pslewis

You give me powers that bewilder me ......... indeed, if you are the type of person to be influenced by others to such a degree, then yes, maybe I am a threat to your ability to think for yourself

But, I would hazard a guess, in that case, that you NEED my guidance and advice

Pete

Sbradley

OK, so now we have two more of the lads seriously injured

I'd like to express my opinion about this rather than commenting on other people's words.

Speaking as an ex front line soldier and more recently ex 'consultant' for the FO, I do hold our current, democratically elected leadership to blame for the casualties we are suffering now and for those we have suffered to date in the action in Iraq.

I accept that when one decides to become a serviceman one should accept that at some point it is likely that a person or persons on the opposing side will try to take your life. That, as they say, goes with the territory. However, as a military professional in the service of the crown (NOT the PM) I expect that I will be serving in defence of my country or my country's legitimate interests. I would not expect to be serving as an occupying force without any legal mandate in another sovereign state.

I served in The Falklands. We were legitimately at war, having been invaded by the Argentines.

I served in several other theatres under the direct mandate of the UN or directly protecting British people and property from illegitimate, illegal activity.

I accepted that this was the job and did it to the best of my ability.

What sticks in my throat is less the fact that our troops were sent to Iraq in the first place under totally false pretenses for totally political reasons than the fact that they were ill equipped then, are under equipped now and are being sold down the river by the spineless maggots in Whitehall. So we have a rifle that is, frankly, rubbish. We have crap comms equipment. We have totally inadequate desert gear and we have no budget for getting more. Then we move a regiment into harm's way so that George W can say that we're fully supporting him and so that the Yanks can be comfortable in seeing someone else's boys in body bags. And while we do it, Whitehall is announcing that the regiment is likely to be disbanded.

If I were a cynic I would look at this as a way of reducing redundancy payouts - a widow's pension is cheaper in the long run.

We have taken a small team of elite men, stretched them beyond what might normally be expected, extended their tour of duty, shafted them royally and then extended them even further. And people here say that's what they are paid for?

The apologists on this list make me sick. We're there without legitimate cause. Saddam may have been a nasty piece of work but we put him there and bolstered him. And, like it or not, we do not have the right to remove anotehr country's government just because we don't like their policies.

And now we're crapping on the guys who did the dirty work on our behalf (our as in the Government, because like it or not we voted them in) and getting them killed.

I see no justification here.

SB

johnfelstead

I couldnt agree more SB.

Pete, you dont actually answer the question. Rather than play with words and ***** around the subject say whether you have been in the armed forces or not, that was the question, not what knowledge you have. From what you have written in the past i would say not, but you are a civilian contractor/employee, but i could be wrong. Until you answer the question we wont know.

I have more military knowledge than most of my friends, but i never served in the armed forces, I have spent plenty of time on military bases and nuclear facilities as a civilian, sometimes in clasified areas, it's not that uncommon for civies to have worked on military projects.

Jerome

SB, again I find myself saying well said. These latest casualties have serious injuries to their lower legs. I'd be surprised if they weren't cripples now.

I'd like to confirm what SB said about being ill equipped. I was there for 2 months before getting any desert kit whatsover. I, and many many others, spent the entire war standing out like a sore thumb in dark camouflage clothing in the desert. Not to mention the fact that we boiled our ***** off in it. We also didn't have issue sunglasses or goggles. Anyone who has experienced a sandstorm will know how important goggles are in the desert. There was a cronic shortage of body armour - mostly because the logistics broke down and it didn't get to the correct places. I was at a storage facility looking at hundreds of sets of unclaimed body armour when a storeman told me of the guy who was shot in the chest and killed because he'd been ordered to hand over his body armour. We didn't get mosquito nets for weeks, even though the area I was in was malaria zone. As for the SA80 rifle (called Rifle 5.56 now), it is a very poorly made weapon. So bad no other fighting force around the world uses it. It is particularly poor in desert conditions - even the A2 version. They fact that it may have jammed was pretty academic for me though - the most ammuniton I carried was 30 rounds, because ammo was so short. Almost every day I was driving around in 2 vehicle convoys with 120 rounds between us - we wouldn't have lasted long if we'd been attacked by a decently equipped force. Considering how long before the conflict started the planned was going on, it was unforgivable that we were so short of ammo and kit.

