A dereliction of duty
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
A dereliction of duty
Sunday Telegraph: A dereliction of duty
'My son was sent to war without the proper equipment being available." Those are the words of the father of Mark Wright, the corporal who, having behaved with conspicuous and commendable heroism, died of his wounds after a five-hour wait for the arrival of a helicopter capable of evacuating him and three critically injured comrades. When a helicopter finally arrived, it was American: there were no suitable British helicopters available.
News: Army hero left to die by failings at MoD
The failure to provide the resources needed to protect our troops is an appalling condemnation of the Military of Defence planners whose incompetence led to the shortage of helicopters that cost Cpl Wright his life. More fundamentally, it should be a profound source of shame to the Government whose refusal to fund the war in Afghanistan adequately has led to the disgraceful situation where wounded men such as Corporal Wright die because of a shortage of equipment.
When ministers order the Army to fight a war, soldiers are entitled to expect that, in return for risking their lives, everything possible will be done to take care of them should they be wounded. That is indeed what ministers promise they will do. It is not, however, what happens - as the official investigation into the death of Cpl Wright in action in Afghanistan, which we report today, demonstrates.
Cpl Wright's death is not an isolated incident. There have been several other cases where soldiers have died because the equipment that would have prevented their deaths was not available.
Accidents are inevitable in war. Deaths due to shortages of equipment, or incompetence in distributing it, are not. Labour ministers were responsible for deciding that, while it was worth sending British soldiers to fight in Afghanistan, it was not worth spending the extra money to provide them all with life-saving equipment. Those ministers have not tried to justify that decision, and no wonder: it has left them with blood on their hands.
'My son was sent to war without the proper equipment being available." Those are the words of the father of Mark Wright, the corporal who, having behaved with conspicuous and commendable heroism, died of his wounds after a five-hour wait for the arrival of a helicopter capable of evacuating him and three critically injured comrades. When a helicopter finally arrived, it was American: there were no suitable British helicopters available.
News: Army hero left to die by failings at MoD
The failure to provide the resources needed to protect our troops is an appalling condemnation of the Military of Defence planners whose incompetence led to the shortage of helicopters that cost Cpl Wright his life. More fundamentally, it should be a profound source of shame to the Government whose refusal to fund the war in Afghanistan adequately has led to the disgraceful situation where wounded men such as Corporal Wright die because of a shortage of equipment.
When ministers order the Army to fight a war, soldiers are entitled to expect that, in return for risking their lives, everything possible will be done to take care of them should they be wounded. That is indeed what ministers promise they will do. It is not, however, what happens - as the official investigation into the death of Cpl Wright in action in Afghanistan, which we report today, demonstrates.
Cpl Wright's death is not an isolated incident. There have been several other cases where soldiers have died because the equipment that would have prevented their deaths was not available.
Accidents are inevitable in war. Deaths due to shortages of equipment, or incompetence in distributing it, are not. Labour ministers were responsible for deciding that, while it was worth sending British soldiers to fight in Afghanistan, it was not worth spending the extra money to provide them all with life-saving equipment. Those ministers have not tried to justify that decision, and no wonder: it has left them with blood on their hands.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Hampshire physically; Perthshire and Pembrokeshire mentally.
Posts: 1,611
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What sort of bonus do MoD Civil Servants get for coming up with ways of making savings on/reductions to the defence budget?
I think we should know.
I think we should know.
It doesn't say if his son was in Iraq or Afghanistan, but if he was in Afghanistan there would have been a Chinook, with a team of medics including a surgeon on 30 min standby to pick hime up anywhare in the AO.
Weather, servicability and workload are just not a factor. The IRT IS OUR NO 1 PRIORITY.
We have picked injured soldiers from the middle of firefights and other difficult situations. However, if there is just too much 'activity' to preclude us landing, there is nothing we can do.
Interestingly, the US could not extract people in difficulty recently as the area was just too hot. Doesn't matter if you have 100 helicopters then!
Can't speak for Iraq.
Weather, servicability and workload are just not a factor. The IRT IS OUR NO 1 PRIORITY.
We have picked injured soldiers from the middle of firefights and other difficult situations. However, if there is just too much 'activity' to preclude us landing, there is nothing we can do.
Interestingly, the US could not extract people in difficulty recently as the area was just too hot. Doesn't matter if you have 100 helicopters then!
Can't speak for Iraq.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,089
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite properly the politicians bear the ultimate responsibilty for this. There is a case as well for asking the military chiefs what they were doing about such equipment shortages. I appreciate it is is quite silly to suggest the chain of command would send troops in without bullets but where does the lack of equipment stop military actions? Not at bullets of course, but who decides on the risk v. lack of equipment? Not very well phrased but I trust you will see what I am asking. Is it ultimately the Chiefs of Staff who say "yes we are ready to go"? If so who are advising them that all is ready? Should they not be called to account since they are being paid to "manage" should scenarios?
