CDS Vs Hoon
 

You may enjoy this;
Today's joint news conference with Chief of Defence Staff Admiral Sir Michael Boyce and Defence secretary Geoff Hoon was 'interesting'. CDS openly speaking of overstretch, cancelled leave, low morale, extremely concerned, etc etc. Standing next to him was an incredulous and alarmed Hoon who developed a most bizarre stance - arched back, wide-eyes, slight grimace, almost as if he was having something large inserted into 'an orifice'. Hoon then went on to desperately spin the previous comments into some sort of govt approved version with CDS looking on, and looking slightly smug if I'm not mistaken. De-mob happy perhaps?

Story here;
http://www.channel4.com/news/home/z/...1120/fire.html

Video should appear here and will be up 'til early Thurs eve;
http://www.channel4.com/news/home/z/...021119/c4n.ram

BBC Report:
 

Wednesday, 20 November, 2002

Forces chief issues strike warning

A continuing strike by UK firefighters would seriously undermine any possible military action against Iraq, according to the country's most senior military chief. In a blunt warning, Sir Michael Boyce said he was "extremely concerned" by the impact on military effectiveness of having 19,000 troops on stand-by for firefighting.

The comments in a news conference came as it emerged there would be no talks between the firefighters' union and employers on Wednesday.

In the House of Commons, Prime Minister Tony Blair moved to play down the suggestion troops were too over-stretched. Mr Blair stressed Sir Michael had also said the armed forces would still be able to respond to any military requirements from the government. The defence chief was pointing out troops "perfectly obviously" could not be engaged in other duties if they were firefighting, said Mr Blair.

The executive of the Fire Brigades Union (FBU) has decided the employers have not come up with a significantly different offer and declined to meet them. The employers said they would work through the night to try to improve the package on the table so talks could resume on Thursday, but warned there would be no more money. An eight-day stoppage is due to start on Friday.

Sir Michael insisted he would not send troops to strike break by crossing FBU picket lines but would expect the police to carry out that sort of operation. "The armed forces should not cross picket lines," he said. Downing Street later said troops would not cross picket lines to reach firefighting equipment, even under a police escort.

Standing alongside Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon, Sir Michael said: "I am extremely concerned about the military effectiveness of our armed forces...

"I do not have a box of 19,000 standing by for such duties so they must come from operational duties. So they are not doing their task for training for whatever eventuality may come in the future."

Sir Michael spoke of the "morale and motivation problem" of sending soldiers straight from operations in areas like Bosnia and straight into firefighting duties. That meant they were not being allowed holidays with their families or to engage in other training for future military operations, such as against Saddam Hussein.

Mr Hoon was forced to explain, stressing the government had always said it was for civilian authorities to cross picket lines to get at red fire engines if there was a continuing strike. The defence secretary also insisted the UK was prepared for a possible Iraq war and able to offer a "credible threat" of force against Saddam Hussein.

Sir Michael's comments, however, have suggested significant differences between the military and the government over the handling of a continuing strike. Ministers have previously signalled that soldiers would be used to cross picket lines but are now having to confirm that is not the case.

The Conservatives said Sir Michael had echoed their view that UK troops had long been over-stretched. Shadow defence secretary Bernard Jenkin said: "Labour has been running the Armed Forces on empty. There is nothing left in the kitty for the unexpected."

At the news conference, Mr Hoon also confirmed America had asked if the UK would provide troops for a possible Iraq war.

Recent attacks on UK planes patrolling no-fly zones would affect judgements on whether Saddam Hussein was keeping to UN resolutions, he said.

"It's clearly relevant that his forces should attack our forces carrying out humanitarian tasks in the no-fly zone," said Mr Hoon. "And certainly I agree that it is important that we recognise that this is an aggressive, belligerent state as far as our aircraft are concerned. That will go to be part of the picture the Security Council discusses but it would be a matter for the Security Council to discuss once all the evidence had been amassed."

Well said Sir Michael!

Certainly well said, and what a shame that he is retiring.

Time for a coup d'etat me thinks!

"No Roman army has entered the capital for a 100 years."

Is it time we thought about doing it? As bad as it sounds until we get a real bloody defeat with 'x' quantity of body bags coming home NOBODY will sit up and pay attention apart from that which comes out of the mouths of this defunct government.

