fed these and other stories to Fleet St and the BBC? You may, of course, think that the public had no right to know about these matters, and that serving personnel not directly concerned had no need to know, but that's another argument, I guess.
Many aviation magazines are now carrying in-depth pieces on procurement policy, strategy, and the technology and practise of air power, and some count serving aircrew (and Air Rank officers) among their contributors. During the last 12 months there have been thought-provoking articles in them (and in some daily papers) about Kosovo, retention, morale, carriers, JSF, EF, FOAS, FCBA, F3 SEAD, GR4, upgrade policy etc. etc. I write for some of them, and don't write about serial numbers or colour schemes.
The audience of the better aviation magazines includes many of the youngsters who will be in the cockpits in five-ten years time, many professionals working in industry, and even a small but significant service readership. (I know of at least two Air Rank GD (Air) list readers, at least!). And as for the rest, they're not all under-educated spotters. Many are professional people who retain an interest in military aviation despite having chosen other careers, whether in the law, medicine, education or even journalism. I'd rather that they continued to be on-side than be made hostile by arrogance and ill-founded and barely disguised contempt. And it's worth pointing out that the well-informed aviation enthusiast may often argue your case with his non-aviation friends in the pub, in the workplace, or at the dinner party. I suspect your attitude may be based on a lack of recent experience of the aviation press, so I'll ask when's the last time you read any of the aviation magazines, BTW?

4) Your points about force levels are well made, but if history teaches us anything, it is that the world is a fast-changing and unpredictable place. To blithely rule out any conflict at any time in the future is as stupid today as it would have been in the 1920s. Who could have predicted (with any real accuracy or conviction) the fall of the Berlin Wall, the collapse of the USSR, the Gulf War, the Balkans.

5) Your cracks about there being "no objective thought provoking coverage of the Royal Air Force" diminish the efforts of many friends who do a difficult job well, and who, in my view, do provide exactly that. I'm personally slightly upset by your direct criticism of me for using the phrase "high calibre, high quality, unrivalled people in the armed forces ... being expected to do too much with too little". That's my opinion. Sorry. You're entitled to your opinion as to the merits of existing commitments, (similar sentiments have been expressed by others on previous threads) and you are certainly entitled to express the opinion that there is no threat and that thus we need no armed forces. Equally, however, I am entitled to mine, and to think that such views are short-sighted and blinkered, and that they take no account of the fundamental instability of human history. I happen to agree that any war is extremely unlikely within even the medium term, but I want the insurance policy of adequate armed forces in case I'm wrong, and I want Britain to be capable of mounting a Granby-sized operation again, if necessary. And so do the politicians and many of the voters. And I don't think an 18-squadron force is adequate for that.

I don't want to get into a slanging match with you, Suit, and I may have over-exaggerated my annoyance - but the prospect of the constant carping about hostile journos being joined by carping about over-sympathetic ones caused my sense-of-humour failure protection system to over-load.

PS: You said: "I am afraid that you have no idea how much I am doing to raise the profile of the RAF as you do not know who I am." As a full-time defence journalist, if you were doing anything to appreciably raise the RAF's profile (more than do the aviation magazines, the Air League, RAFHS, APRA, etc.), perhaps you might expect that I would know who you are! Just a thought....., and intended as banter rather than deadly insult. And when I raise my glass this evening, I'll raise it to you, just to show there are no hard feelings, OK?


[This message has been edited by Jackonicko (edited 03 November 2000).]

[Edmund Blackadder]

Gentlemen PLEASE,

I am slightly worried about the direction this thread has turned.

Suit,

I hope that your comments are due to a bad day at the office or some personal gripe that you have with journos because even I find them strangely stereotypical and can understand how Jacko would be offended by them. I personnally have no interest in who you are but I am intrigued as to the reasons you decided to leave the RAF. Much of your tirade appears to be based on outdated knowledge 'Who are we threatened by now'!!!

As for thought provoking coverage of the RAF, it is difficult to provoke thought in the public at all at the moment due to the low (invisible) profile of the services and any positive coverage given by any area of the media, including 'spotter' magazines as you so condescendingly put, is appreciated.

As has been mentioned many times in several different threads it is unfortunate that many of the stories carried in the media by both the broadsheets and tabloids is factually inaccurate however I feel that the services should be working closer with the media to improve the situation. However it is then vital that the media LISTEN to what is being said and not go off half cocked in an effort to gain political and or public Kudos. Even the most battle hardened Journoi can not deny this happens but we in the services must also realise that the job of a journo is to sell newspapers. I do not feel that the two aims are mutually exclusive.

