Jock Stirrup on Andrew Marr
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sir Jock Stirrup warns ministers not to transfer troops from Iraq to Afghanistan - Telegraph
2 words though.
"Reduced commitment".
Which is awesome.
No extra commitment to Afghanistan, no forays into Africa.
Suppose we should be a tad worried about budget cuts in the current economic climate, but they will come whether we are in up to our balls or up to our neck anyway.
The head of the armed forces has warned ministers that troops should not be transferred from Iraq to Afghanistan when Britain's military commitment there is scaled down next year.
"Reduced commitment".
Which is awesome.
No extra commitment to Afghanistan, no forays into Africa.
Suppose we should be a tad worried about budget cuts in the current economic climate, but they will come whether we are in up to our balls or up to our neck anyway.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: London
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So that's OK then......
Was I mistaken or did it seem that when Sir Jock was asked about the inadequacies of the Snatch Landrovers by Andrew Marr his answer was basically to say that we have excellent medical facilities and casualties' lives are usually saved as a result...? Surely the idea is not to suffer casualties in the first place.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BBC NEWS | Politics | 'No Afghan move' for UK troops
I may have read the story wrong but whilst its accepted that they'll be pulling British troops out of Iraq next year and that they don't want to deploy them to Afghanistan, they also seem to be suggesting that we (UK) have too many troops in Afghanistan?! Now I'd probably agree with that if we looked at it proportionally against other nations, but I'd always kind of got the impression that actually we didn't have enough troops in Afghanistan?
The inference from the suggestion that we have too many troops in Afghanistan even post-Iraq pull out, is that we have too many troops full stop....
So suddenly its becoming clearer as to where all this public money is going to come from to pay bank bail-outs, more spending during the downturn, etc etc. It looks like the defence budget is in for a SERIOUS hammering. The question is will it be major projects being slashed, or personnel numbers and support of existing forces?
I may have read the story wrong but whilst its accepted that they'll be pulling British troops out of Iraq next year and that they don't want to deploy them to Afghanistan, they also seem to be suggesting that we (UK) have too many troops in Afghanistan?! Now I'd probably agree with that if we looked at it proportionally against other nations, but I'd always kind of got the impression that actually we didn't have enough troops in Afghanistan?
The inference from the suggestion that we have too many troops in Afghanistan even post-Iraq pull out, is that we have too many troops full stop....
So suddenly its becoming clearer as to where all this public money is going to come from to pay bank bail-outs, more spending during the downturn, etc etc. It looks like the defence budget is in for a SERIOUS hammering. The question is will it be major projects being slashed, or personnel numbers and support of existing forces?
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suspect the former. Its the only place significant cuts can actually be made.
There are going to to be enough job cuts as it is; any remaining spending will be used to meet browns ponzi schemes and job creation (or loss prevention) targets... I think 3 1/2 million unemployed by 2010 will be plenty for them to cope with as it is... They need to sack a couple of non-jobs in the public sector granted (H&S/middle management) but adding a few extra thousand squaddies/sailors/airmen will do Liebour no favours in the run up to the GE. Oh, its not as if the chairman of the Treasury ctte hasnt just gone and admitted we are entering a depression or anything...
Families and small businesses to receive billions in tax cuts in Pre-Budget Report - Telegraph
Why do we actually NEED carriers? Much easier ways (and cheaper) to project force, especially with so many friendly states in the middle east. Carrier force projection comes at a significant premium over land based ops. As for A400m, the J in combination with the C-17 will do just fine thanks without complicating matters with another platform and the extra associated support structures... engineering IPTs and the like.
As for the inference, I think the general suggestion is the italians, French and germans need pull their thumb out of their hoop and join the fight in the south. Or, at least, thats what I read on the toilet wall at KIAnappa...
As for the overall picture, I have been commenting on here for quite a while now that the long-term effects of the economic crisis in the long term was always going to be bad for our jaunts to foreign lands; I think joe average tax payer will be wondering (quite rightly in some ways) why their tax pounds are being spent on "Ungrateful Mr. Jingle" that doesnt want us in his country anyway whilst they are at back of a million long queue for social housing, having their home recently repoe'd by Northern Cock. The credit crunch has just devoured its latest victim.
There are going to to be enough job cuts as it is; any remaining spending will be used to meet browns ponzi schemes and job creation (or loss prevention) targets... I think 3 1/2 million unemployed by 2010 will be plenty for them to cope with as it is... They need to sack a couple of non-jobs in the public sector granted (H&S/middle management) but adding a few extra thousand squaddies/sailors/airmen will do Liebour no favours in the run up to the GE. Oh, its not as if the chairman of the Treasury ctte hasnt just gone and admitted we are entering a depression or anything...