Brit_in_Japan

I have only just found this thread but and although I have only read the last few pages I am impressed (in general) with the level of the discussion from SBradley, Jerome etc. In particular Harvey's post #230 struck a resonance with me.

Governments do have an onorous responsibility to the people, to keep us safe and protect our interests. But they also have a duty to the armed forces, to ask them to put their lives on the line in defence of this country only when there is an overwhelming reason to do so.

The harsh reality is that we could have let Saddam run his little empire, constrained as it was by ecomonic sanctions, with no threat to us and without creating a fertile breeding ground for terrorists and fundamentalist extremists in the middle east. If there was an overwhelming moral case for deposing him then it should have been possible to do that within international law. If it wasn't possible, we should have left him there. I know people will point to the suffering of the Iraqis, but let's face it there are millions suffering around the world and we haven't chosen to invade their countries and topple thier tyrants.

The WMD arguments have been shown to be false. The intelligence was not firm enough to support the case for war. The intelligence given was accompanied by many warning and caveats, none of which made their way into what was published or what was said at the time. I consider the lack of balance in Tony Blairs statements and the dossier to be deliberately misleading and I believe he should be held accountable for that.

The very fact that we were mislead before now makes it difficult for us to believe what the government says now about the need or otherwise to redeployed TBW, the company of Queens Dragoon Guards, the Commandos and what other units make up the 800 or so strength unit sent north. If the decision has been taken for political reasons rather than military reasons, we have every right to hold the government responsible for any deaths and injuries which are a result of thier decision.

If we have sent troops into danger with insufficient or inadequate equipment, the government should again be held responsible. Armed forces cannot be run in the same way as giant car companies with minimum stock levels and just-in-time logistics. They must have good equipment available as and when they need it. After all, they are putting their lives on the line for us, I think adequate equipment is a small price to pay, however many millions that costs.

Leslie

There are two things I have noted about PSL. He is so biased in our valiant leader's causes that he is incapable of seeing the real truth about it all.

Secondly he seems rather like a toddler shouting for attention which is why he comes out with such stupid comments. I believe that he measures the success of a thread by the number of replies which would explain his insulting behaviour at times. This thread was seriously threatened quite unnecessarily for a while.

I do agree with his point about the importance of voting however.

The sensible comments about the dangers the Black Watch are facing and the tragedy of the unnecessary deaths and injury suffered by them so far have been made by people who are able to see through what has been happening and have the proper attitude towards the use of the Services. The old ideas of using them as cannon fodder are well out of date and were always wrong anyway, like sending the troops over the top to gain a few yards in the first world war.

Life is precious,those of our servicemen just as important too. The attitude of some who dont have to fight saying they are paid to risk their lives is well out of order. Easy to say while you can sit at home watching it all on the box at no personal risk. There is no excuse for sending the military in to a dangerous situation when it is not necessary and the reason for doing so is for political or personal reasons only.

I think a lot of the real truth was demonstrated when they were sent into Iraq in the first place with insufficient or the wrong equipment to do the job. What kind of respect is shown towards them by that situation? Cynical disregard for their lives I would say. How can they explain sending them into a suspected biological or chemical situation with insufficient NBC kit for a start? That was when they were telling us about the WMD's of course!

Les

johnfelstead

I have read lots of reports about this rifle being poor quality, for years, is this what was called the SLR back in the early 80's? 30 seams a frighteningly low number of rounds to carry. I used to take more to a range just target shooting every tuesday night.

the moose

Please can you explain to be the difference between being in the service of the Crown (who does exactly what is said by the PM) and being in the service of the PM. It's a distinction without a difference, surely?

