Thursday, 8 October 2009

The Political Classes Screwing The Military And Us

As a Libertarian the news that General Dannant is planning to join a future Tory Government as a GOAT or a junior minister fills me with trepidation.

General Dannatt has been the squaddies champion, and is a decent and honourable man concerned with the welfare of the men and women formerly under his command. This is a major mistake, if you excuse the pun. He is throwing in his lot with the vultures that are the political classes.He is being a gullible fool.

1. This is what happens when foreign adventures go horribly wrong, it always has repercussions at home.

The Libertarian view is that the only legitimate role of Government is DEFENCE
not aggression and occupation of other countries. Everytime you read a report on Afghanistan transpose the word France or Holland, then transpose French Resistance or Dutch Resistance for the word Taliban.

We are occupying a foreign country, occupiers never win ever, sooner or later we will lose and withdraw.

2. The Armed forces, should be given the absolute very best equipment,the best weaponary, the best accommodation, and realistic salaries. However they should be defending an Island bobbing about in the North Sea called the British Isles, not some flyblown desert in the middle east.

Switzerland and Sweden don't feel the need to do this world policeman lark on behalf of the US of A ?

3. The Labour Party in launching these foreign wars mostly on an illegal basis, has politicised the Armed Forces, they loathe Brown and his cabal of inept stooges and are now saying so out loud. This is far from good.As the Armed forces has the monopoly on violence in this country along with the Police. An Army that has a political ethos is a danger to its citizens. An army that is seen to be pro Tory, will not enjoy the support of 60% of the nation who are not card carrying Tories.

It does not take much of a leap of imagination to see troops on the streets of mainland Europe in support of the 'civil power'- at what stage does it become legitimate to force the Civil Power to put its soldiers back in their box.

The only way to deal with this, is a rapid Public Enquiry into Iraq and Afghanistan and impeach Blair not reward him with the Presidency of the EU. Open negotiations with the Taliban if we have not done so already, we will have to talk to them eventually and withdraw. Propping up this corrupt Afghan Government is like the US propping up the South Vietnam Government.

4. Not a word I use lightly but Cameron is a total fcukwit in manipulating Dannatt whilst at the sametime proposing a 25% cut in non frontline MOD spending.
Cameron in his mad dash for personal glory of being PM, has ruptured a convention that the Military stay out of politics. The last soldier involved at such a level of political literal king making was George Monck, see above.

That Cameron thinks that he has got the Army on his side shows just how inept and juvenile his understanding of our Constitution really is. He is a man so shallow that his personal vanity is more important than upholding the Constitution.

Any right thinking person should be having deep misgivings about Cameron right now.

I knew I would be criticising Cameron as soon as he becomes PM on policy failures, but I did not expect that his Gaffes are so serious and so damaging before he even gets power. He is making Brown look relatively sane in comparison.

We need a written Constitution that safeguards our Liberties and regulates the Constitutional role of the Military, these matters are far too important to be left to the 'professional ' politicians.

Vote Tory- We Have Got The Army On Our Side !


Anonymous said...

Perhaps so, however, I feel the Tories are more likely to act on behalf of our servicemen & women than either Labour or Lib Dems. Perhaps General Dannatt will be able to keep his honour intact & persuade them to do a lot more?

The Beast of Clerkenwell said...

The Gen is both a Christian and an officer
If Camerhoon doesnt pony up

Demetrius said...

It he can get the lot of them on the Square for a working parade at 6.00 a.m., with four hours of fatiques to follow. Then with a cross country run followed by combat training, with the evening spent in cleaning up, I am all in favour.

I am Stan said...

Are we going to see troops on the streets in the near protect us from ourselves..mmmm

Faux Cu said...

Is Dannat not also in charge of The Tower of London?

Traitor's Gate and the Execution Wall?

That is even handier.

SO17 said...

If the English civil war was to happen today, who would people/army side with, The Royalists or Parliamentarians?
If I still worked at Parliament and the army turned up I would have felt like a Frenchman on liberation day.

Dear Prime Minister said...

Dannatt is being used as the way in to soften up the forces for massive cuts in the future.

The 25% cuts already announced in 'the backroom' will soon be extended into the front line.

All the talk about cutting waste and Quangos etc and the first really properly identified target is the MoD.

Now when will that EU defence force idea raise it's ugly head again?

caesars wife said...

Not all wars are about hot metal flying about , how do you defend against subversives ?

Anonymous said...

The forces need to be kept sharp and battle hardened. It costs more to have them on training in Afghanistan that poncing around in Catterick but not a lot.

One day they may be needed to put down civil unrest in the UK and we need them sharp.

