UK military problems & policies

[120mm]

We're currently training a UK unit, and I have to tell you, my eyes have been truly opened. Lots of really, really dumb accidents, including one KIA and dehabiliting WIAs (as in over 10 in a couple of days. An accidental shooting and rounds out of impact top off the list.

An old and wizened mentor of mind once told me that two things will show morale and leadership: Accidents and what the unit looks like during a roadmarch. And, frankly, the column I followed last night blew as much oily smoke as an 1968 Volkswagen needing a ring job, and even at 30 kph, they looked a little ragged, especially going up hills.

I cannot speak as to the entire UK Army, but the piece that I'm privy to where I work doesn't look good, at all.

[Ski]

Was sent this article today:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...ls-825928.html

[Norfolk]

Sickening. The Government simply has got to go.

[Stevely]

It seems the Labour gang's contempt for the British soldier is so complete they don't even feel the need to respond to serious charges like these and others I have heard like this.

As much as I dislike our political culture, at least the public and media can be counted on for outrage when tales get out like the scandal at Walter Reed or the barracks at Ft. Bragg, and the Congress can be counted on to lead a witchhunt for the guilty, even if not always for the right reasons. Surely Labour will pay a political price for this?

[MattC86]

Surely Labour will pay a political price for this?

In just my 4 months here, I have seen at least a dozen stories in the various papers describing numerous military issues all related to funding. BA enlisted living at the poverty level, equipment shortages, vacillation on whether to kill the new aircraft carrier (the first real one the RN would have since the 1960s) and a host of other programs. The budget shortfalls seem to get worse with each passing week.

Yet aside from the smoke being blown at Westminster by Tory MPs, the amount of outrage is miniscule. I don't know what it would take to mobilise either political or public anger about this issue, but it does not seem to have taken hold to date.

This coming from a foreign observer, of course.

Regards,

Matt

[Norfolk]

...the amount of outrage is miniscule. I don't know what it would take to mobilise either political or public anger about this issue, but it does not seem to have taken hold to date.

This coming from a foreign observer, of course.

Regards,

Matt

It's pretty accurate, though. In Commonwealth countries, the military is generally an object of an indifference even greater than in much of the U.S. And the hostile elements are at least as, well, hostile - and with more access to power. Just as the more or less public indifference served those with the political will to use military force rather more freely in the past, much the same public indifference conversely serves those with the political will to do a hatchet job on the military - even whilst increasing operational taskings to ridiculous levels. See the near-breakdown of the Canadian Armed Forces in the 1990's for clues as to what the Brits are possibly in for in the next few years.

If Labour gets the heave, it will not be because the electorate was enraged by its treatment of the soldiery.

[JJackson]

they disagree with the deployments, which were contrary to public opinion, and want the commitments reduced to match the forces rather than the forces increased to match the commitments.

[Granite_State]

In just my 4 months here, I have seen at least a dozen stories in the various papers describing numerous military issues all related to funding. BA enlisted living at the poverty level, equipment shortages, vacillation on whether to kill the new aircraft carrier (the first real one the RN would have since the 1960s) and a host of other programs. The budget shortfalls seem to get worse with each passing week.

Yet aside from the smoke being blown at Westminster by Tory MPs, the amount of outrage is miniscule. I don't know what it would take to mobilise either political or public anger about this issue, but it does not seem to have taken hold to date.

This coming from a foreign observer, of course.

Regards,

Matt

I've been here a bit longer, but see things the same way. Hard to have a day go by without seeing a story about slashed military funding or overstretch in the Telegraph. If Brown goes, I think that'll be pretty far down the lists of reasons why. But I also suspect the Tories wouldn't be much better, because they're just basically New Labour Lite now anyway.

Part of the issue may be that, at least as far as I've seen, ordinary squaddies aren't too well regarded. The usual stuff about drinking too much, starting fights, etc. Maybe things are the same if you live in a military town in the States like Fayetteville, I don't know, we don't have too many of those in New England. But then, there was also that story in the papers recently about RAF men in Peterborough (not far from me) being told not to wear their uniforms out in public.

[Jedburgh]

Chatham House, 27 May 08: UK Security and Defence:
More 'Muddling Through' or Time for a Requirements-Led Strategic Defence Review?

With Britain's Armed Forces stretched to breaking point in Afghanistan and Iraq, calls for a review of defence strategy and commitments are being heard more often. And if British troops become embroiled in conflict in Kosovo after the new constitution comes into force there on 15 June, the government will come under still more pressure to set out its strategic priorities and to ensure that sufficient resources are allocated to defence.

While UK Armed Forces are over-stretched, the UK defence sector is having precisely the opposite experience - a sense of under-employment while government spending plans are confused and important equipment programmes remain on the drawing board.

Armed Forces stretched to the point of exhaustion, and defence industry panicking about their order book: hardly a strong, balanced relationship between government, industry and Armed Forces. Would a review of UK defence sort things out, or are Britain's defence planners rediscovering the merits of 'muddling through'?....

....The UK has tried most conceivable types of defence review; threat-oriented, capabilities-driven, effects-based and foreign policy-led. On the assumption that commitments will not be reduced in the near term, perhaps the moment has arrived for a new style of review, one focused on military requirements. The Armed Forces would be provided with what they manifestly need to meet their commitments, from medical treatment and rehabilitation, to housing and salaries, to the best equipment that British defence industry can provide. Everybody would then be happy. Except the Treasury.