Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
PayPal Acct: 
Feedback: 
Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):
| [ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, [5], 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ] |
| Subject: Hoon's axe falls | |
Author: Dave (UK) | [ Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
] Date Posted: 13:36:41 12/16/04 Thu So Hoon has disregarded public opinion, and the views of ordinary soldiers, and has finally announced the abolition of all the Scottish Regiments, in addition to some in England. This act of callousness by Hoon and his blinkered yes-men on the Army Board has swept aside hundreds of years of tradition in one fell swoop. To quote military stooge number one, General Mike Jackson, who has proven himself to be a politician in a military uniform, the abolition of 4 infantry battalions (1500 soldiers) will leave the Army in “the right shape for the future”. He also described the axing of 1500 jobs and hundreds of years of history as “hard work, but I believe the results are going to be well worth it”. All this is announced in the same week as it emerges that 900 more TA reservists are being sent to Iraq. What a prat, come back Blunkett, all is forgiven... [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] |
| [> Subject: I hope this doesn't fuel Scottish separatism | |
|
Author: Jim (Canada) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 15:40:29 12/16/04 Thu [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> Subject: I doubt it... | |
|
Author: Dave (UK) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 15:46:47 12/16/04 Thu An independent Scotland probably wouldn't even have an army... [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> Subject: Mind you... | |
|
Author: Ed Harris (Venezia) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 17:01:41 12/16/04 Thu The only MP to try to shout down Mr Hoon in parliament was the SNP member for Perth. If only the SNP are standing up for Scotland's historic regiments, then there may be trouble. Mind you, this is evidently a bit opportunist, since I can not think of a single previous instance in which the SNP stood up for tradition, continuity and good old-fashioned colour. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> Subject: The SNP was actually a big force in trying to KEEP the regiments | |
|
Author: FG [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 15:55:19 12/17/04 Fri One of the SNP MPs was thrown out of the Commons for criticising Hoon on this one. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> Subject: Tory opportunism, ain't it great? | |
|
Author: Trixta (UK) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 18:53:35 12/16/04 Thu Fear not, the Tories have said that if they get in power the first thing they'll do is reinstate the regiments. Now, if I see it in the manifesto, I may even think about voting blue. I'm not holding my breath, though... [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> Subject: The Scots should hold their noses and vote Tory on this one | |
|
Author: Jim (Canada) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 19:26:18 12/16/04 Thu [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> Subject: The trouble with politics... | |
|
Author: Ed Harris (Venezia) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 23:11:56 12/16/04 Thu Quite simply, it is impossible to tell these days whether something is opportunism or not. If a party comes up with an idea which is universally popular or sensible, we automatically assume that they're doing it for the votes. On the other hand, if they come up with an idea which is universally unpopular and completely bonkers, we rail against them on the grounds that they should Listen To The People. Sometimes, I feel for politicians... but not often! [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> Subject: Hmmm | |
|
Author: Dave (UK) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 23:36:14 12/16/04 Thu Well, I’m trying to think what acts of political opportunism the Labour party have engaged in over the last few years. Tuition fees? Unpopular Wars? The Euro? Defence Cuts? Cronyism? 66 Tax Rises? The EU Constitution? Gibraltar Stitch-ups? Council Tax Bombshells? Oh wait, I know – It’s the £250 voucher that Gordon Brown is sending out to 2.5 million homes just prior to the election next year: a supposed nest-egg for children, or a bribe to you and me… They are certainly not making life easy for themselves, I’ll give them that. Opportunism is one of the few charges I would not level at this Government. The Lib Dems on the other hand… It’s all the more depressing that all the indications show that the British people are not yet ready for a return to good governance, and will vote Blair again. I’m off to vote for Christmas …buk-buk-buk-bukaaaarr… [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> Subject: D'you know... | |
|
Author: Ed Harris (Venezia) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 00:18:05 12/17/04 Fri I've often thought that myself. When The Great Blair, PBUH, came to power, I was dismayed at the prospect of being governed by a political weather-vane. Now, however, it would seem that Mr Blair is prepared to stick to his guns when all the world seems against him, in the unshakeable conviction that he is Right. Not even Maggie could have done much better in this respect. It leaves war-mongering Tories like me, who are only convinced of the justice of government policy when it is profoundly unpopular, in a kind of schizophrenic state; and we feel that, if it weren't for his Europhilia and colourless disregard for the more eccentric but glorious aspects of our tradition, I might even vote for him. Fortunately, the man has just enough defects to prevent me from perpetrating this act of insanity. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> Subject: Actually I don't think the government's to blame on this one. | |
|
Author: Nick (UK) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 13:04:49 12/17/04 Fri To be fair I hear from within the Officer ranks of the KOSB that the new Scottish regiment has been entirely driven through by the reforming zeal of the current army top brass. In fact Blair tried to wriggle out of it but they wouldn't have it, so I'm afraid the government isn'treally to blame. Even if the defence budget were increased, I'm not sure it would save the regiments. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> Subject: The whole reorganisation stems from the MoD's Defence Review white paper | |
