Looks Like The Army Is Knackered Too.

[bogbrush]

It seems that the Army is running short of people able to fight.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8453369.stm

With no money to recruit, servicemen will no doubt be recycled on duty ever faster, leading to a faster rate of injury and drop-out. I'm not sure that the Taleban will suffer from the same problem, so probably not too long now before Osama succeeds in his long-standing aim to bleed us into submission.

Actually, although I never condone killing people so don't want to give the impression I condone terrorism in any form, on a purely strategic basis does anyone else think that OBL may well be the smartest man active in World politics right now?

Edited January 12, 2010 by bogbrush

[aa3]

I used to debate online about the war on terror. Haven't followed it as closely for a few years.. but one thing I remember in my study of it was how little of the muslim world we occupied. Iraq has today 31 million people and Afghanistan 28 million people. So call it an even 60 million persons. Well the Islamic world is well over a billion people. So we are occupying 5% of their lands, and it is hurting us economically.

That was always the advantage radical muslims had, the sheer vastness of their lands and population.

If I was a radical islamic financier my next plan would be to drag the US and co into Yemen which has 23 million people. And in the long run, into the black hole known as Pakistan. Pakistan is a huge nation of 180 million.

To me our own greed is getting us. Our military leaders are overly eager to be dragged into any conflict so they can spend all that money.

[MrPin]

Sounds like the end of the Roman Empire!

[deflation]

The Tories really need to find some proper stuff to fling at the govt than this tosh.

A percentage of any organisation will always be unfit or ill. Look how many professional 'athletes' like footballers or runners are unfit to carry out their job, i.e. play or compete.

Those unfit to be at the front line are usually given other duties, whereas your average punter who is unft to do his job stays at home. He doesn't get moved to a desk job or telephone answering, etc.

Edit: Ironically, with the amount of losses, a spokesman on the radio said recruitment is running at capacity in the Army, for the first time in years. Unemployment and the image of a comic-book war I expect.

Our news channels should show more gore, like other European broadcasters where dismembered bodies and the true aftermath of bombs are shown at prime time on TV. Our 'recruits' dont' really know what they're getting into, some of them.

Edited January 12, 2010 by deflation

[ken_ichikawa]

It seems that the Army is running short of people able to fight.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8453369.stm

With no money to recruit, servicemen will no doubt be recycled on duty ever faster, leading to a faster rate of injury and drop-out. I'm not sure that the Taleban will suffer from the same problem, so probably not too long now before Osama succeeds

Afganistan has nothing to do with Osama, Osama won his war in 2004, if you look back on the internet there was an interview of him by CNN in the 1990s, his objective at the time was to have a large proportion of US troops leave Saudi, as they were propping up the house of Saud.

In 2004 Bush needed reinforcements in Iraq and had the majority leave Saudi to go to Iraq.

[bogbrush]

The Tories really need to find some proper stuff to fling at the govt than this tosh.

A percentage of any organisation will always be unfit or ill. Look how many professional 'athletes' like footballers or runners are unfit to carry out their job, i.e. play or compete.

Those unfit to be at the front line are usually given other duties, whereas your average punter who is unft to do his job stays at home. He doesn't get moved to a desk job or telephone answering, etc.

20%. Does the organisation you operate in run with 20% illness and absence?

And the stats are from the MoD.

The issue is that the armed forces are f*cked and are about to be impoverished further. Personally, thery have enough to carry out the dutues I'd give them (homeland defence) but NuLab wants to fight all over the World so it won't work. Like everything else.

[bogbrush]

Afganistan has nothing to do with Osama, Osama won his war in 2004, if you look back on the internet there was an interview of him by CNN in the 1990s, his objective at the time was to have a large proportion of US troops leave Saudi, as they were propping up the house of Saud.

In 2004 Bush needed reinforcements in Iraq and had the majority leave Saudi to go to Iraq.

I disagree it has nothing to do with him but i agree he's spectacularly winning. One of his Al Jazeera speeches talked of the aim to bleed the West of money and will.

The guy is a strategic genius; he has the US and UK dancing.

[ken_ichikawa]

I disagree it has nothing to do with him but i agree he's spectacularly winning. One of his Al Jazeera speeches talked of the aim to bleed the West of money and will.

The guy is a strategic genius; he has the US and UK dancing.

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=penny_drop

[bogbrush]

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=penny_drop

Can't open it. What's it say?

