It's good that Mike Jackson is speaking out.
At least he is saying something about the current state of HM Forces.

Compare him to the RAF's most recently retired 4-star, Brian Burridge.
The only thing he has had to say since retiring is to promote heat pumps alongside his new wife.

Target The Blame
 

As you all know, in the UK, serving military officers USUALLY refrain from public political comment but I would hope that some of the points made last night by General Jackson had been previously made privately to his political masters.
It is easy to blame the service chiefs but let's not forget that the Secretary of State for Defence allocates strategic tasking and will be well aware of the shortcomings of funding and equipment as are the PM and Chancellor.

The TV interview by Robin Day of Minister of Defence John Nott ". . why . . believe you . . here today gone tomorrow politician, rather than a senior officer of many years . . " rings as true today as it did 24 years ago.

Let's just throw our taxes at those who won't work, at our flood of immigrants, at those who demand but never contribute, at the Tower Hamlets of this world because they vote 'and it's votes that count!"

Lad I joined up with went on to a reasonably senior position and when inter service rivalry and political force conspired to propose a severe diminution of capability in his area of responsibility he went public via "60 Minutes". Not done old boy, and the pressure, and threats made to him by his masters and seniors I would adjudge lead a great part to the ill health he was to suffer later and his death but a fortnight ago. Earned the undying respect of all during his service and after his final stand the troops would have walked through fire and brimstone for him. Vale PC, you fought a good fight.

AA

ISTR that up to and including 4* it's retirement and a pension determined annually by review.

5*s never retire - at the end of their active service they go on to half pay. [Of course, 5* is now a war-only rank].

Don't know if it has changed in recent years though...

FJJP

I only caught the last 10 minutes of the Generals lecture last night, but I have no doubt in my mind that he would have told the truth to our masters as he saw it at the time. Which is different to how things are now, events have moved on. Politicians tend to hear what they want to hear. He also rightly makes the point that the military are always subordinate to the 'will of the people' through the democratically elected government of the country.
I am particularly disappointed to find that instead of being congratulated on bringing this to the fore in the media he is regarded as a has been by some on this site who will probably fail to get to a similar position of seniority. I have no doubt he is an intelligent and incisive man who felt that constitutionally he could not speak out whilst serving. This is a particular trap set for the military by the executive, which really has no basis or sense in the modern era. I also feel galled that yet again it is the army who have the nouse to speak up on this matter, both serving and recently retired. Our own (and by that I mean The Airships) are noticeably keeping their heads down, at least in public, and that includes those who are taking an active role in politics following their retirement.
I feel the General is being unfairly and unreasonably criticised in this forum. Perhaps his critics here should show the way as serving personnel and speak up now, perhaps a letter to the Times, or an appearence on Any Questions/Any Answers, or any other non anonymous forum.
Takers anyone? :ugh:

I believe that Lord Craig of Radley regularly gives the Govt a hard time on Service matters; he uses his peerage to further the interests of the Armed Forces. Pity he isn't in power - he could do so much good and kick a** in his own quiet way. He was one helluva AOC 1 Gp...

Score so far CGS' 2- CAS' 0! :(
I would say that it ill behoves anyone in the aviation glasshouse (with the honourable exception of the AAC) to throw any stones at Gens. Jackson or Danatt. At least they stood up, ....eventually! It may be unprecedented, unwise, unproductive and every other 'un', but when the brown stuff hits the blades at least they can say they disassociated themselves from the business school theories of the MOD boy wonders. Everyone in HM Forces knows that the defence policies of this government (what a grand way to describe such a bunch of opinionated biased callous bullies!) are literally self defeating. Those who command the Air and Naval Staffs and have not seen fit to join their Army colleagues and present a united front may think that they are playing a clever game, they are not and will reap their just rewards as their services attain meltdown as described elsewhere. Unsheathe your swords gentlemen and fall on them, or stand alongside the Army and reverse this claptrap, but do something!
"What do we want?"
"An integrated chain of command and the restoration of the powers of a subordinate commander!"
"When do we want it?"
"In the foreseeable future!"
Sorry, still working on the chant, it seems to lack something!

One of many quotes:

Quote:

---

The Army feels strongly that the greatest burden rests upon their shoulders, not least when it comes to numbers deployed and casualties sustained. If my erstwhile colleagues from the RN and RAF are feeling a little uncomfortable, I can only apologise. But the facts speak for themselves - logic has its own momentum. It is again a question of balance; taking away from Peter to pay Paul is a difficult and dangerous exercise; it can be avoided by better provision for both.

---

Contentious - although it's hard to not feel a little seen off on your 6 month freebie tour.

Anyway - many, many points for discussion from the General's lecture. However, a man of this capability speaking passionately about the Army is no bad thing. For all services.

As Kitbag said, and has been proved many times before (as the Navy will remember from the Suez crisis), falling on your sword gains little other than a 'what an honourable chap' and the govt and press crack on regardless. As officers, we should turn around to the chain of comd and raise our concerns, some more strongly than others, but once that decision is made it is up to us [officers] to crack on and lead. Yes, this may mean refusing orders and/or resigning.

