Cable Forum

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)
-   Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)
-   -   How not to treat a soldier (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33664881)

Sirius 10-05-2010 18:27

Re: How not to treat a soldier
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35018377)
are you deliberatley winding us up ?

this was not on the streets of london this was in a active war zone where Afghans were caught red handed digging holes for ied's to blow our soldiers up the comparison is just plain stupid

or do you think they digging holes for tatties and carrots :rolleyes:

They are but simple goat herders digging holes for water :rolleyes: Yea right.


Anyone who thinks that these soldier's should have been dealt with in this way wants his head seeing to. But what do expect from the white feather brigade

---------- Post added at 18:27 ---------- Previous post was at 18:25 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35018382)
(shakes head in disgust )


(walks away and puts Flyboy on ignore)

:clap: :clap: If only more did that

martyh 10-05-2010 18:30

Re: How not to treat a soldier
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sirius (Post 35018383)
They are but simple goat herders digging holes for water :rolleyes:

Anyone who thinks that these soldier's should be dealt with this way wants his head seeing to. But what do expect from the white feather brigade


It's not bad enough that they have put up with getting shot and blown up ,now they have the politicians and senior officers trying to do them in

makes me wonder how independent from the politicians this court marshall was ,how much was it influenced by no10? to get a favorable result in the eyes of the Afghan leaders or is it a case of the senior officers being idiots

punky 10-05-2010 18:33

Re: How not to treat a soldier
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sirius (Post 35018009)
mIt joins a list of problems that Labour could of and should of fixed

The Gurkha's
Soldiers having to buy there own kit
No helicopters
No training before deployment for the TA
Snatch land rovers that were obsolete in NI never mind afghanistan.

The list goes on and on, And now they start picking on the soldiers themselves.

Indeed the list goes on much futher than the public really have been made away of. There are a couple of books on 3 Para's deployments and its really quite illuminating/frightening. In addition to the above:

1. Helicopters don't have winches so soldiers trapped in minefields have to rely on US helicopters to rescue them.

2. Helicopters aren't suited to CasEvacs so we rely on US helicopters for those two.

3. Due to appeasing the Afghan government troops are being deployed against their tradition roles and strengths. The Paras are used to working deep behind enemy lines as a recognisance force using a move, hit, move, hit strategy. At the moment they are being used to maintain fire support bases, remain sedentary and repel Taliban attacks add nauseam instead of taking the initative. This is not an Amry descision, its political as concerns about this being raised up to a Colonel level. Also once they were joined by a Danish light infantry group. When their commanders heard they were due to just sit there and survive being attacked they were pulled out. There we depolyed there less than a week.

4. Due to being spread so thin across numerous towns and the lack of helicopters (not to mention safe landing zones) supplies are falling unacceptably low. Sometimes as low as a few thousand rounds which would only last a couple of hours in an average fightfight and 1 MRE (meal packs) per day.

5. Even when supply changes are maintained, there are perennial shortages of certain items. For example: nightvision batteries. Soldiers often have to borrow these items off of other countries to just get by.

6. Having to put up with the continued corruption of the Afghan government, the Afghan National Army and the Afghan National Police.

Those are the ones that come to mind, there were others.

Sirius 10-05-2010 18:44

Re: How not to treat a soldier
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by punky (Post 35018391)
Indeed the list goes on much futher than the public really have been made away of. There are a couple of books on 3 Para's deployments and its really quite illuminating/frightening. In addition to the above:

1. Helicopters don't have winches so soldiers trapped in minefields have to rely on US helicopters to rescue them.

2. Helicopters aren't suited to CasEvacs so we rely on US helicopters for those two.

3. Due to appeasing the Afghan government troops are being deployed against their tradition roles and strengths. The Paras are used to working deep behind enemy lines as a recognisance force using a move, hit, move, hit strategy. At the moment they are being used to maintain fire support bases, remain sedentary and repel Taliban attacks add nauseam instead of taking the initative. This is not an Amry descision, its political as concerns about this being raised up to a Colonel level. Also once they were joined by a Danish light infantry group. When their commanders heard they were due to just sit there and survive being attacked they were pulled out. There we depolyed there less than a week.

4. Due to being spread so thin across numerous towns and the lack of helicopters (not to mention safe landing zones) supplies are falling unacceptably low. Sometimes as low as a few thousand rounds which would only last a couple of hours in an average fightfight and 1 MRE (meal packs) per day.

5. Even when supply changes are maintained, there are perennial shortages of certain items. For example: nightvision batteries. Soldiers often have to borrow these items off of other countries to just get by.

6. Having to put up with the continued corruption of the Afghan government, the Afghan National Army and the Afghan National Police.

Those are the ones that come to mind, there were others.

And guess who it was that oversaw and controlled that situation. and also additionally controlled the money

martyh 10-05-2010 18:59

Re: How not to treat a soldier
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Sirius (Post 35018407)
And guess who it was that oversaw and controlled that situation. and also additionally controlled the money


ooh ooh i love a good puzzle ...now let me think ...does it begin with G and end in B

Derek 10-05-2010 19:01

Re: How not to treat a soldier
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35018437)
ooh ooh i love a good puzzle ...now let me think ...does it begin with G and end in B

I think it begins in G and ends in N actually. :D

martyh 10-05-2010 19:09

Re: How not to treat a soldier
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Derek S (Post 35018439)
I think it begins in G and ends in N actually. :D

Gordon Numpty? :confused:

Sirius 10-05-2010 19:11

Re: How not to treat a soldier
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35018446)
Gordon Numpty? :confused:

:LOL:

Hugh 10-05-2010 19:12

Re: How not to treat a soldier
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyboy (Post 35018381)
I have no idea, but then neither do you.

That is beneath you.:(

Derek 10-05-2010 19:13

Re: How not to treat a soldier
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35018446)
Gordon Numpty? :confused:

Nope thats starts with G and ends with Y. :)

Hugh 10-05-2010 19:21

Re: How not to treat a soldier
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Derek S (Post 35018452)
Nope thats starts with G and ends with Y. :)

That would explain a lot, actually....;)

Ramrod 10-05-2010 19:35

Re: How not to treat a soldier
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35018358)
i've signed the petition with no hesitation whatsoever

Me too....

Sirius 10-05-2010 19:53

Re: How not to treat a soldier
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramrod (Post 35018481)
Me too....

:tu:

danielf 10-05-2010 20:29

Re: How not to treat a soldier
 
So are people suggesting that soldiers should be free to beat up prisoners, or just that their punishment is too harsh?

Hugh 10-05-2010 20:33

Re: How not to treat a soldier
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by danielf (Post 35018541)
So are people suggesting that soldiers should be free to beat up prisoners, or just that their punishment is too harsh?

My view is that the punishment is too hard - when I was in the RAF, someone on my watch got beaten up (looked at someone's pint the wrong way) - he was less injured than the guy mentioned in the OP, and the assailant got two months inside, but stayed in the Mob.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 20:53.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum