I think the 5 former CDS are accurate in their observations, and each are proven in armed conflict. Unfortunately they may not be so well equipped for the spin, lies and double-speak of politics. The 'attack' was well coordinated, for example, but to begin their campaign in the midst of the Northern Rock fiasco and straight after the Euro 2008 qualifier - no matter the outcome of that particular game - may have been mistimed. Now that the government are 'fighting back' the whole thing will sputter and fall at the start unless their Lordships already have some current chiefs of the forces on side.

I'm looking forward to the comments from the current chiefs of all 3 services, surely they MUST have an opinion and MUST be consulted in this matter. Shouldn't they? Well if they each have a pair then they will....

Disagree, this attack came during a Defence debate and took everyone by surprise. Govt looks punch drunk, reeling after blow after blow. Press love this it gives them something else to batter Gordon Brown with. UKAF is in a mini crisis that is going to get worse. Denials will seem hollow in a few months time.

I listened to Des the two-hatted on the Today programme. It seems that he covers the Scottish Office in his spare time; http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/li...e_20071123.ram . What a star!

Remember that CDM was created at 4 star rank and he's been completely silent. I suspect that he's more guilty of being a "yes" man than any Service COS.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7108650.stm

Good ole Des is struggling...

Which doesn't really mean anything, does it? He seems to be clutching at as many straws as he could be, to me.

and

Cowardly Des. Of course nobody who's been press-ganged to meet you is going to express dismay at him being dual-hatted. The blokes want to stop paying council tax for their trench and the ruperts don't want to instantly end their careers. Very cowardly.

Another opportunity for CDS and his cohorts to tell it like it is - will he contradict his predecessors -all 5 of them - or will he offer his best professional advice based on his years of experience and appreciation of needs? Well I'm not holding my breath on that but I wonder what he will have to say to the troops.

We've all had the privelege( and pleasure) of the recent talks by CinC Air and I can say, due to this inspiring 'chat', that my morale is now sky high and I totally agree with Des Browne.

Infact, I can't wait to get back to Basra again, please please please send me!

Did CinC manage to name all the Squadrons at Benson in the end??:ugh:

Oh thats right........

That fool Twigg!
 

What I particualarly enjoyed was his predicatable spouting about how we (UKAF) have enjoyed the longest sustained period of increases in defence spending in recent history.
That's right Mr Twigg. Of course we have.
We have also enjoyed the longest period of sustained ops since about 1945!!!
Not to mention the fact that almost every aircraft/ship/tank/rifle has simultaneously needed replacing or upgrading because of successive governments reticence to actually spend any of our taxes on the equipment that our forces need!
They honestly seem to think it's our fault that most of our kit is old and knackered!
Let's not even mention that if it wasn't for bl00dy politicians we could have been flying F-16s for twenty years by now, instead of waiting for the mighty 'Phoon. (I'm not slagging the jet off, just pointing out that it has arrived a mite later than may have been ideal!)
BV:mad:

Somewhat surprised that ONLY 6Z3 makes the most valid point ... that their magnificent Lordships managed to contain their anger until they were safely encased in their scarlet robes and with pensions intact!!!:mad:
When did we last have people at the top who spoke out when they SAW the problem - not leave it until they were across the drawbridge?? The Abandoned Earl and the Atcherleys demonstrated how it should be done ... our present "Fearless Five (not)" are as much a waste of space as the people they seek to rubbish.:yuk:

I do wish they wouldn't keep banging on about the longest period of sustained growth in defence spending. So the spending has gone up - but not by enough to fund what we are being asked to do - it just means we can afford to get a Landrover when we need a Warrior; we get a Herc when we need a C-17 etc .

Not sure which one of the Lords isaid it, or in which rag they said it, but they hit the nail on the head. Of course the guys in theatre have the kit they need. The problem is the guys back home don't, so there is no ability to train for ops or maintain currencies and skill sets in between time on ops. And that is the dangerous thing because you then end up sending incompletely trained guys out to an operational theatre where they spend the first bit of their tour not dying and working out how to use the kit!

I don't really know how the Minister for Scotland and his minions, the Minister for Late & Overbudget and the Minister for Personnel Overstretch can't see that? Surely, they should be reasonably intelligent ... being Ministers and all that. Or was Sir Humphry right .... in any govt, of all your MPs, 100 are too old, 100 are too young which means you are stuck with what's left to form the Govt.

Melchett
 

Of course they know about the problem. They're not THAT stupid (although sometimes I do wonder!).
They are just so commited to putting a bullsh#t, politicians, weasel like spin on everything that comes out of their mouths that they just won't admit it in public.
They're all lying, scheming cowards and I can't say I'd relieve myself on any of them if they were to find themselves in the unfortunate situation of being on fire. (If only!!!)
BV:mad:

As has been said, if there are no bleatings form the current 'waiting for my peerage' serving officers, then GB and team can justifiably say all is well. What I would LOVE to see is a BBC 'Today' show where a current high-*anker is asked to deny the claims of the 5:)

I have PVRed. Why???

My morale has been shot to ribbons...

Not wishing to rush to the defence of any of them, but senior serving Officers who speak out against Government policy tend not to remain effective senior serving Officers for very long. That is the nature of serving the Government of the day and the Oath of Allegiance. It's an unfortunate truth that to get to those lofty heights requires a degree of political savvy that may not always represent the interests of those below - those who do not play the game very well are not given the opportunity to be heard. A bit like the 22-year Junior NCO NAAFI warrior who has always "told them straight".

The real story here is that is takes 5 retired Officers to expose the day to day management of the MoD for what it is under this Government, an utter disgrace and abrogation of responsibility to those who loyally serve HM the Queen.

Mike Jenvey- thanks for the reference to hansard makes very interesting read. People on here whinge about the guys waiting till they're out but at least they are making their points and making them well; in addition the Lords has more defence expertise amongst its membership than the House of Westminster. Thought provoking reference made to difficulty of seeing "the brink" until you go over it.

Previous governments
 

The phrase that has been trotted out again and again is 'previous governments', but have I missed something and have we had no elections in our recent past. So if we have had an election and the previous government won wouldn’t that make them the 'previous government' when they blame the 'previous governemnt'?

How long can the Labour Party trot out this rubbish and think to get away with it, continuing to try blame a party that has not been in power for 10 years? :ugh:

I'd like to hear the CDS say something along these lines:

"I am aware of the comments of five of my predecessors. I am constrained by my position from publicly expressing whether or not I agree with their comments. I can say however, that I do not disagree with them".

Gets him out of a jam both ways, I should think.

Even "Mine is an apolitical post, so I'm not willing to comment." would have the desired effect.

Interestingly, I haven't heard him say anything.

Anyone fancy a coup d'etat?

CDS has, in fact, observed that the armed forces are overstretched, and did so quite clearly to the Select Committee:

Link

You'll notice that despite the fact that he cleverly found a way of saying 'yes' to a question that he shouldn't really have answered 'yes' to (since it was a politically-loaded query), this went down badly in some quarters on pprune, while it was only picked up by a few journalists, since the issue wasn't deemed newsworthy at that time.

Now that a week has passed I just wanted to bump the thread back up from page 4, point smugly at my previous post and ask 'did they make any real difference at all?'