• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

British Military Current Events

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
187
Points
710
Unlike when he was Chief of the General Staff ;)

Here's one.

Why are Other Ranks being tried at all? Aren't they acting under the supervision and control of Her Majesty's Commissioned and Warranted Officers?

I thought the Her Majesty's commission required her officers to discipline the ORs within the Military Justice system. If Her officers have found no fault with the ORs surely it should be Her officers that are to be held to account. And if, after 50 years, the officers have not been held to account surely that responsibility passes to Her Majesty's Government?
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
1,617
Points
1,060
Here's one.

Why are Other Ranks being tried at all? Aren't they acting under the supervision and control of Her Majesty's Commissioned and Warranted Officers?

I thought the Her Majesty's commission required her officers to discipline the ORs within the Military Justice system. If Her officers have found no fault with the ORs surely it should be Her officers that are to be held to account. And if, after 50 years, the officers have not been held to account surely that responsibility passes to Her Majesty's Government?

In a civil war, the rules are somewhat different. Everyone knew that if they pulled the trigger, they'd have to be able to answer to a Judge if called upon to do so, and we had no problem with that.

The Yellow Card was studied, practised and reinforced again and again. It was amended from time to time, but the basics were always clear:

1620511279756.png
 

FJAG

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
642
Points
940
Here's one.

Why are Other Ranks being tried at all? Aren't they acting under the supervision and control of Her Majesty's Commissioned and Warranted Officers?

I thought the Her Majesty's commission required her officers to discipline the ORs within the Military Justice system. If Her officers have found no fault with the ORs surely it should be Her officers that are to be held to account. And if, after 50 years, the officers have not been held to account surely that responsibility passes to Her Majesty's Government?

I'm not quite sure of your direction here but let me simply say that Criminal Law 101 only holds the perpetrator to account. If there is a finding of "no fault" on the OR who allegedly did the act then that ends it. The CoC would only be liable for their own acts such as in R v Seward (Somalia affair) where Seward's instructions ultimately led to the abuse committed by the ORs.

Yes, the commission requires officers to keep their subordinates in "good order and discipline", however, why should officers (or the government) be held to account if there is "no fault" in the subordinate? You're implying they are covering something up.

Sometimes there simply isn't any fault. Just decades worth of axes to grind and political points to be scored.

🍻
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
187
Points
710
I'm not quite sure of your direction here but let me simply say that Criminal Law 101 only holds the perpetrator to account. If there is a finding of "no fault" on the OR who allegedly did the act then that ends it. The CoC would only be liable for their own acts such as in R v Seward (Somalia affair) where Seward's instructions ultimately led to the abuse committed by the ORs.

Yes, the commission requires officers to keep their subordinates in "good order and discipline", however, why should officers (or the government) be held to account if there is "no fault" in the subordinate? You're implying they are covering something up.

Sometimes there simply isn't any fault. Just decades worth of axes to grind and political points to be scored.

🍻
I may have led you to infer but I certainly didn't intend to imply fault. My own sense is that all this was over and done with long ago.
 

FJAG

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
642
Points
940
I may have led you to infer but I certainly didn't intend to imply fault. My own sense is that all this was over and done with long ago.
That's why I said "I wasn't sure". :giggle:

One would have thought that it was all over with, but the Brits seem to have a talent for masochism well beyond that of any other nation. (Who else would eat black pudding, jellied eels and spotted dick - go ahead. Google those. I dare you. - in fact look here)

🍻
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
1,617
Points
1,060
I'm not quite sure of your direction here but let me simply say that Criminal Law 101 only holds the perpetrator to account. If there is a finding of "no fault" on the OR who allegedly did the act then that ends it. The CoC would only be liable for their own acts such as in R v Seward (Somalia affair) where Seward's instructions ultimately led to the abuse committed by the ORs.

That's it in a nutshell.

And when you're an 18 year old private soldier getting bricked in the face by a howling mob that's getting closer and closer, and support doesn't seem like it's right around the corner, your fire discipline will be tested in a way that you will never have experienced in training.

Hence the Rules of Engagement.
 

RangerRay

Sr. Member
Reaction score
102
Points
480
If the "Free State's" Army Ranger Wing don't come for them first. On the other hand they may make for good recruits. Apparently they are perturbed with their MOD civil servants who don't seem to trust people in uniform.

This puts this movie in context:

 

medicineman

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
88
Points
530
This puts this movie in context:

Reading the books about the subject is even scarier - that company group were treated as pariahs for decades.
 

