I would like to salute you but as a civilian I haven't earned the right.
Instead I will be going to a local event tomorrow.
This generation is to soft by and by for conscription IMO, most have never felt hardship.
Actually 6 months and that is a very long time on the battlefield, we could be in no position to counter anything by then.
This makes no sense as a carrier has to have escort ships, ASW, AAW, RFA's etc, or they are toast in the first engagement. I understand if they meant cutting some fat from the FP/coastal fleet but that saving is negligent.
Would be interesting where you got that info from as ex Senior Service and still have a keen interest in reading about the fleet, I have never seen anyone of influence with that quote.
The problem with the Forces is wasteful spending (normally with contracts that give the contractor loads of outs etc) and inherent bad decisions (Harrier, HMS Ocean to a certain extent to name 2), just look at when we sold all our Harriers, the US Marines snapped our hands off for them.
Well we wouldn't act unilaterally. You'd hope they will always be part of a coalition of Nato ships.
First look at the low manning levels in the Navy now.
I doubt you will find anyone in the Navy saying anything. They want their pensions.
Lack of ships and manpower:
Why the Royal Navy has just been cut by another 2 ships
Further cuts to the fleet in “the year of the Royal Navy” ?
The Decline of the Royal Navy
Navy to reduce to smallest size ever to save carriers
For instance, will there be a replacement for HMS Ocean? Can't see it. Something like Ocean would have been good to get in close and send in helicopters. You can put helicopters on the QE class and send them in from that, but you either keep it out of reach as it's precious but the range over the country will be short, or move it closer and risk it.
The QE class seems to be designed to carry out some functions of the HMS Ocean as well.
I hope other functions haven't been compromised too much.
I've read many books about WWII and most of them mention the lads crying themselves to sleep for the first few night in barracks due to homesickness. Spike Milligan (army) and Jack Currie (RAF) are two authors who spring to mind.
If anything, today's young generation are mentally tougher than those in the 1940s and 50s; but physically tougher? I think not. Too much easy food, easy lifestyle and not enough exercise is taking it's toll with today's young generation.
Most of the conscripted allied soldiers were soft. It's generally a good quality to have.
The Japanese / Germans were mostly hard as nails. Didn't turn out too well for them.
Just on that, in the far east it was conscripted soldiers. Nowadays jungle survival/fighting is considered a step up.
Now it's still quite a forgotten campaign compared to Europe but have a read.
Burma Campaign - Wikipedia
It was Mountbatten who gave a speech to soldiers who were thinking they had been forgotten about and Mountbatten said (approximately) "You call yourselves the forgotten army. I've got new for you - no one has heard of you!". Being squaddies it suited their sense of humour.
Mentally tougher? Not sure I’d completely agree there.
Physically definitely not. Kids of the 40s and 50s didn’t spend all day inside on consoles.
Spot on. Different times. Today’s generation would never cope.
They did smoke a pack a day though.