Thanks for that Mike
 

Clearly the RAF and Navy are not working hard enough as far as Gen Sir Mike Jackson is concerned. On the subject of a role for British troops in any future Lebanon peacekeeping force he has said he doubted it would be "sensible" to offer troops to such a force, but suggested it would be easier to supply air or maritime forces.
Thanks for that Mike - cos we're just not busy enough - I was wondering where to go for Xmas this year, problem solved.:ugh: :ugh: :ugh:

If he gives HM Forces a broomstick they could stick it up thair @rse and sweep the floor at the same time :ugh:

Saves having to spend money on contract cleaners :ok: :E

as RAF 3 and 4* seem to come back as plt offs perhaps the Army might like to start circular careers too. When you reach the top at age 60 you go round again and start a a platoon plod in some sand pit.

How about that for fun?

Crabs on the ground as peacekeepers ?

Why not (apart from the fact that we're quiet busy)? Crabs (as you put it) have done the job before (myself included) and some are doing it right now alongside colleagues from the Army and the Naval Service.

I guess certain individuals in the light blue and dark blue bretheren believe that right now they are busier than the green jobs....

If we accept that the SH force are part of the Army (as with CHF) - they do after all belong to JHC and therefore Land Command - then the remainder of the oldest and youngest services are not really doing much are they? AT force also excepted here. Please don't compare guarding an airbase with infantry patrolling duties in Basrah or Helmand.

Which would allow a destroyer or a frigate to poise menacingly off the Eastern Mediterannean coast, alongside a fighter or two from Strike Command.

Not exactly taxing, is it, compared to patrolling the Taliban heartland. I think Jacko has a fair point. I don't think the Army has anyone left.

KNOB :mad: :ugh: :mad:

I suspect Jacko may have political aspirations. His abounding enthusiasm for the last reduction of army manpower seemed to please his masters.

Thanks for that intelligent response.

I saw in a newspaper recently that our top general had time to go to a wedding of two of TBs closest friends/advisers.An unusual invitation surely!!!

Ok - great - thanks

Last time I looked it still said RAF in the middle of my wings! We may come under their budget, command or whatever - but we are NOT f*****g Army!

No, but you should be.

How much of the RAF effort is expended on supporting the shorter tours that the RAF conduct compared to the Army.

If tour lengths were the same, then surely less AT would be required to move people at less frequent intervals?

Some parts of the SH fleet seem to do more 'training' than anything else.

I think you will also find that a large portion of the RAF Harrier Force is deployed in the 'stan; also GR4s in the 'raq. And that is not for a single short tour, it a repeat commitment. So in fact it would be fair to say that all the Services are pretty well committed.

Oh serf, how amusing to read your uninformed gobsh!te views!

If you had any idea of how stretched the SH force is in various theatres you would eat your words, say sorry and go back to polishing your boots (Army Cadets is it?)

Same for the Nimrod force. There may not be a potent submarine threat to the UK any more (for which they may get some banter) but they know how to redeploy themselves into other roles in operational theatres (nuff said there I think).

And as for your opinions on tour lengths. How would you like a knackered Harrier pilot stacking into the deck while attempting to support you with a bit of CAS?

KKKKKKKKNNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOBBBBBBBBBBBBBB!

What percentage of the Harrier Force is 8 aircraft, exactly? And how many of the Joint Harrier Force are from the RN?

And I am certain that there are no GR4s in the Gulf.

So, other than RN and RAF Harriers, SH and AT, what exactly is the pointy end of the RAF doing?

Is it just me, or are there some countries about this world whose time has come to stand up and be counted? Tis my contention that many NATO and ex Warsaw pact countries were happy to ride into battle on the coat-tails of the senior partners but now they are on thier own in the big bad world it's all suddenly a bit too difficult. Or have I got the wrong end of the stick completely and everyone is just as deep in the brown stuff we are?:(

Perhaps a bit of wargaming in the states...?

Lots of gardening leave...

Planning how they can nadger 95% of the airforce budget in the next round...

Bugger all really...but hey they'll tell you they are worth every penny..

W:mad: :mad: kers...

5d2d

KNOB :ugh:

fabs,

you beat me to it!

TBSG,

I assume you realise that Qatar counts as the Gulf?

Why do the Army have such a large presence in Germany.

What's with all the poncing about at Horseguards?

With the end of Op Corporate, what will the Army do now?

I think that there are a few assets left in the Army doing little (other than the same infantry battalions, such as 1LI) to contribute.

See, I can do ill-informed comments too.

Defend the points above and, while you're at it, you might want to research the RAF commitment to ops. I think you'll find that it's exactly the same percentage as the other 2 services. As for 4 month tours: we are happy; there is a minute impact on AT; more people take their turn; more time with families; finally, less PODL and, therefore more productive (individually) OOA and in UK.

Ignorance is indeed bliss.