|
Author: Dave (UK) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 13:10:19 12/17/04 Fri which was made in Whitehall and will affect all the services... The Army is just the beginning... [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> Subject: Change | |
|
Author: Nick (UK) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 13:21:25 12/17/04 Fri I'm not happy about losing regiments, but change has always been necessary in the armed forces, and has always happened. The important thing is that the military is made more effective for its future role rather than less. That's up to the 'experts' at the MoD to try to achieve, within the limited resources that a peacetime society is willing to spend. It was ever thus. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> Subject: Lest we forget | |
|
Author: Lachie Munro [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 15:50:39 12/17/04 Fri LEST WE FORGET by Lachie Munro "They are hardy, intrepid, accustomed to a rough country, and no great mischief if they fall." - General Wolfe on his Highland troops in Canada. It's that time of year again when we remember the dead of two world wars (and our thoughts may turn to present conflicts), but there's a persistent and morbid fascination in England with the first of these wars - not with the futile obscenity of working man fighting working man to prop up corrupt and decayed empires, nor that it lead directly to World War 2 and many more deaths, nor the estimated 20 million civilian deaths in Europe from influenza that were precipitated by the war (including my grandmother who died on Armistice Day 1918 leaving seven young children); instead, writers and filmmakers seem obsessed with the individual tragedies of the middle and upper classes - the trauma of war, the 'lost generation', 'doomed youth' - "there's some corner of a foreign field . . . " etc., and of course - the tremendous loss of life. The loss of one life in such a conflict would have been a tragedy, but let's try to shed some light on this - just how many were lost - 30%? - 40%? - 50%? - not quite. Deaths as a percentage of the whole British Army (including the Scots and the Irish) were 11.8%, i.e. fewer than 1 in 8 died - far too many, but not as many as we may have been led to believe. However, the Scottish death-toll, taken separately, was a staggering 26.4% - i.e. over a quarter of mobilised Scottish soldiers (including non-combatants) never left the field, not to mention the physically and mentally scarred. This unenviable (sorry 'proud') record was only marginally beaten by the Turks and the Serbs, the large majority of whose casualties died of disease rather than gunfire. (When the Scottish and Northern Irish deaths are removed from the statistics, the remaining 'British' death rate drops below 10%). So why did so many Scottish soldiers die - was it poor leadership, lack of discipline, cowardice, or a death-wish, or was it perhaps that the Scottish regiments, damned by their bravery and effectiveness were continually and indiscriminately used as spearheads to soften up the enemy prior to a mass attack, and as a consequence took the full force of stolid German resistance? Although the loss of life in World War 2 was nowhere near as high, it remains a fact that a quarter of all British casualties were Scots (in the Korean War it was a third) - from a country that had only 10% of the total population, the 'proportional' sacrifice was even greater than in World War I. Generations of Scots have either ignored, subsumed, or not been apprised of the fact that the flower of their manhood was, and continued to be, cynically thrown away with hardly a voiced raised in protest, and that Scotland, the country that gave most for 'King and Country' never recovered economically, culturally, spiritually, or nationally. In the light of current events I leave it to the readers to decide whether General Wolfe's words echo down to this day. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> Subject: Righty ho. | |
|
Author: Ed Harris (Venezia) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 16:20:48 12/17/04 Fri I think that it was Lenin, wasn't it, who insisted that the Great War was a war between the industrial classes for raw materials and markets and that the "working class" soliders were their unwitting dupes. Perhaps in Russia and Germany this may have an element of truth, but in Britain, the Dominions and the Unites States - democracies every one - this is a bit fanciful, or at the very least over simplistic. Samuel Johnson was not far wrong when he pointed out that British patriotism is in fact an invention of the lower classes, and not the Europeanised aristocracy with all their Grand Tours, French wine, Italian tailoring, and German wives. As for the disproportionate contribution of Scots, this has been true of every conflict since the seige of Havannah in 1759. I am not a Scot, but one does get the impression that most Scots (that's ordinary Scots, not the Anglicised gentry) take great pride in Scotland's military record. I imagine that many would be insulted at the suggestion that the only reason for their pride is that they have been brainwashed by an English bourgeois conspiracy to make the Scottish Proletariat into canon-fodder for England's capitalist-imperialist foreign policy. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> Subject: It has historic reason | |
|
Author: anon [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 16:51:35 12/17/04 Fri "they have been brainwashed by an English bourgeois conspiracy to make the Scottish Proletariat into canon-fodder for England's capitalist-imperialist foreign policy." General Wolfe "No big mischief if they [Scottish soldiers] fall... what better way of dealing with your secret enemy" Peel said much the same. The Scottish economy has been run down, and the empire needed soldiers. It both helped the empire, and killed off the "secret enemy". [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |