Printable View
Listning to the news this morning, I see that the RAF and Navy are going to be hit more than the Army.
Does anyone have an idea what may happen to the Bn or are they due for tours overseas.
If the latter applies, I should imagine that they will not be subject to the possible cuts.
Hello Bertie 01
When the first returned from their last tour, I believe they were to be in the UK for 2 years. But will be training for another tour of Afghanistan. I also believe they are staying in The Dale for the next 10 years. I am, sure some one will up date us if I am wrong. But the $64,000 question is what will the latest M.O.D. cut back figures amount to. At present they are quoting percentages and speculating on the possible cash figure.
Regards RBD
have you ever heard things so daft in all your time, defence cuts when we're at War. plain bloody stupid, deport all the illegal immigrants that are filling our jails and costing the tax payer 10s of thousands. However nothing said about that though.
Spot on Rik.
It's what we might call.'Cut to the Bone'. Lord help us if the Balloon goes up again. Surely if the MPs gave up some of their pay it may save a few of our Loyal Troops. Braz
If all the lying torags in Westminster paid back all what theyv'e taken off the tax payer in the last decade alone we could by a new Sub.. Why do we need so many robbing lying Baserds anyway. I could go on all day and save thousands each week.. Defence Cuts labour rob it, tories steal it back. talk about robin hood and the sheriff of nottingham. Nick Clegg needs to earn his wings and get a back bone, and start using the coallition right, and stand up to the robbing torries.
We will still have enough of our armed services left to resist an invasion.......from the Isle of Man.
In forum language that all our members can understand please Rik!Quote:
Originally Posted by rikoshea
What I don't get is they are making cuts everywhere in the UK Defence being one of then, yet in their "wisdom" they are INCREASING foreign aid by 37%. Surely if they cut foreign aid they could afford to at least put some planes on those new aircraft carriers they're building. Doesn't charity begin at home????
How come there,s no cuts in Parliment do we need that many idiots. If whats occured this week is anything to go by we are DOOMED.
Peter my sentiments exactly do we need that many idoits running the country.
As i'm re-enlisting...ive had a word with the recruiting office...looks like the following cuts will only be for the following....1. Artillery (reduce the number of Regiments) in reality..do we need a huge Artillery bombardment anymore?. 2. Tanks ( mothball a whole load of Challenger 2 MBT). 3. Pullout of Germany ( the Russians arent going to be coming over the hill anymore/ and Afghanistan completley by 2015.............
Jase
Their not paying you,so there's a saving.
Stu that may well be the case,but what happens after Afghanistan and the Germany pullout,an army consisting of a couple of Regiments to parade on horseguards and outside Buck house,and another couple to jump out of the 3 or 4 aeroplanes the RAF will have left,as for the Navy, well we can always rely on the French(when it suits them),but sarcasm aside come 2015/16 i can see there being lethal cuts in Army manpower.
God help us if the unions start playing up again - back to the 70's!
Additionally, let's hope the troubles in Northern Ireland don't kick off again. We're pretty depleted as it is and that includes our reserve forces!
When does it stop being an Army and become a Defence Force,how many cutbacks do we have before the figures are so low we no longer have an Army?
Sam
There are proposed cuts in Parliament to reduce the number of MP's by about 70ish. This was part of the demands of the coalition agreement alongside that for a change in the voting system to PR. However, I have it on good authority that a fair number of Tory's and all of Labour will try and filibuster this in Parliament and if they lose that go for a judicial review either way it seems that the old guard, “Don't want change Deidre.” This is because they will lose their grip on the rotten constituencies both have created over the decades to suit their electoral purpose…..representation doesn’t come into their equation!
Hingey
Fine but why are we still making Lords out of old MPs.
If you have business where family are employed as well as others and cuts have to be made, the others will probably be the first to go. Politicians are the same, they look out for each other. Yet another sector who agree that cuts have to be made to get us out of a hole as long as it does not affect them.Quote:
Originally Posted by peterlansley
It is a fact and perhaps a human failing that people do not like change, pure and simple. You see it in everyday life and I certainly witnessed it many times during my service. What I also remember is, although we all dislike change there were those who quickly accepted that change was inevitable and just got on with it with the minimum of fuss. Those people (in my opinion) were leaders. In the present climate I think all parties agree that drastic measures have to be taken to get this country out of the hole it is in. Blame is now pointless save making sure we dont make the same mistakes again.
To that end, this Government/Coalition is making decisions that they believe will get us out of this financial quagmire which is the problem at hand. We are not under threat of a major invasion from Sea, land or Air. The Warsaw pact has gone and the current threat is from terrorists. Shouldn't we concentrate on the current threat rather than fearing another War of historical magnitude. If we send our lads and lasses into conflict they must have the best of what they actually need and not a huge Echelon of equipment that is of little use.
The cuts are being made everywhere, like it or not they will happen. Will they work...only time will tell, but for now, we have people who are making decisions, who are accepting that things must change and are actually doing something about it painful as it may be.
