"Farewell 38th. " Topic

Just read that as part of the regular slashing of the armed forces, (in the middle of a war!… Sun Tzu would face palm) that one of the regiments to be disbanded is the 3rd Battalion the Mercian regiment.

The old 38th foot.
An old noble battalion and also from not far from my home patch.

Other units that will be axed are the old 19th foot. The Green Howards. One of the oldest units.
The Scots get off lightly (odd since they might be off in year or two)
The old 93rd are being reduced to a ceremonial company but little else.

Raise a glass to 1st Staffordshires!

Sad to see this. At least what's left of the Glosters are remaining.

I remember the amalgamation of ………….

The Prince of wales Own
The Green Howards and
The Duke of Wellington's.

We were left with:

"The Prince of Wale's Own Green Wellingtons"

(boom boom)

False economy. They are going to want troops in a few years.

Too true.

They are now expecting and over reliant on the TA..

Not that the TA do a bad job, but they shouldn't be used to replace full time soldiers like they intend to do so from now on.

It's true; Wear a skirt and torture a cat and you become bullet-proof…

The Scottish regiments got away with losing one solitary battalion in the 2006 Review, despite having the poorest recruitment and retention record in the British Army. The English and Welsh line regiments meanwhile were annihilated.

Now, with the Independence referendum looming and the spectre of the SNP using the issue for cheap votes (despite the inconvenient fact that Scots don't seem to want to join the Army in sufficient numbers), they've dodged the bullet again, while wholesale slaughter is done to non-skirt-wearing regiments.

The four Welsh regiments (RWF, Welch, SWB and Mons) were reduced to three after WW2, then two, then one regiment in 2006 and now one solitary regular battalion, despite having consistently very strong recruitment without resorting to recruiting Commonwealth soldiers.

I know I would have thought they would have held off on any dusbandments until we know what the Scots are doing. If they go, we can disband them.

Now if they go, the army will be down twice as many battalions as it was.

As usual. Cack handed and badly thought out.

I wouldnt mind nearly as much if we were at peace and faced no external threats. But in the middle of a shooting war?

A definite tory touch of the John Notts, only this time the army takes the brunt!

You just hope this round of defence cuts does not have the same effect that John Notts did….

And all to bail out those fecking bankers.

They are going to want troops in a few years.

Of course we will. And when we need them we'll recruit and train new units …

Done it before and we'll do it again!

Here to you the 38th.

Too many of my ancestors fell under your colours from the Peninsular to the St Quentin Canal.

Raise a glass to 1st Staffordshires!

Will do so at "happy hour" this evening!

Cheers,

As a South Staffordshire lad born and bred that's sad news. But inevitable cuts as we are bust in all but name…

As a South Staffordshire lad born and bred that's sad news. But inevitable cuts as we are bust in all but name…

------------------
Inevitable? Surely its a matter of what the govt spends our money on – along with letting certain companies off massive tax bills etc. To do this kind of thing at present is mad – and the whole 'the TA will take up the strain' is just looking to do soldiering on the cheap – like the Big Society concept – the opportunity to run all those things yourself(libraries, schools etc etc) that you never wanted to run – however unlike MPs etc most of us don't have that much spare time. I imagine they hope that all those made redundant will go into the reserves to be paid as and when the Govt feel like it. Why don't we police the country with say 10,000 paid police and get Specials to do the rest!

Now, with the Independence referendum looming and the spectre of the SNP using the issue for cheap votes (despite the inconvenient fact that Scots don't seem to want to join the Army in sufficient numbers)
-----------------

Perhaps the upsurge in SNP support is the very reason they don't want to join what maybe they perceive as an English Army (speaking as someone Welsh who was in the TA – with the old joke being "Welsh troops – good soldiers when led by white officers").I know that some of the loonies in Plaid Cymru have campaigned against permitting the Army to do schools work on the basis that its some kind of evil attempt to brainwash kids into joining the evil English dominated war machine (economic conscription and that tosh – as if most people don't go to work to for money rather than a love of working!) – presumably they take a similar stance on the police and any other state organs – idiots!

Re what Mark said

despite having consistently very strong recruitment without resorting to recruiting Commonwealth soldiers.

and as GNREP8 said above- the problem is Whitehall thinks we are 'Commonwealth' soldiers

Why don't we police the country with say 10,000 paid police and get Specials to do the rest!

Who leaked the latest Govt policy document to you!?

