"Military Equipment Ban at Armed Forces Day York" Topic

A decision by York's Labour-led city council to exclude military equipment from its Armed Forces Day event has triggered a wave of political backlash, with Conservative councillors condemning the move as disrespectful to the nation's armed services. The council has cited "residents' concerns" as the reason for removing displays of military kit—ranging from weapons to vehicles—from Saturday's celebration, an event traditionally used to honour both past and present service members…

ASEAN Now: link

Piss poor woke nonsense.

Yes from Conservatives who jump at anything to twist to their advantage. No big deal, not a protest, no less of a celebration. IMO.

Can't have military equipment at an "Armed Forces Day"! Just won't do old boy! Just not cricket.

"Now boys, on to banning crows at the Tower and Horses for the Household cavalry"

🤣

If people care about this then they will elect a Tory council.

I won't hold my breath – it's been labour or liberal for the last 30 years at least, there are only 3 Tories out of 47 councillors, and that's quite a good showing for them.

Democracy says the locals like their local government as it is.

Storm in a teacup generated by those who have no influence at all.

A city that still has medieval walls and a castle wants to
de-militarize their Armed Forces day? Is there no end to non upper class twitism?

A few particulars:

It is very rare to see any military presence in the UK – unless near to a barracks or training area (*).

British politicians have a particular aversion to deploying tracked vehicles in public places (hence wheeled armoured vehicles in Northern Ireland)

Military parades do not use vehicles – unlike PRC, Russian Federation, USA.

Military vehicles when seen are usually only static displays.

---

York is an university city with a large academic population.

There is a lot of angry feeling about the plight of Gazans and West Bankans.

Some parents are very serious about their children not playing with toy guns.

Etc, etc.

---

(*) not counting ceremonial stuff – changing of the guard in london, edinburgh gun salute. NB they are in anachronistic costumes/No2 Dress not combat uniforms

"Blessed are the meek, for we shall slaughter them".

Extra points for knowing the origin of the quote.

The day is about the troops, not the toys, from what a couple of Pommy mates told me. It's just another "OH! The HORROR!" story by gossip-mongers trying to create drama and outrage, so they can sell more papers/airtime/clicks and thereby attract more advertising revenue.

That's true as well -the local armed forces day event for me was mostly for air cadets and the like, with a few entertainments and some food stalls.

That's just the way we do it.

Shouldn't they rename it "Disarmed Forces Day"…? ;-)

Will they have a fireworks show at night, or is it too similar to an artillery barrage…? ;-)

Doubt if they'd have the money to run to a fireworks display…

Does the ban on military equipment apply to re-enactment societies ? Roman soldiers without pila, shields, armour, or helmets ? Medieval knights ditto ?

Hopefully the up-and-coming Ipswich event will not be similarly handicapped.

Dagwood probably not the ones you mentioned, but no Onagers, Scorpios or siege towers. 😉

Well, they could always work up some cardboard missiles to run through town. Everybody could joyously salute the weapons the way they do in …..those places with tough guy leaders.

Try as I might, I cannot connect re-enactors, who also honor the people who served, with real time Mutually Assured Destruction.

They could "Holy Grail" Armed Forces Day. Paint 1 dimensional cardboard cut outs of tanks and walk them down the street. Or have the crews act like they're in tanks and make engine noises. Possibly use coconuts for engine knocks. 😉

Possibly a flyover of "unladen swallows"? 🤔

@dagwood

The military kit was meant to be displayed outside the Town Hall (where the council meets). Councillors dropped mud when they realised that the gun-haters might show up en masse – possibly with water-pistols.

This has nothing to do with any other military display/parade or whatever. Whether they have the power to disarm re-enactors – anyones guess.

@tortorella and @35th

Are you taking-the-michael out of your staunchest ally's war-toys?

Following on from my post about no tanks – here is an article which shows: a.) recce tanks, b.) soldiers with helmets, and c.) a soldier with a light-machine-gun patrolling with armed police. These three things are usually verboten on UK soil.