This thread was not to debate the effectiveness of the British press but to see if there was anything we could do to improve the publics perception of the armed forces. Like it or not the media has a large role to play if we are to do this and uninformed comment from any side can only hinder what is already a very precarious situation.

Does anyone have a cunning plan

Ed

[Jackonicko]

Perhaps we should thank Suit, because what he has done is raise a vital point.

If the public's perception of the Forces is to be better informed (or, if you prefer, if 'apathy' is to be countered) then the Forces must exploit its friends and allies, and must help anyone who will help 'spread the word'.

My feelings as to the usefulness of friendly journos is both well-known and self-interested, but I do think that the usefulness of the enthusiasts (non-spotters) and even the spotters themselves is often under-estimated. Just as a political party must keep its grass-roots activists happy, perhaps these people are the RAF's 'activists', as are the youth organisations, old boys, etc.

[Edmund Blackadder]

Here here !!

Permission to shout a loud HURRAH!!

Ed

[swashplate]

Interesting stuff about US 'schmatzy patriotism'. Maybe they're so extreemly supportive of forces nowadays out of guilt for the 60s excesses?
Remember, America v nearly came apart in that time.
We are 'apathetic', aren't we. I suppose it goes back to WW1 slaughter - people felt betrayed that so much sacrifice achived so little. Those in uniform should remember the 30s - there was an anti-war movement then, too, and patriotism was sneered at. On 3/9/39, however, all that changed, and the country went to the recruiting offices.
I'm sure that would happen again.

PS see you at the bash 1st dec.

[Overstretch]

Suit??

"You will never know how much I do to raise the profile...." Do I detect the hand of DPR - Oops sorry - DCC here??

[Suit]

Edmund

Right on, I was aware I was heading off track as I was composing. No, I'd not had a bad day at the office, just been reading some recent monthly aviation magazines and got annoyed at the contents, that should answer one of your questions Jackonicko.

Jackonicko

Thanks for raising your glass to me, I shall return the compliment, I think I know who you are but doubt you would know me, but you may have come across some of the things that I have done...............

On a more general point, my ranting may well have been a little off track but I do get annoyed at how the RAF is portrayed in the media, both general and specialist.

I am afraid that I will never be swayed as to the merits of most enthusiast magazines, they lack ambition and they lack any depth and they are not staffed by journos, they are staffed by enthusiasts. JN may think that I was tarring him with that brush but I wasn't.

The RAF needs decent PR and it needs it dammed quickly. It doesn't need it with the average reader of the likes of AFM and Aircraft Illustrated, it needs it with the sort of people who would never consider even picking up such a magazine. I am really concerned that the RAF is slowly becoming totally isolated from the rest of the nation and is in danger of being considered a total irrelevance. That was my main motivation for writing what I did when I saw this thread.

We have had a sustained period of media coverage concentrating on base closures, Squadron disbandments, drawdown and restructuring. Some people may be excused for thinking that the RAF either has no future or is on it's last legs, that bothers me and I would like to see things change.

overstretch.

My how I laughed, if only you knew..............



------------------
If the suit fits.........

[Edmund Blackadder]

Suit,

Thanks for clarifying the statements. I agree with what you say about the media coverage concebtrating on the negative aspects of the RAF and how that affects public opinion but do you not feel that the only way to get a more constructive view across to the public is to be more open and proactive with both the media and the population ?

Swash,

One thing history teaches us is that we never learn from history !!

I think that we all agree in general about what needs to be done but who has the right ear and would they bother to listen ?

Toodle pip

Ed

[kbf1]

Before we start having ago at the Americans, it is worth pointing something out. While I do find their patriotism a little over the top at times, they do at leats seem to be proud of their country. My grandfather in law flies the Stars and Stripes over his house, as do many others in the community where he lives. If I wanted to fly the Union Flag I would need (and most likely be turned down for) planning permission. I am accused inderectly by the likes of the Fabian Society of being "Institutionally Racist!", our nation is told to drop the use of the name Great Britian by some tree huggers who think that it excludes minorities, our government tries to prevent christian prayer in state schools for fear of offending other religions, and our teachers (or rather the more left wing) do not want to teach British history before 1960 because they feel it is an irrelevance to know our Viking/Anglo-Saxon/Norman heritage etc. I can see our society being eroded and fragmented as nobody under 40 knows what it is to be British anymore, and those that do are told to be ashamed of it. Defnding what you are told to be ashamed of (as our forces do)is not likely to be seen as a "relevant" vocation any more. It is sadly more publicly acceptable to be a looney-left wing social worker who believes in placing children with gay couples than it is to defend the realm.