Look what happens when they grow sloppy and useless like the gang of Tesco shelf stackers who accidentely found themselves in the PC Royal Navy and ended up being released with a bag of sweets by Iran. Sickening.

Anonymous said...

Does anyone know whats happened to Old Holborn's Facebook account? It's completely gone!

Old Holborn said...

Facebook deleted it.

No idea why.

Marksman said...

Guthrum you knob. Gen Dannatt's a RETIRED officer and has been for a month now, why shouldn't he have the freedom to go into politics?

Guthrum said...

Marksman You Knob

Straight into the Lords (unelected) straight into Government, having critizes the current Government publically on its failings whilst a serving officer.

Is it starting to gel ? or do you need to read Janet & John's guide to the Constitution ?

If he wants to go into politics, get elected, not use the Mandelson route.

PeeWee said...

So when is Dannat standing for election then? And what will be his constituency?

Guthrum said...

So when is Dannat standing for election then? And what will be his constituency?

He is going straight to the House of Lords, collect £200 etc etc

Democracy eh- marvellous

Mandelson, Scotland now Dannatt

Makes you proud to be British, the sleaze has already started

Gallimaufry said...

Actually, Switzerland had a couple of troops working with the German contingent in Afghanistan until Feb 2008 and Sweden has increased its contribution to ISAF

Jim said...


2. The Armed forces, should be given the absolute very best equipment,the best weaponary, the best accommodation, and realistic salaries.

There you go OH, spending my money without my permission. That paragraph should have started with 'I think that...'
Don't tell what I should or should not spend my money on. I have twenty odd years of the cunts telling me how they think that they intend to spend my money. The army, like every other public service should by the best they can afford with what we give them and they should get what each of us gives willingly, not stolen out of our wage packets.
I am a Libertarian, but a Libertarian with the net up. I cannot, in all conscience, demand that I be excused from paying for things that I don’t believe in, then expect others to pay for things that they don’t believe in. That would make as a big a hypocrite as the Labour/Tory Party. Given how much I resent people that tell me that we need this or that for our ‘own good’, then how can I tell some peacenik that he should shell out for an aircraft carrier, when I will not part with a fiver for his outreach centre?
I Know that leaves me with some difficult questions to answer, but I have to be honest with myself. Yes, I want freedom and I cannot expect that freedom for me and deny it for others.

enich said...

Sir General Dannatt has apparently been advising the Tories on the sly. That would explain why their stance on Afghanistan is a simplistic 'more troops, more helicopters' which is precisely Dannatt's.

Dannatt is partly responsible for the state of the armed forces today. For years he has been happy to send the MoD in the direction of the Euro Army in the hope he would get his FRES armoured vehicles. Vast gobs of money have been wasted on that and other pie in the sky ideas such as the A400M (integral to the FRES project as Hercs wouldn't be able to carry them).

Vast gobs of time too have been wasted through Defence dithering while the politicians sit back and refused to exercise their authority - the MoD has been bereft of direction since the fall of Communism and has stuck to that procurement path albeit with a reduced budget. Had important decisions been taken in a timely fashion 15-20 years ago we wouldn't be farting about with 40 year old choppers that can't fly during the daytime and so much military equipment that is to training standards but not to warfighting standards.

What does the Afganistan campaign need? It has hit a logjam because the Armies have not yet trimmed their plans to suit their resources, consequently they have failed to provide enough security for the civillian contractors to get on building schools n hospitals or for locals to side with us and the Afghan Government. The idea is however morphing and Dannatt is out of the loop - smaller areas better under our control looks to be the way forward. His idea is more troops and no change in strategy. Far too late in this game the politicians are getting a grip of things having too long left it to the technocrats in the Army.(It's not that the politicians have better ideas but that the Army has none beyond slogging it out with the Taliban.)

An addittion to that ought to be more combat engineers but the varied armies of the world seem to balk at that, seeing construction as a civillian affair. This could come from other NATO countries to up their committment to Afghanistan that is not overtly offensive and they could build some of the infrastructure and return fire if attacked.

Guthrum said...

There you go OH, spending my money without my permission.

Read the bit about it is the ONLY legitimate area of Government spending.

Dannatt is still on the Army payroll until Nov 22nd, therefore is still a serving officer. Sign of the stunts to come from Cameron, all PR and wind.

Marksman said...


Democracy eh- marvellous

Mandelson, Scotland now Dannatt


The Prince of Darkness is a professional politico, as is Scotland. Both of them jump back and forth between government jobs without a care in the world, so long as their pay packet comes in.