The inevitable ups and downs of armies in democracies – run them down when you think you don't need them so you can pump them up later when you actually do

As to Scottish independence, I wish the SNP luck in convincing anyone that an independent Scotland has any kind of economic future

Why don't they just keep a small cadre bn for each regt, keep the tradition and the pride, and use them to build a regiment around when they need to later- wouldn't that be worthwhile?
I'm an American, so I don't know the fine points…but it just seems like the quality of the next army needed would be served better by giving recruits the traditions of the old regiments to hang their hats on when they come in.

Sad news to hear of the disbandment of proud and distinguished regiments…

The worst of it is, defence cuts on this scale inevitably presage a major war – oh no wait, this time they made the cuts while were still fighting a war….D'Oh!

Frederick, at the risk of going all Blue Fezzy, the Scots economy is doing better than anyone else in Britain on the latest figures.

And recruitment is reputedly down because of a basic lack of trust in the Westminster Government.

Of course, they are going easy on most of the Scots battalions (one regiment), because they don't want to provide the SNP with any more ammunition, especially after all the base closures for RN & RAF in Scotland in recent years.

There's a 3.7 billion pound shortfall in revenue spent by MoD in Scotland over the per capita share, and that's being pointed to.

I've been reading about this for quite a while now. I'm American, serving as a contractor in Iraq. I'm watching my own country make its hatchet job on the military, with budget shortfalls and deficits the inevitable reason. Our enemies, which are many, are enjoying this caper. Freedom is not free. National safety costs, and without it, all else is moot.

I could rail about this all day, but suffice it to say, on both sides of the Atlantic the Progressives will demand an entitlement, nanny state society, spending our future, and the next generations' futures, into oblivion. Then have the audacity to target Defense as the scape goats for bloated deficits.

We live in a dangerous world. The US and the UK, like it or not, are the targets. Yet we'll let our guard down.. again. Saddens me to see this happen. The US and the UK may have some differences in reasons for downsizing, but for both its a myopic view. Hack the military, keep entitlements in tact (which are the real killers to deficts, not defense) and the MPs and Congressmen will be heroes for saving Grandma and get re-elected back to thier thrones. We'll continue to pay homage to the unworthy.

I read some where recently, and can't quote verbatim, but the jist of it is…

Vibrant economy x strong defense x personal liberty = healthy, enduring society. Diminish any factor, and the sum may plummet to zero. Quick.

Finally, traditions also have significance in a nation's identity. Obliterating history and tradition, military or otherwise, has an effect on psyche and pride. I'm saddened to see some of the British history sent to mothballs.

For what it is worth ………….

Conventional forces( land, sea and air) have been in constant deployment since 1945 somewhere in the world and in a variety of roles.

Meanwhile trillions of pounds are spent on nuclear strategic weapons which, ethically and morally, are unlikely to be used.

So which do we cut ?

I think the British Army at it's peak had over 100 regiments of infantry. They have already deleted some and combined most so that often famous regiments with long histories are represented by a single company.

The British regimental system has pros and cons. It is very difficult for the bean counters to manage 'efficiently' but I gather it really helps at the sharp end to feel you belong to somehing meaningful rather than the 317th Infantry regt.

It's certainly a sad development and one beset by political double dealing.

I don't fully agree with pbishop but I can see his point.

Whatever saving is made in these cuts (and as 90% of the soldiers laid off or not recruited will go into low skilled low paid jobs or straight into long term unemployement it can't be all that much) is dwarfed by the budget for numerous hardware projects – nuclear weapons being the elephant in the room – that cost billions and add nothing to national security.

I'm not a total pacifist – there are real threats of war in the world today – but I'd like an open honest debate about what is and isn't necessary, rather than what we get which is underhand and self serving. And it seems not to matter which flavour of politicos are in office.

BTW, Britain (like the US) is far from broke. Huge amounts of wealth have been created over the last 30-40 years but more and more has ended up in the hands of fewer and fewer people.

seems like every government we get likes to cut troop numbers.

Feel for all the lads out on their ear now. Tough time to be looking for work. Seems a daft way to get out of a recession .. Sack 12000 odd blokes.

Very Sad.
40 Regiment RA got the axe also.
Particularly sad for me as a did a six month exchange with them in the 90s.
Some of my lads were upset over some of the hits we've recently taken.
I reminded them that as bad as it was, as least we weren't in the British Army and getting the Pineapple as badly as they were.
Someone should explain to these s in Parliment (both the Brit and ours) that there is a bloody war on.
s!

So which do we cut ?

which one allows us to pretend we are anything more than an also ran in world affairs?

