|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Oct 6, 2023 10:24:37 GMT
I'm watching the five-part series on BBC1 which documents the experiences of new recruits going through the Infantry Training Course at Catterick.
To say this is an eye-opener is an understatement for several reasons.
First, it's surprising off the bat that it takes six months to turn a civilian into a soldier, or Infanteer according to the current speak. But when you get to appreciate the poor calibre of the human material they get to work with the rationale becomes much clearer.
'Soldier' focuses on a single intake of 49 recruits which includes four females and a handful of blacks (no Asians, although the platoon commander, a Capt Wahab appears to be of subcontinental heritage). The rest of the platoon consists of white working-class males aged from 17 to 27. In terms of employability in civilian life I'd say their chances are probably low, in fact most of those interviewed indicate they were fleeing dead-end jobs.
I was particularly interested in how the four females went on. Only two of them are featured in the programme and surprisingly neither were butch, Amazonian types but rather petite and small-framed as became obvious when you saw them marching along with the rest of group. One of the instructors let slip that because their length of stride was so much shorter they were placed at the front of the column in route marches, otherwise they'd get left behind. As indeed they were.
From the start the training staff insisted they made no accommodation for the physical disadvantages and they treated the female recruits exactly the same. However several vignettes caught on camera gave the lie to this. At this stage it looks likely three of the four will pass and go on to join an actual regiment. I wonder if NCOs there will be as accommodating as their Catterick instructors were. Nobody will be allowed to complain of course.
The blacks haven't featured yet, except for one recruit from Ghana, who nobody thought to ask why he's taken the Kings Shilling rather than join the Ghanaian army. The others appear to be holding their own so far (I'm about half way though).
All in all this is a fascinating reflection of 21st century Britain, well worth watching. All episodes are on iPlayer.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Oct 6, 2023 10:35:14 GMT
I'll give it a watch when I get a moment.
|
|
|
|
Post by piglet on Oct 6, 2023 21:58:52 GMT
Yes, how do you get an ordinary person to be a soldier and engage in genocide, Russian stle, pray tell, you think genocide is ok.
|
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Oct 7, 2023 12:31:17 GMT
Yes, how do you get an ordinary person to be a soldier and engage in genocide, Russian stle, pray tell, you think genocide is ok. i think you know very well A popular way is to suggest service includes training in some skill or professional or other qualification. Sadly to engage in the sort of massacres i have in mind would present many problems |
|
|
|
Post by piglet on Oct 7, 2023 12:50:35 GMT
Yes dubdrifter and Dan Dare dont get it, that if a bad man wanted to see them off, then they would take a knee, and beg, only their safety gives them protection and the ability to approve of genocide. I can take satisfaction in the fact that this war will not end until Russia is destroyed, or its rulers, the Ukrainians will see to that, i dont think they will stop when Crimea is liberated.
Hitler murdered children because he knew they would come looking for him, so will the Ukranians, if dan dare and dub drifter are in Russia, i think they are, they will get theirs. Like Hitler. Anyway, i enjoy discussing such, fancy a beer Dan?
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Oct 7, 2023 17:07:15 GMT
Thanks for invite piglet, but as far as Ukraine vs Russia is concerned I don't have a dog in that particular hunt and I don't think we (the UK) should have either.
But anyway, that's an entirely different matter, so back on topic.
I've now got through all five episodes of 'Soldier' and it's raised some interesting questions in my mind.
The first would be why does the UK need 'Infanteers' anyway? As I understand it, even after the radical downsizing in recent years there are still 49 battalions in total. In theory at least that's enough to make up five divisions. What are they supposed to be for? I can understand the need for special forces type units to carry out specific missions (eg assassinating a Bin Laden) why on earth does the UK need five infantry divisions in this day and age?
A second thought concerns the depressingly low calibre of the recruits as depicted in this documentary at least. It's as if the army brass are only interested in taking on troops who do exactly what they're told as if they were automatons. It seems this is a time-honoured tradition in the British army, I've read several accounts by German military experts about their encounters with British soldiers in both world wars. The consensus view is that the British infantryman (sorry 'Infanteer') is a brave and conscientious sort who can be relied upon to do whatever it is he is told to do but is not trained to take initiative when things don't go to plan. That apparently is the preserve of the officer class is certainly, a strong conclusion that can be drawn from watching 'Soldier'.