CBH99

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
301
Points
860
That's why I said "I wasn't sure". :giggle:

One would have thought that it was all over with, but the Brits seem to have a talent for masochism well beyond that of any other nation. (Who else would eat black pudding, jellied eels and spotted dick - go ahead. Google those. I dare you. - in fact look here)

🍻
Hey now, I like wine gums!

But besides those...mushy peas were the only thing that sounded remotely edible...


Spotted dick? Jellied eels? :sick:
 

RangerRay

Sr. Member
Reaction score
102
Points
480
Hey now, I like wine gums!

But besides those...mushy peas were the only thing that sounded remotely edible...


Spotted dick? Jellied eels? :sick:
But haggis with ‘beeps and ‘tatties is the food of the gods!

No mention of Christmas fruit cake. I thought that was Brit too?
 

dimsum

Army.ca Fixture
Mentor
Reaction score
548
Points
940
Hey now, I like wine gums!

But besides those...mushy peas were the only thing that sounded remotely edible...


Spotted dick? Jellied eels? :sick:
Black pudding and Spotted Dick are great. Spotted Dick is really just a steamed pudding.

Eels (jellied or not) are a little too fatty for my liking.
 

FJAG

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
642
Points
940
Black pudding and Spotted Dick are great. Spotted Dick is really just a steamed pudding.

Eels (jellied or not) are a little too fatty for my liking.
The only way I like eel is barbecued with sauce on sushi.

New article in Wavell Room. I've extracted a few snippets to point the way.

... This article argues that the current British military mind-set lacks sufficient imagination to fuse the ideas together into a coherent tactical plan. Commanders are increasingly unwilling to take risk with assertive ground manoeuvre, instead favouring an artillery duel and non-lethal effects in the deep. ...

...Modern military planning has become a balancing act between the ‘risk’ of close combat and the need to impose effects on an opponent. In this author’s view the balance is firmly weighted with joint fires over manoeuvre to achieve military effect. This means that ground attack options are routinely disregarded and considered to be too risky. ...

... Doctrinally, the role of a divisional headquarters is to fight the deep and resource the close. During one recent exercise, such was the focus on the fires battle that the staff predicted that the close battle would be ‘anti-climactic.’ In the event, it wasn’t, and the lack of resource for the close battle meant tactical defeat. The planning had placed too great an emphasis on fires and did not enable an aggressive close battle; instead it had restricted and constrained ground manoeuvre. ...

... The UK has one fighting division and it must be protected; if it is defeated we cannot re-cock and start again. Statistically, fires are also likely to have the greatest kinetic effect if the kill count is considered an important measure of success. Fires assets are increasingly seen as formations in their own right, reducing the need for manoeuvre forces to be committed to the close battle. ...

... When considering these themes together, it is clear that we need to find a better balance between fire and manoeuvre at divisional level. The British Army has become conceptually fixated with the deep battle at the expense of the close. ... Ground manoeuvre is the key element for developing our understanding of how to fight land warfare in the future.


So where does the Canadian Army stand on either the deep battle or the close these days?

🍻
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
1,617
Points
1,060
The only way I like eel is barbecued with sauce on sushi.

New article in Wavell Room. I've extracted a few snippets to point the way.





So where does the Canadian Army stand on either the deep battle or the close these days?

🍻

I'm not sure, but it seems that the UK is reverting to WW1 style tactics!
 

CBH99

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
301
Points
860
Black pudding and Spotted Dick are great. Spotted Dick is really just a steamed pudding.

Eels (jellied or not) are a little too fatty for my liking.
You would all fair far better than I, if we all end up on the same plane and crash somewhere remote. Heck, with the way things are going in my life, if one of us needs to die to feed the others - I volunteer.

I've tried black pudding before, wasn't really my thing. Albeit, if I had grown up with it, I may have enjoyed it more. It wasn't horrid, but it wasn't really my thing...

And spotted or not, my mouth has been dick free so far. Plan to keep it that way.
 

dimsum

Army.ca Fixture
Mentor
Reaction score
548
Points
940
Albeit, if I had grown up with it, I may have enjoyed it more
The first time I had it was in 2010 in Scotland, on the way back from a deployment. Same with haggis, which I also seem to like.
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
187
Points
710
The only way I like eel is barbecued with sauce on sushi.

New article in Wavell Room. I've extracted a few snippets to point the way.





So where does the Canadian Army stand on either the deep battle or the close these days?

🍻
No idea on the Canadians but I sense that there is an element missing in the Wavell appreciation. I don't get the sense that enough attention is being paid to the Time dimension.