One thing we should consider that is a strong and influential factor in American politics is the NCO Association. This organisation has a great deal of political might. They dwarf the British Legion in terms of their opinion swaying ability and a number of Senators and Congressmen are elected only with their support. Because of this the voice of veterans who have served in the armed forces is listened to and acted upon. Unfortunately, we do not have the same opinion swaying powers because there aren't enough of us servicemen to be worth listening to (we wouldn't be able to swing a single seat in Parliament)and we are too fragmented. Look at the Gulf War Veterans Association. Far more people are suffering from Gulf War Syndrome that from CJD, yet the Gov't are willing to pay millions in compensation to the families of 84 victims of CJD and yet they won't pay a penny to the families of the victims of GWS.

Now ask why apathy exists.

[Edmund Blackadder]

KBF

Welcome to the party. You have very succinctly summed up what I think a lot of people have been trying to say. I too think that the US patriotism, all though a little garish at times is truly heartfelt. As a nation we are fragmented and being driven even more so. There is a real desire for national identity among the people of the home nations but don't forget that the US also suffers from this, just ask a Texan about his identiy or someone from New York!!

What I think we sometimes miss is that in our efforts to gain a natinal identity we just end up slagging each other off. If it really is the wish of the Scots to become an independant nation then they should be allowed to do so but the incescant sniping at each other does no good to the counntry as a whole let alone the armed forces. The banter is all well and good but can be very devisive, ask the English who live in the north of Scotland.

We must all over come our narrow mindedness if we are to present a united front and reestablish the services as a good way of life.

I for one am proud to be British. I also think that the British people are among the most tolerant in the world, which could account for our opinion being easily swayed but often ill informed statements.

(god I can go on sometimes)!!

Wibble

Ed

[Jackonicko]

E-mail me a 'safe address' (wife's cousin's brothers or somesuch, and I'll post you the next bit of 'positive coverage' you'll approve of. Or E-mail me and I'll E-Mail you the draft back.

If we know each other (MA? IG?), Hi and how the devil..., if not, hope you enjoyed your glass as much as I enjoyed mine.

[Suit]

Right! A perfect example of what is currently "getting my goat" appeared in the Sunday Times yesterday. There was one article about the current armed forces. Was it positive, did it encourage the brave and the good to join, did it cement relationships between the military and the populace at large, did it make our forces more relevant to todays society?

DID IT £*** !!!!!!!!

It reported that the forces have been reminded adultery is a disciplinary offence!

For christ sake! How are we going to persuade people to join up or accept the funding of the forces with this kind of nonsense?

It goes on to say that soldiers have been reminded that they cannot afford the individualism and self-obsession of modern civilian life.

Now putting to one side for a moment the truth of such a statement, how the hell are we going to persuade people that it is worth taking the Queens shilling if we constantly make the forces out to be an institution from the dark ages.

As the percieved gulf between the real world and that of the forces continues to widen, the forces are in grave danger of becoming so remote and out of touch with the real world that the best PR and image in the world won't make the population proud of the UK forces.

JN
E-mail on it's way


------------------
If the suit fits.........

[Jackonicko]

Concur with you eval. of S.Times article.

However, my young nephew (13 and achingly trendy, even by 13 year-old standards) would like nothing better than to fly helicopters with the Army Air Corps.

I asked him about what he thought of the discipline, formality and old-fashioned ethos of the forces, and his answer was along the lines that he'd rather that than some @rse trying to be trendy while staffing his company with the required quota of "gay lesbian black wheelchair-bound vegetarian whales".

[reynoldsno1]

I see the captain of the All Blacks, currently on tour in France, lay a wreath yesterday at the memorial to the New Zealand soldiers killed during World War 1.

Are UK sports teamd encouraged to do similar things?

[Nil nos tremefacit]

Unlikely the England soccer manager is going to indulge in such behaviour!!!!!!

Most premiership soccer teams don't contain a full contingent of Brits - why should the Moroccans and Peruvians that fill my home side give a toss that the city they live in was flattened during the last war?

