please help us to SAVE OUR REGIMENTS - Page 2




 
--
 
February 5th, 2005  
savetheregiments
 
IRAQ (potential for years)
DAFUR (imminent)
IRELAND (potential)
IRAN (who knows when that may kick off)
TERRORISM (any time)

oh sure we live in a peaceful time
February 5th, 2005  
A Can of Man
 
 
How many of these actually affect the national security of the United Kingdom?
And even if the UK deploys troops, how many would be sent anyways?
February 5th, 2005  
savetheregiments
 
You are joking?

None of these affect National Security?? All of these affect our national security or do we only need troops for wars in the UK - strange logic?!

I can hear the cries 'why do we not have enough troops' when there is a terrorist strike and then there is another far off civil war that our government committ thousands of troops to.

Meanwhile, our existing troops are on continual tour of duty - Royal Scots for example have not been home for the past 4 years at Christmas.
There Colonel says it is an intolerable situation ...

The say that people get the press they deserve ..
perhaps we deserve the Army we are going to end up with
--
February 5th, 2005  
r031Button
 
 
Cutting the remginets doesn't mean their getting rid of the troops. My understanding is that several regiments are being cut, and reformed into mulit battalion regiemnts. No loss of troops, just a loss of Colonoals and RSMs.
February 5th, 2005  
A Can of Man
 
 
Reorganization then.
Everyone's moving to smaller, more rapidly mobile units. Everyone that's involved in long distance operations like the US, UK and Australia who are unlikely to see a massive war on their own doorstep.
February 5th, 2005  
savetheregiments
 
and as usual it is the Generals and the likes who actually do bugger all (most of them went to Sandhurst and got promotion off their daddies names) - your regular squaddies get shafted whilst int he service and shafter when the government want to save a few pounds!

Let's wait and see anyway ..
February 5th, 2005  
A Can of Man
 
 
That's how it always works everywhere. Welcome to Earth.
February 5th, 2005  
r031Button
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by savetheregiments
and as usual it is the Generals and the likes who actually do bugger all (most of them went to Sandhurst and got promotion off their daddies names) - your regular squaddies get shafted whilst int he service and shafter when the government want to save a few pounds!

Let's wait and see anyway ..
But your not cutting the number of battalions, just the number of regiments. That actually works out to less command positions, as in less Colonels.

I thought the immature "I hate officers" thing was usually over by the time you joined the military in most people.
February 5th, 2005  
A Can of Man
 
 
And less Colonels means less fat (litterally too ). Colonels are expensive as well.
February 6th, 2005  
savetheregiments
 
2,000 less ground troops, regular soldiers - the army is losing 4 regiments - not being amalgamated but DISBANDED - let me say that once more for those who have difficulty ..

2,000 LESS SOLDIERS AS A RESULT OF THE DISBANDMENT OF 4 REGIMENTS

The amalgamations of the regiments will make it much harder to recruit.