Hello Hingey and Peter Lansley,
Hingey re the AVM (alternative voting method or system) If this system is accepted what right has any one to move my vote to another candidate? This looks like another old pal's act. Even allowing for the fact I will only put one cross on any voting paper and nobody BUT NOBODY can then move my vote. Who decides why people are to be disenfranchised. Peter Lansley hit the nail on the head with his thread. Why do we need some thing like 670 peers in a small country such as ours. Unless it is for the obvious fact of off-loading the sycophants that always kept to party lines regardless of the damage they done to the country.Gwyn Nichols 's thread was very true and pertinent. If people dig deep and look at the money that is wasted by the manifold of Quangos the position is grave to say the least. A good example albeit only one of many is the woman who is in charge of the voting system she works for two days a year at best and is paid many thousand 's of pounds for it.Another point to ponder on is why does the UK need more people to run the UK, than it takes to run the government of the U.S.of A.
RBD
Reading all the posts on this thread and know one mentioned the 2.9bn increase in overseas aid
It really beggars belief when they make cuts in this country. What the hell ...
Isn't it about time we looked after our own country FIRST........
Xxxxxxccffdds....
Having posted the original post, I feel that the thread has gone a long way, but I believe it has gone over the top with what has been said regarding the political side of things. Having spoken to people close to the top I have been assured that the Bn is safe and that what has been planned for the future will remain.
Roger, perhaps your original post was just about the Bn but it has raised issues that affect the whole of the Services in this country with the impending cuts. People have their concerns about the whole sorry mess that we are in and perhaps would like to air their views . I see little point in starting another thread to cover ground already covered in this one. At least there is some discussion going on in this thread that members are taking part in. If your question is answered fine, but please give the rest of us the grace to continue this discussion if we so wish. Care to share where you got your "close to the top " info from.
Jungle 1810. I agree with you what i would like to know is how many failed MPs are now Peers. Would,nt it be better to abolish the House the Lords and use the monies saved to better this Country and our Armed Forces. After all arn,t they part of the civil services, and work soley for the Govenment of the DAY.
Hi Don
Nobody is going to move your vote anywhere except where you want it to go! For example say for instance there were 4 candidates instead of putting a X against the one you want you will be asked to rank them in order of preference i.e. 1-4. Now this is where it becomes intertesting! You don't have to use all your preference voting options. Say there's only 2 candidates you want to vote for then you put 1 against the one you prefer and 2 against the other leaving you 3rd and 4th preference votes blank.
Hope this is of help?
Hingey
There are proposals to completely re-vamp the House of Lords to have it an elected chamber. We need a a revising chamber to dilute ther excesses of Governments. However, as you can imagine there is resistance to this because as soon as a chamber becomes elected it has a mandate and can exert political pressuere.....so watch that space!
Hingey
Roger good on yer,
Remember there were 3 things you never discussed at the bar in the Mess, they were Politics, Religion and Tactics (Now Wine Women and Sex were the favourites).
Best Regards
BennyThe Ball
PS let us not this thread into a edition of BBC Question Time and get back to the orginal thread in which Roger's Question has been answered.
Leave the "soap Boxes for the Politicians amongs our members.
So Ian you dont like politics being aired on the Forum. You do realise, that if you exclude politics you cant really talk about troop deployments as that is a political decision. You cant talk about pension increases or the lack therof because that would be political. In fact you wont be able to moan at anything because to do so is political. As I said if you dont want to join in - dont, if you have no interest dont read it. If no offence is being caused what is the problem with the way the thread was going. Why get personal toward people who have an interest just because you dont share or understand it. Roger is a moderator and you are an Elite member, I would have thought you would have cut us mere mortals a bit of slack, obviously I was wrong. I will say no more about defence cuts and I will try not to get on my political soap box too often. I will say one thing though, keep picking at the bits you dont like sharing on this forum and we will be left with notices, v Bookie and the arcade.
Dear Gwyn, me old mucker,
It wasn't intended to upset you or any members' political views, I was merely trying to point out that I personally thought the thread was going away from Roger's original question so my apologies to you and other members for not putting my post in the right context. I for one is a great admirer of this wonderful forum and as it has been said before everyone has their own opinions and beliefs which can be "aired" on this forum.
So Gwyn and other members' once again my utmost apologies.
Best Regards
BennytheBall
Ian you would never upset me mate I am too much of a fan! I agree that the thread was drifting away from the original question which actually was half answered by Jungle. The other half of the question still remains to be seen though Roger says he has it on good authority and I for one have no reason to doubt him. Sometimes however a question raised by a member has more value than just a straight forward yes or no as Rogers question has shown. Twenty odd replies and other members showing their interest with the thanks/like/dislike icons. Your point about your opinion is a valid one and I am not and would not criticise you for giving it as is your right.
Well I for one think that threads like this are informative to everyone an would not like to see any reasonable debate on any topic stifled. As Gwyn so correctly puts it if you disagree or don't understand then leave well alone. There have been threads on here that I could not answer and perhaps would like to do so....from apersonal position but as this forum is and has had quotes attributed from threads then placed in the open web arena I have steered clear of them.
Hingey
Regarding my source, I will try and get their approval to repeat what has been told to me on here.
Would just like to know what people think of the deal signed today linking the British and French armed forces in certain areas.
Who would have thought it? The Brits and the Froggies fighting along side each? (Anyone want to buy my Sharpe DVD collection?) LOL!
Only my Personal Opinion, No History lessons Please
The wine ration could be interesting
How right you are, trouble is the people that matter never listens. ( maybe we should have a winter rising)