We get the government that we deserve.

But we really did not deserve this one.

Simple solution - stop helping.

Maybe when people stop sleeping safely they will get off their backsides and sort this lot out.

iccarus,

After the magnificent evening I've had out in the Surrey hinterlands this evening, I could easily join you with a few others.

Still serving, ex-serving and ex-reserve alike, we were all in agreement. It's gone to rats, something has to be done and it will take STILL SITTING chiefs, not - with respect - the retired chiefs, to stand up for the rest of us.

It's a b:mad:dy travesty. I'm bitterly angry tonight.

Beatriz,
I just think that you and I could be the people to start the revolution. do you reackon she has the fire D?? I am sure you do. B I am up for it in Spades. I have a campaigne and nothing to lose!!! ( I know i have 3500 Ghurkas to support me:ok::ok:). Lets doooooo it!

By the way (P) If i am dead in the next two days you know why!!:}:}

Great, lets all go lads, and watch the forces fall apart. And it can all be someone elses fault when we no longer rule ourselves in ten/twenty years time. Shouldn't someone of done something? :suspect:

Yes someone bloody well should have. And it is about time the government realised this.

Everyone PVRing is not the answer at all. As much as we are mis-treated, someone has to do it, which, I know, puts us in a difficult situation. But how to make the government realise the error of their ways is a different matter and one, if I am honest, I don't have an answer to.

This country needs another Churchill. Someone to stand against the popular opinion and warn this country of its impending doom.

Actually, he needs to realise that he can't sleep peacefully at night because there are "rough men who stand ready to visit violence" upon him. (sorry, George)

So, can I suggest those that wish to add the "Get out" posts leave this thread alone so that the rest of us whom would like to pursue some sort of action can plan and organise something.

Tigs and Beatriz, just let me know what the general idea is and I will endeavour to clear my diary.

"Last Man out please turn off the lights?"
 

RAF and navy hardest hit by £4.5bn MoD cuts
• Overstretched armed services facing crisis
• Army chiefs warn Britain fighting on too many fronts

• David Hencke and Richard Norton-Taylor
• The Guardian,
• Monday February 18 2008
•http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/fe....foreignpolicy

Treasury proposals to cut £4.5bn from the defence budget over the next three years will be discussed by senior civil servants and military chiefs this week amid warnings that the armed forces are overstretched and facing a crisis.
The cuts are described by a Whitehall insider as the largest since the end of the cold war, and have provoked private fury from military chiefs. They say Britain's soldiers are not properly equipped and are deployed on too many fronts including Iraq, Afghanistan and Kosovo.
A senior MoD official has warned that the existing equipment is "unaffordable", that the ministry is heading for a "train crash", and that a budget squeeze risks "mortgaging the future" of the armed forces.
Internal MoD documents show that the armed forces will get a real cash increase of just 0.6% this coming financial year, significantly less than the 1.5% annual average rise over the next three years quoted by ministers. Even the higher figure would have meant cuts of more than £1bn a year.
The squeeze on the defence budget is even more severe because the cost of weapons systems is increasing much more than the costs of other goods and services, defence officials say.
At a crunch meeting on Thursday, officials and military chiefs are expected to propose cuts and delays in the equipment programmes of all three branches of the armed forces. Their proposals are due to be presented next week to ministers, who will then have to take the difficult decisions.
The main impact of the cuts will be on the Royal Navy and the RAF, with the hard pressed army escaping the main savings - although it is still likely to have fewer and less sophisticated new battlefield vehicles.
The main blow for the navy will be a proposal to halve the number of Astute submarines at Barrow. This could lead to job losses in the constituency of John Hutton, the business secretary, who has been opposing the cuts. Reducing the number of submarines by 50% would leave the Barrow yard with a gap before the nuclear submarines to replace Trident need to be built and there will be fears from the trade unions that workers could be laid off, losing some of the country's skills base.
The decision to cut the number of submarines in service would reduce this section of the navy to the level of European nations such as the Dutch. However, the counter argument is that Britain no longer needs such a big navy.
The government is confident it might get more work for Scottish yards in Rosyth and the Clyde that would be hit by the delay in ordering the two new aircraft carriers and cancelling two destroyers.
Another big problem will be cutting the number of Eurofighter Typhoon jets. Originally the government hoped that Saudi Arabia might be interested in buying fighters built for the RAF. But following the recent court case challenging the government's decision to drop the fraud investigation into BAE arms sales, relations with Saudi Arabia have plummeted.
This will leave the ministry having to find compensation from a reduced budget to pay off BAE Systems for lost orders as well as the likelihood of fresh redundancies.
A more controversial measure to save money that could be discussed by the MoD is whether to expand the use of mercenaries abroad. This would amount to a form of privatisation and would raise questions about accountability.
Ministers may also have to look at other areas in the MoD to see if the work can be privatised - though they recently rowed back over plans to privatise training.
Officials are likely to advise ministers that it is politically easier to delay than cut. However, where there is no alternative to cuts, they are expected to argue that better capabilities mean that the armed forces do not need the number of ships, planes, or fighting vehicles originally planned.
Explainer: Defence budget
Tightening the military's belt
Nuclear submarines
A reduction in the number of Astute submarines built in Barrow for the navy, which may get only four of the planned eight. This will affect work at the last submarine facility in Britain.
Type 45 destroyers
The original plan was to build 12 vessels. This had already been cut to eight. The navy may only now get six.
Aircraft carriers
Construction of two carriers, the first of which was due to enter service in 2014, will be delayed. Scottish shipyards, including the Rosyth yard in Gordon Brown's constituency, could be soothed by the prospect of separate orders for new supply ships for the navy.
Eurofighter Typhoon jets
The number ordered will be reduced, meaning the government may have to pay compensation to BAE Systems at a critical time.
RAF Tornado squadrons
The reduction is still to be finalised.
Cuts in the number of RAF bases
No sites have been named, but the decision could release new sites for housing or possibly new prisons.
Nimrod reconnaissance aircraft
Cuts or delays to the programme are planned.
Future Rapid Effects System
Cuts or delays in the £14bn programme to supply the army with a new battlefield vehicle. This could be the most difficult to implement, because of the urgent need to protect troops in Afghanistan.