The young public look to idols from far away - they are less likely to be motivated by patriotism than an enthusiasm for Vialli or Wenger et al.

Just a thought.

[Letsby Avenue]

Suit – Rules are rules and you live by them or die by them. Are you saying that two young male airmen with a penchant for mutual sexual deviancy should be encouraged to co-habit in a FMQ next to you? Where does this breakdown of social barriers so encouraged by our trendy European neighbours end? The simple answer is that the services should exist in their own regulated environment with strictly enforced codes of behaviour so that the forces may do what they do best – Kill people who don’t conform to our society’s expectations.

[Suit]

Letsby.

Careful, your Dad might find out your on his PC.


Actually I don't give a toss what anyone living next door to me does.

And I'm afraid that "rules ain't rules" and that absolutely no-one lives or dies by them.

If you are a pilot (got on to FS2000 yet?)then your grasp of military history is woeful, ever heard of the Spartans?

If you really define the success of the UK forces as;

"killing people who don't conform to our societies expectations"

Then you've just defined them as perhaps the most unsuccesful outfit in history-was that your intention?

Now run along before a grown up finds you where you don't belong.



------------------
If the suit fits.........

[Edmund Blackadder]

Suit,

I have to say you have a way iof grasping the nettle !!

Letsby,

I have to agree that it is exactly this outdated and misplaced attitude that discourages the young from even enquiring about a career in the services. Things have changed and moved on old chap, not all for the better I'll grant you, but if we don't adapt then we will be left in the past along with some of the stupid ideals we are supposed to uphold. Tradition is one thing but blind insistance on being separate to society will only drive the wedge further in.

Reynolds & NNT

Just as we must adapt to society so should those who ply their trade in this country (within reason). I'm not saying they should bow and scrape, just show a little respect when asked to do so. I started this thread with a comment on how US sports teams (including the foreign players) all wore black ribbons on their uniforms as a mark of respect for those killed on the USS Cole. Not too much to ask is it.

Toodle pip

Ed

[kbf1]

NNT..fair point. In days of yore boys comics used to inspire with tales of bravery and service. Who remembers the comic books that told stories of gallantry and patriotism? Role models were role models because they faught for the greater good of King and Country and sah-darn if they didn't enjoy it! Now what do teenagers have to inspire them? Neolithically un-intelligent and mono-syllabic plebs like Beckham who can't write his own name, let alone a book, and his self-serving wife. Why be paid a pitance to serve your country when you can earn millions kicking a ball round a pitch and serve yourself?

We also have to look at the lack of moral leadership from our government. We are led by Europe and their agenda. They want homosexuals in the armed forces, we have homosexuals in the armed forces (I am not making an argument for or against this, just illustrating a point that we don't make decisions because it suits US any more). We feel morally outraged by the election of a right wing government in Austria where the people voted without a gun to their heads in free andf fair elections. We feel we have the moral high ground to bomb the Serbian President out of office. We will get involved in any scrape that doesn't involve us, yet when Mugabe kills Britons because they have farms we don't fly to the rescue of our own, instead we give him money to buy more arms to carry on killing whites. Really ethical use of our armed forces by the Ginger Gnome? It gets even better when the armed forces are used to ship fuel to petrol stations to save the government from reducing fuel taxation. The right decision is to lower the levels of duty by the equivalent of the £16bn warchest the Chancellor has stashed away, not use the army to do their dirty work for them. Call me cynical, but I expect the army will be used to support the Govt's ailing popularity so that the war chest can be used in the 6 months ahead of the next election.

So where does that leave us? Involving our forces in conflicts that are non of our concern, not getting involved in conflicts that are, and being used as a political pawn in the run up to an election. Given the choice between an easy life of earning ££ playing footie and joining up what would you do if you were 16?

I have heard it said that the forces should be a force for good. I say we should be a force to be reckoned with (I saw that somewhere and agree with the sentiment whole heartedly)

[misterploppy]

Letsby

You say: "The simple answer is that the services should exist in their own regulated environment with strictly enforced codes of behaviour so that the forces may do what they do best – Kill people who don’t conform to our society’s expectations."

Our modern liberal (small l) democracy and, indeed the Armed Forces, expect that all citizens / Servicepeople should be valued for their contribution to society / the Armed forces regardless of race, creed, sex, disability, sexuality etc.

When would you like your appointment with the firing squad?