Pat

Ok, Im currently a member of 2 Yorks, (the Green Howards) Yesterday we were told by the CO that the Bn will MERGE with 1 and 3 yorks.

Whilst its a great shame that all 3 Bns will lose their old titles, PWO, GH, DWR, i believe the Yorkshire regiment will come out stronger for it.

Fact – currently all 3 Bns are very understrength. As soldiers we work alot harder than we should. Duties etc come round very quick and the quality of life is crap.

After the merger, both of the new Bns will be upto strength, for the first time.

Fact – Redundancies are not generally compulsory. Sadly a few will be forced to go. but for the young pte soldiers and NCO's not much will change. Except they will be on duty less, because they will be fully manned.

So, the reported 20,000 troops that are being axed? Bear in mind this is for the army 2020 structure. Most of the cuts will be through natural wastage, people getting out, or finishing their careers and leaving etc.

Im not condoning these cuts by any means, far from it. There are many that are rightly upset about losing their regiment. But we all have to stop looking back, and as Infantrymen always have done, crack on.

(sorry to hear about all the other units too).

Steve.

Also sad to hear my county regiment is to be no more.

This Government has learnt nothing from the lessons history has taught us.

On that vein it's high time we had a good old military coup – a benevolent dictatorship is just what the UK could do with right now. Execute the corrupt politicians, civil servants and bankers. Forced repatriation of non-vital immigrants. Redistribution of wealth and land to the masses……..

Don't know what all the fuss is about!

We will easily be able to defeat global insurgency with what's left and the TA, backed up by all the rapid deployment Challenger 2's that will be back in the UK from Germany in 2014.

Of course if that fails we can just Nuke them with the Six Billion quids worth of Trident replacement, or wait around until the new Carriers are available, assuming we can ever afford the planes for them but basically – No Worries!

Sentimental whiners!

the Progressives will demand an entitlement, nanny state society, spending our future, and the next generations' futures, into oblivion. Then have the audacity to target Defense as the scape goats for bloated deficits.

------------------
Though in the UK its the Conservative led coalition that is implementing the cuts so Progressives? In fact said party has a long and not very honourable tradition going back to Options for Change etc of chopping the forces and esp targetting those who have been in for long enough to be too expensive (per the comment by the soldier above that young private soldiers and NCOS (well maybe junior ones) won't be effected much). Personally I never believe too much govt comments re minimal complusory redundancies, as things are often done to "persuade" people to resign hence keeping the figure for compulsories low. Also whilst the new btns will be fully manned – on duty less? – with an army that has 20,000 men less? The normal mantra nowadays is do more with less and I suspect that whats the army will get too

Execute the corrupt politicians, civil servants and bankers
--------------------
actually speaking as notionally a civil servant not sure that too many of them are corrupt or in receipt of questionable bonuses or expenses!

The biggest problem with this dozy Defense Review is the questions it fails to answer, not the issues of which famous and illustrious names fall off the roll.

If you want to continue looking backwards my fathers RAF squadron is long gone, my Grandfather served in the 57th Foot, his father and his father before him, in the 24th both gone and not an eyelid batted!

This really doesn't matter.

What does matter is the Six Billion about to be wasted on a Nuclear Weapons system we have to ask the Americans permission to use – supposing there is ever going to be someone to use it on.

Two aircraft carriers of indeterminate cost one of which will never be used, along with the American planes we are being fleeced to buy for them.

Not to mention some 360 odd MBTs that have no place in the Review just published but all of which are ending in up in the UK when we pull out of the German bases we can't afford by 2014, with no secure storage available for them.

Even after the Review there will around 200, who the hell are we going to be fighting with them and given we have no lift capacity for them, how would they get there anyway?

By the way, has anyone told the Government that the last Tank production facility in the UK closed a couple of months ago – a firm indication of the importance of these weapons in the years ahead!

Finally don't forget that we on TMP may have a feel for military history and tradition but the British public at large don't give a stuff, they just want out of Afghan and no more Tommys dead.

They don't want a global reach if it means morons like Tony Blair can get us dragged into idiot adventures in the Middle East fighting wars for nothing!

My apologies GNREP64 I didn't wish to infer that ALL Civil Servants are corrupt.

Hi Yorkie,

Thanks for posting and giving us the view at the sharp end. Thanks also for your Service and I'm sure all your mates on TMP wish you and your comrades all the very best for the future of the Yorkshire Regiment.