Families and small businesses to receive billions in tax cuts in Pre-Budget Report - Telegraph
But John McFall, the Labour chairman of the House of Commons Treasury Committee, insisted: “We should not be shy about borrowing money to get out of a depression.”
Why do we actually NEED carriers? Much easier ways (and cheaper) to project force, especially with so many friendly states in the middle east. Carrier force projection comes at a significant premium over land based ops. As for A400m, the J in combination with the C-17 will do just fine thanks without complicating matters with another platform and the extra associated support structures... engineering IPTs and the like.
As for the inference, I think the general suggestion is the italians, French and germans need pull their thumb out of their hoop and join the fight in the south. Or, at least, thats what I read on the toilet wall at KIAnappa...
As for the overall picture, I have been commenting on here for quite a while now that the long-term effects of the economic crisis in the long term was always going to be bad for our jaunts to foreign lands; I think joe average tax payer will be wondering (quite rightly in some ways) why their tax pounds are being spent on "Ungrateful Mr. Jingle" that doesnt want us in his country anyway whilst they are at back of a million long queue for social housing, having their home recently repoe'd by Northern Cock. The credit crunch has just devoured its latest victim.
Last edited by VinRouge; 9th Nov 2008 at 23:15.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Somerset
Age: 68
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There was a 'reading between the lines' meaning in CDS's answer to the question of moving troops from Iraq to Afghanistan even though the obvious answer was that Gordo would be barking mad to demand it. The price to pay would be political - the only coinage Gordo really understands.
I also feel that Andrew Marr is feeding the perception that nothing much has happened since the end of WW11. He said this morning that the fighting in Afghanistan has been the most intense experienced by British forces since the 2nd WW. It seemed a rather off-hand dismissal of the effort and sacrifice of those involved in Suez, Korea, Falklands, Brunei, Oman, Malaya and more. I find this disappointing, coming as it does from someone who has, through his book 'A History of Modern Britain' demonstrated a good grasp of modern British history. If he'd said the most intense fighting since Korea for example, I wouldn't have argued.
BBC News | UK | Britain's forgotten war
Gloster Hill
I also feel that Andrew Marr is feeding the perception that nothing much has happened since the end of WW11. He said this morning that the fighting in Afghanistan has been the most intense experienced by British forces since the 2nd WW. It seemed a rather off-hand dismissal of the effort and sacrifice of those involved in Suez, Korea, Falklands, Brunei, Oman, Malaya and more. I find this disappointing, coming as it does from someone who has, through his book 'A History of Modern Britain' demonstrated a good grasp of modern British history. If he'd said the most intense fighting since Korea for example, I wouldn't have argued.
BBC News | UK | Britain's forgotten war
Gloster Hill
Gentleman Aviator
Well said Riskman..
.... and let us not forget NI, where in one year (1972) more British trops were killed than in the whole time we've been in the 'Stan. (No criticism of current ops or those in them of course - my gripe is with BBC who seem to conveniently forget Op BANNER now it's over....)
.... and let us not forget NI, where in one year (1972) more British trops were killed than in the whole time we've been in the 'Stan. (No criticism of current ops or those in them of course - my gripe is with BBC who seem to conveniently forget Op BANNER now it's over....)
Gentlemen,
Question: How many of us get get Christmas cards from our present sqn boss; answer quite a lot.
Next question; how many of us get Christmas cards from said same sqn boss 1 year later when either he or you have been posted from his sqn; answer infinitesimal.
So what is my point? Clearly our sqn bosses send us Christmas cards when we are on their sqn because they feel it is the "right thing to do"--ok nothing wrong in that is there--but this is just one example of the seemingly "caring, sharing "I love You" RAF that is so shallow and typifies the short-termism.
So, back to the thread....Sir Jock doesn't give a flying f*ck about anyone and neither has anyone of Air Rank since Sir Peter was photographed on the steps with that Latino bird. He resigned-when was the last Air Rank to resign-durhhhh?
Folks, Wake up and smell the coffee-to use a phrase born before most of you were born. The senior officers DON'T care about you and never have-you are simply a stepping stone on their path to an Air Officers Pension. And no, I'm not ducking--fire away.
Question: How many of us get get Christmas cards from our present sqn boss; answer quite a lot.