Another thing, why does your opprobrium for specifically *young* 'sexually deviant' airmen romping in the MQ next door raise its head? Is this some fantasy of yours? Perhaps only held in check by your insistence on "strictly enforced codes of behaviour"?

Reminiscences of:

Sir

As a lifetime subscriber to PPRuNe, I feel compelled to express my disappointment that you have chosen to print supporting messages from one of those nancy boys intent on corrupting every bone and rippling sinew of our youngsters' bodies. It fills me with disgust to imagine the sweating craved cavortings of such lust filled throbbing sex monsters. I stand firm and proud against such licentious behaviour and only hope that in future you shall endeavour to banish any further communication from people whose only joy in life is to obtrusively and perniciously inveigle their despicable vices into the hearts and minds of lithe, pert, voluptuous and writhing orgasmic bodies melting uncontrollably in the uninhibited thrashings of steaming pulsating sex.
Excuse me while I mop this up.

Sincerely
Jock Stiffly (Wg Cdr)
(With apologies to the Daily Reckless http://tommymackay.tripod.com/letters.htm )



[This message has been edited by misterploppy (edited 07 November 2000).]

[gatego]

I thought I would take my life in my hands and place a post.

The comment that the public are not interested in the Armed Forces until the bad guys are climbing up the cliffs at Dover is true. Then we would leap into action, climb out of action, get into the spare action and hopefully go on to sort out the threat.

People in the UK would care deeply about their Armed Forces if this was happening; their boys being shot at and protecting the homeland, stirring stuff.

The fact that the armed forces are being shot at every day around the world protecting UK PLC interests, should be no different.

Joe B's thinking.

1. Well why are we there anyway?
2. Whats that got to do with us?
3. Out of sight, out of mind.

If we are to win over the public we have to keep them informed.

1+2. They need to know why we are there. A proper reason that they can relate to, not spin, trumped up or otherwise which will just go in one ear and out the other! (All the rest does)

3. There are lots of British Forces on Ops around the world being brave/shot at/sacrificing 6 months with their family, all the time. Its not recognised by the suits, why should it be recognised by Joe P? The Kosovo medal fiasco? Gulf medals?

Whatever happens it has to happen soon. Otherwise those of us that are left will have to scrabble for the last 3 pairs of NVGs as the lights are turned off around us.

[S Potter Esq]

Actually one of my own personal bugbears with the mainstream media is their constant OVERplaying of the importance of the UK armed forces and the UK generally in e.g. Kosovo/Gulf. One paper referred to the 'Anglo-US' bombing of Serbia, neatly forgetting that France provided twice as many aircraft as the UK and that France, Canada and Holland all dropped more PGM's than the RAF. The Observer recently ran an article on UCAV's, implying that the UK was on a par with the US in the development of same and/or were collaborating with the USA on eg X45, which as far as I know is not even slightly the case.

Strangely, this phenomenon seems to affect the left-wing press as much as the right wing, which also have in common the profound inaccuracy of most of their reporting.

Anyway, just my 2D in old money. Don't even get me started on legal dramas...




------------------
S. Potter, Esq
"Gentlemen! You can't fight in here! This is the WAR ROOM!"

[Ham Phisted]

S Potter Esq

I think you've missed the point re our military efforts in Kosovo/Serbia/Gulf etc. Militarily our contribution may not amount to much but, politically, for the world to see that America is not acting unilaterally gives them a higher moral standpoint. Without a shadow of a doubt it would be cheaper, easier, more efficient for the US to act on its own; however, they are very conscious that world opinion would view this as heavy-handedness on their part. Granted, we will be viewed as a junior partner but, in my experience, we are still regarded as a valued partner. However, unless our lords and masters get their act together on procurement and funding issues, the US may lose interest altogether.

[Roc]

Heres an American perspective,
Alot of the so-called over the top patriotism in the US is the result of a reasons. The fact that we felt it was a Cold War up until a few years ago made many Citizens value the military even though no bullets were flying, we were ready to go at a moments notice. The fact that every now and then some wacko bombs us or kills a few soldiers, forces the public to not forget we are in harms way. Finally movies, TV and especially all the recent interest in the WWll generation, helps keep the military in the spotlight. This will change..Without the threat of the Russian Bear, relative peace, and our own weak-left wing liberals, who tend to look down on military service, I expect apathy will rise..its the price of peace I guess, By the way as an Air Force pilot who's operated with British forces on numerous exercises and skirmishes over the last 15 years, I can vouch that we have the highest respect for your military and consider you invaluable allies, hell the RAF is revered by most Americans for their stand in the Battle of Britain. You may suffer from bad PR back home but your reputation here is superb...

