I'm struggling to recall any acts demonstrating Spine from any recent CDSs.

To not resign over the gutting of the armed forces over the last couple of decades means that none of them have an ounce of respect from me.

You might say that it is better to work from within, but the evidence suggest that that is not the case.

A succession of CDSs resigning would have an effect.

I'm not a believer in apolitical military leaders when it comes to the actual survival of the military.

Tourist,

As we discussed some time ago, the Government will not be held to ransom by VSOs (or the heads of any organisation or department) resigning on points of principle. Their response would simply be that he felt he had to go due to irreconcilable differences of opinion. And then they'd get another one. The top team spend a lot of time providing evidence, rather than opinion or personal wishes, to the politicians and explaining what is required to achieve the Government's desired effect. That effort within a sound and professional relationship has far more effect than simply walking out.

You have moved on from tribalism, which was your point that I was replying to.

I suspect your perception of your VSOs not respecting you because they haven't all resigned is a tiny bit precious.

Well, I realised that there is little point in arguing whether various people were truly purple with a bunch or RAF when the new guy and many of the last guys were light blue.

It's a bit like standing at the wrong end when a ref makes a bad decision. Not many around you tend to see a problem.


I have no interest in whether VSOs respect me. What I do have interest in is whether they fight our corner or whether they bend over and let the military take it negative lube.

Post resignation post K complaints earn no respect fro me.


If you imagine a CDS resignation over an issue would hold no fear from our current crop of politicians then I think you underestimate how scared they are of public opinion.

Tourist.

Your argument seems to have transcended its original point, and by that I mean the repetitive succession of "light blue", as you like to point out, and has now morphed into VSO resignations out of principle as a means of showing spine. [note: last two CDS' were Army btw]

I'm sorry but Sir Stuart hasn't even taken the job yet and you are pontificating about him resigning over the perceived p*ss-poor state of the Armed Forces?!!

Are you for real or a Union boy? Nobody's taking your jobs. My speculative guess, as shared by many, is that the top job went to the best man, as many have intimated.

Seriously, tell me who stole your lunch money and I'll try and do something about it mate.

Or just get over yourself precious.

I attended a lecture where a VSO was asked why he had not resigned after his minister had given him a public rebuke.

He said that to have done so would have been a 'one day wonder'. Better to stay and work gradually to achieve the result desired if at all possible. To have 'run away' would have been the betrayal and staying and trying to sort out the issues was more important.

Perhaps years' later, the VSO is widely respected by those who know him, whilst the politician is generally reviled and thought to have misused his position for personal gain.

As was said by another who was close to the event, the VSO had nothing to lose or gain financially by staying but his self respect would have been tarnished had he left.

O-D

It's funny that everybody on here is happy to agree that pretty much all politicians are w@nkers, yet when they chose another light blue suit for CDS, "it's because he is the best man for the job"

We all agree that politicians are only interested in one thing, themselves, so how does that equate to choosing the best man to run the forces?

Given the chance, the politician will always choose the CDS that does as he is told.

There is more to the top job thN being a yes man.



Old Duffer.

Weak excuse.
If staying and fighting from the inside worked, the military would not be in the parlous state it is today.

Wow, you Navy guys really are cut up about this, aren't you? Your bitterness shines through magnificently and I am happy to bathe in it.

Personally, I couldn't give a toss what colour uniform he wears, I happen to know him and work with him regularly and couldn't be more delighted by his selection. Although there are a couple of Browns and Darks around at the moment, none with Peachy's breadth of experience or understanding of the other two services. So the good news is, the other services will end up being very happy with him too - the general feeling in the Big Building this week is one of approval.

Funny how the further down the food chain you are or the more removed from the Services, the more expert you are in the business of the higher echelons.

I'm pretty certain your rancid attitude and sweeping generalisations of VSOs aren't shared by the serving RN at large Tourist. When it comes down to it I suspect your comments are really a bit of a personal rant at the 'have's' by a 'have not'.

Once again I invite you to get over that little ego of yours. You clearly have absolutely no idea about the way things work at the higher Pol-Mil levels.