:( :( :(

Duck Dogers,

I wholeheartedly agree with you.
The fact is that we have been involved in many conflicts fairly recently (I have been involved in Falklands, Gulf, Bosnia, Kosova, Afghanistan myself)
With the exception of a relatively 'few' losses we have all managed and coped, and won!
Sadly, until we do take a good kicking and sustain sever losses, then the perception of the government and probably the public, is that the armed forces 'will win' because we always win!
God help us all if Saddam starts to play real dirty, I fear many of us will be returning home in your plastic bags.
Come on Tony, open your eyes for Christs sake! this is not a game Sir. This is for real, and the Top Military Man is telling you Louad and Clear!!!!!

The Swinging Monkey
More Rope Caruthers!

CDSvWho
 

What a lovely interview! Hectorusrex says 'what a shame he is leaving...' real question is 'why is he leaving?'

Fact is that the armed forces are being expected to achieve everything and anything with the lowest numbers of personnel in living memory. Probably would have been fine in a steady state situation like the cold war but these days is it fine?

I wonder if Sir M had an interview without coffee after the press conference! Let's hope he continues to stand up for ordinary servicemen and women in his remaining time in post.....no one else is better placed.

I thought the relative calibre of the two men was the really telling aspect of the session. CDS looking confident, speaking clearly and getting straight to the heart of the matter with some simple truths. Hoon looking shifty, clearly not listening and obviously well out of his depth. I thought CDS was a typical product of our professional armed forces, whilst Hoon was a typical product of this government.

Still cant say I support a coup, even though most sgts I know could do a better job than that arse Blair.

I quite like the idea that in the end CDS works for the Queen and so does Hoon. A much healthier arrangement than for Hoon to be CDS's immediate boss and employer as yesterdays press conference illustrated.

You could actually see Hoon demonstrate the dictionary definition of "squirm".

WWW

No offense, but were only going there for some flag waving to fight a media war. How hard can that be :confused:

Dear Mr Civilian,

I'd like to see you try. Get back to shuffling paper, where you wont get hurt.

Im just being a realists (or a cynic depending on your point of view). Lets face it the Iraqi squaddies are going to surrender as soon as their out of sight of Sadams gestapo. An easy 75% of them probably fought in the last war and dont want to be on the receiving end of that again. America doesnt need us, not with all the toys that they have. Besides that the Americans that ive talked to would rather go it alone without anyone else involved.

Dear Mr Civilian,

your comments are an insult to those servicemen and women who by their very actions enable you to make such sad and unwarranted remarks.
I have served in several conflicts, Falklands, Gulf war, Bosnia, Kosovo and more recently Afghanistan. Yes, casualties are much less than they used to be, but flag-waving?
If you think that flying at 50' over a featureless desert at night, with a few thousand pounds of HE under your belly is 'flag waving' or spending 16 hours at 40,000' in an AWACS is 'flag waving' you are patently an ignorant and stupid person.
Do us all a favour, crawl back under your little stone and get a life.
I am unable to waste any more of my valuable time on you

The Swinging Monkey
'Smithers, kick this civilian in the nuts for me, theres a good chap!!

just read your comment about the Americans prefering to go it alone. Now I know you are a fool. I work directly with US aviators EVERY day, and believe me, they much prefer us to be with them. Why do you think we are still in Afghanistan? 'cos its nice weather or what? you are a fool Sir.

The Daily Telegraph has an excellent transcript of the conversation - it mentions that Sir Michael said he had extreme concern, then Bufhoon said - "i didn't hear him say extreme concern - he said extremely concerned instead" - trying to lie and spin your way out of a press conference indeed. One man a low life piece of political trash, the other a man who has devoted his life to the service of his country and stands up for the lads. BZ Sir Michael - the measure of his success though will only become apparent when our dicators start leaking information about him to discredit him - i confidently expect stories to appear soon that he is gay/lesbian/kiddy molestor/satanist/tory voter -with the aim of shooting him down/ You can't humiliate the Government and get away with it these days...

I dont want to get into a flame war. All im saying is that a certain percentage of americans dont want to goto war alone. Therefore we get involved and maybe others I dont know. Im sure Bush would be just as happy if we sent some ships down there and some doctors instead of a couple of hundred tanks. This is what I meant by fighting a media war.

