tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post543033328182025113..comments2024-03-20T12:03:26.126+00:00Comments on Thin Pinstriped Line: What the General Said Next – the CDS 2013 RUSI SpeechSir Humphreyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08704774192275240783noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-16369161505907581902014-01-05T23:51:03.418+00:002014-01-05T23:51:03.418+00:00The 30.000 reserves are the objective for the Trai...The 30.000 reserves are the objective for the Trained (Phase 2) strenght. Up to 8000 more recruits would be in the pipeline. I think the 82.000 regulars also are meant to be the trained strenght. <br /><br />The resulting 112.000 trained men are meant to deliver a combined Deployable Field Army numbering 74.000, of which around 80% (some 61.000) should be effectively "ready" to deploy within X months. That's the plan on paper. Gabrielehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01623558391676151582noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-85944506820990451802013-12-23T18:33:27.018+00:002013-12-23T18:33:27.018+00:00The UAE deal owes a great deal to politics and app...The UAE deal owes a great deal to politics and appears far more complicated than perhaps seen. Arms purchases in the Middle East owe more to wider considerations than just the specifications of the aircraft.Sir Humphreyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08704774192275240783noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-53925284403203288962013-12-23T18:31:53.238+00:002013-12-23T18:31:53.238+00:00Thanks for your very insightful and thought provok...Thanks for your very insightful and thought provoking comments. I completely agree with you that money is not the answer to the problem, and that it would still have seen similar outcomes to many of our conflicts over the last 10 years. <br />As a friend put it to me, never forget that many of those at the highest levels are those who chose to not bail out and get a decent second career when they were SO1s. There is perhaps something in this.<br />Sir Humphreyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08704774192275240783noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-55979232456957332852013-12-23T17:34:25.028+00:002013-12-23T17:34:25.028+00:00Very very well said.Very very well said.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-1174222373334746242013-12-23T17:33:17.920+00:002013-12-23T17:33:17.920+00:00I think you need to read anon 23 December 2013 15:...I think you need to read anon 23 December 2013 15:40<br />Oh and no one said 'only buy British' if we don't make it. Even then I would be asking the question then perhaps we should!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-25177698665018178792013-12-23T15:40:10.031+00:002013-12-23T15:40:10.031+00:00If we are to learn anything from the open-market, ...If we are to learn anything from the open-market, laissez faire attitude to buying goods from anywhere in order to encourage home suppliers to be competitive and keep costs down it is this: everywhere we have done this (from cars to trains and beyond), we have ended up destroying our own industrial base while propping up the state-supported industries of other countries (now even to the extent where today we rely on other countries to bankroll our energy industry and charge UK customers twice the rate for power than is available elsewhere). <br /><br />Some may argue that this is the right thing to do. I would argue that IF other countries did the same it might work, but, as France has shown time and again, by following its own self interests it has been able to pick up sales - and profits - as a consequence of British ineptitude. <br /><br />I am fed up of hearing this twaddle from government ministers and civil servants. If we have no pride in what we make and what we stand for, if being British is only an emotional value with little of consequence, then why should people lay down their lives on our behalf? I cannot favour any political figure or official who advocates any policy which sees the further wanton destruction of our industrial base and the consequent increase in our already outrageously negative balance of payments tally.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-63856595118187384092013-12-21T14:31:13.882+00:002013-12-21T14:31:13.882+00:00The problem with tea leaves is that you can make o...The problem with tea leaves is that you can make of them what your your prejudices dictate. General Horton is expected to make provocative statements to entertain the troops and upset the status quo.<br />It doesn't make him right and it doesn't make him a fortune teller, although he hopes that at least something of what he said turns out to have been fortuitous. Sir Humph sees prejudice afoot and the continued dominion of the Army, even though Gen.Sir Nick gives a long list of potential threats about which the Army is least well prepared to tackle.<br />Whatever the future, "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote. - (Benjamin Franklin, 1759) Derek McBridenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-33978289632786947972013-12-21T13:02:51.931+00:002013-12-21T13:02:51.931+00:00I beg to differ. UN operations are keep to ensurin...I beg to differ. UN operations are keep to ensuring conflict is contained or never occurs again.<br /><br />This is rubbish about must buy only British. World War II was not won based solely on British only equipment. Neither are American-only campaigns using only American made hardware. This is the age of globalisation--if you want to buy only British, then dont use the Chinook, Apache, Sidewinder Missile, AMRAAM, and even the 5.56 and 762 bullets! Don't buy the Mastiff vehicle--it's American made. Don't buy the Repear drone--American. Don't buy the ASTER 15 and ASTER 30 missiles, they are French made!! Let's not have an armed forces at all!!<br /><br />Trident nuke all opponents!