[ken_ichikawa]

I was wandering around aimlessly at work the other day when I saw a group of co-workers watching a video of some war footage in Afghanistan. It was a good opportunity to be unproductive, so naturally I stood there and watched. The video was in black and white, and was shot from the point of view of the gunship as it fired explosive rounds at people. There was a little cross hair on the screen, and you could hear chatter of the pilot as he dropped the bombs.

Every time the pilot clicked the trigger button, it resulted in an explosion a few seconds later. They were literally firing thousands of rounds per minute, easily using hundreds of thousands of dollars in ammunition on people; not tanks, not turrets, not even jeeps, but people. So this gave me an idea: rather than using $100,000 worth of ammo, why don't we take $100,000, convert it to pennies, then drop the pennies on people instead? You could get 10 million pennies for $100,000, which should be able to fill at least 40 bags full of pennies. Thus we could drop bags of pennies more frequently than bombs, which could mean big savings for our military. Hell, you don't even have to drop them in bags to kill people. You could tape the pennies together 10 at a time and drop them from a height of 5,000 feet and kill damn near everything on the ground (and in a war on terrorism™, this is exactly what you'd want to do).

I call it: operation penny-drop. It's the perfect way to win a war. Even the hippies won't be bitching because after the war is over and we've killed all the terrorists, the people who are still alive can rebuild their country by picking the pennies from the skulls of the dead people. Not only will we have won the war, but we don't even have to worry about paying war reparations. It's the perfect plan because everybody wins. We kill all the evil terrorists, and give them some of our own currency to rebuild their country with. Eventually when we open the first Starbucks in their country, we won't even have to worry about currency exchange because they can use the left-over money to buy beverages, and let's face it, who could resist an ice cold frappuccino after a long war?

The military probably won't consider this idea because it's too good. Realistically, the military will probably continue to drop traditional bombs. However, it's a well-known fact that a percentage of bombs we drop every year won't detonate. When we're talking about bombs that cost over $100,000, that could add up quickly, so what can we do in case the bombs don't go off? Simple: strap bombs to the back of german shepherds:

The idea is that if the bomb doesn't go off, and the german shepherd's back doesn't break, then the enemy would be in for a nasty surprise when they'd try to retrieve our weapons. Sure a few dogs would die as collateral damage, but it would totally be worth it to see the expression on the terrorist's face when they get attacked by our german shepherds. The CIA could capture this with spy satellites and put together a "Terrorist Bloopers" video, which could mean more money for our military. I can't believe nobody thought of this idea until now.

[SarahBell]

20%. Does the organisation you operate in run with 20% illness and absence?

That'll be the local council then?

[bogbrush]

Military genius stuff there, ken.

[Red Baron]

Dr. Peter Hammond has this to say about Islam.

Islam is not a religion, nor is it a cult. In its fullest form, it is a complete, total, 100% system of life. Islam has religious, legal, political, economic, social, and military components. The religious component is a beard for all of the other components. Islamisation begins when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to agitate for their religious privileges. When politically correct, tolerant, and culturally diverse societies agree to Muslim demands for their religious privileges, some of the other components tend to creep in as well.

Here's how it works:

As long as the Muslim population remains around or under 2% in any given country, they will be for the most part be regarded as a peace-loving minority, and not as a threat to other citizens. This is the case in:

United States -- Muslim 0.6% Australia -- Muslim 1.5% Canada -- Muslim 1.9% China -- Muslim 1.8%

Italy -- Muslim 1..5% Norway -- Muslim 1.8%

At 2% to 5%, they begin to proselytise from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups, often with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs. This is happening in:

Denmark -- Muslim 2% Germany -- Muslim 3.7% United Kingdom -- Muslim 2.7% Spain -- Muslim 4% Thailand -- Muslim 4.6%

From 5% on, they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population. For example, they will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature halal on their shelves -- along with threats for failure to comply. This is occurring in:

France -- Muslim 8% Philippines -- 5% Sweden -- Muslim 5% Switzerland -- Muslim 4.3%

The Netherlands -- Muslim 5.5% Trinidad & Tobago -- Muslim 5.8%

At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves (within their ghettos) under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islamists is to establish Sharia law over the entire world. When Muslims approach 10% of the population, they tend to increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions. In Paris , we are already seeing car-burnings. Any non-Muslim action offends Islam, and results in uprisings and threats, such as in Amsterdam, with opposition to Mohammed cartoons and films about Islam. Such tensions are seen daily, particularly in Muslim sections, in: Guyana -- Muslim 10% India -- Muslim 13.4% Israel -- Muslim 16% Kenya -- Muslim 10% Russia -- Muslim 15%