[The Mistress]

Just heard on the radio that some Poppy Day collecting boxes have been stolen in Oxfordshire.

These people should be flogged. It's the big day on Sunday and I for one will attend a ceremony in honour of an uncle I never had chance to meet. My Dad never truly got over the loss of his 'baby' brother. (Killed in action at sea).

If the thieves are caught maybe they should be given to the survivors of Japanese POW camps. Just a thought.

[reynoldsno1]

My 9 yr old daughter at school here in the US has recently completed a project on militray veterans in her family. She compiled a news sheet on her late grandfather, who flew with Coastal Command in WW2 and was awarded the MBE, her late great uncle - a Beaufighter & Mosquito nav radar killed in Normandy in 1944 and awarded two DFCs, and her dad, formerly of the RAF & RNZAF. I have been told such a project would be (shock, horror) "never allowed in UK schools". Is that true (I have been away from the UK for a long time)

It has instilled an interest in history in her, and she watched a recent documentary on the Holocaust with mounting disbelief and anger and the comment "I would never let that happen...." which makes me feel more confident about the future - so much so that we are planning to return to the UK in the near future and start our own business.

Come to think of it, perhaps it would better if everyone stayed apathetic and we can clean up the market 8-)

[S Potter Esq]

Ham Phisted,

You're exactly right, which is why the Spams let us have TLAM, Trident, etc.

------------------
S. Potter, Esq
"Gentlemen! You can't fight in here! This is the WAR ROOM!"

[jumpseater]

Re my earlier posting, my little girl came charging in this evening waving a poppy she'd made at nursery today. Quite good of the nursery to start an awareness of the sacrifice we've asked in the past of our sevicemen and women, at such an early age I thought.

[The Scarlet Pimpernel]

Jumpseater....that's made my evening. You read something like that and the phrase "We will remember them" will live on.

[This message has been edited by The Scarlet Pimpernel (edited 11 November 2000).]

[Edmund Blackadder]

ROC,

Thanks for that. Does anyone else know how the UK armed forces are percieved in other countries ?

Mistress,

I'm afraid that this is probably more of a sad indictment on society than an indication of British apathy.

reynolds,

It is true that many schools no longer teach WW1 or WW2 or any war for that matter as part of their curriculam. However my son (who attends a school without any other service children) has recently been learning about the blitz and Rememberance Sunday from what I would consider a very young teacher with no military background.

JS,

perhaps there is hope ! I happened to be in London yesterday and took the opportunity to wander around the Garden of Rememberance outside Westminster Abbey. The ratio of young to old was surprisingly high. At what stage do (did) people become apathetic and why. Sorry Jacko but I can only think that much of the reason is media related.

Toodle pip

Ed

[Jackonicko]

I still think that there are grounds for some optimism. I think that the 1980s and 1990s (I hesitate to politicise this by referring to the period as the 'Thatcher Years') when individualism was stressed so much more than society, were a selfish and inward-looking time, when there was a degree of apathy towards anything outside one's own narrow sphere. And there was a degree of apathy towards the armed forces, just as there was towards foreign affairs, history, and even the progress of the national football team!

But I think that there are signs that people generally are looking outward more, and there is more interest where there was once apathy. Look at the growth of interest in current affairs, history etc. marked by new TV documentaries, magazines, and even the emergence of dedicated satellite and cable TV channels. Look at the take-up of CNN and the Discovery Channel, the History channel etc. Kids at school are now interested in history again (and especially the violent bits) and from 1990 (the 50th anniversary of the Battle of Britain) onwards, interest in recent history has spiralled. My father, and my father in law have both been called in to local schools to say "What they did in the war, grandpa" and kids watch the various documentaries (and Dad's Army, and Bilko, and Vietnam War movies) as avidly as their elders.

And this all helps to foster better awareness of the Armed Forces. The military is (almost) cool again, in a restrained kind of way. Defence stories are of general interest again, and are considered useful front-page leads or prime slot fillers on TV and radio news bulletins. It's not like it is in the USA, where (as has been pointed out) patriotism is expected to be worn on the sleeve, and where the military has considerable visibility in society.

