i agree with you, i served 11 yrs in the RN during which there was all manner of talk of improvement for service personnel then and it came to no avail. i left nearly ten years ago, and from what snippets i catch on the news/net it's still going on. as for upgrading the carriers all i've ever seen is putting them into dry dock for a few months for a coat of paint.
as recently highlighted in the news of the soldiers accomodation, they should hopefully be embarrassed into sorting that out(shame it has to be on the national news to be highlighted and not already dealt with)
why should anyone want to join the services to fight wars as you say, when you get squalid living conditions as a reward.
there are, no doubt more issues which need to be brought to the attention of the media. god help the poor servicemen as they are gagged and bound to silence.
and of course there was the hospital treatment for injured personnel, the list goes on. it infuriates me. regards
2007-01-12 03:26:10
·
answer #1
·
answered by Troubled Joe(the ghost of) 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
I suspect you know the answers, but:-
1. You can only make commitments within the budget you are prepared to spend.
2. In the military, it is disastrous to scimp and save on trying to do too much. The result will be inadequate and obsolete equipment that is defeated in battle and personnel whose effectiveness is destroyed by poor morale.
3. It follows from point 2 that the Government must prioritise its commitments, giving precedence to basic needs such as defence of UK food supply routes over far flung foreign adventures.
4. There must be no "sacred cows" i.e. Trident.
The only thing New Labour seems to respond to within the UK, as opposed to abroad, is electoral considerations. Perhaps I could therefore observe that I am responding from a constituency New Labour nearly won in 2001, because military voters then thought Blair was skimping less than Major had done. Now they are more likely to get wiped off the local coundil next May. Labour looks like sacrificing marginal seats in places like Portsmouth and Plymouth because Blair puts being nice to foreign leaders before a sensible naval policy.
2007-01-12 03:29:35
·
answer #2
·
answered by Philosophical Fred 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
understand? Like Henry II knew that Beckett changed into occurring? a minimum of Henry II repented and did penance. perchance the installation of the "faith" starting up is his way of atoning. yet denying it type of feels to undo any solid each and each and every of the starting up element is doing. The face confirmed all of it at the same time as he changed into requested pointedly with information from a reporter, "How do you sense to have blood on your hands?", precise this second Kelly's body changed into got here upon. BTW, that's almost particular now that Kelly might want to not have died with information from slashing his own wrist. The 9 signatories of the open letter coated a number of our ideal pathologists and medical and legal brains. the actual incontrovertible fact that Hutton stopped the inquest is likewise telling. because the Ian Tomlinson case shows, all you want is both an incompetent or compliant pathologist to come back up with the decision you want.
2016-12-02 04:08:57
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Either we want to be a military power or we don't, so why TB think we can do it on a shoe string is beyond me. as they say "if you cant take the heat, get out the kitchen" Perhaps its time we boarded up the shutter and battened down the hatches and start taking care of our own !
2007-01-16 02:15:17
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Too true all talk no action our forces are over stretched budgets have been slashed .. equipment in all parts of our forces needs updating and we live in sub standard quarters
2007-01-12 05:30:34
·
answer #5
·
answered by sammie 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Why does he want a debate? You cannot run the country on endless debating, nothing would get done. It seems as if he should have some ideas and then act on them, instead of asking people what he should do. Muppet.
2007-01-12 04:37:54
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
its because the UK is run by a load of Scotsmen.they like people to think things are big on the out side, but when you look under there kilts ,its a different story
2007-01-12 05:03:39
·
answer #7
·
answered by BD M 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
Tony Blair commits Britain to join the EU in creating a 200,000 troop military that can deploy 60,000 troops on immediate notice.???????????????????? Think about it??????
2007-01-12 03:47:38
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
The Royal Navy.
I think they still got two tugs and a rowing boat.
As for any serious weapons...not sure.
2007-01-12 04:06:56
·
answer #9
·
answered by knowitall 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
They are already building the aircraft carriers.
2007-01-12 03:25:08
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