Dismiss Notice
'Users of this forum are reminded they should not discuss performance of individual attendees at PRMC or in Recruit Training for PERsonal SECurity and in observance of Diversity & Inclusion legislation'.

Royal Marines cuts U-turn: 1,500 troops and assault vessels SAVED

Discussion in 'RM Operational News' started by Rover, Apr 8, 2018.

  1. GreyWing

    GreyWing Nobody

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2007
    Posts:
    4,910
    Of course anyone that now gets promoted out of merit, may carry the stigmar of being the best social worker on camp.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  2. Ninja_Stoker

    Ninja_Stoker Admin

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2007
    Posts:
    33,283
    I do find myself baffled by the need to be inclusive when selection, by its very nature is entirely exclusive.

    Must confess I missed this earlier but saw a related thread on ARRSE regarding Officer's OJAR (reporting) which discussed the compulsory objectives that must include the individual's support for Diversity and Inclusion. I suspect the new CDS is very much the main driver.

    An interesting comment raised the question whether a Muslim would be expected to support homosexuals, despite it possibly contradicting their religious views.

    I guess my complete indifference could be viewed by some as passive aggressive resistance or negativity but my own views are simply that a person should be selected on their ability to do the job in the manner required, nothing else.

    The Arrse thread, for reference, is here: https://www.arrse.co.uk/community/threads/compulsory-objectives-scheme.275815/
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Chelonian

    Chelonian Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Posts:
    6,295
    A Christian with a fundamental belief in the Book of Leviticus might also struggle to support homosexuals and women. It's an ecumenical matter. :)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Ninja_Stoker

    Ninja_Stoker Admin

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2007
    Posts:
    33,283
    It's certainly a paradox with regard the difference between actively supporting something and tolerating it, despite your fundamental beliefs.

    My beliefs are simply that equality should mean equality. By that, I mean that we should not discriminate against people who choose to have facial tattoos, or people who prefer to have long hair, or coloured hair or "cult haircuts", irrespective of gender.

    Likewise people with piercings such as earrings should not be discriminated against by gender. If you permit someone to wear a turban because of their religion, you should allow anyone to wear a turban regardless of faith, likewise a skullcap or indeed a mitre.

    The rules and regulations should apply and be applied equally. Trouble is, they aren't and it makes a farce out of equality and diversity and inclusion.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Old Man

    Old Man Ex-Matelot

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2008
    Posts:
    2,079
    Ooh, I like that.
     
  6. ozzy4399

    ozzy4399 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2017
    Posts:
    10
    App Stage:
    Not Applied Yet
    As a member of the LGBT community, one thing that motivates me to join the armed forces is the emphasis on meritocracy found therein. Schemes like this will only put off those LGBT persons who, like myself, already see the consequences of this at University (and I'm sure other institutions too).

    When I apply to the RM at the end of my degree, I want to pass POC/AIB and make the batch based only on merit and the fact that I have worked my *text deleted* off in order to achieve the required standard. If I do not meet this standard, or there are other stronger applicants, I would not want to be offered an undeserved place on the batch thanks to some quota or directive; it would be unfair to those who have put the hard work in and are more suitable, and insulting to those whose worth and value extends only as far as their sexuality.

    Similarly, these kinds of schemes would undermine the genuine achievements of those 'minority' persons who do in fact make the cut, or achieve promotion, based on merit, for 'non-minority' persons may (understandably) be inclined to attribute such achievements to quotas and 'inclusivity'.

    Had I not had Navy parents and been brought up in the forces community, would I not know that this PC culture is not representative of your average, accepting, meritocratic forces personnel.
     
    • Like Like x 8
    • Nailed It Nailed It x 3
  7. ThreadpigeonsAlpha

    ThreadpigeonsAlpha Royal Marines Commando

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2015
    Posts:
    4,019
    App Stage:
    Not Applied Yet
    You mean “politically justified”.
     
  8. ThreadpigeonsAlpha

    ThreadpigeonsAlpha Royal Marines Commando

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2015
    Posts:
    4,019
    App Stage:
    Not Applied Yet
    Bang on the money.

    The only thing I would say, and I would welcome your opinion is why do you say you are part of the LGBT community? Surely you are part of the same community, you are just of LGBT persuasion?

    I don’t understand this big divide, it seems like an Us v Them sort of deal?
     
    • Like Like x 3
    • Gen Dit Gen Dit x 1
  9. its_meg

    its_meg Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2017
    Posts:
    219
    App Stage:
    Passed Medical
    I have the same view, I have no issue whatever people want to say, do, believe or anything else (it is none of my business), I just don't understand why people (and I am generalising here) appear to make a point of creating that divide.

    From what I have been told, the whole point of the 'community' is to make people feel included and so they have a place where they can be themselves but the vast majority of people don't care and wouldn't say anything. No more than 6ft guys get ripped into or me for being that person who asked for extra work in class (things changed in Sixth Form ;)). By creating that community it almost has an opposite reaction to the desired effect as far as I can see.