After reaching 20%, nations can expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings, and the burnings of Christian churches and Jewish synagogues, such as in:

Ethiopia -- Muslim 32.8%

At 40%, nations experience widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks, and ongoing militia warfare, such as in:

Bosnia -- Muslim 40% Chad -- Muslim 53.1% Lebanon -- Muslim 59.7%

From 60%, nations experience unfettered persecution of non-believers of all other religions (including non-conforming Muslims), sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon, and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels, such as in:

Albania -- Muslim 70% Malaysia -- Muslim 60.4% Qatar -- Muslim 77.5% Sudan -- Muslim 70%

After 80%, expect daily intimidation and violent jihad, some State-run ethnic cleansing, and even some genocide, as these nations drive out the infidels, and move toward 100% Muslim, such as has been experienced and in some ways is on-going in:

Bangladesh -- Muslim 83% Egypt -- Muslim 90% Gaza -- Muslim 98.7% Indonesia -- Muslim 86.1%

Iran -- Muslim 98% Iraq -- Muslim 97% Jordan -- Muslim 92% Morocco -- Muslim 98.7%

Pakistan -- Muslim 97% Palestine -- Muslim 99% Syria -- Muslim 90% Tajikistan -- Muslim 90%

Turkey -- Muslim 99.8% United Arab Emirates -- Muslim 96%

100% will usher in the peace of 'Dar-es-Salaam' -- the Islamic House of Peace. Here there's supposed to be peace, because everybody is a Muslim, the Madrasses are the only schools, and the Koran is the only word, such as in:

Afghanistan -- Muslim 100% Saudi Arabia -- Muslim 100% Somalia -- Muslim 100% Yemen -- Muslim 100%

Unfortunately, peace is never achieved, as in these 100% states the most radical Muslims intimidate and spew hatred, and satisfy their blood lust by killing less radical Muslims, for a variety of reasons.

'Before I was nine I had learned the basic canon of Arab life. It was me against my brother; me and my brother against our father; my family against my cousins and the clan; the clan against the tribe; the tribe

against the world, and all of us against the infidel. -- Leon Uris,

'Adapted from Dr. Peter Hammond's book: Slavery, Terrorism and Islam Haj'

It is important to understand that in some countries, with well under 100% Muslim populations, such as France, the minority Muslim populations live in ghettos, within which they are 100% Muslim, and within which they live by Sharia Law. The national police do not even enter these ghettos.

There are no national courts, nor schools, nor non-Muslim religious facilities. In such situations, Muslims do not integrate into the community at large. The children attend madrasses. They learn only the Koran.. To even associate with an infidel is a crime punishable with death. Therefore, in some areas of certain nations, Muslim Imams and extremists exercise more power than the national average would indicate.

Today's 1.5 billion Muslims make up 22% of the world's population. But their birth rates dwarf the birth rates of Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, and all other believers. Muslims will exceed 50% of the world's

population by the end of this century.

Adapted from Dr. Peter Hammond's book: Slavery, Terrorism and Islam:The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat

[RufflesTheGuineaPig]

Actually, although I never condone killing people so don't want to give the impression I condone terrorism in any form, on a purely strategic basis does anyone else think that OBL may well be the smartest man active in World politics right now?

The FBI have formally ruled out Osama Bin Laden as the mastermind for 9/11. They have formally stated that they have no evidence what-so-ever to link him to the 9/11 attacks.

In fact, the FBI has admitted that they aren't even sure that HE EVER EXISTED.

The only "credible" people they have been able to find who admit to having met him are senior members of the Bush administration. (Credible means people who haven't been paid or tortured into saying they've met him.)

Despite it being the 21st century and digital cameras and camcorders being cheap, reliable and available everywhere on earth, the only footage anyone has of him is grainy video tapes and crackly audio cassettes supposedly produced by him using analog equipment.

Edited January 12, 2010 by TaxAbuserOfTheWeek

[The Masked Tulip]

I disagree it has nothing to do with him but i agree he's spectacularly winning. One of his Al Jazeera speeches talked of the aim to bleed the West of money and will.

The guy is a strategic genius; he has the US and UK dancing.