Stop trying to make ends meet and make do with crap equipment.

The Health and Safety laws apply. You are contracted to wage war on behalf of your Government, but the other part of the deal is that the Government as your employer is required by law to provide you with appropriate personal protection equipment. If it is night and there is a chance of someone shooting at you and if you don’t have NVG’s, or Body Armour - cancel. Stay in barracks and tell the Gov’t that you will try again another night when they comply with their part of the contract. Not disobeying orders, just complying with the law.

Similar back home. If the government will not pay for and supply sufficient equipment, then they certainly can’t afford to keep a fleet of horses and diamond encrusted carriages. If they insist on having official birthday trots down the Mall, don’t refuse to turn up, just turn up wearing greens.

Officers and SNCO’s responsible for such events don’t have to be involved, they just don’t realise its happening until its too late.

Oh dear, how sad, never mind.

There are plenty ways of protesting within the rules of Military law. You just need your senior officers to understand what you are trying to achieve.

Where’s Charlie and little brover Andy in all this? They are not normally afraid of winding up people like Gordon Broon if it’s for a good cause. Time for some of their retired mates to do some lobbying.

I know people here don’t like me banging on about the MoD wasting money – after all, the NHS do it on a far grander scale – but here’s a few suggestions for the Broons;

1. Stop approving the committal of resources to protecting those who deliberately waste money. It is often said, correctly, that an aspiration only becomes policy when funded. Well, you (and your staffs) actively fund the protection of these people so, logically, deliberate waste is de facto policy.
2. Identify those who condone deliberately wasting money and sack them.
3. Identify those staffs that have a track record of delivering programmes to time, cost and performance. Promote them and learn from them.
4. At the VERY least, recreate the old troubleshooter posts and parachute them into programmes which cannot get enough “greens” on the “traffic light” system. These people used to be hated, but it worked. Thick skins essential, so elderly staffs satisfying 3. above only (as your career is effectively over, so ****** huge bonus for success).

I know I’m repeating myself, and these suggestions are consistently rejected (mainly by those to whom 1. and 2. is applicable, unsurprisingly) but demonstrably the MoD has able staffs who deliver the majority of programmes efficiently. Use them, don’t abuse them. Note, I’m not referring to people who inadvertently waste money through inexperience or incompetence – I’m talking about knowingly wasting money for personal gain (advancement). And I ESPECIALLY refer to people who deliver aircraft or their systems knowing them to be unsafe.

