The head of the Army has issued a dire warning that Britain has almost run out of troops to defend the country or fight abroad, a secret document obtained by the Daily Telegraph has revealed.
Gen Sir Richard Dannatt has told senior commanders that reinforcements for emergencies or for operations in Iraq or Afghanistan are "now almost non-existent".
In the memorandum to fellow defence leaders, the Chief of the General Staff (CGS) confessed that "we now have almost no capability to react to the unexpected". The "undermanned" Army now has all its units committed to either training for war in Iraq and Afghanistan, on leave or on operations.
There is just one battalion of 500 troops, called the Spearhead Lead Element, available to be used in an emergency, such as a major domestic terrorist attack or a rapid deployment overseas.
Gen Dannatt's comments will come as the first serious test of Gordon Brown's policy on defence.
The new Prime Minister has already faced anger over the decision to give Des Browne, the Defence Secretary, the additional part-time role of Scottish Secretary with Tories labelling the move "an insult to our Armed Forces."
Military leaders have privately suggested that a defence review is essential to examine if more money, equipment and troops are needed.
With Britain's military reserve locker virtually empty, further pressure will mount on President George W Bush to review US troop levels in Iraq after fellow Republicans suggesting significant withdrawals.
It also comes at a time when more forces are needed to combat the Taliban in Afghanistan.
Liam Fox, the shadow defence secretary, said the lack of reserves was "an appalling situation and damning indictment" of the way the Government handled the Services.
"They are being asked to carry out tasks for which they are neither funded or equipped for. There is an urgent need to review our strategic approach because we cannot continue over-stretching our Forces."
The document said that Britain's second back-up unit, called the Airborne Task Force formed around the Parachute Regiment, was unavailable. It was unable to fully deploy "due to shortages in manpower, equipment and stocks".
Most of the Paras' vehicles and weapons have stayed in Afghanistan with other units using them in intense battles against the Taliban.
Parachute Regiment officers are deeply concerned that with nearly all their equipment abroad they are unable to train properly for future operations.
The Paras also no longer have the ability to parachute as a 600-strong battalion because no RAF planes were available to drop then en-masse, the document said. The situation was unlikely to be resolved until late August.
With the Army significantly under-strength by 3,500 troops – many disillusioned with being constantly on dangerous operations and away from their families – it is now struggling to plug the gaps on the frontline.
"The enduring nature and scale of current operations continues to stretch people," Gen Dannatt wrote.
The Army now needed to "augment" 2,500 troops from other units onto operations in Iraq and Afghanistan to bring up the total force to 13,000 required. This remained "far higher than we ever assumed," the CGS said.
"When this is combined with the effects of under-manning (principally in the infantry and Royal Artillery) and the pace of training support needed to prepare units for operations, the tempo of life in the Field Army is intense."
The Army has also been forced to call up almost 1,000 Territorial Army soldiers for overseas operations. The general's concerns came after three RAF personnel were killed in a mortar or rocket attack on the main British headquarters five miles outside Basra bringing the total dead in Iraq to 162.
With the main force pulling out of Basra city to the air station in the coming months there is concern of increased attacks on the large base where some troops are forced to live in tented accommodation.
A lack of vehicles meant that "training is significantly constrained".
Gen Dannatt was also "concerned" that some equipment, particularly Scimitar light tanks that are vital to fighting in Afghanistan but are 40 years old, "may be at the edge of their sustainability".
More needed to be done on housing and pay in order to retained troops because "people are more likely to stay if we look after them properly".
The pressure on numbers was partially being alleviated by bringing in civilian firms to train soldiers and guard bases and by "adopting a pragmatic approach to risk where possible".
While the current situation was "manageable" Gen Dannatt was "very concerned about the longer term implications of the impact of this level of operations on our people, equipment and future operational capability".
It is not the first time Gen Dannatt has raised concerns on Britain's fighting ability. A few weeks into his job last year, Sir Richard said the military was "running hot" and urged for a national debate on defence.
The plain-speaking officer later suggested that the British presence in Iraq was "exacerbating the security problems" and warned that the Army would "break" if it was kept there too long.
Gen Dannatt, who said manning was "critical" in the Army, called for extra infantry units earlier this month following the devastating cuts inflicted by his predecessor Gen Sir Mike Jackson which saw four battalions axed.
"General Dannatt's appraisal means that we are unable to intervene if there is an emergency in Britain or elsewhere, that's self-evident," a senior officer said.