Next question; how many of us get Christmas cards from said same sqn boss 1 year later when either he or you have been posted from his sqn; answer infinitesimal.
So what is my point? Clearly our sqn bosses send us Christmas cards when we are on their sqn because they feel it is the "right thing to do"--ok nothing wrong in that is there--but this is just one example of the seemingly "caring, sharing "I love You" RAF that is so shallow and typifies the short-termism.
So, back to the thread....Sir Jock doesn't give a flying f*ck about anyone and neither has anyone of Air Rank since Sir Peter was photographed on the steps with that Latino bird. He resigned-when was the last Air Rank to resign-durhhhh?
Folks, Wake up and smell the coffee-to use a phrase born before most of you were born. The senior officers DON'T care about you and never have-you are simply a stepping stone on their path to an Air Officers Pension. And no, I'm not ducking--fire away.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I dont agree I am afraid. Something worth far more to Air Rank than pension is Legacy. What is the point working all that way if you are going to finish up as the worst CAS/CDS in history.
IMHO, I do believe we have a lot of people working very hard for us with very little support from the government. Although I agree, a little more rigour in combatting Labour a la danatt wouldnt go amiss. Unfortunately, we dont benefit from seeing the arguments that go un behind the scenes. I am sure there are a few.
IMHO, I do believe we have a lot of people working very hard for us with very little support from the government. Although I agree, a little more rigour in combatting Labour a la danatt wouldnt go amiss. Unfortunately, we dont benefit from seeing the arguments that go un behind the scenes. I am sure there are a few.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: england
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OKOC - I am happy to take a pop at the buffoons at the top when they screw up. However, to say none of them care or have ever cared is too bitter even for me.
Did someone not get enough love as a child? Dry your eyes Princess
Did someone not get enough love as a child? Dry your eyes Princess
VinRouge:
Well you'd have to ask that of Messrs. Torpy and Stirrup. They may not admit it but I suspect their response would be "worst in whose eyes?". If ours then your epitaph is probably apt, but if HMG's then gongs all round and back home for lots of cake and lashings of ginger beer! Stirrup is planting a seed here which will blossom into a government initiative to bring the boys and girls back home to a land of dole queues. In a thrice Brown will placate public opinion, save lots of dosh and show himself independent of a new administration in Washington. Remember it is he that led the world out of the Valley of the Shadow of Banking Death so very recently. A Legend in our time!
Something worth far more to Air Rank than pension is Legacy. What is the point working all that way if you are going to finish up as the worst CAS/CDS in history.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Exiled in England
Age: 48
Posts: 1,015
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't need carriers??
Old adage, those that do not learn from the mistakes of history are doomed to repeat them.
We don't need a carrier today, what two or three or even ten years down the line will be is................................
we need the capability to do many things.
Lets just say we are back from the sandpit in five years, oil and gas dry up and then bad things happen which result in a big air and ground war fairly close to home.
Those pointy expensive typhoons will be very popular all of a sudden.
Old adage, those that do not learn from the mistakes of history are doomed to repeat them.
We don't need a carrier today, what two or three or even ten years down the line will be is................................
we need the capability to do many things.
Lets just say we are back from the sandpit in five years, oil and gas dry up and then bad things happen which result in a big air and ground war fairly close to home.
Those pointy expensive typhoons will be very popular all of a sudden.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did I say Typhoon?
No.
I said Carriers and A400M.
Defence cash can be spent on better things. Mainly battle-tested things like the Americans produce, instead of crap produced (not talking systems and weapons here) by Europe and the UK.
And seeing as we are looking at the worst financial crisis since 1929, we need to save every penny we can. Therefore, pay for the capabilities we are most likely to need, not the capabilities that will keep Labour constituents in work.
No.
I said Carriers and A400M.
Defence cash can be spent on better things. Mainly battle-tested things like the Americans produce, instead of crap produced (not talking systems and weapons here) by Europe and the UK.
And seeing as we are looking at the worst financial crisis since 1929, we need to save every penny we can. Therefore, pay for the capabilities we are most likely to need, not the capabilities that will keep Labour constituents in work.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They may not admit it but I suspect their response would be "worst in whose eyes?". If ours then your epitaph is probably apt, but if HMG's then gongs all round and back home for lots of cake and lashings of ginger beer!
That is what Wikipedia is for!
The encyclopedia that will last an eternity!
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So VinRouge, what you're suggesting is we take those tax payer pounds and give them to American companies? That employ Americans. In an effort to save money rather than pay said tax payers a wage? That'll help with the worst finacial crisis since 1929.. 