FM anger at cap badge speculation

Alex Salmond says any attempt to drop the names of historic Scottish army regiments shows "arrogance".

FM anger at cap badge speculation
Thu, 10 May 2012 13:31:15 GMT

This is a typical piece of Salmond bombastic bluster. The most enduring tradition of the British Army is that since Elizabethan times regiments have been raised, amalgamated and disbanded continuously. I wonder if he or his officials know that, for example, what we know now as the Royal Scots Dragoon Guards(Scotland’s senior regiment) is a recent entity, having been formed on 2 July 1971 from two other regiments and at the time of Waterloo were known as the Royal North British Dragoons, the 6th Dragoon Guards (The Carabiniers) or the 3rd or Prince of Wales’s Dragoon Guards depending on which of the forebear regiments you fancy!

So tradition has it that cap badges must go.

Sic transit gloria mundi

Inside story of the UK's secret mission to beat Gaddafi

 

Sounds more like Spooks than SEAL Team 6

Are we really up to covert operations in foreign countries?  It must have come as quite a shock to realise that Arabs could tell that Chinooks weren’t theirs.

Inside story of the UK's secret mission to beat Gaddafi
Wed, 18 Jan 2012 12:56:09 GMT  From the BBC

Why We Have Soldiers

A compelling raison d’etre piece on the importance of democratically controlled monopolies on violence, by the Chief of the Netherlands Defence Forces General Peter van Uhm:

The Generals Speak

In a rather astonishing prediction General Richards, Chief of the Defence Staff asserts that:

History Will Judge Afghan War Positively

I should have thought that this is would apply only if we win; by no means a foregone conclusion.

I must say that I am starting to have serious concerns about the geopolitical understanding of our senior military leaders who seem to be living in a colonial time warp.

Jolly good show chaps!

And You Thought Monty Python Made it Up

Well they didn’t…the Queen’s Own McKamikaze Highlanders, QOMH, 23 Bn Royal Regiment of Scotland really do exist:

Welcome Back RCAF and RCN

 

Canada has just announced that it will restore the names Royal Canadian Navy, Royal Canadian Air force and Canadian Army.

The traditional names were originally dropped by Trudeau in a petulant display of anti royalty.  All true Canadians will rejoice at common sense breaking out.  No longer will the Canadian military create collective sniggering from others.

Modern militaries are now all joint services and as the Brits, Aussies, Kiwis and Yanks have shown traditional names in no way hamper this and indeed provide a source of inspiration and pride to veterans and serving members alike.

Welcome back Canada, we’ve missed you.

Military chiefs' clash with politicians over Libya and Afghanistan

This is a headline being trumpeted by the Telegraph.  Judging by some of the quotes in the article it’s a fairly mild clash.  Military rebellion isn’t just around the corner.  The PM can sleep comfortably in his bed without fear of a visit by the SAS or whoever is currently tasked with what the KGB used to refer to as “wet work”.

The substance of the “military chiefs” concerns is entirely reasonable but the public airing of them is not.  These disagreements should be resolved in private.  Making them public suggests that the service chiefs are entering the political arena, one they should and must keep clear of. 

Once serving generals become political our trust in their neutrality and objective reasoning withers. Unlike places like Libya we live in a democracy where war is an extension of policy by other means, not a way of  life.  The government makes the decisions and where necessary the military acts.  My country right or wrong – that is one of the facets of the Faustian Bargain entered into by all warriors. And besides generals, admirals and air marshals make great military leaders but usually lousy politicians (The Duke of Wellington notwithstanding).

Now before you dismiss me as a bleeding heart liberal I would remind you that I am one of the greatest supporters of the military having been a soldier and an airman too.  In fact my friends ridicule me for it. But I am an even fiercer democrat by instinct.

BBC News - Taliban resistance 'under-estimated' by Britain

 

 

This is a Western affliction for which the evidence is strong:

• The Romans at Teutoburg Forest in 9BC
• Britain and the settlers in the American War of Independence
• Britain and the Zulu in 1862
• Britain and the Afghans 1839-1842
• Britain and the Boers in 1880-1881
• Britain and the Japanese in 1940
• The US in Vietnam
• The Russians in Afghanistan
• The US and Britain in Afghanistan

(and there are probably lots of others)

Why is this so?  Do we really believe we are better than the opposition or do our intelligence people simply not know what’s going on?  And why, in the face of this sort of evidence, do we fail to learn?

As Sun Tzu said 2,500 years ago Know yourself and your enemy and you need not fear the results of a thousand battles.

Clearly we ain’t got a clue.  And they teach military history at Sandhurst!  Maybe the cadets can’t be bothered listening.

BBC News - Taliban resistance 'under-estimated' by Britain

Richards new UK armed forces head

Richards new UK armed forces head: "Gen Sir David Richards is named as the next Chief of the Defence Staff - the head of the British armed forces."

This comes as no surprise given the amount of trailing that has gone on.  Whilst it is inevitable after the rather unsuccessful  CDS incumbency by Sir Jock Stirrup it doesn't make me happy.

I have no doubt that General Richards is a skilled and courageous soldier whose service in Sierra Leone and his tenure as CGS during the current war in Afghanistan give him peerless credentials for the post and thereby lies the problem. General Richards is a soldier, an armoured warfare man, a boots on the ground military commander.  He is ideal to lead a military engaged in a deadly asymmetric struggle with a dangerous adversary.  But we have larger and far more dangerous potential enemies.  Potential enemies that have nuclear capability, powerful air arms (I would remind everyone that the Taliban has no aircraft) and maritime power projection (the Taliban hasn't any of that either), capabilities that General Richards is hardly instinctively well-disposed towards.  Will he be a powerful voice in Whitehall to advocate a much wider strategic view?  Well we'll soon see with the forthcoming Strategic Defence Review.

So my worry is that we will take our eyes off the ball and throw out the baby with the bathwater (to mix my metaphors).  I am afraid that  it might be no aircraft carriers, no new Typhoons, no Joint Strike Fighters and maybe even no Trident.  Moscow, Tehran and Islamabad are probably much cheered by the appointment.

Back

MoD 'pays more in compensation to chicken farmer than injured soldier'

From the Telegraph.  There could not be a better example of what ministers think of the military than this.  Its crassness beggars belief.  Shame, shame, shame.

MoD 'pays more in compensation to chicken farmer than injured soldier': "The Ministry of Defence has been condemned amid claims it paid less compensation to an injured soldier than to a farmer whose chickens were
disturbed by RAF jets."

Back

Pot Calling the Kettle Black

So Iraq "amateurs" were to blame!
Army chief blames Iraq 'amateurs': "A senior official tells the inquiry into the Iraq war that 'amateurs' with limited experience were put into key roles in the country."

This is a bit rich coming from the  man who was "taken by surprise" and "unprepared for the speed of victory" in the Second Gulf War. During the First Gulf War the Iraqis were crushed in no time.  Did he think it would be any different the second time around?

Image from The Telegraph

Back

When the War is Over...

Australia is doing its best to tidy up all the loose ends of the Vietnam War which still exercise and distress people.  The remains of the crew of a Canberra bomber shot down near the Laotian border (but in Vietnam) 39 years ago have been located and are to be repatriated back to Australia.


But there are still some frayed ends: for example the civilian medical staff who served in field hospitals etc. alongside their enlisted mates but have never been classified as war veterans and so are not entitled to receive benefits.  I hope that their case is successful and that the Aussie spirit of a fair go prevails.