Dannatt, on the other hand, is outspoken, honest (check out his expenses on the MoD Freedom of Information site) and has up-to-date experience of the ministry he's entering. His criticism of Labour comes from that bunch of scumbags treating the forces like shit and deliberately underfunding them, not party politics on behalf of Call Me Dave.

Better to have him as a Lord/Defence Minister than yet another guzzling pig who's only in it for himself!

Jim said...

Read the bit about it is the ONLY legitimate area of Government spending.
Yes, but who made that decision? And on whose authority?
What if I disagree? Why should I be forced to pay for something that I see no relevance to my life? Before I go any further, let me explain something. I am NOT saying we should not have an army, I am asking why people should be forced against their will to pay for that army.
What are implications for Libertarian movement with that type of authoritarian statement? Is the libertarian movement just a bunch of rich selfish bastards who resent paying tax to provide for others? People who don’t need State education, a health service, a broadcaster, or unemployment benefit, outreach centres etc, etc, etc, but DO need an army, but can’t afford to buy one themselves, so they expect everyone to chip in, irrespective of their desires? What kind of ideology is that?
You believe in ‘freedom’ until that freedom hits against your wishes and needs, and then we are all collectivist again? Nonsense, you cannot preach to the dole punter that he should look after his self, but expect the State to defend your house with other people’s confiscated money.

Guthrum said...

Without the ability to defend your Liberty, you have no Liberty, you will be subject to the Authoritarian will of those that have the bigger gun,bomb etc

General Stiltskin said...

"The Libertarian view is that the only legitimate role of Government is DEFENCE
not aggression and occupation of other countries."


If Ireland was muslim and had a nuclear programme in progress and had a leader openly saying that nuclear war was an option to drive the British off their island, do you honestly think there'd be any alternative but an invasion?!

It's not an issue of patriotism, but of regional security and protecting the "libertarian" (rolls eyes) right of self-determination.

Libertarianism is a logically fallacious philosophy - a posh way of saying it's bullshit.

You talk about "climate change, the new religion"; well libertarianism demands equally religious zealotry, being as it is, so myopically axiomatic.

Switzerland and Sweden, as you must know have no international interests... Britain is and always has been a global nation, not a continental backwater.
The "British Isles" extend to the Pacific, Atlantic (& Caribbean, Mediterranian Seas), and Indian Oceans.
The reason we align ourselves with the USA is fairly cynical... we get the best military technology.
e.g.: the Join Strike Fighter (www jsf mil/) project yields us the best military aircraft in the world; it also secures THOUSANDS of British jobs... not just BAe ones, but all their suppliers... and all the companies that do business with them... it goes on.
We also need fucking oil to keep HMS Blighty shipshape, unless you want us to develop a parasitic relationship with the likes of Russia and Venezuela.

Third one... since when was there such a thing as a "legal" war?!

Alas, stoogism is pragmatism... making the world a better place is for adolescents and Eurovision song contest fans (throws up).

Yeah, Camembert would clearly be shit at poker, which is enough of a reason for him to fail to win the election.
I would much rather have a leader with some stubble on his face and the ability to conceal and express genuine emotion in anglo-saxon terms.

Still, this comically telegraphed punch of nabbing Dannatt is still sufficient to pound the Labia Party with... they are all lightweights when all's said and done.

Rogerborg said...

The job will still exist, whether Dannatt takes it or not. Who would you rather have doing it?

Jim said...


Without the ability to defend your Liberty, you have no Liberty, you will be subject to the Authoritarian will of those that have the bigger gun,bomb etc

That sentence makes more sense if it starts of ‘Guthrun thinks that…’. You are perfectly entitled to your view and it is a view I have some sympathy. However, if you are spending other people’s money you need to convince them of that, not simply tell them that stealing their money and spending it on their behalf is ‘for their own good’ or ‘the good of the State’, the 646 do enough of that already.

Forget the argument regarding defence for a second; if I (for example) do not believe that an army is necessary for the defence of the Country, on whose authority should I be forced to pay tax to subsidise the beliefs of those that do see the merit of it? Why should a pacifist be forced to pay for an aircraft carrier or trident, when you would absolve everyone else from paying for a health service or a welfare state?

If liberty means anything, surely it means setting people free from tyranny from State interference? You wish to free the millionaire from funding a welfare State, but not the CND supporter from funding WMDs. If so then it is not ‘freedom’ you want, is it? Not true freedom. Libertarianism is just a way of rich cunts being able to buy freedom that the poorer are denied. What is the point of that?

Anonymous said...

Perhaps it really is time for an army supported coup to clean parasites out of the UK.

Ratings and Recommendations by outbrain


Related Posts with Thumbnails