MP fears 1,200 posts could be lost in North Yorkshire (From York Press)

Hugh Bayley MP fears 1,200 posts could be lost in North Yorkshire

Think of all those fences unable to hold themselves up...

Oh the hypocrisy....! This coming from a representative of the party who sent out soldiers ill equipped for the job or having to buy their own gear.
This let's create a headline and 'put out a press release that I am bothered' just will not wash. All he is doing is trying to frighten people with numbers plucked out of the air. Before the General Election Labour knew that they too would have to make tough cuts in all areas but with the luxury of opposition Mr Bayley is able to not face the reality of a situation his own party created. Even Jim Murphy, shadow defence minister, has said labour need to be realistic and avoid populist opposition to necessary austerity measures, thus maintaining credibility avoiding shallow populism. Did Mr Bayley not hear that advice or has he come out of his shell and become a Labour wet.

Now a comment to stir you all up -

"Imphal Barracks - would make a lovely new housing development ?? Luxury flats ??"

lol

I would rather my taxes were spent on extra NHS staff than soldiers fighting other peoples unwinnable wars in foreign climes.

Rode along Fulford Rd the other day. Banner said "We are recruiting."

The US believes that its days as the dominant super power are numbered and with other nations anxious to protect their sources of natural resources the UK may find itself too weak to avoid losing out when supplies are squeezed. The calm before the battle for resources has begun and Europe appears anxious to use the opportunity to axe defence while it can.

Pedro wrote:
Rode along Fulford Rd the other day. Banner said "We are recruiting."

That's for the Territorial Army. If you remember, government policy is to cut the number of full time, regular troops who are able to dedicate their entire working life to the demanding business of becoming, and remaining, proficient soldiers. Instead, the government intends to rely increasingly on reservists - who are part time, cheaper and are only able to keep their hand in when not otherwise occupied with their day job.

If Labour/New Labour hadn't committed the UK to seemingly neverending/pointles
s wars, then the armed forces would be in a much better state.

When we all leave Afghanistan in 2015 it will revert back to its Taliban ways in no time at all. I am confident about predicting this as I know the mean age of Afghani males is around 16 years, very young, gullible and wanting what the rest of us have.

Also, Labours PFI projects have led to massive massive waste, and the way they allowed themselves to be swindled by defence contractors is unbelievable.

Bayley's party is the cause of the MOD's woes; the coalition is left with a legacy of Blair's and Brown's mismanagement; hence the situation as it stands today.

If Labour/New Labour hadn't committed the UK to seemingly neverending/pointles
s wars, then the armed forces would be in a much better state.

When we all leave Afghanistan in 2015 it will revert back to its Taliban ways in no time at all. I am confident about predicting this as I know the mean age of Afghani males is around 16 years, very young, gullible and wanting what the rest of us have.

Also, Labours PFI projects have led to massive massive waste, and the way they allowed themselves to be swindled by defence contractors is unbelievable.

Bayley's party is the cause of the MOD's woes; the coalition is left with a legacy of Blair's and Brown's mismanagement; hence the situation as it stands today.

nearlyman wrote:
Oh the hypocrisy....! This coming from a representative of the party who sent out soldiers ill equipped for the job or having to buy their own gear.
This let's create a headline and 'put out a press release that I am bothered' just will not wash. All he is doing is trying to frighten people with numbers plucked out of the air. Before the General Election Labour knew that they too would have to make tough cuts in all areas but with the luxury of opposition Mr Bayley is able to not face the reality of a situation his own party created. Even Jim Murphy, shadow defence minister, has said labour need to be realistic and avoid populist opposition to necessary austerity measures, thus maintaining credibility avoiding shallow populism. Did Mr Bayley not hear that advice or has he come out of his shell and become a Labour wet.

The only reason they had to make cuts was because the capitalist bankers screwed up.

working class tory wrote:
If Labour/New Labour hadn't committed the UK to seemingly neverending/pointles

s wars, then the armed forces would be in a much better state.

When we all leave Afghanistan in 2015 it will revert back to its Taliban ways in no time at all. I am confident about predicting this as I know the mean age of Afghani males is around 16 years, very young, gullible and wanting what the rest of us have.

Also, Labours PFI projects have led to massive massive waste, and the way they allowed themselves to be swindled by defence contractors is unbelievable.

Bayley's party is the cause of the MOD's woes; the coalition is left with a legacy of Blair's and Brown's mismanagement; hence the situation as it stands today.

Working class Tory ? Victim of false consciousness. Turkey voting for Christmas.

@ bloodaxe

Left-of-centre posters on this site seem to be all rhetoric and no substance (as usual).

Please, can we have some reasoned argument and debate rather that petty banal posts.

About as good at arguing the point as Ed Miliband in PMQs.