"But this is a direct result of the decision to go into Afghanistan on the assumption that Iraq would diminish simultaneously. We are now reaping the reward of that assumption."
){kind=link}
BULLSHIT.
I know of many squadrons that are willing and at the ready
Madness! How can the UK be so cavalier with its defences? I cannot believe that a once major power has allowed its armed forces to fall into such disrepair. The UK will have to spend a lot of time and money to rebuild its forces - just like we will in the USA.
The comments from ex-soldiers and others about the loss of morale and the exclusion of experienced and more expensive soldiers mirrors exactly the state of the NHS another fine British institution being dismantled by Brown with his misplaced 'consultant' driven inept initiatives focused on cost-cutting and now likely to see reduction in experienced front line staff. Brown will retire on a large pension without any further responsibility for the mess in which he will have left this country. Hopefully he will be sueable for all the bad decisons he made and not suffer merely political defeat.
Norman Tomlinson - "what do your readers think?" Well, I'm not having my sons put at risk fighting an unwinnable war just because a bunch of armchair generals want it. I have sympathy with the people who are out there at the moment but they are after all volunteers - presumably if you join the army then you do realise there is the possibility you may end up on active service. There is no chance of military conscription happening because any party that proposed it would (rightly) get creamed at the polls. Remember, 18 year olds (and their parents) have the vote. And do you really think the army want it? - they want a properly funded professional force. It would be interesting to know how many of the people proposing this have ever served in the forces...
Britain and America have only one option, an option that they see as unpalatable for political sensibilities, but for the sake of the Iraqi people they must act sooner rather than later. They must become king makers.
in response to Greg 11:05 It is as simple as this-in no way am I anti UK or anti America.I am at the stage whereby, it is all a matter of supreme indifference as to what happens in Iraq, and Afganistan.My comment was purely based on astonishment that individuals would allow themselves to be put in harms way- without the very best of equipment,full support,and renumeration that reflected the level of danger faced.If said individuals are happy to function under the lamentable circumstances they are subject to-and for the levels of pay-then fine.
Leaving Iraq aside (and all the well rehearsed arguments about why we should not be there) the valuable role that our Armed Forces are attempting in Afganistan is not only being undermined by lack of resources but 'stretch' due to the failure of the rest of the world to pull its weight there. There needs to be half a million professional forces in Afganistan, otheriwse we are wasting our time.
I think we are very fortunate in General Dannatt. He had the courage to tell the idiots in government the obvious about Iraq, that we need to leave. He said that the army must retain its "Judeo-Christian" heritage, of which the obvious corollary is that so must the nation. And now he warns that he has not the resources for "unexpected developments"; when such developments on the domestic front are by no means unpredictable. Oliver Cromwell told the House of Commons at a time of great trial; "It is now a time to speak or forever hold the tongue. The occasion now is no less than to save a nation out of a bleeding, nay, almost dying condition....." We need to men and women to speak fearlessly and, if necessary, to act. And if we are lucky enough to find them, then we need to stand resolutely behind them. General Dannatt is much to be commended.
Just make Browns Last Day - Poll Day!
I served in the army for 22 years, and the army I joined in the early eighties is very different from todays. Back then you did the occasional operational tour, for which there was no shortage of volunteers, and a lot of training exercises which I remember being hard, but fun as morale was very high. The army I left was one of constant operational tours, I myself was on one tour or another every six months between 1996 to 2002, as well as taking part in the usual training exercises that increasingly lacked relevance as they were still geared to fighting a Cold War enemy. Rather than being keen to volunteer for operations, you became resigned to the fact that you would be going on an operational tour whether you had recently come back from one or not. I now work for a civilian firm that deals closely with the British Army, and I deal with soldiers on a daily basis. There is generally, a distinct lack of morale. The soldiers who have been in a while can't wait to get to the end of their time so that they can claim their pension, while the younger ones are signing off as soon as possible, and who can blame them? We have the best army in the world, and its about time this government started looking after our serving men and women by reducing our commitments abroad, improving pay and conditions and investing in equipment.
This government has squandered billions on useless schemes, while scaling down and under-funding defence and making our borders dangerously porous. What could be more important than defence of the country?
This makes for grim reading. I recall that in 1939 Britain was quite unprepared for war. Why do we not learn from our own history and reform the way in which we govern ourselves (and presume to govern much of the rest of the world)? Is it unreasonable for us to look for prudence and patriotism in our rulers?