PS. Well I speak with a couple of american civilians every few days, some of them being ex-military. Well one of them anyway :)

Dear Mr Civilian,

Despite saying I wouldn't waste any more of my valuable time with you, I find I now am:confused:
Stop trying to dig yourself out of a very big hole.
You said we were simply 'flag waving' and that Sir, in Military terms is 'Bollocks!'
Oh and you speak to some Americans every few days - that must be nice for you:) Do they like you? I wonder:confused:

JimLad,

I like your sentiments, and I fear you will be proved correct. I can just see the headlines now........
'CDS found to be having an affair with black, one-legged homosexual Russian' 'Off with his head demands Bafhoon'

Sir Mike, I am not in your service, but you get my vote every time! Enjoy your retirement

The Swinging Monkey
'Caruthers, get the Admiral a drink!'

SM

Words can hurt like a fist. Its a pity yours dont :D

Mr Civilian,

Yes, now let me see, how did it go...um ah yes.....
NO BRAIN - NO PAIN!

Guess that just about sums you up;) ;)

Mind you don't hurt yourself with that paper clip old boy!

Night night

Swinging Monkey
'Caruthers, hit this civilian again, harder!'

Oi Civvie!

Off to fight a media war, are we? Well the last time I looked, the worst thing you could get from The Sun was a nasty paper cut. Headlines don't kill people but SAMs, AAA, artillery, tanks, SSMs and CBW do! When we are out in the desert and the casualties begin (god forbid), I dare you say "It's only a media war"

Get back in your box you ignorant fool.

CV:mad:

A Civilian

Unfortunately we in our distinguished profession have to defend the likes of people like yourself. I for one would be quite happy to see al Qaeda commit an act of aggression here in the UK against people like your, only for the reason of awakening you from the pathetic, 9-5, tree-huggy existance that you live and open your eyes to the real world!

You see Saddam is one of the few in the world who still upholds traditional realist values and has on many occaisions exhibited those Laws of Nature as laid down by Thomas Hobbes in his book 'The Leviathan'. Namely Law 1) that people pursue only their own self-interest, and 4) the natural condition of war. You see despite the changes the International System has endured over the last decade or so nothing has changed.

As for your comment blow;

"America doesnt need us, not with all the toys that they have"

This i'm afraid is not so, from first hand experience i suggest you look at the RAF contribution to Op NORTHERN WATCH enforcing UNSCR 688, then to the recent air ops over afghanistan in support of Op ENDURING FREEDOM where we provided ESSENTIAL AAR to not only the USN, USMC, FAF and Navy as well as our own assets!

At the end of the day you need people like swining monkey and i because it is people like YOU who would hide behind others to save his own behind!!

I leave you with another excert from The Leviathan and that popular TV series called The Simpsons. Enjoy the very Freedom that my colleagues and i provide for you!!!!:mad:

"Hereby it is manifest that during the time men live without a common power to keep them all in awe, they are in that condition which is called war; and such a war as is of every man against every man. For war consisteth not in battle only, or the act of fighting, but in a tract of time, wherein the will to contend by battle is sufficiently known: and therefore the notion of time is to be considered in the nature of war, as it is in the nature of weather. For as the nature of foul weather lieth not in a shower or two of rain, but in an inclination thereto of many days together: so the nature of war consisteth not in actual fighting, but in the known disposition thereto during all the time there is no assurance to the contrary. All other time is peace. "

and

"Smithers, unleash the hounds!"

Now then chaps,

Can't you see that we are all enjoying Labour's "peace dividend"? We simply don't need more people in the military.

Oh no, sorry, it was the last government who said that. Ah well, that was them too....

Isn't this sort of thing where the term "spin" originated? Only called that because "bull$hit" isn't politically correct, of course.

Too much with too few resources again, so they try and hoodwink the public, who of course are even more stupid than the government (they must be, look who did the voting)!

P.S. I have to say I saw this coming some years ago and took the ultimate sanction. I left the services. Not that it's much better outside in civvy street though.

My regards to all of those facing a Green Godess Christmas. BTW, looking on the bright side, when we did this 25 years ago it resulted in a big payrise for the military!