Sir Mike, I suspect, was in a position where he could have resigned but what effect would it really have had a week later? Gen Dannat gained a great deal of press (as he is in post). Yet Gen Jackson’s words struck me as a man who had a great deal to say but felt he had an obligation to his chain of command. The politicians hold the cards. Whatever you say up, is very different to what you say to those below you. If the bosses boss is saying ‘it’s **** – why bother’. How can you expect junior commanders to maintain any sort of cohesion. I certainly don't think he was a perfect CGS, as the decimation of Regts seemed to lack higher reason and limited opposition.

Anyway, the full text:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...jackson107.xml

Discuss

To answer the title of the thread, Who here knows that he did not?

Just because he did not make a song and dance about it then in the press does not mean he did not speak up.

There is a difference between speaking up and speaking out but no reason one cannot do one then the other.

Maybe he just did what all he could whilst in and this is now all he can do.

To all those "armchair critics" what have you done to change things?

cheers

BHR

To acheive the mission requires teamwork.

one man speaking up would isolate him as a target, so perhaps a concerted effort on mass would have the desired effect. MOD do not have the resources to throw everyone on a sword.

Isn't that called a revolution or a coup? :confused: :)

Mmmmm, now there's a thought.:hmm:

To satisfy the requirements for a revolution there has to be a number of requisites in place first though.

Injustice
Lack of moral courage from leaders
Terrible conditions
Poverty
Feelings of unrest amongst the troops
etc etc.

Been There, you may have a point

I watched most of this and it was interesting ..... just far too late in the General's career to have any balsted effect!

Does anyone know whether a full transcript of this speech exists anywhere?

Kitbag,
People are following your comments Sir and voting the only way they can - by quitting! hence why all three services are so desperately undermanned.

Sir Mike may look good in the eyes of you, but to anyone who has had to put up with the phenominal cuts that have occurred recently, together with the overstretch, he is most certainly NOT.

Had he made such a public stand whilst still in post, where his comments might have made some difference, then yes, I would applaud him without doubt, as would most servicemen and women. The fact is however, he chose now, when his pension is safe and there can be no comeback, to act like a General and tell it as it is.

Maybe we should be grateful that its 'better late than never'

TSM

Just to get back to the senior officer moolah issue. Is everyone aware that officers 1* upwards get paid performance rated pay? i.e if they complete their TORs (part of which can be written by MOD (whitehall manderins)) they get an additonaly 5% of their total salary again - now tell me thats right and justified?
Silly old me, I thought military Officers were meant to be motivated to care for the wellbeing of the men and women under their command, rather than a financial incentive?

No, it's called appealing over the heads of the politicians to their employers, ie the electorate. The one thing that terrifies those in power is the thought that they might lose it! Make it clear that they are reneging on their duty of care to the Armed Forces, and it will add to their unpopularity, especially in areas with close relationships with the military. Sticking to traditions of not speaking out in public is a luxury that means nothing changes and is no longer appropriate, given the desperate shortfalls in personnel, material and administrative support that all three services are suffering.
It is good that this country's Armed Forces are conscious of the constitutional, legal and traditional curbs on their power in a democracy. That does not mean that when their leaders are as concerned for them as they are now that they must be quiet. Speaking out is of course a two edged sword, so should be done only after careful thought, but is nonetheless a responsibility of a chief of staff if the situation calls for it. If he/she chooses not to do so for considerations of the effect on their personal fortunes(!), that is merely an indication that he/she was the wrong person appointed to that post.

Where on earth do you get the "desperately undermanned" from ?

If you read the latest report from the NAO you will find that the Armed forces are undermanned by 2.8%. Undermanned I agree but hardly desperately. The Army is maintaining its balanced strength, the Navy is undermanned by 3.6% and the RAF are undermanned by 4.4% due to a redundancy trance in April 2006 (they did this on purpose ).
If you continue to read the NAO report on Armed Forces mannig you will see that all 3 Services will be at their trained strangth by April 2008.


Irish Tempest. Its not Just 1* that receive performance related pay. All aviators on the PA spine are also on performance related pay....from Lieutenants upwards.....and to be frank, I don't know of one military Offcier who is in the mob to Most military Officers I know (and I count myself in this) are in the Mob in order to pay the Mortgage.

Maybe the quote should have been, desperately undermanned in key areas such as pilots, medics and comms specialists (the only ones I can think of off the top of my head)...:cool:

General Sir Mike Jackson is no poodle. Apart from being terrifyingly ugly, he is hard as nails, and takes $hit from no man. I served under him when he was Comd ARRC/Comd IFOR in Bosnia, and witnessed him rip a 1* a new ar$ehole in front of the entire HQ staff. It was unbelieveably embarrassing for the Brig, nobody knew where to look.

There is no doubt in my mind that as CGS he would have been banging on tables behind closed doors, and now he feels able to bang on the same tables openly.

Bravo :D :D :D