Finally, the women. A bit of a spoiler but two of the original four do make it through to the end of the course. However not without a number of failures at specific points and only then with intensive support from the training staff. During the Role Fitness Test each of the two women had a personal coach right behind in the form of a corporal instructor bawling out instructions. Even then both were last, several minutes behind the men and one failed (but was allowed to take it again) One of them had a tantrum on being failed in another test and threw her rifle on the ground, which got her a lecture from the platoon commander. All through it appeared that the training team were under instructions to make sure at least some women passed out. As it happens both were deployed to the Royal Regiment of Scotland.
All in all watching this is a quite depressing experience for anyone concerned about the nation's future security.
|
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Oct 7, 2023 17:34:07 GMT
Thanks for invite piglet, but as far as Ukraine vs Russia is concerned I don't have a dog in that particular hunt and I don't think we (the UK) should have either. But anyway, that's an entirely different matter, so back on topic. I've now got through all five episodes of 'Soldier' and it's raised some interesting questions in my mind. The first would be why does the UK need 'Infanteers' anyway? As I understand it, even after the radical downsizing in recent years there are still 49 battalions in total. In theory at least that's enough to make up five divisions. What are they supposed to be for? I can understand the need for special forces type units to carry out specific missions (eg assassinating a Bin Laden) why on earth does the UK need five infantry divisions in this day and age? A second thought concerns the depressingly low calibre of the recruits as depicted in this documentary at least. It's as if the army brass are only interested in taking on troops who do exactly what they're told as if they were automatons. It seems this is a time-honoured tradition in the British army, I've read several accounts by German military experts about their encounters with British soldiers in both world wars. The consensus view is that the British infantryman (sorry 'Infanteer') is a brave and conscientious sort who can be relied upon to do whatever it is he is told to do but is not trained to take initiative when things don't go to plan. That apparently is the preserve of the officer class is certainly, a strong conclusion that can be drawn from watching 'Soldier'. Finally, the women. A bit of a spoiler but two of the original four do make it through to the end of the course. However not without a number of failures at specific points and only then with intensive support from the training staff. During the Role Fitness Test each of the two women had a personal coach right behind in the form of a corporal instructor bawling out instructions. Even then both were last, several minutes behind the men and one failed (but was allowed to take it again) One of them had a tantrum on being failed in another test and threw her rifle on the ground, which got her a lecture from the platoon commander. All through it appeared that the training team were under instructions to make sure at least some women passed out. As it happens both were deployed to the Royal Regiment of Scotland. All in all watching this is a quite depressing experience for anyone concerned about the nation's future security. To that in bold what a load old cobblers,you rely on German judgement for being unable to take any initiative,priceless from the military where befehl ist befehl. I think you’ll find the British officer class rely on the NCO’s who basically run the show day to day and whom junior officers rely heavily on for advice on how to proceed. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Oct 7, 2023 21:15:35 GMT
Thanks for invite piglet, but as far as Ukraine vs Russia is concerned I don't have a dog in that particular hunt and I don't think we (the UK) should have either. But anyway, that's an entirely different matter, so back on topic. I've now got through all five episodes of 'Soldier' and it's raised some interesting questions in my mind. The first would be why does the UK need 'Infanteers' anyway? As I understand it, even after the radical downsizing in recent years there are still 49 battalions in total. In theory at least that's enough to make up five divisions. What are they supposed to be for? I can understand the need for special forces type units to carry out specific missions (eg assassinating a Bin Laden) why on earth does the UK need five infantry divisions in this day and age? A second thought concerns the depressingly low calibre of the recruits as depicted in this documentary at least. It's as if the army brass are only interested in taking on troops who do exactly what they're told as if they were automatons. It seems this is a time-honoured tradition in the British army, I've read several accounts by German military experts about their encounters with British soldiers in both world wars. The consensus view is that the British infantryman (sorry 'Infanteer') is a brave and conscientious sort who can be relied upon to do whatever it is he is told to do but is not trained to take initiative when things don't go to plan. That apparently is the preserve of the officer class is certainly, a strong conclusion that can be drawn from watching 'Soldier'. Finally, the women. A bit of a spoiler but two of the original four do make it through to the end of the course. However not without a number of failures at specific points and only then with intensive support from the training staff. During the Role Fitness Test each of the two women had a personal coach right behind in the form of a corporal instructor bawling out instructions. Even then both were last, several minutes behind the men and one failed (but was allowed to take it again) One of them had a tantrum on being failed in another test and threw her rifle on the ground, which got her a lecture from the platoon commander. All through it appeared that the training team were under instructions to make sure at least some women passed out. As it happens both were deployed to the Royal Regiment of Scotland. All in all watching this is a quite depressing experience for anyone concerned about the nation's future security. I hate to point it out but the Germans lost |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Oct 8, 2023 10:00:09 GMT
They weren't just fighting the British Army. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Oct 8, 2023 12:40:15 GMT
Wapentake: "To that in bold what a load old cobblers,you rely on German judgement for being unable to take any initiative,priceless from the military where befehl ist befehl."