Civilian

If it's going to be a 'media war', will slander and libel be war crimes?

Reg

Good Idea
 

I like the idea of a coup.
Now let me see, we owe our oath of loyalty to the Queen, not Tony Blair so all we need for an excuse is a Labour Govt attack on HM Queen. Ah, what about the Princess Royal being convicted today because her dogs savaged some children...that sounds convenient.
The Guards are ideally placed to seize Parliament, MoD, Downing St and the BBC. All on those on Op FRESCO can block every line of communication in and out of major cities with thunderclap surprise(well,as quickly as they can at 30mph).
The RAF jaguars can waste both of Prescotts jags...how ironic and the Navy can steam around for a bit with some nice bunting....mind those rocks.
We install a provisional government loyal to the Crown, award ourselves a 40% payrise ( another bout of irony) and arrest every Guardian reader and Mrs Taversall (my old maths teacher and criminal)
Right, I am off to armoury to sign out a shooter. Look out for me stuck in the traffic on the A1 tonight in a purple Corsa.
Go back to your crewrooms and prepare for Government

Did I hear talk of a coup?

Where do I sign?

Spose a Daisy-cutter is a bit OTT though for Millbank or wherever they're holed-up now, or is co-lateral damage just a New Labour thing?

Just as a counter comment, who the h*ll does he think he is stating that soldiers won't cross picket lines? He's a member of the armed forces, if it's a legal order he'd better do what he's told. If they're ordered to cross them, they d*mned well better.

The police have now stated that they won't either. What is going on in this country? I'm waiting with great interest to find out who "Two Jags" is going to get to do it if the army and police won't.

BBC:

In a separate development, the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) has said its members will not cross picket lines to take red fire engines for the armed forces to use.

Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon had suggested police could cross picket lines after army chiefs said soldiers would not.

ACPO vice president Chris Fox, the chief constable of Northamptonshire Police, said: "Under the legislative framework currently in effect, police have no part to play in themselves removing red engines from fire stations."

Downing Street insisted the government was prepared to issue instructions to commandeer the red fire engines, but it would not be drawn on how if both the Army and police refused to cross picket lines.

"Precisely who goes through a picket line, should it be necessary, is less important than the fact that it happens," a spokesman said.

Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott was due to make a statement to the House of Commons later on Thursday.

ORAC

I have niggle somewhere in the back of my memory that the “one must obey a legal order thing” does have some limits. Orders that are legal in war may not be quite so watertight in a time of peace. Is it always mutiny, especially in peace-time, if you can later show your superior was wrong in what he wanted you to do? Interesting times.

CDS gets my vote for the most effective statement for ages on the current problems that affect the armed forces. Sadly, judging my the look on Hoon's face, he will be ignored and Phoney Tony will continue to 'willy wave' at every opportunity and keep committing the armed forces for even greater OOA activities, without having the decency to fund the appropriate equipment.

CDS deserves a vote of thanks from every member of the armed forces for doing something few if any of his predecessors ever did - he stood up in public and was counted.

John,

I believe the rule is still that one must obey a legal order.Though it is true that some orders may only be true in certain circumstances. I cannot, however, see how an order from the government of the day to cross a picket line could be considered illegal, which is the case in point. if you wish past precedent, they did it in the General Strike of 1926 when the forces crossed the picket lines to run the buses and the underground.

You may quibble as to the ownership of the fire engines (government or local authority), but that is a separate argument and one presumes that, since they are the people in dispute with the firemen, they would authorise their removal and use.

I don't want to get involved in an Orac vs John Farley debate so I won't!

However, when I use to teach about this stuff there were two categories of "Military Aid" that could be invoked.

The first was "Military Aid to the Civil Power", and had to be invoked by a Senior Judge at the request of the Police. The ever-present example of this is in Northern Ireland where the troops only work within the limits laid down by the judiciary. This emphasises the principle of the "Rule of Law".

The second was "Military Aid to the Civil Community". This category is not subject to Civil Law, but has clearly got to be conducted according to standard military procedures. There are lots of examples of this from flood relief to foot-and-mouth measures. There can be no question of a Service(wo)man not doing something because they don't happen to believe in it. And that must apply to the CDS as much as to a Lance Corporal in a fire engine. The Military personnel work under the instructions of a head of the Civil Government (Mayor, Prime Minister etc).