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
minigun, would you care to comment on the following;
A spokesman for the Ministry of Defence said: "At the time of the incident, all of the helicopters in theatre would have been fully equipped.
"However, a fault with another system, necessitated all of the winches being returned to the UK, as a matter of urgency, for inspection to ensure their reliability."
A spokesman for the Ministry of Defence said: "At the time of the incident, all of the helicopters in theatre would have been fully equipped.
"However, a fault with another system, necessitated all of the winches being returned to the UK, as a matter of urgency, for inspection to ensure their reliability."
Timex,
I particularly like the bit about giving bonuses to attract retain the right kind of quality people. Doesn't that apply to the guys that pull the trigger then?
Don't get me wrong, I don't want the MOD manned by retards that can't find gainful employment anywhere else (though I suspect this makes up a large section of the Dept).
However, the Forces don't really try to compete with the civil sector and yet top flite people are attracted to a career within the military. Several of my friends have left recently (a sign of the times?) and have gone to very good jobs, including the City. Bonuses would have had no effect.
The MOD needs to get university output with no pre-concieved ideas, offer them a worthwile environment to cut their teeth before moving on to better things after 5-6 years.
Whomever it attracts, they need to be inducted into understanding the over-riding priority is the guy pulling the trigger, or worse still, the guy stood in front of the guy pulling the trigger.
I particularly like the bit about giving bonuses to attract retain the right kind of quality people. Doesn't that apply to the guys that pull the trigger then?
Don't get me wrong, I don't want the MOD manned by retards that can't find gainful employment anywhere else (though I suspect this makes up a large section of the Dept).
However, the Forces don't really try to compete with the civil sector and yet top flite people are attracted to a career within the military. Several of my friends have left recently (a sign of the times?) and have gone to very good jobs, including the City. Bonuses would have had no effect.
The MOD needs to get university output with no pre-concieved ideas, offer them a worthwile environment to cut their teeth before moving on to better things after 5-6 years.
Whomever it attracts, they need to be inducted into understanding the over-riding priority is the guy pulling the trigger, or worse still, the guy stood in front of the guy pulling the trigger.
Fly-Friendly
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Around the middle
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Minigun
I think the incident was during the 3 Para Battle Groups deployment in summer 2006. If you remember it was the minefield incident near Kajaki Dam (I think) when the Chinnie came but couldn't get to them due to no winch being fitted. They had to wait for a winch equiped Blackhawk.
I think the incident was during the 3 Para Battle Groups deployment in summer 2006. If you remember it was the minefield incident near Kajaki Dam (I think) when the Chinnie came but couldn't get to them due to no winch being fitted. They had to wait for a winch equiped Blackhawk.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To add some balance ...
A quotation from AARSE (if this is not acceptable would the mods delete it please)
"Is anyone suprised, although i think that we need to remember that the civil serpents who are getting these incredible bonuses will not be what i suppose you can call the 'front-line' guys, by that i mean the people that we in units work with regularly. They are paid just as ****e, if not worse than us and its not fair to pin any of this on them.
On the other hand, the fat cat civil serpents in main building need shooting, why should they get performance related bonuses when the MoD is in the sorry state its in. I dont want to go into the normal moans here but i feel i have to, how many sets of osprey body armour could one of those bonuses pay for, how many repairs to shoddy quarters and barrack blocks could it pay for, i could go on......"
"Is anyone suprised, although i think that we need to remember that the civil serpents who are getting these incredible bonuses will not be what i suppose you can call the 'front-line' guys, by that i mean the people that we in units work with regularly. They are paid just as ****e, if not worse than us and its not fair to pin any of this on them.
On the other hand, the fat cat civil serpents in main building need shooting, why should they get performance related bonuses when the MoD is in the sorry state its in. I dont want to go into the normal moans here but i feel i have to, how many sets of osprey body armour could one of those bonuses pay for, how many repairs to shoddy quarters and barrack blocks could it pay for, i could go on......"
R21
Yep remember it well, as does the handling pilot, a good mate of mine. That could be an equipment shortfall, though not in the way you think. There is an an issue, and I don't think Sea King or Merlin would have made a difference(don't really want to go into more detail).
Unless we purchase pave hawks for exactly this reason (gets my vote- but can't see it) then the guy is right. Not that helicopters aren't available, but because a specific capabilty isn't available.
Yep remember it well, as does the handling pilot, a good mate of mine. That could be an equipment shortfall, though not in the way you think. There is an an issue, and I don't think Sea King or Merlin would have made a difference(don't really want to go into more detail).