Hi PBishop,

I couldn't agree more with your commentary. I believe it was a fellow countryman of yours who said the 'price of liberty is eternal vigilance'? I suspect that is a price our politicians are no longer prepared to educate and lead our electorates to pay…

British Infantrymen – Never Outthought, Never Outfought…

What I'm struggling with… Aside from the loss of history is with the last round of amalgamations and disbandments when the created the super regiments they claimed that single battalion regiments were out dated and not flexible and that multi battalion regiments were the way forward.

But they've just reduced the Welsh to a small single battalion regiment. Which kind of meant the previous amalgamation was kind of pointless? Or wrong?

The Royal Welsh still have two TA bns – 3rd & 4th.

Edwulf – sadly I don't think there is any logic behind it. The powers that be want the army to cost less. Certain regiments have special status and remain untouched while others are almagamated or deleted.

It may be necessary and it might even be more efficient in the long run – but there has been no public debate that I know of and no attempt to justify the decisions beyond – 'we are in charge so do as we say'.

Not just defence cuts are rushed through without discussion – the same goes for all areas.

True.

Considering the number of out of work guys at the moment I would think more infantrymen might be better… More guys working, making money paying tax.

I'd have all regiments at a three battalion standard. I'd raise a Sikh regiment too. They've always wanted one.
Scrap our nukes.

Have the Sikhs always wanted a regiment? I know they have an illustrius war history.

I think it would be expensive to fully man many 3 bn regiments. To recruit and retain high quality men you have to pay them a decent wage – especially since there is a consierable element of risk to life and limb, even in peacetime. (When was there last 'peace' BTW?)

I suppose the 3 bn regiments could really be a group of 3 alamgamated regiments – like a brigade? Sharing some of the admin and support units that presumably make too many small regiments too expensive.

But with no nukes the money could likely be found. I'd also limit the amount of heavy armoured vehicles on inventory. They go out of date fast and cannot be deployed. Just keep one units worth of vehicles at an NTC type facility and send everyone to train there for a few weeks at a time. The rest of the time they can train for what they actually do have to do – armed policing mainly.

This would be like combining the 101st AB and the 82nd AB. That is just appalling.

You wonder if the all these cuts are based on the fact that the present government somehow believes (or hopes) there won't be a need for as many troops in future, at least, not regular ones. Time will tell and, as usual, if it all goes goes pear-shaped, it won't be their fault!

Yeah Sikh representatives have lobbied for one twice I think. Including once directly to Prince Charles who backed the idea.

I think the stumbling block would be against anti discrimination legislation.

Maybe a Sikh regt would open the door to other minority regiments?

A West Indian regt, a Gay regt, a transvestite regt (gotta see Eddie Izzard's point about surprise on that one).

Probably a step backwards in integration and would lead to the difficulty of deploying certain units in certain situations thereby complicating matters.

It would be nice if it could be managed but it seems unlikely for many reasons.

Prince Charles' backing is usually a death knell too.

The British army and the US army are so different there is almost no parallels for this issue, and the scale of the British army is already so small that many viewing it from the US POV cannot believe how weak and underequipped it actually is – leading to it being ask to take on tasks it is not manned or equipped at a level to manage, yet making a good go of them due to training and tradition.

To my mind – too much is made of the famous 'posh' regiments and too little of the workhorse units. The Royal Tank Regiment suffered many cuts when the old Cavalry names were less impacted. Ought probably have been he other way around. The Guards infantry are said to be no better than average yet keep their favoured status for some reason.

Hello Yorkie, good points you raised, but bear in mind that reducing numbers by 'natural wastage, people getting out, or finishing their careers and leaving etc' means that they'll be less recruitment of young squaddies (and matelots & flyboys) and that by 2020 the ratio of old sweats to the youthful will be changed. There won't be the promotion prospects and the old sweats will be doing the jobs traditionally done by the larger number of newer recruits. If there's the same amount of duties/tours/etc but fewer boots on the ground, those duties will come round even quicker. I left the army in 1990, just before it was cut from about 150,000. We thought we were busy then……..
All the best and stag on. Keep yer head down and NEVER volunteer

Pray for peace, prepare for war.

The problem with benevolent dictatorships is that the term is an oxymoron.

As to the cuts, if they help us to realise that we are a second rate power with no real influence in global affairs any more, that may be a good thing. We gave up our first rate status due to the sacrifices that we made in WW2. As long as we have enough resources to maintain the integrity of our territory (including the more distant bits) and contribute to policing and peace keeping operations, that should be adequate for our needs. Of course, this does raise a question about aircraft carriers and the aircraft to go on them when considering more remote bits of territory.