I imagine we are in a MACC situation and not a MACP. If it's all different now, I'm sure someone will enlighten me!

ORAC

Thanks. I was not arguing a point. Just not sure. Your General Strike precedent is interesting too.

I really admire the CDS though. A true senior officer standing up for his men.

I don't think that anyone has said they would 'refuse' to cross picket lines, merely that they would be extremely reluctant to do so, and for very understandable reasons - it is not the job of the police or military take sides in a civil industrial dispute, and it would be foolish for a government to order them to do so. Unfortunately Labour, despite the 'New' prefix, still display the authoritarian arrogance so typical of socialists. They believe that they now 'own' the country and everything in it - an attitude usually only seen in African dictators.

Article ....here

On a related note, some interesting reading here, by a self-described Royal Marine squaddie;
http://www.spectator.co.uk/article.p...-11-23&id=2517
Why I quit the army. Gordon Bourne has resigned his commission in despair

The government of the day went a bit further than having them cross picket lines!!

---------------------------------------------------------------------

"The London docks were besieged by striking dockers and middle-class blacklegs were afraid to go there. The docks were heavily guarded by soldiers in full war-kit and machine guns were mounted everywhere. The Home Secretary met high army and naval officers,

"Make your own plans" he said. "Use whatever force you require - I give you carte blanche - but my orders are that the London Docks must be opened at all costs."

Warships took loads of blacklegs down the Thames at night and one hundred food lorries were loaded. Next morning the lorries passed through the East End in convoy guarded by hundreds of police, two battalions of infantry with fixed bayonets, a number of tanks and ten armoured cars.

---------------------------------------------------------------

On the 7th of May the government issued the following proclamation:

"All ranks of the Armed Forces of the Crown are hereby notified that any action which they may find it necessary to take in an honest endeavour to aid the Civil Power will receive, both now and afterwards, the full support of His Majesty’s Government."

-------------------------------------------------------------------

But the situation was a bit more extreme then, so a tank might be a bit OTT. Don't know when the army last fixed bayonets except in a parade. :D

Well certainly that was done in the Falklands

1. CDS has demonstrated outstanding military leadership. We must all take comfort from the fact he was prepared to publicly state the way it is for the Armed Forces. What will it cost him?

2. ORAC, I understand your argument and it makes compelling reading. However, what would the RoE be in the event of pickets becoming violent? What about the role of the Euro Court of Human Rights (not around in 1926)? I don't think the legal advisors to the government could make the case for a 'lawful order to cross a picket line' stick. I also believe that is why the Police aren't keen on it either.

3. Has anyone seen the spoof Army recruitment advert allegedly being circulated in Squaddie circles? Today's Current Bun had a feature on it - amusing and pertinent if true.

4. I really hope they don't go on strike for 8 days. It would put unbearable pressure on our lads filling in.

Regards

JJ

Thanks for your post Mr Civilian, your words will be of great comfort. At least when the bullets start flying, people start losing their lives and servicemen have to endure another several months away from their families, we'll know it's only a flag waving exercise. :o

Not only do we have to endure the back-to-back tours of the Balkans, Falklands, Middle East and Afghanistan to name but a few, we have to do it with ill funded kit, with little extra money and now with narrow minded people like you coming out with bone statements as you do.

You thinks it's easy. Try telling that to the serviceman who has just returned from an Op theatre, had his post Op leave cancelled due to our dear friends the fireman and has the threat of a conflict in the Middle East looming. Oh and do it on very little money with no right of recourse or protest (not that a majority of servicemen would, loyalty and all that).

Even though the bullets may not fly, there would be the constant threat of CBWs being used. Spending untold hours in NBC kit and a respirator is no fun although i suspect you wouldn't appreciate what it's like; I suspect you've spent little if any time wearing the kit.

I'm also glad that 75% of the Iraqi Army will surrender, that only leaves about 100,000 Republican guard to deal with, easy money. 'A few of our ships and doctors' should see them off a treat.