What a very revealing artical. We have just had 2 by-elections and Brown's people have been returned in both constituencies. Maybe the people of Ealing Southall and Sedgefield were not aware of the situation or don't care or didn't vote, clearly enough of them see this Government and Brown as being the best of a bad lot. I am ex-Para and ex-pat but I still have my vote at a general election and boy will I use it, providing that the ballot papers don't go 'missing' in the post.
By the suffering that they have inflicted upon the Iraqi people and the needless danger that British soldiers are being exposed to, Brown and Blair (and Bush) have redefined the concept of "scum" in my mind. A disillusioned citizen of Airstrip One.
The Ministry of Defence has responded this Telegraph report. We have made no secret of the fact that the Armed Forces are working hard. The situation in respect of current operations remains manageable. We have already stated publicly that if the current tempo of operations continues at this pace for another 10 to 15 years, we will have to revisit our planning assumptions. In recent months, we have drawn down our force levels in a number of operations. The Armed Forces' mission in Northern Ireland will end on 31 July, we withdrew the bulk of our forces from Bosnia-Herzegovina earlier this year and only yesterday we announced that we will reduce further our force levels in Iraq by 500. We are certainly not complacent about the longer term implications, which we are acutely aware of and are addressing. A copy of this response can be found at: www.blogs.mod.uk/defence_news
I believe it is the labour government's policy to destroy any potential opposition to socialist supremacy in true Stalinist fashion. To achieve their aims they need to destroy the army and officer class (Iraq, Afghanistan) the landowning class (agriculture increasingly unprofitable, right to roam etc) and undermine the monarchy by creeping republicanism (constitutional change)
I too served in The Army until 2 years ago, for 26 years. It is undoubtedly true that this loose minute (it is not a memo, under military writing guidelines) was published primarily to sell papers. However, how else are we, the general public, to ever get to know the true picture, other than by such means? The problem goes back to Labour, who in 1997 carried out the Strategic Defence Review, which whilst it did reorganise our armed forces into more cohesive formations, was still primarily a cost-cutting exercise. Since then, despite all the politicians’ claims, reducing the bottom-line cost of the AF has been Labour’s priority. They were helped no end by Mike Jackson, toeing the party line and publicly supporting the most recent cuts. He may have been the press’s darling whilst leading the charge in Kosovo in ’98 but he never lived up to that reputation once he became C-in-C and then CGS. What a shame he only became outspoken about the way Labour was treating the AF, after he had left.Thank goodness, General Dannatt is of a completely different ilk to his predecessor. At least the AF know they have a leader who has their interest truly at heart. To quote a colonel I once worked for ‘This government does not deserve the Armed Forces it enjoys treating so badly. 48;
I know this will hit 'a raw nerve' in certain quarters, but ... seriously ..... don't you think it's time that the Prime Minister gave serious thoughts to reintroducing National Service ? The present number of servicemen and servicewomen are 'becoming knackered' due to the present tour of duty in 'active zones' We have also been told that, with it being school summer holidays - 16 to 18 year olds are becoming 'bored' doing nothing and even University Students - unless Daddy .. or Mummy ... is rich .. find summer holidays a time of extreme boredom - especially after the first fortnight ! But seriously .. we owe it to the present number of Service personnel .. who doing a truly magnificent job under the circumstances - to 'give them a break' .. and National Service .. say for 12 months .. would relieve the present situation of the regular service personnel We are told - 'Britain is at war against terrorism and civilians are being targetted' - as was highlighted by the 7/7 and 21/7 bombings - plus the recent attempted bombings in London and Glasgow a month ago, therefore - don't you think that the civilian population should also - 'Take up arms' to fight against terrorism ? What do your readers think ?
What beggars belief is that we have disposed of and amalgamated regiments with hundreds of years of tradition and great Esprit de Corp. Even worse we have cut our Ghurka regiments down to the bone, when they are our amongst our toughest, most loyal and cost effective troops to have served in the British Army. Now we have an army that can't cope with a bit of global policing, let alone any serious emergencies at home, and with all the flooding we might well need them in Gloucester rather than Helmand Province.