Daily Fail Dec 2024 – Deployed Military Toys at London Heathrow Airport Feb 2003

It should be noted that the Scimitar recce tank can do about 50 miles-per-hour – useful for responding to possible terrorists with anti-aircraft missiles.

We… "taking the michael?"… 😇

But the " flyover of unladen swallows" 🤔. Just don't look up. 😉

There are no bounds to the left's, etc. quirks, predilections, etc. However, just so the Troops, get their due. But somehow by some trying to make Armed Forces not look too lethal misses the point, IMO …

War exists … weapons fight wars … By some way trying to ignore or deny the reality, seems a little silly ?

story by gossip-mongers trying to create drama and outrage, so they can sell more papers/airtime/clicks and thereby attract more advertising revenue.

However there may be some truth to this.

But somehow by some trying to make Armed Forces not look too lethal misses the point,

I disagree. The Americans, and a Briton or two, are missing the point, probably because of cultural differences. From what Mark told me the British Armed Forces Day is designed to highlight the service and sacrifices of those who have served, and the emphasis is placed on them, not the weaponry/vehicles/ships/planes. In the US, China and Russia, massed vehicles, missile launchers and other weaponry seems to be the reason for the parade. The emphasis is on the gear, not the troops who use it.

If people want to drool over weaponry and equipment- AFV, missiles, bombers or whatever- then they can easily get their jollies at Hendon, Duxford, Cosford, Portsmouth, Leeds, etc, or any of the excellent regimental museums that exist in most of the cities.

Most respondents to this thread seem to have missed a major point, too. This was one city- York- not the entire UK. How would you like it if ignorant foreigners criticised the whole US because of decisions made in San Francisco or Seattle? (On this board it usually erupts into a flame war.) Or are you using York's decision to have a go at the Poms?

I think the criticism has nothing to do with cultural differences: the article is quite plain in the reasoning for the removal of the equipment: they mention the "diverse" city, refugees, and those scarred by war (particularly noting those who might be from Ukraine).

In other words: they don't want to offend some minority in that community. They state it plain as the sky is blue. This actually reinforces the criticism levied: the traditional martial culture of Britain is being put aside for fear of offending those who, both by choice and recent arrival- are not British.

It happens in many major US cities, and is increasingly prevalent in British and French cities: the fear of "offending" recent arrivals or culturally "diverse" groups trumps common sense, and denigrates the traditional culture of the UK.

There's a lot of what you say in the decision, Maggot, but the fact remains that there weren't going to be many, if any, vehicles or artillery with the march. They were going to be displayed at the town hall. So no parade of massed vehicles, missiles and other paraphernalia, which seems to be popular in some countries, and which some posts above indicate are expected in the US.

Compared to the "fun" we used to have with protestors during ANZAC Day marches in the '70s and early '80s (no immigrants then, mainly idiot uni students and their prof's), banning some kit from being displayed in front of the town hall really is a storm in a thimble.

IMO It's about the people who served and have served. It is an event to honor them, not the tools of the trade, or an opportunity to thump your chest at the world using the latest goodies, like totalitarian rulers. Here there was planned a minimal display of weaponry. But you don't even need that. Just keep it about the people. We honor their character and courage, historical weapons sometimes, like the Spitfire, but not the latest hardware.

Maggot +1

This was the paragraph:

"Lord Mayor of York, Councillor Martin Rowley, a Conservative, acknowledged that hosting such events in a diverse, multi-cultural city required sensitivity. "We live in a very diverse city, a city of refuge, a city where we have Ukrainian families who have been deeply scarred by war," he said. "As a cosmopolitan city we have to be wary of everyone's views. They have to be considered decisions.""

Otherwise, I doubt anyone cares if military vehicles were there or not. We rarely have any in our parades. Everyone here would complain about tracked vehicles damaging the roads. But I do enjoy the Air Force flyovers. 🙂

And yes… having some fun with the "POMs" as you call them. 😉

But…. I am going to miss seeing the "flyover of unladen swallows" on TV. 😞

This whole thing is just a smokescreen. They planned to have the British tank there, but it's down for repairs.