Unless we purchase pave hawks for exactly this reason (gets my vote- but can't see it) then the guy is right. Not that helicopters aren't available, but because a specific capabilty isn't available.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: East Ecosse
Age: 71
Posts: 453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am sorry, I am aware that I am not technically entitled to post on this thread, but the title interested me and I thoroughly agree with the sentiments here. However this should demonstrate what you're up against - from today's Mail on Sunday
'Fury as minister brands army kit shortage complaints 'absolute bollocks' in obscene Commons outburst'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1770
'Fury as minister brands army kit shortage complaints 'absolute bollocks' in obscene Commons outburst'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1770
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Sitting on the toilet of Europe.... the UK
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A quotation from AARSE (if this is not acceptable would the mods delete it please)
Story here also,
http://news.uk.msn.com/Article.aspx?...mentid=7227717
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
minigun, I am sure it will come out in open court, but I simply do not understand why a decision on the servicability or otherwise of the chinner winch system can only be made in the UK.
Any thoughts?
Any thoughts?
nige
I know where your coming from but winch fitted to a chinny would have made no difference to the outcome, though may have had impact on the aircraft.
You want to be winched out of a minefield, you don't want the worlds biggest wind and vibration generator overhead... anymore than you would want a chinny turn up to winch you off a cliff which you have a very light grip on. We'll just finish the job, no matter how well meaning.
I know where your coming from but winch fitted to a chinny would have made no difference to the outcome, though may have had impact on the aircraft.
You want to be winched out of a minefield, you don't want the worlds biggest wind and vibration generator overhead... anymore than you would want a chinny turn up to winch you off a cliff which you have a very light grip on. We'll just finish the job, no matter how well meaning.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you don't have the tools to do the job then don't do it.
Why Why Why do service personnel still put themselves at risk?
If someone said to me you have to hand over your bullet proof vest then I would also hand over my gun and sit down awaiting a replacement vest then pick my gun up again.
A police man on duty in London say would not go out on patrol with out an anti stab vest on, the union would be up in arm's. Take that guy last week told off for taking a risk saving that girl on the cliff face. He got told off for not using the right kit and putting himself at risk.
About time those in charge made it so that if you don't have 100% of the kit to do the job then its bumps on seats till the kit arrives........ but they have no balls do they.
Thats one of the reasons I PVR'd. No one looks after you so make sure you look after yourself No kit then say no to doing the job.
What are the bosses going to dso charge you
Love to see it in court the Mod would loose big time.
Why Why Why do service personnel still put themselves at risk?
If someone said to me you have to hand over your bullet proof vest then I would also hand over my gun and sit down awaiting a replacement vest then pick my gun up again.
A police man on duty in London say would not go out on patrol with out an anti stab vest on, the union would be up in arm's. Take that guy last week told off for taking a risk saving that girl on the cliff face. He got told off for not using the right kit and putting himself at risk.
About time those in charge made it so that if you don't have 100% of the kit to do the job then its bumps on seats till the kit arrives........ but they have no balls do they.
Thats one of the reasons I PVR'd. No one looks after you so make sure you look after yourself No kit then say no to doing the job.
What are the bosses going to dso charge you
Love to see it in court the Mod would loose big time.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The three soldiers who lost legs in the minefield are suing the MoD for £5 million for negligence.
I wonder how much it would have cost for a few batteries?????
I wish them well when they have their day in Court. In the case of Sgt Roberts, the cowards in the MoD settled out of Court. I sincerely hope, the whole sorry tale is told in public, as a lesson for the bean counters and politicians who decide what equipment our troops are given to go to war with.
I wonder how much it would have cost for a few batteries?????
I wish them well when they have their day in Court. In the case of Sgt Roberts, the cowards in the MoD settled out of Court. I sincerely hope, the whole sorry tale is told in public, as a lesson for the bean counters and politicians who decide what equipment our troops are given to go to war with.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: England
Posts: 964
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The MOD will not allow the case to go through the courts, they will go to any means to get a settlement out of court, otherwise precedence will be set and the flood gates will be opened for other claims. The only way it will go all the way is if the 3 soldiers refuse any out of court offers and press on to the end with their claim. Sadley in the short term they would be faced with huge bills for legal services. A common trait of the MOD is to have its lawers 'string' things out with claimants in the hope that they (the claimant) run out of money and have to give up the case. Now if the 3 soldiers could get a good 'no win no fee' lawer then it would be game on.
The very best of luck to them. I dearly hope that they recieve the amount they are after.
The very best of luck to them. I dearly hope that they recieve the amount they are after.