<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-70151931623257700812013-12-21T12:10:24.952+00:002013-12-21T12:10:24.952+00:00Another important point to remember in respect of ...Another important point to remember in respect of the buy British argument is that, once you stop manufacturing a category of equipment, overseas providers can charge what they like. As a starting point,Sikorsky charge three times the price for a military helicopter as they charge their own forces. Just ask the Canadians about Sikorsky! I am also concerned about the eventual outcome of the RFA tanker project, I am only aware of one previous export contract completed by Daewoo, namely a frigate for Bangladesh. Standards were so poor that the Bangladeshis sent it back! Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-34479479797107117222013-12-20T23:56:51.719+00:002013-12-20T23:56:51.719+00:00Not sure the whole, "buy British to export Br...Not sure the whole, "buy British to export British" thing is going too well anyway despite half of the cabinet having been to the gulf in the past few months: http://www.lep.co.uk/news/business/multi-billion-jet-deal-is-scrapped-1-6327616Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-76186713987945966052013-12-20T23:36:27.302+00:002013-12-20T23:36:27.302+00:00Slightly off topic, but I thought the army 2020 fi...Slightly off topic, but I thought the army 2020 figure was supposed to be 120,000 eg 84,000 plus 36,000 TA/AR, has that now reduced to 82,000 plus 30,000 so a total strength of 112,000?<br />It seems difficult to pin down exactly how many troops are in the TA/AR as different figures are always given in the media, the figure in Charles Heyman's The Armed Forces of the UK 2010-2011 is 30,000, if so where is the uplift? <br />I would assume the 82,000 & 30,000 totals do not include new recruits in training, so that would be 7,000 - 8,000 for the regular army and 6,000 reserves?<br />WaylanderAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-82033799489711360402013-12-20T18:22:26.070+00:002013-12-20T18:22:26.070+00:00I am afraid that too many of the really senior off...I am afraid that too many of the really senior officers in the Army (and I have had experience in educating a number and working for some) are by no means as bright or sharp as they think they are. What passes for a 'thinking general' within the Army would not necessarily pass muster elsewhere. With a few exceptions, they have a tendency to want everything, regardless of cost, to misestimate threats, to actively seek out unnecessary missions such as peacekeeping to justify the organization, and refuse to think outside a quite narrow box. The British failures in Afghanistan and Iraq are as much intellectual as practical ones. I remember the decision around 1995, taken as the most senior levels, that the UK would never again undertake COIN operations and all related training and education would cease. The Army Board even refused to issue the new 1995 COIN Manual, which explains the lack of preparedness to deal with the Taliban.<br /><br />It is clear that there is a real danger of the UK armed forces being unable to deal with future threats, but the responsibility lies as much with senior officers and their crass decisions over doctrine, tactics and procurement in the last decade, as it does with politicians. Interestingly the military hierarchy is always very quick to point accusing fingers at the Treasury, civil servants and DE&S for failure, with the implication that 'if we just had the money and right equipment, then all would have been well'. However, if MOD's budget had been 300% higher in the last decade I have a horrible feeling that the operational outcomes would have been the same because of the uneven quality of the leadership. They were obsessive about the irrelevant Northern Ireland experience and their over-self confidence, and ingrained knowledge that 'we are right', all led to the dismissal of warnings by others that they were heading in the wrong operational direction.<br /><br />Some might argue that Options for Change in 1991-94 is the culprit. In my view a lot of very good junior and middle rank officers were made redundant, while some real stinkers remained. After 1994 many more good people left because they were so disillusioned and the ones who stayed to float to the top were in large part the Third XI players, over-promoted and often resistant to change. It is time for a real clear out since there are still too many mediocre officers serving (not surprising when the the Service manage almost 480 1* posts and above, despite massive manpower cuts), and we need to get some radical thinkers in place, not the conservative and complacent careerists, who will never take a chance or show initiative. or originality If you want to see what people really think of the quality of British Army leadership then try talking candidly to any American senior officer - you will be startled and disappointed in their view of the British Army hierarchy.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-24393314142011461762013-12-20T17:23:28.396+00:002013-12-20T17:23:28.396+00:00It always amazes me when servicemen say that the d...It always amazes me when servicemen say that the defence budget should not be used to support the British industry and exports. This seems like very muddled thinking to me. Why else would you sign up and risk your life but to protect the interests of Britain. Surely the health of our economy is a vital British interest which we should all care about. I have spent a life time buying British (and yes we do still make things!) and this sort of attitude from CDS frankly really disappoints me! If you don't think the British option is the best available for the budget then work with industry to make it so, don't throw the baby out with the bathwater for goodness sake!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6254362504495980377.post-51108328695905120582013-12-20T14:58:34.638+00:002013-12-20T14:58:34.638+00:00One cannot but wonder why an army general thinks i...One cannot but wonder why an army general thinks it important for British troops to be engaged in UN operations, while simultaneously emphasising supposed threats from a rag-tag gaggle of non-state actors. Of course the army will generate such discourse – this keeps it busy, and relatively well-funded. We should be deeply suspicious of such discourse: it damages the two components of the armed forces that really need funding...the navy and the air force!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com