I agree with the emphasis currently being on the artillery duel. My sense though is that the artillery duel (writ large and including air and space forces) is predicated on using the other guy's stocks of ammunition and reducing the number of launch systems. And that is expected to take a finite period of time.

If When that marvelous state of affairs is achieved then the well-husbanded last man with a pointy stick, possibly with the last tank in support, will be able to achieve General Foch's elan-filled walk-over.

Having said that, 40mm rifle launched air-burst projectiles are likely to make the lives of machine gunners a lot more difficult than they were in 1916. Not to mention man-portable drones and 84mm guided projectiles.

I think we are all developing a sense that things are changing but nobody has any solid idea of how. And that the experimentation is likely to be as bloody, chaotic and confusing as similar changes have been in the past. Doctrine develops once hypotheses have been tested. Right now, I believe, we have little more than hypotheses.
 

CBH99

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
301
Points
860
Well said.

We are entering a new era of warfare, absolutely. I believe that era has already started, and we have just been lucky enough to be observers thus far. That new era, from a weapons & munitions perspective, is going to complicate the battlespace and make it even more dangerous than it already was.

More types of munitions, being deployed by more varied systems, that can be employed right at the individual or section level. And, thus, will require an equal number of countermeasures.

One broad aspect is that it will give a smaller force a significantly more dangerous punch when operating against larger forces - or has the potential to, anyway. And vice versa, if the larger force is employing these new tools and concepts effectively, it will make the fight even more lopsided. (Let's use Ukraine as an example.)


An 84mm guided projectile with advanced warheads is a lot harder to see than a big TOW tripod. A small drone either thrown by hand or deployed by an M203 that can almost instantly locate enemy comms, or find the enemy using thermal/IR systems, and instantly relay the coordinates to a waiting artillery unit, etc - warfare is absolutely becoming more dangerous and more complicated from a weapons perspective.

The Brits seem to be leading the field quite well in adapting to & employing these same concepts, and seem to be well on their way to building a 21st century force that operates with these concepts in mind. I've found the recent transformation of the Royal Marines to be quite fascinating.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
1,617
Points
1,060
Well said.

We are entering a new era of warfare, absolutely. I believe that era has already started, and we have just been lucky enough to be observers thus far. That new era, from a weapons & munitions perspective, is going to complicate the battlespace and make it even more dangerous than it already was.

More types of munitions, being deployed by more varied systems, that can be employed right at the individual or section level. And, thus, will require an equal number of countermeasures.

One broad aspect is that it will give a smaller force a significantly more dangerous punch when operating against larger forces - or has the potential to, anyway. And vice versa, if the larger force is employing these new tools and concepts effectively, it will make the fight even more lopsided. (Let's use Ukraine as an example.)


An 84mm guided projectile with advanced warheads is a lot harder to see than a big TOW tripod. A small drone either thrown by hand or deployed by an M203 that can almost instantly locate enemy comms, or find the enemy using thermal/IR systems, and instantly relay the coordinates to a waiting artillery unit, etc - warfare is absolutely becoming more dangerous and more complicated from a weapons perspective.

The Brits seem to be leading the field quite well in adapting to & employing these same concepts, and seem to be well on their way to building a 21st century force that operates with these concepts in mind. I've found the recent transformation of the Royal Marines to be quite fascinating.

However, we depart from a solid focus on providing enough high quality, and well supported, indirect fire type tube/rocket artillery at our peril. It's expensive and complicated, of course, because it's important.

It would be much wiser to make sure we that have those basics in place first before we go 'innovating' our way into a position where a determined enemy can crush our Infantry and Armoured formations using the good old frontal assault.

For example, the Royal Marines aren't transforming much either, from what I can tell. They still have a regiment of (good old fashioned) artillery and a regiment of engineers under command, plus a long, solid and flexible Commando Logistics tail.

And the 'new' tasks they seem to be adopting have already been done by the Royal Marines. Commacio Group, for example, were 'semi-special' forces responsible for nuclear weapons/ Trident security at Faslane and elsewhere, for years.

Royal is just smart enough to re-organize, up-kit and rebrand to capture public (and MoD) imagination in a way that will ensure the continued survival of the Royal Marines, which has been their primary mission since well before I served with them. My guess is that the Army is copyig them with this new 'Ranger Regiment' thing, which is probably a role that could be done by any CAF OMLT type BGp, IMHO.

Royal Marines Inc. is full of big, tough guys with an inferiority complex to match!
 
Top