Tories.... Labour... All the same..
91 options for change.. The forces were cut... The Tories...
98 another go..... This time labour... This was disguised as a restructure for the future..... 2 new aircraft carriers to be in service by 2010... Blah blah blah... These parties are all the same cut cut cut.. Eventually all you have left from cuts...... Bare Bones

ZuluCharlie wrote:
Tories.... Labour... All the same..
91 options for change.. The forces were cut... The Tories...
98 another go..... This time labour... This was disguised as a restructure for the future..... 2 new aircraft carriers to be in service by 2010... Blah blah blah... These parties are all the same cut cut cut.. Eventually all you have left from cuts...... Bare Bones

I thought I'd never see the day, someone coming on a public forum read by dozens and admitting they'd still vote Lib Dem. Personally I don't think we should have any defence cuts, we may well need that aircraft carrier we don't have soon and the troops we have abroad fighting Blair's wars should have only the best kit and support.

I find hard to stomach when the governments of the day declare war or send our armed forces to other countries and declare a victory after the event at the cost of our men and women who serve .Is it political point scoring, oil, territorial interest? The Falklands, Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan to name a few.
It could be a true assumption that if you join an armed service that you will be put in a position of danger, and the training etc should keep you alive , with the possibility of injury and lost limbs . We have all seen the images and interviews of our brave men and women that have suffered in combat. It must be rewarding for our service personnel currently serving to find out that on return to the Uk they have no job/career. Whilst in a theatre of war, you have inadequate kid of which you had been promised to fulfill your role and personal safety, but it never turned up.
My point is if you cannot afford a war/ conflict, don’t do it in the first place.
All the political parties are guilty, and our governments have stuffed our economy, past and present, which allowed banks to have a free for all, when they should have been tighter regulation.

Whilst in a theatre of war, you have inadequate kit

hi ho hi ho its off to Iran we go .....

working class tory wrote:
@ bloodaxe Left-of-centre posters on this site seem to be all rhetoric and no substance (as usual). Please, can we have some reasoned argument and debate rather that petty banal posts. About as good at arguing the point as Ed Miliband in PMQs.

Well I am not left-wing and ex-military but try this for substance:

the Tories under Thatcher and Major cut defence spending in real terms slightly more than the last Labour one did.

Brickie.... Lib dem... Who???
We don't need an aircraft carrier. We need aircraft carriers. But then we need planes and personel to put on them.
A good strong and cable military in these times seem to be a luxury we can't afford. But we should find the money. Next time you fill in your tax return mr Brickie.. Own up and admit all those items are for personal use instead of needed for work.. Pay a bit more tax!! Then you can have your carrier..

Omega Point wrote:

working class tory wrote:
@ bloodaxe Left-of-centre posters on this site seem to be all rhetoric and no substance (as usual). Please, can we have some reasoned argument and debate rather that petty banal posts. About as good at arguing the point as Ed Miliband in PMQs.

Well I am not left-wing and ex-military but try this for substance:

the Tories under Thatcher and Major cut defence spending in real terms slightly more than the last Labour one did.

@ Omega Point
They may have cut (again, when the country had to) but, Thatcher only sent troops to defend British territory and citizens with strategy, tactics, limited timescales and will to win. Blair - strategy, timescales, objectives, success???

I'll leave readers to decide.

Let's put mrs T back at the helm.. Even at her age shed do a better job than the current mob..

Or Pete the brickie for PM..
He seems to be suitably qualified... He always knows best...

working class tory wrote:

Omega Point wrote:

working class tory wrote: @ bloodaxe Left-of-centre posters on this site seem to be all rhetoric and no substance (as usual). Please, can we have some reasoned argument and debate rather that petty banal posts. About as good at arguing the point as Ed Miliband in PMQs.

Well I am not left-wing and ex-military but try this for substance: the Tories under Thatcher and Major cut defence spending in real terms slightly more than the last Labour one did.

@ Omega Point They may have cut (again, when the country had to) but, Thatcher only sent troops to defend British territory and citizens with strategy, tactics, limited timescales and will to win. Blair - strategy, timescales, objectives, success??? I'll leave readers to decide.

Accept your point here on wars but Tories still cut more in real terms.
To say "when they had to" does not alter that choice of priorities. They could have cut elswhere.
In the Forces nearly all voted Tory who mentioned their preference (usually because of pension issues).

Omega Point wrote:

working class tory wrote:

Omega Point wrote:

working class tory wrote: @ bloodaxe Left-of-centre posters on this site seem to be all rhetoric and no substance (as usual). Please, can we have some reasoned argument and debate rather that petty banal posts. About as good at arguing the point as Ed Miliband in PMQs.

Well I am not left-wing and ex-military but try this for substance: the Tories under Thatcher and Major cut defence spending in real terms slightly more than the last Labour one did.

@ Omega Point They may have cut (again, when the country had to) but, Thatcher only sent troops to defend British territory and citizens with strategy, tactics, limited timescales and will to win. Blair - strategy, timescales, objectives, success??? I'll leave readers to decide.

Accept your point here on wars but Tories still cut more in real terms.
To say "when they had to" does not alter that choice of priorities. They could have cut elswhere.
In the Forces nearly all voted Tory who mentioned their preference (usually because of pension issues).

Whilst dealing with the unions Thatcher had to keep the police sweet.

Another unfortunate effect is technology replacing men, didn't they once say that two men usung the Maxim was equivalent of 100 men with rifles; and much of 'proper' operations these days are 'special' with SAS, marines and para's, though I read now that the paras are in line for being cut as we have not sent the force to fight by parachute for a long time. Progress.