The fact that the CGS requires more resources is beyond doubt, however he must also try and recycle some of the waste generated by his predecessors. The Army and its Reserve is only 140,000 strong yet it has more non operational Headquarters, Generals and Brigadiers than when the strength was 400,000. As an example HQ Land is not a deployable HQ it is an administrative one, yet it has within it sits HQ Regional Forces, another administrative HQ. We have 3 Administrative Divisions 2nd, 4th and 5th and a plethora of Regional Administrative Brigades and Reserve Forces and Cadets Association (RFCA) for each Regional Brigade area. There is scope for massive savings here. Get rid of HQ Regional Forces, down grade the Regional Brigades to Military Districts Commanded by a Colonel and merge the RFCA into them, this gets rid of a further layer of Chief Executives complete with their Company Range Rovers. The Army Medical Services has 4 non deployable RHQ’s and 4 different Cap Badges (RAMC , QARANC , Dental Corps and Veterinary Corps) Yet these work together at all times, time for one Capbadge an AMS one. Could the PT Corps join this as well, they are closely involved in the “Body” and perhaps the “Soul” (The RACHD) cold merge as well. We have an abundance of 2 and 1 Star Directorates and Agencies, reduce them to Colonel Status and yet more savings will accrue. This action will not affect operational capability one little bit; in fact it will improve it by releasing resources and removing layer after layer of bureaucracy.
When are the people of this Country going to wake up to the fact that our Politicians and Sovereign Democracy are dead, by a whisker!! The first duty of our Parliamentary Democracy is to defend this Country.Our multi accumulated Fifth Columnists in the Civil Service and our Parliamentry elected members (two I could mention, Clarke and Hesseltine, Lords excuse me),wish to uttely capitulate to a central body. It is called Dictatorship. I defy anyone, especially the 2 I have mentioned, to disagree! They will not as they are on course for the next gravy train and to hell with us.
I just so totally and completely agree with T. Green at 1.22pm, he has said in a far more articulate way what I feel!! The first duty of any government is to defend it's people including the brave service personnel them selves, to send young people out with totally inadequate equipment and numbers is the action of completely uncaring people , and they call themselves socialists?
Brown and Browne. What a complete pair of jokers, cowards and disingenuous cowards to boot.General Guthrie once told Brown he didn't have a clue about Defence. The lamentable state of our Forces, the arrogance of the decision to bolt the Scottish Portfolio onto Defence and the lack of funding for our Forces is a national disgrace and proves the potency of the generals comments.I am just so fed up with the stunts this government pulls,they are a complete bunch of liberal, unreformed left wing tossers who are ruining this country. I would love the opportunity to tell Brown and that miserable wretch of Secretary of State for Defence what a pair of prats they really are. Instead they will be surrounded by sycophantic a*** lickers blowing sunshine at them. Brown, you are a rotter, a liar and a coward,you send young men and women to war with worn out, obsolete equipment, too few casevac choppers and the disgrace is that you are indifferent to their suffering. I despise people like you for as king them to do what you would never dare
One has to wonder why, for example, the RAF recently underwent three years of phased redundancies and are now actively recruiting again. It strkes me that funding is at the root of it - get rid of experienced men who are on the higher rates of pay and replace them with new recruits on the lower rates. The loss of experience - regrettable but necessary. Funding, of course, is the cause of all the armed forces troubles. Proper funding, decent pay and accommodation plus adequate equipment and we would, I am sure, set the forces back on track. Perhaps the £9 billion white elephant,the olympics,should be shelved in favour of a much more important British asset. Our armed forces are internationally recognised as the best there are - not much else can make that boast in modern Britain.
People like General Dannatt would make far superior politicians than the ones we have had for the past 30 years. To a man (or woman) they are a self-interested money grubbing bunch of lunatics, that care not a jot for the UK. The one thing that shocks me is the apathy of the average British person that has allowed this to happen. Living in their nest, watching mind numbing rubbish on the TV, or living in a drink or drug induced stupor, watching the world go by, just wont make a difference. Political Correctness has dumbed down the rest of us, frightened that by saying something we will offend someone. Well sorry but the truth sometimes hurts. The Infantry have a saying "you cant talk a good trench, you have to dig it". I served 22 years Army, saw many political changes, and most was to the detriment (by way of never ending "Defence Cuts") of our troops. Nothing will change while Nu Liebor, Blue Liebor (Cons) or "We aren’t liebour but we'll go along with everything they say" (Libs), are in any position of power. We need to think again.
Why the hell are we paying for a war that's getting us nowhere? Pull out right now and we wont solve the problems in the Middle East but at least we wont be paying for them with our taxes, lives and reputation.