You don't have to rely on German sources, distinguished British military men and military historians have made similar statements. John Keegan, for example, and Max Hastings in particular. The latter, in his authoritative account of the D-Day landings and the battles in Normandy, writes "Captured Germans who had fought in the desert often expressed their surprise at the willingness of the British soldier to do what he believed was expected of him, and then to stop - even to surrender - when ammunition ran low, petrol ran out or he found himself encircled or deprived of officer leadership. Again and again in Normandy, British units fought superbly, with great bravery, only to lack the last ounce of drive or follow-through necessary to take an objective or withstand a counter-attack 371". He contrasts the ethos of the British army as one of men doing an unpleasant but necessary job in the cause of democracy with that of the German army, 'profoundly influenced by the threat from the East, fighting to the last for a society facing its Götterdämmerung. As Monty wrote to Alan Brooke CIGS "The trouble with our British lads is that they are not natural killers. [372]"
Hastings Max, Overlord, 1983, Pan Books
|
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Oct 8, 2023 17:49:24 GMT
Wapentake: " To that in bold what a load old cobblers,you rely on German judgement for being unable to take any initiative,priceless from the military where befehl ist befehl."You don't have to rely on German sources, distinguished British military men and military historians have made similar statements. John Keegan, for example, and Max Hastings in particular. The latter, in his authoritative account of the D-Day landings and the battles in Normandy, writes "Captured Germans who had fought in the desert often expressed their surprise at the willingness of the British soldier to do what he believed was expected of him, and then to stop - even to surrender - when ammunition ran low, petrol ran out or he found himself encircled or deprived of officer leadership. Again and again in Normandy, British units fought superbly, with great bravery, only to lack the last ounce of drive or follow-through necessary to take an objective or withstand a counter-attack 371". He contrasts the ethos of the British army as one of men doing an unpleasant but necessary job in the cause of democracy with that of the German army, 'profoundly influenced by the threat from the East, fighting to the last for a society facing its Götterdämmerung. As Monty wrote to Alan Brooke CIGS "The trouble with our British lads is that they are not natural killers. [372]" Hastings Max, Overlord, 1983, Pan Books You have to remember in the main the British were not professional soldiers they were in effect a people’s army,the Germans fearing the east and rightly so after their brutal invasion and Barbarossa they reaped what they sowed and I have absolutely no sympathy for them nor all the whining about Dresden. As to this And why unlike the Germans was that a bad thing Anyway to today and the British army as is and a professional bunch they are too |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Oct 8, 2023 20:45:30 GMT
Professional is one of those trendy terms that covers a multitude of sins.
I invite you to watch 'Soldiers' and explain how you believe that it applies to the British Army in 2021.
|
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Oct 8, 2023 21:24:25 GMT
Professional is one of those trendy terms that covers a multitude of sins. I invite you to watch 'Soldiers' and explain how you believe that it applies to the British Army in 2021. Have been watching it,I think you’ll find they can turn the useless in to professionals. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Oct 9, 2023 7:46:11 GMT
Professional what though? Uniformed social workers?
|
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Oct 9, 2023 8:19:28 GMT
Professional what though? Uniformed social workers? Well to be fair Dan you did mention the German angle on this,have you seen the state of the Bundeswerh? |
|