Is he a genius or are our lot idiots?

[bogbrush]

Baron; I want to dismiss this as scaremongering but I must confess it worries me. Religion really is the biggest cloud hanging over the future of humans in my opinion. Always has been, probably always will be.

It seems that the last thing we should be doing with the expansionists is carrying out their work for them by attacking their countries.

[bogbrush]

Is he a genius or are our lot idiots?

These aren't mutually exclusive.

[sundance_kid]

It seems that the Army is running short of people able to fight.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8453369.stm

With no money to recruit, servicemen will no doubt be recycled on duty ever faster, leading to a faster rate of injury and drop-out. I'm not sure that the Taleban will suffer from the same problem, so probably not too long now before Osama succeeds in his long-standing aim to bleed us into submission.

Actually, although I never condone killing people so don't want to give the impression I condone terrorism in any form, on a purely strategic basis does anyone else think that OBL may well be the smartest man active in World politics right now?

I actually have an example of this. One family I know, both parents with a history of long service in the armed forces. They're two sons both went into the army, one left as he just couldn’t hack it. The other was supposed to be going out there shortly but has now picked up a convenient injury you might say to halt his redeployment. One friend of his who came back from his first tour of duty has vowed never to go back there again.

The reward for doing this job just isn't worth it. It's to the point that the salary is far too low for these lads. The army tries to counter this and bribe the lads by adding on various offers like free or cheap trips but it's not enough.

Some though are also reluctant to leave due to the state of the economy, although the lad who came back from is redeployment has stated he'd rather work in a supermarket.

The problem now is the British army is in a major war of attrition, something we haven’t been in for some time now and it's killing the army.

[deflation]

They get stacks more perks than in the past. Deployment cash awards, reduced income tax, free internet, mail and phone calls home, extra leave and no food and board charges abroad. 'm not saying they don't deserve it but they are NOT hard done by.

It's still a volunteer force and the forces abroad in the 80s and 90s would blink in surprise at what they get now. There's more to employment overall (salary if you like) that just wages.

Edited to add: It was 20% of the infantry were not fit for front line service, not unfit for any work at all. A person having had a minor injury such as a sprained ankle or fractured arm would be medically 'downgraded' for a while until fully fit again

Edited January 12, 2010 by deflation

[bomberbrown]

They get stacks more perks than in the past. Deployment cash awards, reduced income tax, free internet, mail and phone calls home, extra leave and no food and board charges abroad. 'm not saying they don't deserve it but they are NOT hard done by.

It's still a volunteer force and the forces abroad in the 80s and 90s would blink in surprise at what they get now. There's more to employment overall (salary if you like) that just wages.

Edited to add: It was 20% of the infantry were not fit for front line service, not unfit for any work at all. A person having had a minor injury such as a sprained ankle or fractured arm would be medically 'downgraded' for a while until fully fit again

I was one of those squaddies in the 80's & 90's.

If you failed to complete your BFT and CFT (Basic & Combat Fitnes test) in a reasonable time frame, you were out! Bye bye! If you were exceptional at something else or prepared to do menial work (stores etc) they would overlook it, but on the whole you would have been out of a job.

Has this all changed?

[enrieb]

Dr. Peter Hammond has this to say about Islam.

Yup the gun smuggling, paintball-welding satan-shooter says a lot of things.

Paintball spree was anti-occult, says pastor

December 01, 2005 Edition 1

Controversial Christian evangelist and pro-gun campaigner Peter Hammond confirmed he has been charged with assault after what he said was an anti-Hallowe'en spree with a paintball gun. Hammond, director of the Cape Town-based Frontline Fellowship, an organisation dedicated to "missionary outreach", said he would appear in the Goodwood Magistrate's Court on December 20.

He said last night that he had not touched the gun that day, and that it was accidentally discharged by his 10-year-old son. "It was not intentional and not malicious," said Hammond, who is a vociferous opponent of South Africa's gun control laws.

He said his family - a wife and four children - did not approve of Hallowe'en, which they saw as an "occult holiday celebrating human sacrifice, witches and goblins". His children had wanted to do a "counter Hallowe'en", and he had agreed to drive two of them around to "do paintballing" on trick or treating youngsters on October 31.

"It was meant to be a joke: nobody was meant to get hurt," he said.

"I laid down a few ground rules: we were just going for teenagers, no kids."