I agree with officer,Im currently in iraq and a serving soldier and have been already told that I will be on optelic 15 and that was even before I went on 10.We have been there 3 times since 2003 and have either been training to go, or coming back.
A disgrace & now we have a part time Secretary of Defence. What signal does that send? Expect an invasion of the Falklands - coz we couldn't do a thing about it now thanks to ALL governments in the last 15 years slashing Armed Forces Budgets.
All of this is down to Gordon Brown; the blood of British soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq is on his hands.
Thanks to Brown's criminal negligence of treasonable proportions the Army could eventually be faced with some unpalatable choices: (1) Collapse through mass resignations/desertions; (2) Mutiny; (3) Coup d'état.
The majority of the army are manifestly better men than those in government and share an inherited value system that is entirely alien to the sub Orwellian gravy train of New Labour. It is a wonder that they haven't been abolished and replaced with a new representitive, ethnically diverse, european integrated, gender balanced, wheelchair friendly, gay lesbian and transgendered peacekeeping service that only kills when all other options have been exhausted and a full consultation has been carried out. Joking apart; Labour lives in an entirely different world to those who serve and has no understanding at all of any aspect of service life. Labour instinctively fears and despises the armed forces and has barely tolerated their existance while they remain a useful tool of foreign policy. The question that must be asked is whether Labour is deliberately running down the armed forces prior to a major change in their status or is what we are seeing just ordinary criminal negligence from a callous and incompetent government.
Under-funding by a government that was, and is, fire-hosing money everywhere else but Defence in an indiscriminate fashion is undoubtedly a fundamental cause; however, consider too the impact of the high-profile prosecutions of soldiers for alleged abuses. Soldiers who do not believe that the government that committed them to fighting operations will support them publicly, will leave. Many more will have seen young soldiers doing their difficult job become the the target of human rights lawyers in open court and be deterred from joining in the first place.
Sir Just another day in Iraq: 100 more fathers, mothers, sons and daughters killed .. This is from the TV and the other papers. What you say is on target. The TV says that the NATO miscalculated the military force that would have been reasonable in Iraq. To be very honest, English soldiers no matter what they did, they were friendly in Basra and people loved them. How the scenario changed is the veto power. These are the countries that are actively engaged in the battle offensively if I may add. Britain, America. NATO that holds all the power says "we have had enough", tell me what will Mr. Brown who just got the new seat do or Mr. Bush who is building wire fences around the boundaries do? I sat sadly. No one wants to be there. They are just there. Not out of choice but ego. I thank you Firozali A.Mulla MBA PhD Tanzania
This Document finally brings us to a crunch point;for many years the UK Politicians have assumed that superior training will always compensate for lack of numbers. Where you are fighting opponents who actually see warfare as a natural way of life and who are not overawed by our forces you have two stark choices - Put in the money or get out.
I am absolutely appalled at the Telegraph's decision to put this letter on the internet. This country is experiencing an unprecedented threat to it's national security and by issuing this letter you have handed those who would wish harm on us a golden opportunity to plan an effective attack, not to mention motivating terrorists in Iraq/Afghanistan to step their campaign. There is no doubt the AF are overstretched, underpaid, undervalued and deserve so much better, but issuing a letter like this is NOT the way to instigate change within government. And people should not be tricked into thinking this is the Telegraph standing up for "our boys" - this is an attempt to sell papers. The editor should be ashamed.
How come a 'secret military document'has come into the hands of journalists.The spy must be located and prosecuted. 60+ years ago they would have been executed for such an act.
The fact that we have no reserve capability is truly worrying. How would we react if the country was struck by a concerted and continuous wave of terrorist attacks? How would the population be protected against an Iraq style campaign? You think this sounds far fetched? What about the thousands of extremists residing in the UK who are plotting our destruction. What if they grouped together and started such a campaign? Labour has broken the fundamental covenant of protecting British citizens. And yet there are still people willing to support this bunch of corrupt and incompetent sorry excuses for politicians. After so many disastrous government policies, why don't opposition parties have the courage to do the decent thing and table a motion of no confidence in the government and instigate a general election? The fact that they don't just goes to show the lack of integrity and moral fibre throughout our political class. After all, politicians can choose to escape the country when it all goes wrong. Politicians aren't concerned about the country or its citizens. They are interested in power and legacy, though they are deluded if they think their legacies will be looked upon in a positive light in years to come.