Very true Courtney

I think it is very telling that everyone serving who has ever met ACM Peach is united in agreeing that he is the perfect man for the job. He is bloody good, ideal for the challenges we face and just the sort of man who will happily not just challenge sacred cows, but probably eat them raw for breakfast :E

""If the politicians like him, it is probably because he is credible, honest, and won't just tell them what they want to hear""

If ever there were reasons for politicians NOT to like him.......:eek::ok:

In fairness, I don't believe that anyone would put their "service loyalties" above the security of the nation. Not in this day and age anyway. That said, the RAf did get rid of the Harrier........:P

Interesting point.

I would certainly say that yes, as a scrote, I know exactly what I want from the higher echelons.

I want them to put their subordinates before their career.
I want them to put getting the right equipment before the directorship post career.

I used to spend quite a lot of time dealing with VVSOs because of the job I did.

Some impressed me, some did not. Some were altogether too excited about their own importance and intelligence and believed that management speak is a good proxy for intelligence.
It isn't.

Army were mostly very polite and human, though Dannet's bag carrier was a prize tw@t.

Navy seemed pleasant enough.
RAF VSOs wouldn't even shake my hand in general much less talk to me.


It does not matter if I have been a senior officer any more than it matters if a rugby fan can coach.
You still know when the manager should be fired, and this millennium has been an abortion.

Senior officer were we?

I'm most terribly sorry, I underestimated you. Bitter AND chippy.

And as for,

Ah! I think I see the real issue now. You don't like the RAF or VSOs. Well done, that man! :D:D:D:D:D

Mach

The current crop of VSOs have just lost 2 wars in succession against stone-age countries.

That makes them failures.



They are not to be respected, they should be vilified, either for their inability to come up with a plan, or their inability to persuade politicians to not go to war if indeed there was no viable plan.

That is their job.

Winners get respect, not losers.

I'm sure you would have been much better at the job. Shame you didn't hang around long
enough.

You seem you have done a 180 on your opinion two days ago,

Compared with today,

Henman failed, it doesn't mean he was cr@p. It just means he wasn't good enough.

In the words of the great philosopher

"Losers do their best, winners go home and @#'# the prom queen"

The last few are losers.
Many died for nothing and the blood is at least partly on their hands. Those are the perks of command.



No, I wouldn't be better at the job, not my thing, politics. I like flying.

CDS earns less than a good plumber or average builder.
 

Very true. The problem (if it is a problem) with many on this site is the real world. CDS is nothing. Osborne and Cameron laugh about them.....Senior Officers are nothing but hot air to them. All the politicians laugh about them.
Our politicians are in an exclusive club, constantly voted in but never catching out. They are rich, they are educated... they are incredibly arrogant.
A little new crab is nothing to them.
Has CDS a twitter account? Does he tweet.? Do people know his name? What does he bring to them? To make them richer? Happier?
He brings in to them nothing..at all.
The military are presently bringing to the nation only failure, tears and tales of woe. Tales of charity, injury. Defeat.
Yes I long for the happy times to return, but they are gone.

Doesnt look that good on google.
 

I got to 14 pages of hits on google about Peach before I got to 4th division websites about him.... it thinned out at about 10 pages.
Is it true he led the "allies" air campaign against Libya? Is it fair to point out.. y'know... did he think that through? I mean to where we are now, with Libya?
Is he Cameron's "Yes " man?
Like often, I get on this site looking for the hard, no bull**** truth. From hard faced professional airman, and Lord there are a few on here who tell me like it is... or as they see it.
But he is looking like a Conservative party shoe in. A yes man. At least on a quick hit on the internet.
Zero faith in our current crop of SO regardless of colour.
Sorry if I've offended people lately. Don't mean to - just my age and cynicism.
I'll be watching the news for Peach.

No - you get the best person for the job regardless of the colour of their uniform - anything else would be a disgrace - HH

Quite right, although some of the posts give the impression that this thread is becoming like the Academy Awards argument in more ways than one.:=

Jack