I think the majority of responders are missing the point that this is manufactured angst for political purposes. We do things different in the UK compared to the usa, that doesn't mean there's no visibility for the military.

Here's a good example – last cinema visit there were 4 adverts before the film for different branches of the armed forces. The weekend before there had been an armed forces day – a bit like a village fete with uniforms.

People with an axe to grind against the UK who generate these misleading stories are more of an issue than the actual facts of the case.

And I know that those who want to believe the opposite have already dismissed this. So you don't need to tell me (but you probably will 🙄).

Again, no one really cares if military vehicles are there, or not. It was the reason the Lord Mayor gave, that we are "taking the michael?", as Stoppage says.

"The roads can't handle it"
"The expense was too high"
"The vehicles are under repair"
"We just want the soldiers and vets this year, no vehicles this time"

Any other excuse and no ribbing would have followed. But:

"… acknowledged that hosting such events in a diverse, multi-cultural city required sensitivity."

Would be like saying: "No Union Jacks on display, as the flag might assault the sensitivities of some". 😉 And the proper response to that should be: "You're bloody well in England!! Get the devil over it, or take the next ship home!"

Civilians being reminded of those who guard them when they sleep? All too familiar a tale…

I went into a public-'ouse to get a pint o' beer,
The publican 'e up an' sez, "We serve no red-coats here."
The girls be'ind the bar they laughed an' giggled fit to die,
I outs into the street again an' to myself sez I:

O it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, go away";
But it's "Thank you, Mister Atkins", when the band begins to play,
The band begins to play, my boys, the band begins to play,
O it's "Thank you, Mister Atkins", when the band begins to play.

I went into a theatre as sober as could be,
They gave a drunk civilian room, but 'adn't none for me;
They sent me to the gallery or round the music-'alls,
But when it comes to fightin', Lord! they'll shove me in the stalls!

For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, wait outside";
But it's "Special train for Atkins" when the trooper's on the tide,
The troopship's on the tide, my boys, the troopship's on the tide,
O it's "Special train for Atkins" when the trooper's on the tide.

Yes, makin' mock o' uniforms that guard you while you sleep
Is cheaper than them uniforms, an' they're starvation cheap;
An' hustlin' drunken soldiers when they're goin' large a bit
Is five times better business than paradin' in full kit.

Then it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, 'ow's yer soul?"
But it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll,
The drums begin to roll, my boys, the drums begin to roll,
O it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll.

We aren't no thin red 'eroes, nor we aren't no blackguards too,
But single men in barricks, most remarkable like you;
An' if sometimes our conduck isn't all your fancy paints,
Why, single men in barricks don't grow into plaster saints;

While it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, fall be'ind",
But it's "Please to walk in front, sir", when there's trouble in the wind,
There's trouble in the wind, my boys, there's trouble in the wind,
O it's "Please to walk in front, sir", when there's trouble in the wind.

You talk o' better food for us, an' schools, an' fires, an' all:
We'll wait for extry rations if you treat us rational.
Don't mess about the cook-room slops, but prove it to our face
The Widow's Uniform is not the soldier-man's disgrace.

For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Chuck him out, the brute!"
But it's "Saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot;
An' it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' anything you please;
An' Tommy ain't a bloomin' fool -- you bet that Tommy sees!

Tort +1 (and thanks for being more eloquent than me.)

I think the majority of responders are missing the point that this is manufactured angst for political purposes.

Definitely. And selling advertising space, no doubt.

<q?And yes… having some fun with the "POMs" as you call them.

Stop being honest, 35th, you'll diminish your reputation.

SBm, that's Mr Kipling's most insightful poem and applies to soldiers everywhere, not just Tommy. Thanks.

Maggot +1

SBm +1 Kipling knew what the deal was … seems too many in the West have forgotten.

OVI +1

Dal +1

Mr Kipling's most insightful poem and applies to soldiers everywhere, not just Tommy. Thanks.