Thank God for General Dannatt. He seems to me to be the only person in any position of importance in this country worthy of our respect and indeed admiration.
as another writer who knew the army once remarked .. "Tommy isn't such a fool; Tommy sees, you know" the British Armed Services are composed of carefully selected, professional volunteers. Such people don't make commitments of that nature for reasons they don't believe in. I know, because I work in the offshore oil business. The connection may not be obvious, but in fact it employs many ex-servicemen and values them highly. In many respects its pressures - constant mobility, extreme working conditions, rapid reactions to unforeseen developments, difficult locations, huge logistical problems, management of high levels of risk with real and possibly disastrous consequences - are very similar in some respects. But, there is a LOT of money in the business. The industry's habitual disregard for its personnel, and habitual short-termism, are offset by the sums of money it is able to throw around when the heat is on; and of course, it isn't fighting a war. It is pursuing a commercial objective which can be quantified and assessed at regular, fairly short, intervals. It also has a fairly predictable cycle of boom-and-bust in which wholesale personnel turnover plays a regular part. I have repeatedly heard the same remark from ex-servicemen taking advantage of the current high oil prices; that the reasons that would have kept them in the services, have ceased to apply, and they see no prospect of them returning The Armed services aren't PC. Their final aim is to administer high levels of sometimes lethal violence against persons or organisations deemed unacceptable to the body politic. NuLab have undermined the basis of trust upon which this depends, the ultimate faith that if a soldier obeys orders, he can do no wrong. They have combined this with the oil industries' ruthless driving of personnel to quite unacceptable stress levels, to the detriment of performance and recruitment, which is recognised these days as a real problem. I'm not saying the problem is solved, but it is at least recognised and addressed. There is no reason we couldn't follow the traditional Imperial pattern and recruit large numbers of foreign mercenaries, with British citizenship upon completion. That's what Gurkhas are, so is the French Foreign Legion. The Romans invented the concept and practiced it for a millenium. But somehow I can't see the blinkered professional political class from which NuLab is drawn, making such a leap of imagination; and I can't see Grumpy Gordon footing the bill; and I really don't believe we would be best served by such a course, anyway. Phony Tony and the Millbank minions are operating in territory where their mental maps don't function, and the results are predictable.
The CGS both present and past must have seen this coming and have been making representations to the Defence Minister and interested members of Government which have fallen on deaf ears and this comes when we have fools in charge and a PM who loved the limelight and made him feel tall rubbing shoulders with the only world superpower. Brown as Chancellor robbed us and spent huge sums on supposedly improving the NHS & Schools which to this day nobody can define and now as PM he is going to build x number of houses and improve standards in schools where is the money going to come from? We certainly need more money for the Armed Forces, but where will it come from? New Labour should be put out to graze, unfortunately, Cameron sounds like Tony Blair and the Lib Dems are neither here nor there. We are in trouble.
The participation of British troops in the successful expulsion of Saddam Hussein from Kuwait, under a UN mandate, was a correct use of our defence forces. However, Tony Blair's idiotic support for the subsequent illegal invasion of Iraq, on the part of George Bush Jnr, has landed us in a messy heap of political and financial trouble, which Blair himself recognised as being beyond his capacity to manage. Hence his "early retirement". Blair no doubt knew his action was illegal, but he supported Bush in order to preserve the Atlantic Alliance. Now, however, that the Cold War between NATO and the former Soviet Union is over, the time has come for a thorough overhaul of what we understand by "defence". The Tories, in particular, will have to state their case on this, since the Iraq War has thrown two fundamental principles of Conservatism into conflict with each other: (1) the Atlantic alliance, on the one hand, and (2) the rule of law on the other. George Bush Jnr is a cowboy, and David Cameron is going to have to face up to the reality of dealing with a law-breaker as an ally.
"we now have almost no capability to react to the unexpected" - and that apparently means also no capability to help out unexpectedly flooded towns and villages this weekend. Remember when the Army would come in and help with disasters like this? I remember that, when New Orleans was struck by Katrina, Americans complained that the state National Guard was in Iraq instead of at home in their own state helping the victims of the flooding which is their first duty.
