Libyan mission racked up $11M in hotel bills
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: North of Superior
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Libyan mission racked up $11M in hotel bills
From the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation...
Libyan mission racked up $11M in hotel bills - Politics - CBC News
Libyan mission racked up $11M in hotel bills - Politics - CBC News
Complete non-story. Italian bases maxed out, short term alternative needed. Effort concentrated on delivering operational effect, so what's the quickest and easiest (and probably cheapest) way to provide food and accommodation? Rent some hotel rooms.
Do you take a tent when you travel on business?
Do you take a tent when you travel on business?
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Milano
Age: 53
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do you take a tent when you travel on business?
Ciao,
Dg800
It sounds like $CAN 11M in International Aid to me. Moreover, that's International Aid which won't be going into some bent dictator's pocket.....
Tents? How awfully lower order. In any case, there's the question of feeding, watering and providing acceptable sanitation for several hundred troops to consider.
Simplest solution? A decent contract with a hotel.
Tents? How awfully lower order. In any case, there's the question of feeding, watering and providing acceptable sanitation for several hundred troops to consider.
Simplest solution? A decent contract with a hotel.
Please, not another rant about how it's much more macho to operate out of tents and how girlie we all are in the air force because we do it the sensible way.
It was boring years ago.
It was boring years ago.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to provide some meat to the bones of just another jocky's post, a blunty Lt Col tried to put us in tents but the proposal was rejected due health and safety (noise and mozzies)and ultimately lack of manpower to make tented village work. He then tried to put us in condemned buildings which met similar fate but ONLY due to them being scheduled for demolition.
Every man and his dog tried the same but accom was premium. Canadians had the rough end of the stick having to travel over 2 hrs just to get to work.
Question is do you want the job done safely or not.
Every man and his dog tried the same but accom was premium. Canadians had the rough end of the stick having to travel over 2 hrs just to get to work.
Question is do you want the job done safely or not.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Belgium
Posts: 254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
However much it cost it was a lot cheaper than running an aircraft carrier
Hotel Rooms?
I suppose it was "safer" to put troops all over the place in small bunches in hotels...no security....then drive all sorts of unprotected vehicles to/from "work"....than put them inside a secure area right next to the operation.
Now tell me about the Mozzies again?
The USAF has air conditioned tents now....hell even the Army does that now.
You lot break my heart telling me all about the necessity of living in a hotel, sleeping on white sheets, eating off white table clothes, and using the Squadron silver ware. You you carry along your Serviette Rack so you can have you own mouth wipe too?
I suppose it was "safer" to put troops all over the place in small bunches in hotels...no security....then drive all sorts of unprotected vehicles to/from "work"....than put them inside a secure area right next to the operation.
Now tell me about the Mozzies again?
The USAF has air conditioned tents now....hell even the Army does that now.
You lot break my heart telling me all about the necessity of living in a hotel, sleeping on white sheets, eating off white table clothes, and using the Squadron silver ware. You you carry along your Serviette Rack so you can have you own mouth wipe too?
SASless,
No personnel were killed by enemy action in Italy. Therefore the threat assessment that allowed the use of hotel accommodation was correct in exactly the same way as it was correct in 1991. It WAS 'safe'.
You (deliberately) conflate 'need' with 'preference'. We air force types will do whatever 'needs' to be done to achieve the mission; if you ground-pounders 'prefer' to do it the uncomfortable way - crack on.
Agree with JA jocky - your contributions are normally more reasoned - has happy hour started early?
No personnel were killed by enemy action in Italy. Therefore the threat assessment that allowed the use of hotel accommodation was correct in exactly the same way as it was correct in 1991. It WAS 'safe'.
You (deliberately) conflate 'need' with 'preference'. We air force types will do whatever 'needs' to be done to achieve the mission; if you ground-pounders 'prefer' to do it the uncomfortable way - crack on.
Agree with JA jocky - your contributions are normally more reasoned - has happy hour started early?
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: S England
Age: 54
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to provide some meat to the bones of just another jocky's post, a blunty Lt Col tried to put us in tents but the proposal was rejected due health and safety (noise and mozzies)
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The decision was ultimately made by a 2* army chap. The location of the tented area was to be by the rwy (24 hr ops) and the army doc (who accompanied Lt Col) provided the H & S risk assessment. Any issues - take it up with the brown jobs as a great deal of the AIR campaign was controlled by those with limited appreciation of such. No "crabs" involved unfortunately for you. We were merely thankful common sense prevailed in some areas.
SAS - at no point did anyone mention that it was promulgated as a necessity to stay in hotac - just that all other options were discounted for one reason or another. If you disagree with that decision that is your prerogative. I would merely question your attitude towards your currently serving military colleagues.
SAS - at no point did anyone mention that it was promulgated as a necessity to stay in hotac - just that all other options were discounted for one reason or another. If you disagree with that decision that is your prerogative. I would merely question your attitude towards your currently serving military colleagues.