If you want an idea how much the above would generate, just think of the programmes discussed here that have suffered problems that were wholly foreseen, advised to those I refer to; and promptly ignored. Chinook Mk3. £250M and counting? Nimrod 2000. £500M+? And we’re getting 12 (?) aircraft instead of 20-odd. What price that reduction in capability? BOWMAN. £500M, not counting the avoidable regression work that’s imminent? I know I’m not the only one who thinks this way – there are numerous reports by the NAO, HCDC, PAC etc highlighting precisely the same things, albeit after the event. (Get with the programme guys, don’t just invite the sycophants in front of you, speak to those who deliver with effortless competence and see the contrast). But these reports are tossed aside by politicians and MoD alike. “We’re better now, so there are no lessons to be learned” is the mantra. CDP used to send e-mails to ALL his staff when these reports came out, telling them this was the party line (and woe betides anyone who did anything to embarrass the department, like demonstrating competence or save money WHILE MAINTAINING CAPABILITY). The last is very important and is key to this discussion. I used to think Broon was being firmly prudent with the MoD – refusing extra money because he knew they wasted it on a truly industrial scale – he’s on record as saying as much. But I now think he’s given up, which is a shame. The lunatics have won, and still control the asylum.

Grauniad leaks/forecasts of proposals for cuts: RAF and navy hardest hit by £4.5bn MoD cuts...

Tightening the military's belt

Nuclear submarines

A reduction in the number of Astute submarines built in Barrow for the navy, which may get only four of the planned eight. This will affect work at the last submarine facility in Britain.

Type 45 destroyers

The original plan was to build 12 vessels. This had already been cut to eight. The navy may only now get six.

Aircraft carriers

Construction of two carriers, the first of which was due to enter service in 2014, will be delayed. Scottish shipyards, including the Rosyth yard in Gordon Brown's constituency, could be soothed by the prospect of separate orders for new supply ships for the navy.* (see link below)

Eurofighter Typhoon jets

The number ordered will be reduced, meaning the government may have to pay compensation to BAE Systems at a critical time.

RAF Tornado squadrons

The reduction is still to be finalised.

Cuts in the number of RAF bases

No sites have been named, but the decision could release new sites for housing or possibly new prisons.

Nimrod reconnaissance aircraft

Cuts or delays to the programme are planned.

Future Rapid Effects System

Cuts or delays in the £14bn programme to supply the army with a new battlefield vehicle. This could be the most difficult to implement, because of the urgent need to protect troops in Afghanistan.

*Naval fleet built abroad if BAE wins MoD contract

“Future Rapid Effects System

Cuts or delays in the £14bn programme to supply the army with a new battlefield vehicle. This could be the most difficult to implement, because of the urgent need to protect troops in Afghanistan.”


This has long been viewed as a problematic programme. It is not a single battlefield vehicle, but a suite of vehicles. Within that suite, a group of vehicles would, for example, use a common chassis. There is also the aspiration to deliver a hybrid power train. The programme could be cut back but still deliver the protection not afforded by, for example, WMIKs or Snatch LRs.

The ever changing survivability requirements mean more weight. The programme already uses the premise that we can use US C17s as and when. The C130 is quite inadequate for many FRES variants. It may be that the Army decides some of the recent UORs (e.g. Mastiff) are capable and available, so go for more of the same, at the expense of common long term support. Just a quick thought, sure there’s more.

Recruiting
 

Welcome one and welcome all.

How would you like to volunteer for a private armed force??

I can't pay you, I can't equip you, I can't even give you a uniform. (sound familiar)

I will turn a blind eye to whatever you steal from MOD, My aim is to have a force of tanks parked in whitehall by Easter, being overflown by air cover. I will have a set of big grey ships come up the Thames. I will ask all AT for an evac of the troops deployed sausage side until we can mount a credible offensive. ( we did it in 1940 and it worked quite well)

I want the meanest dracula with a stick to be my swo. I want FS B4st4rd to run the shift and when we are at the door to number 10 I will demand the keys to the treasury. I intend to scrap a vast amount of bullsh1t and get the forces running again.

I need leaders of men, I need warriors, I need Mick Smith for journalistic integrity and I intend to stop the minority interest groups and the tail wagging the dog..........


Who wants in??

Oh and my sh1t list so far reads......

Gordy.
Swiss Des.
MOD.
Tony the liar.
Torpy the spineless.
Quangoes.
Faceless beaurocraits.
BOWS.
Spineless yes men.