"...but what madman would join the Army-or even stay in it to risk their lives for the whims and vanities of scumbag liar politicians..." Antony Graham, your point requires clarification. Is it the strategy of the war in Iraq that you object to? (A strategy that is starting to succeed, in spite of the misrepresentations of the media, and the mendacity of the US Democrat Party) Or is it a more general point about the grand strategy of responding to Islamist fascism through the War on Terror? (Bumper Sticker?) Or are you simply using the current unpopularity of the war in Iraq to hide an anti-UK or anti-US agenda?
As a serving senior nco, i feel at last we have a CGS who finally speak the truth, pace of life in the field army is one long cycle of operations, training for operations and leave.Then to have a job share sect. state of defence, just goes to show how much the past and present goverment , respect the armed forces, who are fully committed to the operations in both Iraq and Afganistan and other areas around the world.
I'm sorry, and really do not mean to be offensive....but what madman would join the Army-or even stay in it to risk their lives for the whims and vanities of scumbag liar politicians.
What a disgrace!Underpaid,underequipped and now undermanned.Our pm should hang his head in shame.He, and his party are responsible for this, and so much else that is so sadly wrong with what was once our great nation. We desperately need a general election.
In the not too distant future, after more and more defence cuts, it will finally dawn on the contracting military establishment that the United Kingdom is no longer a significant world power! The U.K. still struts the world stage but only by remaining a junior client-state of the U.S. In 1956, the U.K. had an (mainly conscripted) army of over half a million men, a Royal Navy with fleets of over 160 operational vessels, and the RAF had vast flights of aircraft. No longer. Technological advances may have reduced the need for quantity but the quality is now dubious and the fact remains that the U.K. has a defence budget permanently skewed by its insistence on retaining a nuclear capacity! The Royal Navy has only 28 operational fighting vessels, including Polaris, according to Jane's Defence Analysis! The RAF is flying warplanes over 30 years old, although the troubled Eurofighter, costing four times its original estimate, is due to come into operation! This century, the U.K.'s declining status as a global power will continue with unremitting pace. It is inevitable.
This is a damning indictment for Gordon Brown's Government. He has cosntantly failed to address the issue of this country's defence, either as Chancellor or as Prime Minister - which is the duty of Government to ensure. He is a derelict and should go. General Dannatt is reluctantly forced to make public the total nonsense of this Labour Government, with a part-time Defence Secretary who has no personal experience of military service and a total lack of backbone or resilience. God save the UK.
Tell us something we don't know.
General Dannatt is right. For far too long our armed forces have been neglected to such an extent that today they are lamentably undermanned, under-equipped, underpaid and undervalued. It beggars belief that while our forces are expected to subsist on a shoestring, the country can afford to spend £9 billion on such follies as the Olympic Games.
It's incredible that a government that prides itself on public sector investment has left the men and women of our armed forces down so badly. Initially all fingers must point to Blair. But Brown and Cameron now have an opportunity to unite and protect, moreover invest in the Army etc. Infantry are vital to any Army and this will make or break Gordon. It will be a test of his character, moreover, if he does nothing it will haunt him ever more. I believe David and Gordon will do the right thing.
This will not come as a surprise to anyone inside the services. Whether mr Broon will do any more about it as PM, than he was prepared to permit as Chancellor remains doubtful. A hint. Should you wish to see how soldiers react to this, visit the Army Rumour Service website: www.arrse.co.uk/cpgn2/Forums/viewtopic/p=1405001.html#1405001
This is a leak of a secret document that has the potential to damage the National Interest and jeopardise both military and civilian lives. Hostile foreign governments and terrorist organisations will exploit this information to mount attacks both home and abroad to coerce our government to conform to their intentions.
Here we have a government that has masterminded the "mother of all splurges" tossing money around like a drunk gambler. In the meantime, the armed forces have suffered not least because the procurement of appropriate weaponry has been abysmal, but as Christopher Booker points out regularly in the Sunday Telegraph it has been appalling value for money, predicated by issues that are to do with European army integration, and has left the men in the field utterly exposed. It's a real scandal- one of many after 10 years of this circus in Westminster. I hasten to add that my next door neighbour is a reservist and as a former Para officer he has close personal friends in Afghanistan and Iraq, so I have a very good feed of what really happens out there and it is utterly shocking.
Civilians have no idea of what life in the military is like. I served 33 years in the RAF and in that time I moved 30 times. Fortunately I had a wife who put up with it but the strain caused many families to break up. Add to that fact I believe it is now very hard to sign on for pensionable service and I'm only surprised that troops are staying in.