    As I said before I have no issues with it all, I am just confused behind the 'Us vs them' as mentioned by TPA.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Chelonian

    Chelonian Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Posts:
    6,295
    When I die will I join the community of the dead? :confused:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. ozzy4399

    ozzy4399 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2017
    Posts:
    10
    App Stage:
    Not Applied Yet
    I see where you're coming from, and I do agree. I only use that language to the emphasise the point that I do not share the attitudes and outlooks typically found in these identity groups despite 'qualifying' to be a member of one

    The biggest issue I find with these 'communities' is that they tend to become political echo chambers dominated by the loudest voices, which in my experience is often always the millennial PC ones. Common sense then quickly goes out the window, and all sorts of regressive policies and ideas come to fruition which aim to address divide and perceived discrimination that does not exist.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  12. Chelonian

    Chelonian Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Posts:
    6,295
    I suspect that many associate with a social 'community' for the same reason others might join an angling or cycling club. It's a shared, common interest. It makes people feel better about themselves; it gives people a sense of purpose, particularly if they self-identify as being an 'activist' for their chosen cause or hobby.

    One problem with social 'communities' of any flavour is that those who become 'community leaders' are often self-elected and purport to represent the 'community' but don't have a mandate to do so from anyone.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. R

    R Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2008
    Posts:
    1,653
    Interesting how a cut of 450 has been given a positive spin, especially without addressing the deeper retention problem. With all that is going on now i just cant help but wonder what actual deployable force and capacities we really have. Not what we have on paper as capacities... -banghead-
     
    • Nailed It Nailed It x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  14. Caversham

    Caversham Former RM Commando, Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2009
    Posts:
    3,750
    Spin is easy on that one. Announce that you are going to cut a couple of thousand and everyone is, quite rightly, up in arms.

    A few weeks later, reverse that statement and announce a much smaller reduction and everyone feels that they've won the lottery!

    Politicians, senior officers and Civil Servants? Utter dross, the lot of them.:mad:

    Alan
     
    • Like Like x 6
  15. R

    R Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2008
    Posts:
    1,653
    So glad we have an aircraft carrier with no airframes, and whats the range without a diesel refuel? So glad we have the support vessels. But if you think retention is an issue now just wait till an RM company or two are press ganged into manning it. :D
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. Old Man

    Old Man Ex-Matelot

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2008
    Posts:
    2,079
    I don't , you know. Objectively justified is the counter to political interference. The counter to drops in standards.
     
  17. Ninja_Stoker

    Ninja_Stoker Admin

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2007
    Posts:
    33,283
    My understanding is there are about 20 F35s in UK, so far, and the carrier about to start deck landing trials this year. Most RN ships use about 50% of their fuel capacity for stability and the fast fleet tankers (RFA) usually refuel warships underway (aviation fuel as well as diesel fuel) about once or twice a week, depending on the strike range capability required. The previous carriers, under full power would burn 24 tons of fuel an hour (226 gallons to the ton) and had about 700 tons of fuel, half of which was ballast. Some bright spark worked out they do 18" to the gallon - I suspect the new ones are far more efficient as they don't run on Rolls Royce Olympus gas turbines, (the ones they used for Vulcans and Concorde).

    Not heard the one about Royal serving in the role of seamen but most Royal Marines drafted to ships undertake whole ship duties unless they are an embarked amphibious force being taken from A to B. There are currently detachments of Royal Marines serving on the QE as part of the Fleet Protection force, seconded from units besides 43 Cdo but when the ship does its first global deployment, I doubt we'll find many Bootnecks dripping whilst enjoying a world tour :D
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. R

    R Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2008
    Posts:
    1,653
    The UK has not taken delivery of any F35s yet. But yes the US have some in country.

    Ref the QE range not sure its in the public domain but it isnt great. Sure you are right ref ranks morale as lads never comment on whats coming up to me or their motivations for txing early. :D
     
  19. GreyWing

    GreyWing Nobody

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2007
    Posts:
    4,910
    Are they operational? My understanding was that F35's weren't ready for combat until they had ironed out the kinks. That's in the US and here. I genuinely thought they were years away from going live.

    Some were even talking about scrapping the project altogether as the problems are so vast.
     
  20. Ninja_Stoker

    Ninja_Stoker Admin

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2007
    Posts:
    33,283
    The RAF/RN took delivery (in the USA) of the 14th F35 last December.

    Opponents of the aircraft carrier project forget the first Harrier flew in 1966, the Invincible was launched in 1977, the first Sea Harrier squadron joined four years later(1981), just a year before the Falklands conflict. It had no radar system fitted until the latter half of 1981 & the first weapons system (Sidewinder II) was not even tested or accepted before it was used in anger.

    With regards people leaving the Corps and their reasons, they are varied. Many claim "things have changed". Truth is, the job often hasn't but the individual's aims and aspirations often have, particularly if they join young, carefree and single and their personal circumstances evolve.

    My understanding is many leave because they joined-up expecting to fight and for want of a war, leave unfulfilled.

    I've yet to hear anyone leave reluctantly, they usually find something negative on which to pin their reason for leaving. Seldom will their claim their priorities have changed, usually it's the Corps that's changed.

    Equally, ask those who left if they regret it and many will say they wished they had never left - especially if things go pear-shaped outside. The RMA is toppers with people who hated it at the point of departure (to justify their leaving) but pine for it after they leave.

    Not making light of it, but the Harrier, Tornado & Typhoon were no different, nor the Fleet Air Arm fixed wing fast jets from inception onwards.

    The Sea Vixen was probably the most unsuccessful aircraft ever flown by the RN - 51 non-combatant fatalities. Madness.
     
    • Hoofin Hoofin x 2