Tuesday, 15 February 2011

Military Blunders and More Deaths in Afghanistan

The death toll of our military increased to 357 yesterday when the MoD announced two soldiers were killed in a fire (thought to be a boiler explosion) and another was killed by an IED while on duty.  The first two soldiers, from the Royal Logistics Corps, were killed at Camp Bastion.  The third soldier, from the 2nd Battalion The Parachute Regiment, was killed in the south of the Nahr-e Saraj district.

There's much talk in the MSM and the blogosphere about the manner in which 38 warrant officers were sacked.  It beggars belief that the basic courtesy of an interview with their commanding officer(s) was omitted, but will the WOs be too upset at their sacking?  They may feel insulted at the manner in which their many years of service have been reduced to a brief email but I should think they're quite content to leave the Army.  They will realise they are fortunate insofar as they have received a year's notice compared with the one month of less many receive in civilian life.

All have completed at least 22 years service and knew they were susceptible to manning cuts.  Each will receive their full pension - that is assured. Some politicians and commentators have stated they will also receive redundancy pay although I have yet to have this confirmed. Their opportunity for employment in civilian life is excellent.

The PM is 'furious'. It looks good doesn't it?  He, along with his political colleagues, should be looking at the reasons for and the results of this war, not voicing his dismay at another MoD or military blunder. They happen all the time.  Our elected representatives sent our armed services to fight in Afghanistan against the wishes of many of their electorate, who were ignored once again and yet they refuse to examine their decisions.

A quarter of trainee RAF pilots are to be sacked because they are surplus to requirements.  Training a pilot is a costly business and it does seem ridiculous to have pilots and no planes, but is it sensible to sack those just a few hours from qualifying? Of course not.  Another MoD and military blunder.  What should happen is those who are x number of hours from receiving their wings should be allowed to complete their course. In such cases a clause could be written into their terms of service stating that they have to make themselves available for service in case of emergency. Some have made a plea to the RAF high command for a year's sabbatical, while others have offered to take a drop in pay in order to qualify.  The RAF has plenty room for manoeuvre and can surely come to some compromise.

It's my opinion these cuts are far too speedy and ill thought out - hence the blunders.  It would be good to see some common sense entering into this decision.


The Last Of The Few said...


Do you really think that pathetic individual, laptop loosing, exp fiddling almost as useless as Ainsworth ares that is Liam Fox would walk into "Call Me Dave"'s office and demand or debate a re think.

I think not.

The days of the British Military are numbered.

The EU strile Force which has been on the cards for long enough now is the next step !!!!

John said...

It is just this sort of thing the Covenant was intended to prevent. There could not be a specific 'don't sack by email' instrn but the Major who did it was uncaring

subrosa said...

LotF, no I don't and yes, I agree the days are numbered as we well know. The best are planning their escape as soon as contracts are completed.

Aye, LotF, were seeing the demise of a great institution which has kept these islands safe for centuries.

subrosa said...

I don't think it was intentional John. Just another lack of communication and you know all about that in the military.

English Pensioner said...

With almost 40,000 personnel in the RAF, one must wonder what on earth they are all doing, particularly as much of the aircraft maintenance has been transferred to outside contractors.
If we aren't going to have real armed forces, it's time we withdrew from all these international peace-keeping and similar activities, declared ourselves neutral, and put our Services on the same basis as the Swiss or Irish.
We could then deploy them around our coasts and at ports to keep out illegal immigrants and terrorists. This would probably do more for our security than fighting in Afghanistan.

Anonymous said...

Will the person who sent the emails, one of which was reported to be completely false and the guy isn't getting sacked, be sacked or at least disciplined?

Will the £50,000 bonuses that the epople at the top of the MoD got be reduced?

Nah, thought not.

I can just imagine how angry the pm is, that he has had yet another disastrous headline.

Oldrightie said...

Last of the few is spot on. EU jackboot orders are through the roof.

subrosa said...

I doubt if he will be Tris as I should think it was a communications problem and not solely his error.

Aye that's the only thing which upsets Cameron. He should be far more upset at the continuing deaths.

subrosa said...

Oh they're certainly the next course of action OR.

subrosa said...

Oh EP I doubt if any member of the RAF would like your idea, but I certainly think that's the road we're going down. Said it just the other week that our troups are being thinned down to prepare for Europe's big military.

Strathturret said...

Well if we can't afford the expensive toys we don't need the pilots.

Seriously the military sacking people is good news. Less capability = less (stupid) foreign wars.

Poverty isn't completely bad I guess but brings some benefits!

subrosa said...

I see no problem reducing the numbers Strathturret and as I said, the WOs won't be worried in the least. They would possibly have been prepared for this and a year's notice isn't bad.

As for the pilots that's another matter. It's daft not allowing the few, who have a nominal number of flying hours to complete, to finish their course. It's a bit like a university taking you on for a degree course then telling you in your last year you can't continue because they can't afford you. It's morally and economically wrong.

Anonymous said...

It's not just daft SR, it's plain nasty. If you've wasted nearly £4 million on a guy, what's anotehr 4 hours flying time so that he gets his wings.

Spiteful hateful cheap.

I bet it wouldn't have happened to his princliness the royal Wullie.

No sir, he got to go pick up his g'f in one, at our expense, and tehn fly on to his cousins wedding.

We DO zip up the back

subrosa said...

It is nasty Tris, but I think it's because these trainees have signed on for only three years and the course is four. Hence the RAF is within their rights to say their contract isn't going to be renewed as they've no obligation to do so.

Some of my readers may correct me on that though.

But I still think those who are say less than 15% from completion ought to be given the chance somehow.

Brian said...

Subrosa, Please could you link to EURefendum's posts on the scandalous way that Epeli "Pex" Uluilakeba is facing deportation. Why can't his human rights be respected?
As for the RAF pilots getting the chop, they'll be no fast-jet solo flying until the after the interviews with coffee. Just in case someone accidentally flies through the DfID HQ to register an objection. I hope they invest their redundancy money in more courses and get good jobs with airlines.

Anonymous said...


You're prbably right. It sounds like a cack handed MoD thing to sign people on for a 4 year course, but with a three year contract.

Even if they have every right to do it, it is such a mean evil little trick.

They get more detestable by the day. They have wasted hundreds of millions on this training, trat these junior people like dung, and yet we pay £50,000 bonuses to the people at the top.

subrosa said...

Brian I'll put one in Take Your Pick this week. Will that be ok?

subrosa said...

Aye Tris. I'm no fan of RAF pilots, believe me. In my experience they're a very snobby bunch who think themselves better than any other members of the forces, but fair's fair.

Related Posts with Thumbnails