Looking at our nuclear weapons, I would like to see us not replace the existing systems; however, I do think worry that to be without a deliverable nuclear weapon system would leave us potentially vulnerable in an unstable world where quite a few see us as the enemy because of our imperial history and our more recent involvement with US adventures.

I came into the US Army in the early 80's so it isnt quite the same, but I sure have an idea about not enough gear, plenty of vehicles, but no parts to keep them running. requirements to qualify with your rifle, but no ammo to atuqly practice with it. Field problems that consisted of rolling out of the motor pool to a fireing point, where you fire one round from each gun once a day. But no playing of cards or reading or anythining but "training". been there, done that and am still more than a little bitter about it.

As far as less work, I will take a guess. Again this is US, but I was in Germany for seven years and worked with a few UK units, and they seem to have a lot in common with day to day operations.

In a full up US artillery battery there where around 120 soldiers, if you could ever get them all together in one place. In practice you might have 90-100 assigned, with 70-80 available to do something. You have to keep the vehicles and guns(howitzers to the uninitiated) ready to go. this takes time and people. but you also have to have somebpdy on orderly room duty (we called it chage of quraters, no idea what is to called now) which draws off two guys for 24 hour duty. Then you have an area you have to go pick up trash in, we called it police call. Maybe a dozen guys or so. And there are alwyas a half dozen other stupi little things that some up.

But the thing is it is all based on you haveing that 120 guys. And it does not matter at all if you really have 90, or 60. CQ is genreraly hated, have to stay awake for 24 hours doing nothing. Boring and you can get in a lot of trouble for sleeeping, even though you can do little to stay occupied. If you have 120 guys it only comes around sometimes. but if you have 50, it coems around twice as fast. And it includes weekends as well. Saturday is particularly hated, because after you get off sunday mornig, you get to sleep fpor the rest of your weekend. loads of fun. Friday is almost as bad.

And all those vehicles? Still ahve to be maintained. To bad if instead ofg 10 guys to do it you have three, still has to be done. Have to work late to get it all done? well just suck it up. No overtime pay in the army! And it is every day like that.

I have served in and with several US named units. As a history nut, it was cool. As a soldier trying to get a job done and have some off time so I could play with my toy soldiers, I would much rather be in some unknown unit with a mostly full roster. we used to joke that the rock of the Marne was located in the Commanding Generals skull, and the Sgt Majors Butt. And ths froma slodier who reallywas interested in unit historys and such. most of them would not give a small cup of warm spit about it.

So yes, when two units combine, many of those assinine little jobs so beloved by a certain element in all Armys go away. Sure you still ahve to do them, but there are more guys to share the load.

Also, when Politicians talk about sending troops, three battalions does not sound nearly as good as six battalions, yt if it is the same number of troops the three may well be more effective. So with fewer units maybe they will be less likely to play silly games with them and only deploy them overseas for actual needful reasons, rather than because it sounds good.

So, as a retired soldier that doesnt have to deal with it, I hate to see the old famous names go away. But thinking as an NCO who had to deal with being undermaned and over worked, if it makes life better for the troops, then what the hell we can still read about them.

So hang in there Yorkie, and yes by all means keep your head down, and let the maniacs do the volunteering.

Owen

collinJallin, How many nukes do you have? The net being what it is and tone not coming through well, that is meant as a straight up question, I really dont know. But I be t we have more. In fact it would not surprise me if we had more than everybody else combined. And yes it eats up a huge chunk of our budget. So do stupid big airplanes.

Among the crap we had to read before Desert Storm was a few really worthwhile things. Most of the NCOs realized they could not read ahlf of it, so just chucked it all, but I waded rthrough and found some interestig things. Like the US spends 95 percent of its military tranport budget on Aircraft, that provide five percent of the lift capacity. in other words the meer five percdnt we "waste" on ships, actualy provides most of the tomage capacity to move troops and tanks. But old slow frieghters are not glmourous and aperently dont have good lobbiests. So we continue to pour billions into systems that simply are not the best for overall effectiveness, but look better on TV.

Sad coment on our society. US I mean. So this doesnt really help you, but I hope it does show that the stupidity of politicians does not respect international boundrys, but rather spreads where ever they go.

Owen

I would not mind moving back into a 1970 – -1980 posture in the US. We used to have so many bases, it made the public feel a lot better!

Many units in the US Army have been deactivated too … and their colors, artifacts, etc. stored somewhere, I'd imagine … (maybe the same place where the Arc of the Covenant is !? )

Still,……. just as long as the future of the new Trident is assured, eh?

I just love paying for stuff that we will never use……