He said his 10-year-old son had initially paintballed youngsters who appeared to have just strewn rubbish across the road as a Halloween prank, shooting low and from a distance, and then called out to another child, asking whether he was a trick- or-treater. The boy came over to the car, saw the paintball gun, swore at Hammond's son and tried to pull it out of his hands. The gun went off, and Hammond drove away.

His 12-year-old daughter, in the rear of the car, looked back and saw that the boy was rubbing his jaw. "With hindsight it would have been better to go back, but he didn't look in great pain that I could see," Hammond said. He said that some days later he was "mortified" to learn from an article in a community newspaper that police were searching for the paintball shooter, and tried first to phone the parents of the boy shot on the jaw, then phoned the police investigating officer.

"Somehow or other this accident is being interpreted as a malicious adult going around shooting people.

"Categorically, I can say I never handled a paintball or shot anyone that night. It was a case of a small boy (his son) panicking. I take full responsibility for a bad judgment call. I've apologised to everyone I can. We want to meet the parents and apologise, but so far they've not been willing to meet with us. "We feel terrible that anyone got hurt, but it really was an accident." Many fundamentalist Christians believe Hallowe'en, with its pagan origins, is a celebration of the "powers of darkness".

Some describe it as "an evil day of Satan", and say participation sends a message to children that witchcraft, demonism, Satanism, and the occult are fun, entertaining and harmless.

They also believe even normally well-behaved children are driven by "unseen forces" to destructive behaviour and vandalism at Hallowe'en.

Hammond is described on the Fellowship website as a missionary who has pioneered evangelistic outreaches in war zones of Mozambique, Angola and Sudan.

He has also been accused of gun- running for rebels in Sudan, and of assisting the Renamo movement when it was fighting a South African-backed civil war against Mozambique's Frelimo government in the apartheid years.

Hammond is known for his opposition to homosexuality, pornography, communism, militant Islam, and to what he says is "humanism" in state schools.

I believe that the correct response when your 10 year old expresses a desire to shoot satan worshipers, is NO.

[Big Will]

They get stacks more perks than in the past. Deployment cash awards, reduced income tax, free internet, mail and phone calls home, extra leave and no food and board charges abroad. 'm not saying they don't deserve it but they are NOT hard done by.

It's still a volunteer force and the forces abroad in the 80s and 90s would blink in surprise at what they get now. There's more to employment overall (salary if you like) that just wages.

Edited to add: It was 20% of the infantry were not fit for front line service, not unfit for any work at all. A person having had a minor injury such as a sprained ankle or fractured arm would be medically 'downgraded' for a while until fully fit again

Just to set this straight:

Deployment cash awards: £12pd

Reduced income tax: No

Free internet: When deployed but painfully, painfully slow and only really good for email

Mail and phone calls home: 30 mins per week

Extra leave: Yep, but not sufficient to make up for the weekends lost when deployed

No food and board charges when abroad: Not when deployed, but have you seen the 'food' and 'board'?!

It's got better but still a long way from rosy!

Edited January 12, 2010 by Big Will

[deflation]

No food and board charges when abroad: Not when deployed, but have you seen the 'food' and 'board'?!

When a regiment's 'home' was abroad, i.e. Germany, Cyprus, whatever, food and board charges applied. Same goes for all UK bases of the Navy and RAF too.

There are many, many people would very much appreciate free food and board, wherever it was. Especially the locals in some of the countries British forces are deployed in.

As for expecting extra leave, on top of the 30 days a year, for having to work weekends, as well as the other types.....

http://www.army.mod.uk/join/terms/1104.aspx

[mightytharg]

The problem now is the British army is in a major war of attrition, something we haven’t been in for some time now and it's killing the army.

If they're whining about that than they didn't read the job description very carefully before they signed up...

[RufflesTheGuineaPig]

If they're whining about that than they didn't read the job description very carefully before they signed up...

We weren't in an unending war in a third world hell hole when they signed up.

They knew there was a risk - everyone remembered the Falklands - but the ridiculous situation we are in now in an unending unwinnable war... no-one would have believed it was even possible... no government could be THAT stupid? A life of 20 years in the army traveling the world, maybe helping as a peace keeper or in disaster zones is what they were told to expect.

I'm personally suprised that half the army hasn't deserted.

The only reason the army haven't overthrown the UK government is there aren't enough soldiers based in the UK to do it anymore... they are all deployed. We have more armed police based in the UK than soldiers now. Maybe that's by design, who knows.