:E:E:E:}

tucumseh,

I for one have no problem with your posts, they are clearly based on a wide experience in very relevant areas and are, therefore, 100% correct. Whilst I myself am not directly associated with the procurement and approval executive I have a close association with those that are. The MOD woes are almost exclusively self-inflicted due to idiotic decisions and policies pushed through against incontrovertible evidence to the contrary. In this respect, the uniformed senior management are by far the worst culprits - inter-service in-fighting is a cancer that has existed for years and until that childish past time is eradicated there will be no improvement whatsoever.

lm

If this weren't so familiar, I would be speechless (see below).

Whilst a coup d'etat would be cathartic and give us the opportunity to make our unspeakable politicians run the gauntlet, it has not been the British way for 350 years and I, for one, would find it distasteful. We need not dishonour the memories of those who have died defending democracy by abandoning it.

I have, however, joined this lot:

http://www.uknda.org/

They are apolitical but committed to driving home the message that we stand on the brink of disaster in this country if short-sighted cuts emasculate our Armed Forces.

They have some pretty impressive retired folk in their ranks,

http://www.uknda.org/my_documents/my...-VPs-Board.pdf

(the sort who have been standing up to be counted) and their manifesto is such that serving folk can join with a clear conscience. If we do want to send a message, then perhaps joining en masse may be a good way of doing it.

Kipling used a 17th Century incident as to highlight the shocking state of the late Victorian Forces, it still rings true:

http://www.kipling.org.uk/poems_dutchmedway.htm

Another excellent poem is "The Lesson" about the disasters in the Boer war. It should not take defeat and avoidable casualties to make the government realise that they are failing in their primary duty: the defence of the Realm.

Edited for bad spellign

Cornish-stormrider: I'm in. Also sounds like I'm your SWO.
However, would a Gordy 'hit-fund' be a good start to guage public opinion?

Now where did those nice black cars come from?.......

Did you miss out an "n" there Fawkes?

Watch the spin
 

All very true points being raised. However, my biggest concern right now is that we are being played. We have seen it all before - leaked reports of mass cuts and reductions prior to spending rounds. These then all prove to be greater than the reality announced later on prompting false relief that it could have been worse.

Don't let them off the hook. Any cuts will have a devastating effect on operational capability and effectiveness, not to mention moral. Whatever the results of the spending round it should be condemned if it does not support the armed forces and allow the brave men and women who serve to get on with their jobs unhindered.

Just because it isn't as bad as predicted doesn't mean it's not bad! Let us keep up the pressure on this bunch of self-serving, spineless politicians. Today we learn that the government is taking on £110 billion liability for Northern Rock (a private company that ruined its own business through inept business practices) and the speaker of the house of commons has been spending tax-payers derived air miles on business class flights for his children.

It is time to stand up and say enough is enough. These politicians, I refuse to call them leaders, don't have any respect for the people who employ them and treat the armed forces with utter contempt. Evil triumphs when good people do nothing.

If I was as incompetent and arrogant at my job as these peolple are with their's I would be dead by now!

fawkes, agree about the inappropriateness of a coup, as the Queen Mum is reputed to have told the last lot that dreamt up such a wheeze, "I don't think that's a very good idea, dears". Which brings us neatly to the MOD, the brainchild of the same person who was rumoured to be involved in the wheeze. Reform of that monstrous carbuncle must be a sine qua non before demands for pouring more tax payers dosh into the military have any chance of being taken seriously. Believe me, I'm a tax payer! Which brings us neatly to UKNDA. One of their emissaries (an Air Power advisor, or somesuch) posted on this forum recently, wanting information. The ensuing discussion ceased abruptly when it was suggested that the MOD was a prime obstacle to the proper defence of this nation. The problem would seem to be vested interests....
Tigs, a combined serving, ex-serving campaign is spot on, we can all wear our new tin badges! Count me in.

Oh Badges.........

I realise that there are issues but there are those of us smalley b4st4rds (and proud of it) without much time in who also have left and would deeply like a little badge please. I missed the in date by 7 months. And could someone please PM me with any gen on the veterans ID card and how to apply.

I could just go on fleabay but I want to wear one with integrity, and as to the smalley b4st4rd...... I wear that monniker with pride.:ok: I had some time in, and reached the best rank in the RAF..... Jelly Tot.