How not to treat a soldier - Page 3

Sirius · 10-05-2010, 18:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyh

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

They are but simple goat herders digging holes for water

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

(shakes head in disgust )

(walks away and puts Flyboy on ignore)

If only more did that

10-05-2010, 18:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sirius

They are but simple goat herders digging holes for water

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sirius

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by punky

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

10-05-2010, 18:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sirius

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyh

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.

10-05-2010, 19:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derek S

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

Gordon Numpty?

Sirius · 10-05-2010, 19:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyh

Gordon Numpty?

**Hugh** · 10-05-2010, 19:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyboy

I have no idea, but then neither do you.

That is beneath you.

Derek · 10-05-2010, 19:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyh

Gordon Numpty?

Nope thats starts with G and ends with Y.

**Hugh** · 10-05-2010, 19:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derek S

Nope thats starts with G and ends with Y.

That would explain a lot, actually....

Ramrod · 10-05-2010, 19:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyh

i've signed the petition with no hesitation whatsoever

Me too....

Sirius · 10-05-2010, 19:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramrod

Me too....

danielf · 10-05-2010, 20:29

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by danielf

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.