And at the risk of ever-so-slight thread drift, how does 29 days to go fit with the need for deployed forces to register/fill in/return postal votes by the due deadline ......

..... or are they to be disenfranchised....?

Edited to add: Much info about Service Voters here on the Electoral Commission website. Which admits that deployed troops may not be able to get a postal vote back in time!! However, a "proxy vote" may be used, providing your other half/significant other/Mum shares your political views. Spread the word!

To the Moderator who chopped my comment
 

Fair cop, sorry about that. I think it obvious, I was a trifle agitated.

The 'stiff upper lip' and 'take it on the chin' frame of mind really doesn't work for me when our people are being shafted then shafted again.

In the days when government respected (or at least were respectful of) the armed forces, being non-partisan in politics was achievable, I think that these days are gone (hopefully only for now).

I think that with these days of evermore watchful and 'troublesome' investigative journalism, the populace in general are being made far more aware of our 'lords and masters' indiscretions. Politicians are known for being cynical, never more than now - everybody is dispensible in their quest for power and nest-feathering (a la Hoon, Byers et al).

PMQs
 

According to Gordon Brown at PMQs today, he is very respectful of the armed forces and indeed, asked CDS if there were enough helicopters in Afghanistan. Indeed, he always ensures that there are sufficient resources for all military operations.

So, it would seem, CDS (Sir Jock) and his service staffs gave the wrong 'advice'. It is hard to imagine that such officers are so incompetent. They really ought to have been removed from their posts!

Or perhaps we should believe that Gordon Brown is a lying b***ard and is a traitor to this country. But of course he is too great a man to have to answer for his crime.

"According to Gordon Brown at PMQs today, he is very respectful of the armed forces and indeed, asked CDS if there were enough helicopters in Afghanistan. Indeed, he always ensures that there are sufficient resources for all military operations."

"So, it would seem, CDS (Sir Jock) and his service staffs gave the wrong 'advice'. It is hard to imagine that such officers are so incompetent. They really ought to have been removed from their posts!"

However hard it may be to imagine.... give it a try. Try your hardest.

Stirrup is a place-man left in post over and above his normal "tour length" precisely because he is the least politically disruptive for Brown. As for his competance in post... make of that what you will, given Brown's history.

I know I'm biased. Never liked Stirrup, never will. Not that he'll lose any sleep over that. :mad:

'So on the basis of his opinion that he "appeared" uninterested he then gets involved in a pretty petty insult.

Those claiming its ok because they dislike the party should perhaps ask the question of when someone uses the actions of said Lance Corporal to act inappropriately with a senior officer or HM herself then will you think person is acting rightly or wrongly.

If he wishes to protest then do so out of Uniform not in Uniform.'

Don't remember swearing allegiance to the PM when I joined up. Brown deserves no respect and has certainly not earned any. He is a disgrace as a PM with his appalling attitude towards the Armed Forces. He has only started appearing pro-military because an election is looming. The sooner he is gone the better. Well done to Beharry for doing what I am sure 99% of the current and former Military would like the opportunity to do.

I have a nice piece of paper stached away somewhere, signed by HM that says I worked for Her not Gordon Brown. :ok: Hope all you boys & girls in uniform get your votes cast next month wherever you are; we might just get rid of him and his shabby government. Anyone know of a labour MP with family in the services ? Not sure they have a clue what serving our country is about; too busy fiddling expences.

If we have enough helicopters in theatre, according to the Principal Moron (PM) why are we ordering more, to be delivered after the proposed date for the withdrawal of our Forces from AFGH?

racedo,

WW2 lies ?
Falklands more lies ??
GW1 even more lies ???

I think your spouting is based on lies.

B
 

I cannot agree that a politician, even if fully democratically elected, deserves respect in every instance (or should that read as 'should not be openly criticised by an employee'?). By that qualification both Hitler and Stalin would have been beyond reproach. Not that I would compare the PM with those two, but unblinking loyalty and respect based solely on the holder's office is by no means automatic. 'Respect' seems to work best when it is mutual.

Flug

In which case why did you take orders from people who were not HM ?
Oh wait they were appointed by the Government of HM, as is the Prime Minister.

Sadly this has degenerated into a well as its a Labour PM then its ok to do whatever he wants while ignoring the way the Tories acted with respect to the Armed forces.

I think GB has been a pathethic PM, but then again I thought Jim Callaghan, Maggie for quite a long period, John Major and Tony Blair were just as pathetic.

However they were the PMs and while in that position deserve the respect that the position commands even though I feel they were unworthy of the position . But then again only the elected MPs get to choose the PM.

I believe allowing a member of the forces in uniform to act inappropriately sends a wrong message and allows people to question the conduct and professionalism of our forces at a time when the support of the public is required.

