Thedelldays Posted 12 June, 2012 Share Posted 12 June, 2012 with the army to cut 20,000 people by 2020 the 4000 were going to be told today. im not one of them... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glasgow_Saint Posted 12 June, 2012 Share Posted 12 June, 2012 that sucks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 12 June, 2012 Share Posted 12 June, 2012 Much respect must go to the armed forces for the way they are getting on with it. Contrast this with the rest of the public sector. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 12 June, 2012 Share Posted 12 June, 2012 with the army to cut 20,000 people by 2020 the 4000 were going to be told today. im not one of them... What are those figures as a percentage of the existing numbers? Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 12 June, 2012 Author Share Posted 12 June, 2012 What are those figures as a percentage of the existing numbers? Cheers god knows....but from a fairness point of view. about time the army took a hit (if a hit is required) as for getting on with it dune...after 2 years, the MOD has already cleared its budget defecit (apparently) also, those of us that are left are having our pension changed dramatically from 2015 too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 12 June, 2012 Share Posted 12 June, 2012 after 2 years, the MOD has already cleared its budget defecit (apparently) I'd bet good money they have simply massaged the costs of depreciation and the projected costs of planned future capital expenditure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 12 June, 2012 Author Share Posted 12 June, 2012 I'd bet good money they have simply massaged the costs of depreciation and the projected costs of planned future capital expenditure. why don't all public departments do that then if its that easy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 12 June, 2012 Share Posted 12 June, 2012 why don't all public departments do that then if its that easy? Because the vast majority of costs for most public departments are staff - with regular and hard to cut pay. The MoD have very large capital expenditures, which they can move around or massage in order to fit whatever target the government announce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 12 June, 2012 Author Share Posted 12 June, 2012 Because the vast majority of costs for most public departments are staff - with regular and hard to cut pay. The MoD have very large capital expenditures, which they can move around or massage in order to fit whatever target the government announce. well, either way, another 4000 people are told today that they can go...with the army set to shed 20,000 by 2020.. huge numbers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 12 June, 2012 Share Posted 12 June, 2012 Personally I believe we should withdraw from getting involved in foreign wars and instead focus more on the defence of Britain and her colonies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 12 June, 2012 Author Share Posted 12 June, 2012 Personally I believe we should withdraw from getting involved in foreign wars and instead focus more on the defence of Britain and her colonies. agree...however, we seem hell bent on having a presence in the gulf region with surpasses "protecting our interests" IE. sea lanes etc... which is utterly bizarre considering we keep slashing the navy etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 12 June, 2012 Share Posted 12 June, 2012 agree...however, we seem hell bent on having a presence in the gulf region with surpasses "protecting our interests" IE. sea lanes etc... which is utterly bizarre considering we keep slashing the navy etc Istead of protecting sea lanes in the gulf the navy should be protecting our own territorial waters from Spanish incursions. In the old days we would have chased them out, but because we've gone soft they are becoming more brazen. It's high time we put them in their place again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micky Posted 12 June, 2012 Share Posted 12 June, 2012 Cut them to the quick - pretty sure morale amongst the boys in places like Afghan will be sky high today. Up to your eyes in smelly stuff and even the BFPO is sending you shyte - just another day. If we have a decade without the problems that we currently do, or have experienced in the last 10 - 15 years (improbable I would guess) then these redundancies could work. Otherwise it is a false economy - we have smaller army, hopefully it will be the support arms that take the brunt of the redundancies - still less capability but the lads who currently are 'front line' will be less affected. When (if) it all goes tits up, we rely heavily on reservists and 'contractors' to support the lads on the front line. Whether that support will be anything like what they get now is anybodies guess - but it would scare the shyte out of me. Anybody who has been anywhere, operationally, within the last 30 odd years will tell you that support services are paramount if front line soldiers are to do their jobs properly. I think I'm right in saying that during the Falklands Conflict, no soldier who was injured, who subsequenly got to the in theatre medical services died - not one. So it's a very risky strategy - but the books are now balanced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now