You must also remember that the disappearance of uniformed personnel (even in garrison towns) due to the pira threat has made our small armed forces almost invisible, while the growing tendency for all ranks and all arms to wear DPM combat clothing, distinguished only by headgear, (and by the ubiquitous woolly pully, which isn't smart, and which can make the wearer look like an employee of Securicor, or the Customs service) has perhaps further reduced the visibility of the RAF and RN in particular.

But I still think you are being unnecessarily pessimistic.

[Paul Wesson]

Sad about the PIRA threat making it harder to spot servicemen - we used to have all those security briefs about wearing non-uniform jackets on our way to work, varying our routes etc.

Bases, which were previously public places where locals were welcome in the messes and walked their dogs along ancient rights of way through the grounds were all fenced in at great cost. Personally I reckon the cost outweighed the benefits of seeing unifomed personnel on the streets of free society. It's not that long ago that Swinderby cadets would have to travel everywhere in SD uniform, hats had to be worn when walking the streets and carrying a military bag guaranteed a hitch hiker a lift.

I don't know the full cost of fencing in hundreds of square miles of land, but I think the money spent on security could have been better spent following known players around and stopping the terrorist offences occurring in the first place.

Just my view.

[kbf1]

It is good to note that programmes such as Soldiers To Be is being repeated on UK Horizons and Guns & Roses was shown recently on the BBC. What I think saddened me a bit was the selective editing that went on in both programmes. In spite of good instructors and staff at ATR Pirbright and RMAS, the instructors were often shown as cruel and the OCdts often shown as incompetant. As long as the Blair Broadcasting Corp continue to produce programmes with a slant that is clearly mocking the forces in their documentaries of the modern forces (I also note that they would never get away with it in coverage of the BoB etc)the public will have false perceptions of what we as servicemen are all about. Interestingly one of the programmes that raised the profile of the army and did a lot for its image with Joe Public was Soldier Soldier. I wonder what that says about us Brits?

[Jackonicko]

Of course the best antidote to apathy and the best way of spreading the good word is to fail to fly friendly journos, who'll make the case for low flying etc., and instead fly Charlie the gardener (and both her dimmocks). No jokes about negative g, being wobbly on the approach, or pressing the tit, please!

[SRENNAPS]

Paul Wesson

Agree totally with your comments.
I once was that proud hitchiker carring that military bag. When I was a kid on a base many years ago my school mates and myself could walk on and off a base without a spanish inquisition.(We used to go onto the airfield and watch Jet Provists, Buccaneers, Vulcans and Gnats taking to the sky).

But when it comes to apathy why dont we look at ourselves. To this day I know people who still use the security threat as an excuse not to wear uniform. They wear jeans and a T shirt to and from work, (even when they drive their car's), and use their protective clothing to hide the fact when at work.

However last year when I was stationed at a little base in Hampshire the rules of wearing uniform in public were relaxed. I must admit I got a kick out of the number of locals who went out of their way to say Good Morning when I popped the the bank or the local petrol station - obviously very pleased to see us again in the community wearing uniform. All is not lost.

[Talking Radalt]

SRENNAP, good point about wearing of uniform off-base, but just to throw a proverbial cat with a spanner into the pigeon works......Around the same time as relaxed rules were introduced I spotted a JT off base in uniform but minus hat. Only two days previously the Station Commander reminded us all that wearing uniform meant ALL of it and to discreetly pass on the word. So without making a scene (I was in civvies) I passed on the Bosses wishes to said "incorrectly" attired JT, who then told me to "**** off if I thought he was wearing a hat off camp". Just remind me where the problem lies again?

[Edmund Blackadder]

TR,

It's an excellant point you make. Although in an earlier post I referred to the need for the services to adapt to the modern lifestyle this does not mean a flagrant disregard for discipline. If we are to venture out into the new world wearing our uniforms and, as Jacko put it, making the RAF cool again we must ensure that personnel such as the one you describe are educated and not allowed to get away with portraying a shody image to Joe P.

It is not obligatory to wear uniform in public and therefore if any aspect of doing so embarrasses an individal (although why it should escapes me) then they should stick to civvies.

Toodle pip

Ed

[jumpseater]

Just a few thoughts:

ed: last year in the week after Remembrance Sunday I too was in London during the working week and went past the Garden and the Cenotaph. There were still quite a number of people of all ages viewing the wreaths and dedications on a rainy cold afternoon, so it still means something, I myself will be going to London this week and will go and have a look myself.

