I wish ..
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While I agree with the motivation behind your suggestion, Churchill, your namesake would have been appalled. Winston famously described our constitutional system as the worst possible way of running a country....with the exception of all the other systems tried so far! Alternatively you could move to Burma!
Last edited by ShotOne; 5th Sep 2013 at 17:27.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Westerham, Kent
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
high spirits I think you may have been taking a little too much of your own medicine, either that or you never met Richard Dannatt!
You must be off your rocker if you think he didn't try and do his level best to support our boys at every turn during his time as CGS!
Criticise people by all means (if you must) but get your facts straight first! I am genuinely stunned! Dannatt was made of the right stuff.
You must be off your rocker if you think he didn't try and do his level best to support our boys at every turn during his time as CGS!
Criticise people by all means (if you must) but get your facts straight first! I am genuinely stunned! Dannatt was made of the right stuff.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: at home
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CG,
I don't doubt that they were all well intentioned. But each were partly responsible for an enormous budget overspend of the last 2 decades, and did nothing about it.
Hence the brutal cuts we have just been through that have seen some 'good men and true' leave the 3 Services out of bitterness and despair.
In my book, they are all just as culpable as the politicians. Sorry if that doesn't fit with your point of view. It's purely my opinion...
I don't doubt that they were all well intentioned. But each were partly responsible for an enormous budget overspend of the last 2 decades, and did nothing about it.
Hence the brutal cuts we have just been through that have seen some 'good men and true' leave the 3 Services out of bitterness and despair.
In my book, they are all just as culpable as the politicians. Sorry if that doesn't fit with your point of view. It's purely my opinion...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Westerham, Kent
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No problem with the conflicting point of view, just that in Richard's case he actually went to extraordinary lengths to defend the forces and so I wouldn't have put him in such a list, in fact, quite the opposite.
Jimlad1,
"I strongly disagree - I think it is vital for a civilian to lead on defence, and preferably one who comes at it 'fresh'. The reason being is that Ministers will come without baggage, and be willing to question sacred cows and ask hard questions."
Ministers come with the baggage of "collective responsibility". Jesse Norman is a prime example. Sacked for not voting in line with the PMs requirements. Hardly a sign of encouraging a "fresh approach". And all pollies come with baggage AFAIK. Some things need taking away from the childish, often obsessive, foibles of professional politicians. Just try to explain the logic of cutting force levels, and committing to more military tasking to anyone with a brain. No offence mate, but if you are going to run your military on a shoestring budget, you need to let the military choose where and how it gets spent, then step back.
Smudge
"I strongly disagree - I think it is vital for a civilian to lead on defence, and preferably one who comes at it 'fresh'. The reason being is that Ministers will come without baggage, and be willing to question sacred cows and ask hard questions."
Ministers come with the baggage of "collective responsibility". Jesse Norman is a prime example. Sacked for not voting in line with the PMs requirements. Hardly a sign of encouraging a "fresh approach". And all pollies come with baggage AFAIK. Some things need taking away from the childish, often obsessive, foibles of professional politicians. Just try to explain the logic of cutting force levels, and committing to more military tasking to anyone with a brain. No offence mate, but if you are going to run your military on a shoestring budget, you need to let the military choose where and how it gets spent, then step back.
Smudge
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: at home
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CG,
I'm sure that they all defended 'our boys'. But they all ignored the ever growing elephant in the room. Those that are left are now living with the legacy of the last 2 decades. Fleets of aircraft and ships gone. Redundancies and poor morale. I could go on but you've no doubt heard it all before.
I for one am tired of seeing them on sky news every time something new crops up. I'd rather they just quietly retired and considered what they have left behind. I respect them as men who tried to stand up to the pollies. But ultimately they are neck deep guilty of the mess we are in now.
I'm sure that they all defended 'our boys'. But they all ignored the ever growing elephant in the room. Those that are left are now living with the legacy of the last 2 decades. Fleets of aircraft and ships gone. Redundancies and poor morale. I could go on but you've no doubt heard it all before.
I for one am tired of seeing them on sky news every time something new crops up. I'd rather they just quietly retired and considered what they have left behind. I respect them as men who tried to stand up to the pollies. But ultimately they are neck deep guilty of the mess we are in now.
)
CG,
And that was the problem! Great man to fight the Army corner on every level but not good for UK plc. CAS and CNS were just as bad though fighting for FJ, carriers and submarines. Personally, I would like to see our military leaders removed from the debate on the future structure and capability of our Armed Forces, so that a neutral cross party organisation could get the balance right for the UK and fund it accordingly, as well as having a long term plan that succesive governments would have already signed up to.
Dannatt was probably 'the' key advisor to Cameron and Fox in opposition leading to political bias in favour of the Army once in power. Good for the Army for sure but is it really best for Britain? Is our balance appropriate right now? If so, please tell me why as an island race with 90% of our commerce delivered by sea, we have no Maritime Patrol Aircraft of any sort?