Re being in the Falklands, and being legitimately at war; I'll agree that the Task Force was sent there legitimately, but the war should never have happened. The conspiracy theorists would argue that it was allowed to happen to give a foreign policy distraction from the grim home news, and those of a more charitable nature would argue that the Foreign Office was utterly inept. Either way, there should have been no conflict.

I don't know the military situation in Iraq. I have no special sources of information,unlike everyone else here, who seems to be ex-services at the minimum - god knows what PSL claims to be. What I can say is that for better or worse we're in there, and we have to support our allies. If this means using military troops in a political manner, to support the US troops, so be it.

This doesn't mean that I support the war - I don't. We should not be there at all, in my opinion. And I feel for the families of the dead of all sides. But the fact is that soldiers die in every conflict, and this one's no different.

the moose

No, the SLR was a 7.62 - this is the replacement, which is a 5.56. It's a poorly-designed weapon, which is fine when first issued but prone to jamming in use. It doesn't seem to like dirt of any kind getting into the mechanism, which is a bit of a pain when you consider that wars tend not to be fought in surgically clean environments.

There was a redesign a year or so back by H & K which has answered many of the criticisms, but you can't polish a turd, and this weapon is pretty poor.

johnfelstead

OK Thanks.

popeye

Lol! The 76-year old, body-building nuclear scientist/nightclub bouncer now adds "International Man of Mystery" to his CV.

Jerome

Ah yes, I'd forgotten about the shortage of NBC kit. I endured several Scud alerts with guys who had no NBC suits and even one who had no respirator. Many had training filters (ie no longer effective). The only reason we got any was because the SQMS ran around (during a SCUD alert!) ordering guys to hand over their spare kit. I only had a full set of kit because I was an NBC instructor and I brought my own kit with me - I didn't trust the MoD to supply me with decent kit.

The SLR was an excellent weapon and is still in use around the world. The SA80 (they renamed it the Rifle 5.56 because the MoD were embarrassed that the name indicated the year it was supposed to come into service - 1980 - I got my first one in 1992) was a good design (EM2) but made down to a very low price/quality. The design required very skilled metalwork which never happened. Also, even if the jamming was only occasional, we were against (as we often are) guys equipped with the Kalashnikov. An AK47/AKM can be buried in sand and still not jam, an extremely robust weapon.

UK troops: Best trained, worst equipped.

US troops: Worst trained, best equipped.

Ted Maul

why does anyone voluntarily join the army? I've never understood this.

Also, the zionist plot - they're taking over the world. LOL

gsm1

The fact that troops were so poorly equipped is more evidence that Blair knew Iraq had no chemical weapons.

We may be in there but doesn't mean we still have to follow the US blindly from here on. They are slaughtering civilians (all terrorists to Americans) in Fallujah every day and now we are being asked to be party to it. This will be another Bloody Sunday.

bigJoe

While I think that those who’ve served have valid points about the horrors of war etc, politicians have to think on a whole different level to most of those that serve in the forces – they have to consider factors and consequences using information gained from many more sources than the media or even limited first hand experience, then they make tough decisions (including sending men to their deaths) for what they see as the best for this and other countries.

Do you really (and be honest) think you could take those sort of decisions – I know I couldn’t – the stakes are higher than we could imagine.

However, kit shortages/problems (re the SA80) are a real disgrace to those who protect us, it has (as far I’m aware) been an almost constant problem through different governments. I think much of can be blamed on the MOD procurement process and their love for anything BAe (or whatever they call themselves this week).

Whatever the situation is for the Black Watch, I don’t think that any of must envy what the American forces and Iraqi forces are having to do right now. As the moose has said our allies need help so it’s the least we (as a nation) could do.

Taff107

...........

Aztec Performance Ltd

iTrader: (234)

:
:
:
:
:
:
:

Jerome

Yet another Black Watch soldier has been killed. See here.

How much more blood will be on Blairs hands before they get to move back south?

Leslie

He will continue to entertain us with his crocodile tears and the troops will be ordered to stay where they are until his promise of their withdrawal by Christmas cannot be denied any longer.

This is part of the "Blood Price" he so bravely told us he is prepared to pay!

Les