In our extended family we have two career military men, one Pongo, one Crab, one is my cousin, one is the wife's. I have always followed the forces with respect and interest, tried to join once, more of that later.

I follow news quite frequently and take an interest in the world events, my wife does not. During Kosovo, Sierra Leone, her questions were quite frequently why are we there?, whats it got to do with us?. We are in our 30's, at school history for us was Henry 8th etc, nothing 'modern'.
The general media, (papers, tv, radio,net)plays a significant part in the perception of the forces, as do the politicians. Without going into party issues, or their career aims, compare Hesseltine and Clark of the 80's and 90's to today's ministers, and then their respective media profiles. I can't remember the last time I saw the current defence minister on telly, and as I type this I can't remember his name or face. We have seen this week members of the forces helping with flood work at home, but the 'similar' work done in Mozambique had a far greater coverage. This summer why not take a big chopper back to Yorkshire filled with the sandbag fillers?, and visit Selby etc land on the playing field, to say hello and remind them of the help in their time of need. Tell the TV companies first so they can get piccies of the kiddies climbing over the toys and getting gizzits from the troops, it'll make a nice story, any thoughts jacko?.

Recruitment must be positive a few days after my 28th birthday I saw an RAF advert for aircrew, but I was literally two days too old to join, and there was no way over that hurdle. I understand that there have to be limits, but perhaps 48 hours may not have been that important if it meant getting someone committed to try their hardest to achieve navigator status, which was what I wanted. By the age of 28 I'd already had 6 years working in civil aviation, so I at least knew something or the aviation world, which may or may not have been of use.

I'll get my coat now, but there's still a little girl who likes seeing Crabs, Fish-heads, and Pongo's (alphabetical, before teddy throwing starts), sitting on horse's marching up and down etc. Keep showing them that at an early age and maybe from small acorns.....
JS

[Suit]

Edmund and reynolds.

You say that WW1 or 2, or any war, is not covered by some schools?

Not true my friend, the days when a teacher could dictate what is and is not covered are long gone.

The modern history part of the national curiculum gives two options for British history, the Victorian era onwards or the 1930's onwards, two fairly large wars in there if you look hard!

Jackonicko raises a good point re the current interest shown in history in general and conflict in particular.

From every news bulletin, through Discovery Channel to Hollywood and UK Gold, there is a large chunk of both fictional and factual coverage of conflict with a good deal of it being UK orientated. Even a child who went to a Quaker school could hardly avoid it.

The extent to which the nation came to a halt on Saturday would simply not have happened in the 1970's, again Jackonicko I agree with you, the age of "there is no such thing as society" is over and there was a really poignant concentration of youth involved in Rememberance functions across the land, it may not be cool to do such things but it is no longer square!

Jackonicko

Is your hotmail account working?



------------------
If the suit fits.........

[Roc]

I've found that the power of Hollywood is quite impressive on the psyche of the young. For instance, I attended Pilot training when the movie "Top Gun" came out, It had a huge effect on people and alot of friends I've made at my airline job have told me they joined the Navy after seeing "Top Gun" Also the effect that "Saving Private Ryan" has had on all Americans, and Nations, I'd Presume, about the real sacrafice that all soldiers have made was profound! Disney is currently working on a Pearl Harbor Movie, it looks like a real winner. I know most of the time Hollywood stuff is inaccurate and Kooky, But Imagine if Steven Speilberg put his talents and realistically updated a new Battle of Britain movie it would go a long way in raising public awareness. JMHO

[Mmmmnice]

On the subject of discounts: took the kids to Warner Cinema near the "Home of the Battlefield Helicopter", flash id and get told that the cheap ticket is no longer available to "come into line with all the other cinemas that don't give a discount"!Doesn't it warm your heart to get treatment like that! Having read book about writing/complaining etc I have written to MD/CEO of TimeWarner - which I will send if I can get a suitable address; phone calls to the flics in B'stoke don't get answered! Meanwhile I must go and put in my own shower - cos no-one else will - hurrah!

[S Potter Esq]

Roc,

Re Spielberg BoB film. Yes, can't wait to see those brave American Mustang pilots save England again.



------------------
S. Potter, Esq
"Gentlemen! You can't fight in here! This is the WAR ROOM!"

[Jackonicko]

SUIT,

Can't seem to send outgoing Hotmails, at the moment, but yes, it's working, and thanks!

Will reply when technically able!

JN