You must be off your rocker if you think he didn't try and do his level best to support our boys at every turn during his time as CGS!
Dannatt was probably 'the' key advisor to Cameron and Fox in opposition leading to political bias in favour of the Army once in power. Good for the Army for sure but is it really best for Britain? Is our balance appropriate right now? If so, please tell me why as an island race with 90% of our commerce delivered by sea, we have no Maritime Patrol Aircraft of any sort?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Westerham, Kent
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And what is then, in your opinion, the "right balance"?
What I want to see is the Armed Forces protected and not trashed and which I fear may happen.
Re: the maritime patrol aircraft, this was just one of many MoD c*ck-ups (on a grand scale) and was never planned to have happened (the abrupt decommissioning of the Nimrod). It was a purely political move. However I know for a fact that the Boeing Poseidon is being touted as a potential replacement. This is where a pro-military person in a position of responsibility can be of effect.
What I want to see is the Armed Forces protected and not trashed and which I fear may happen.
Re: the maritime patrol aircraft, this was just one of many MoD c*ck-ups (on a grand scale) and was never planned to have happened (the abrupt decommissioning of the Nimrod). It was a purely political move. However I know for a fact that the Boeing Poseidon is being touted as a potential replacement. This is where a pro-military person in a position of responsibility can be of effect.
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: England
Posts: 924
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know this is done to death but he successive Government Ministers around the period 1974 to about the late 1980s had:
Callaghan (RN), Heath (I think Army Intelligence), Enoch Powell (Army Intelligence?) Pym (Army I think), Benn (fighter pilot), Healey (Army), Whitelaw (Army), Carrington (Tanks) and so on and so on - all or most had served. Most with WW2 combat experience. But perhaps crucially all were non professional - simply had to serve because of the circumstances and their time.
It must have given them a feeling,an understanding and a massive advantage understanding for the problems faced by service people of all ranks at all levels.
There is simply a complete absence of that sort of experience on the present opposing benches, and so it shows, deeply and almost every week.
Many of the 1940-45 Churchill war cabinet had WW1 combat experience and service.
Different times, people, country.
Hardly helpful to this thread, do carry on.
Callaghan (RN), Heath (I think Army Intelligence), Enoch Powell (Army Intelligence?) Pym (Army I think), Benn (fighter pilot), Healey (Army), Whitelaw (Army), Carrington (Tanks) and so on and so on - all or most had served. Most with WW2 combat experience. But perhaps crucially all were non professional - simply had to serve because of the circumstances and their time.
It must have given them a feeling,an understanding and a massive advantage understanding for the problems faced by service people of all ranks at all levels.
There is simply a complete absence of that sort of experience on the present opposing benches, and so it shows, deeply and almost every week.
Many of the 1940-45 Churchill war cabinet had WW1 combat experience and service.
Different times, people, country.
Hardly helpful to this thread, do carry on.
CG,
Unfortunately, the reality is that an Army CDS would join in with CGS to insist on the parochial view that more tanks and more infantry is what is needed, out trumping the single arguments of CAS arguing for more FJ sqns and CNS arguing for more submarines. The debate is there to be had on what is the right balance for the UK but independant defence analysts with pan Westminster input would hopefully listen to the defence chiefs but ultimately make an unbiased judgement on the path to follow - with a strategic plan out to 30 years agreed by all parties.
Unfortunately, the reality is that an Army CDS would join in with CGS to insist on the parochial view that more tanks and more infantry is what is needed, out trumping the single arguments of CAS arguing for more FJ sqns and CNS arguing for more submarines. The debate is there to be had on what is the right balance for the UK but independant defence analysts with pan Westminster input would hopefully listen to the defence chiefs but ultimately make an unbiased judgement on the path to follow - with a strategic plan out to 30 years agreed by all parties.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hangarshuffle - you forget that Heath was in the artillery as well - even commanded a firing squad post-war
his conclusion was that a united Europe was a good thing
Callaghan stood head and shoulders above the rest in using his military experience in power
Of the non-servers Heseltine was a disaster whereas the vile Portillo was apparently actually very switched on
his conclusion was that a united Europe was a good thing
Callaghan stood head and shoulders above the rest in using his military experience in power
Of the non-servers Heseltine was a disaster whereas the vile Portillo was apparently actually very switched on
Join Date: May 2006
Location: 2 m South of Radstock VRP
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ShotOne
Alternatively you could move to Burma!
Carping about the military credentials of former and current politicians is largely irrelevant: they are politicians. Remenber that it was former assault Beachmaster Healy who confessed on the BBC that he, (as Deputy PM) would not have authorised a nuclear counter strike!
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
we do not have a written Constitution - it's a mish-mash of tradition, custom & practice and bits of law
I am sure that HMQ will remember what happened on Tuesday, 30 January 1649 to the last Monarch who overode parliament and gave directions to the Military.............
I am sure that HMQ will remember what happened on Tuesday, 30 January 1649 to the last Monarch who overode parliament and gave directions to the Military.............