It's because of people with your thought process that this country is in the current mess it finds itself.

You'd rather pander to keeping up appearances and etiquette than actually cutting the head off the snake, the PM and all politicians should be ashamed and slated to eternity.
People are being killed on a daily basis, and that is due to PM & friends.

I doubt you've ever signed up fwiw, or else you'd actually value what you say and maybe think before typing.

I do agree that the cons would be no better, that doesn't mean brown/bliar shouldn't be berated from high heaven, they're all scum.

Pious,

Well said, sir.

Racedo,

You are wrong. Brown deserves absolutely no respect from anyone in uniform. The Queen is the Head of State, not that idiot. The Royal Family understand the Forces and as such have earned our respect, as evidenced during Prince Charles' recent visit to Theatre. He can relate to what the Military and, as importantly, our families, go through when loved ones are away, Brown and his cronies never will. That is why they do not care a jot about the Military, they are only interested in safeguarding their votes and money, as evidenced by their cowtowing to the corrupt left-wing unions.

where were my desert boots?
 

A couple of years ago Brown the PM visited Basrah. As he entered Brigade HQ ops room, miraculously everyone seemed to need to make an urgent phone call. GB approached the only available person, a female Australian Army captain. He thanked her for "all the hard work you are doing for our country". It was rather amusing, as she was clearly wearing different DPM combats complete with Aussie flags on - but also showed he can't pick a UK service person in a line-up. I don't think anyone was being political by 'snubbing' him; certainly for me, it was personal. Rightly or wrongly I blame him for the problems we have experienced and continue to experience having tried to fight 2 conflicts with inadequate funding for all the necessary equipment, training and support. Not in his current job as PM and I don't have a problem with us being sent to either conflict (and I've served several times in both). I blame GB the former Chancellor for lack of adequate funding.

I didn't want to be part of his photo opportunity - don't forget, all you people who keep making the point that it isn't appropriate for Armed Forces personnel to behave politically: the politicians continuously use Armed Forces personnel for party politics. That was why GB came to Basrah that time (he was almost going to call a snap general election and he wanted to be on TV surrounded by smiling troops to get one over on the Tories), it was for PR not out of respect. If I am not allowed to be political in public, fine, but I don't wish to be used publicly for party politics either.

I actually wanted to ask him where my f***ing desert boots were, promised in Jan 03 and never turned up. 56 deg and winter boots. Followed by 7 years (and counting) of insufficient funding for what we're asked to achieve. I didn't ask him about my boots - I had no desire to embarrass my commanding officer, and I didn't have the balls anyway. But there was an urgent call I had to make. Find someone else to shake your hand for the cameras.

Gentlemen/Ladies as appropriate:

I'm proud of you. Well said.

You keep confusing this.

I am asking for respect for the Prime Minister who ever he or she is, as elected by parliament who are elected by the people.

The fact that you seek to make it based on an individual is incorrect.

What if the next PM doesn't feel enamoured with the military does it then allow the military to decide whether it wishes to respect the PM or not ?

I'm with racedo on this.
Perhaps if it was put in terms of non commissioned personnel deciding to ignore certain commissioned officers because they have no respect for them (it's true there are some officers who really should not have been commissioned) you can start to see the problem, which is where racedo s coming from I think.
Someone mentioned the scroll earlier- it says HM and her duly appointed ministers and representatives. Brown is duly appointed.
Maybe we could take this disrespect idea further. HM can force the dissolution of a Parliament if she feels her ministers are not up to the job.
Seems to me that neither she, nor Chas actually do give a stuff as they are, effectively, irrelevant to politics in Britain.

Oh and I won't be voting for Labour

GB may be appointed by HM but he is chosen from within the ranks of the Labour party by the members of that party - not fully democratic and not representative of the wishes of the population at large

Was L/Cpl Beharry right to snub the PM? Probably a bit rude, eh?

Would I do the same? YES.

My wife and I have our "Letter from Betty" on the study wall behind me ... nothing there that says my loyalty is/was to the PM. Just to my Queen and my military superiors. The parchment says, as many of you know "... Observe and follow such Orders and Directions as from time to time you shall receive from Us, or any superior Officer ..."

I don't see some transient politician mentioned there, on either copy.

So Gordo can "strut and fret his hour upon the stage", but he will NEVER have the respect of the British military community.

[Still a bit f-ing rude, though, Johnson :ok:]

No

PM is chosen by votes of Members of Parliament, all of whom are elected by the wishes of the population at large in an election.

racedo,

Check your facts!

"The voting is split equally three ways between Labour MPs and the Labour MEPs, party members and members of affiliated trade unions who have not opted out of paying a political levy." Reuters

This certainly isn't a new topic; perhaps we should remember the following thread:

http://www.pprune.org/military-aircr...-shabbily.html