What A Disgrace - Armed Forces Cuts - Page 2

Mancie · 19-07-2011, 01:40

And as I'm up late I'll add..these sort of cuts would have been front page disaster news on the Sun,Mail,Express if this was a Labour government.. but lets see what these tory rags say about it

Eric · 19-07-2011, 07:41

Maybe your government has realized that the UK no longer needs a large military estabishment. Most Canadians are happy with the size and structure of our military. (We have purchased 80 Locheed F35 fighters, and this will allow us perform our NORAD duties more efficiently, but that's a 25 yr. blip.) Our regular forces, well supported by a great reserve system, are suffiecient to our needs. In Afghanistan, 44% of the soldiers who served were reservists, some of them were killed. Many governments have realized ... finally

... that "boots on the ground" doesn't mean "victory." Militarily, it's a whole new ball game.

DaveinGermany · 19-07-2011, 18:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mancie

How many of the 17,000 soldiers to be cut will be actual redundancies?

The early estimates were about 11,00 over 4 years (up to & including 2014) with the end of the mission in Afghanistan ? But it appears far more have applied for the redundancy package than they at first thought. I suppose it's to be expected better to jump before you're pushed & come away with something rather than nothing. The biggest impact will be on the Gurkha Battalions from the Infantry view point, but a lot of snedding will happen within the support Corps (RLC).