Many of our guys routinely risk their lives. Not wishing to sound dramatic but tearing around at 250 feet in a FJ, conducting Armd Bde live firing Exs etc etc are not without risk. These are things people in the forces do without question, daily; all to train to defend the country. Oh i forgot, we can't do those things at present as we're putting out fires.

The bottom line is, you're comments here are unwelcome, insulting and ill informed. If you think it's easy, why don't you join the military and see for yourself, or are you one of those who is well and truely entrenched in the comfort zone?

If you said what you said to provoke a reaction, you got it but, final comment - F%ck you and crawl back under your rock. :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:


PS CDS what a speech, what was needed right now.

Civvie,

I have to hand it to you - you really have mastered the art of dentopedology (the art of putting one's foot in one's mouth).

I won't rehash the apposite comments of other Ppruners more qualified to remark on this matter. All I will remark is that the government (and, for that matter their predecessors) keep remarking that our armed services are the finest in the world. I happen to agree with that, not least since I work with members of all the services 0830-1730 Monday to Friday at the PLC (OK, perhaps 1200 on Fridays...). What puzzles me is why, if the government believes this, they then treat said finest armed forces like Sh-one-t. Treating finest roses with said substance may work, but we aren't dealing with gardening.

By the by, also thanks to this goverment, we don't have any bl00dy ships or Doctors - ever heard of Defence Medical Services trying to manage with something like 10% (I forget the figure) of the required manpower?

Media war is a myth - at its basest level, war is about killing people. It is nasty, brutal and not necessarily short (with apologies to Hobbes). Whether we send any or all of our services into a war zone, every single person deployed faces the risks. That,That is what fighting means. It is hard. It is nasty. It is never easy. It is, though, easy to forget this if you're not the one being shot at/bombed/gassed/bombarded. Sorry, but it's at best insulting and at worst glibly stupid to suggest that any war is going to be easy, even if we do happen to be fighting it with the biggest kid on the block.

Completely changing tack - crossing picket lines is an interesting one, and always leads to a bit of debate when CMR crops up. The problem, I think, is that unlike Foot & Mouth type scenarios, crossing a picket line is an inherently politicised activity, and UK governments of all colours have been a tad reluctant to get the forces involved in overtly political activity since about the time of the Levellers and the Putney Debates... The MACP/MACC questions are interesting ones. As for ROE, surely they'd be based on necessary force? I.e, if fireman sam attacks you with one of his natty baseball caps, bayoneting him might be viewed as a little harsh... Major (now Major-General at least) John Kizeley, a Coy Cdr in Scots Guards bayoneted at least 2 Argentineans during the battle for Tumbledown by the by. 'Pretty sharp for a company commander' as his Btn cdr put it several years later.

[edited to evade censorship of mild expletive]

I have a big mouth I know that. Ive always spoke whats on my mind all my life and suffered accordingly for it, I just dont know when to shutup sometimes. There's nothing I can say that will make what I said right. All I can say is that I was telling the truth when I wrote it. Im not attempting to tr0ll people just to get a cheap response. There's things that need to be said about this war and if no one else is willing to say them then I will.

I fully concur with the theme of this thread and surprised that so many with a respected view even bother to give the "civilian" airtime. Ignore him chaps for he knows not what he is jibbering about.
Why is it though that the military has to wait until the senior man of the day is on his home run before he demonstrates the outstanding leadership you should expect daily. Did Sir Michael G not wait until a similar timescale was imminent? I totally applaud his stance, and a brave one it was in such a public forum, but that IS his job after all. if such stands were taken more realistically often our valiant servicemen would undoubtedley go through more CDS's but they might (eventually) get some solutions as opposed tp perpetually being on the wrong side of the queue when cash and equipment is being allocated by the purse stringholders.

:confused:

Please, please, please Mr A Civilian stop digging and throw your shovel away! Every post you make merely serves to demonstrate - each more clearly than its predecessor - that you are totally ignorant on matters military and political.

Civvy,
No problem with you speaking your mind, but you were giving your opinion - not the truth.

If our fine Service Men and Women have to go to war to fight for the freedom of the civilised world, I would much rather they did it with someone like CDS at the helm, as opposed to any of those amoebas in Government.

You should have a little more respect for our service personnel, and their predecessors. They have given you the freedom you enjoy.

And ........ to top it all, I bet you're an Evertonian.