Red Arrows petition

On 19 Mar, 13:15, wrote:
On Mar 18, 6:19 pm, "John Dundas"



wrote:
"Conor" wrote in message

. ..

In article , Brian
Robertson
says...

My future son-in-law is in the Parachute Regiment and I am
concerned
about why he has to buy much of his own equipment, that provided by
the
MOD simply not being fit for purpose.

Have you been in the Forces Brian?

Squaddies have bought their own gear and modified issue kit for
decades. IT IS NOTHING NEW. The MOD issue kit is fit for purpose,
it's
just that for some people, there are better alternatives available
if
you're prepared to pay the horrendous money charged for them. Same
as
for anything.

Well I have to agree with that. I spent 15 years in the Navy and we
did buy our own kit when needed. This was a common occurrence. Also we
were issued with a certain amount of kit but I always bought some
extra working shirts and trousers, even found a Army/Navy store which
was cheaper than buying them from our own stores.

I have mixed feelings about display teams etc. They are good publicity
machine for the forces. Its a pity they cant find a sponsor....Maybe
Mr Branson?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Excellent idea John - that would keep everyone happy.

Not me. These highly polluting showoffs are an expense we could well
do without.

--
UK Radical Campaigns
www.zing.icom43.net
One man's democracy is another man's regime.

"Doug" wrote in message
ps.com...
On 19 Mar, 13:15, wrote:

Not me. These highly polluting showoffs are an expense we could well
do without.


Hurry up and die you sad old ****

On Mar 19, 1:19 pm, "Doug" wrote:
On 19 Mar, 13:15, wrote:

On Mar 18, 6:19 pm, "John Dundas"

wrote:
"Conor" wrote in message

. ..

In article , Brian
Robertson
says...

My future son-in-law is in the Parachute Regiment and I am
concerned
about why he has to buy much of his own equipment, that provided by
the
MOD simply not being fit for purpose.

Have you been in the Forces Brian?

Squaddies have bought their own gear and modified issue kit for
decades. IT IS NOTHING NEW. The MOD issue kit is fit for purpose,
it's
just that for some people, there are better alternatives available
if
you're prepared to pay the horrendous money charged for them. Same
as
for anything.

Well I have to agree with that. I spent 15 years in the Navy and we
did buy our own kit when needed. This was a common occurrence. Also we
were issued with a certain amount of kit but I always bought some
extra working shirts and trousers, even found a Army/Navy store which
was cheaper than buying them from our own stores.

I have mixed feelings about display teams etc. They are good publicity
machine for the forces. Its a pity they cant find a sponsor....Maybe
Mr Branson?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Excellent idea John - that would keep everyone happy.

Not me. These highly polluting showoffs are an expense we could well
do without.


may i suggest:
http://portal.campaigncc.org/node/1411

as an environmentally friendly alternative you might enjoy ( still
showing off but in a good, save the planet kind of way)

Fod

Gizmo. wrote:
"Doug" wrote in message
ps.com...
On 19 Mar, 13:15, wrote:
Not me. These highly polluting showoffs are an expense we could well
do without.


Hurry up and die you sad old ****


Perhaps then he could get a first class flight with BA,

--
Moving things in still pictures!

Conor wrote:
In article , Brian Robertson
says...

My future son-in-law is in the Parachute Regiment and I am concerned
about why he has to buy much of his own equipment, that provided by the
MOD simply not being fit for purpose.

Have you been in the Forces Brian?

Squaddies have bought their own gear and modified issue kit for
decades. IT IS NOTHING NEW. The MOD issue kit is fit for purpose, it's
just that for some people, there are better alternatives available if
you're prepared to pay the horrendous money charged for them. Same as
for anything.



Yes, I know that forces personel buy their own equipment, but there is
no excuse when it comes to basics like boots, because the army issue is
NOT fit for purpose.

Brian.

In article , Clive. says...
In message , Conor
writes
Fine observation: "The MOD issue kit is fit for purpose", provided you
end up being issued with it, or you're allowed to keep it following its
issue to you. Wasn't there a case of "Hey you, give your body armour to
him..." as there wasn't enough to go round, with disastrous results?

What would you know? The nearest you've got is watching it on Sky News.
What consolation is that to the mother of the soldier, that got killed
because he was instructed to hand over his body armour. Wasn't he the
first or one of the first to be killed in Iraq?

Ho-hum...

--
Conor

Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright
until you hear them speak.........

In article , ®i©ardo
says...
Conor wrote:
In article , ®i©ardo
says...

Fine observation: "The MOD issue kit is fit for purpose", provided you
end up being issued with it, or you're allowed to keep it following its
issue to you. Wasn't there a case of "Hey you, give your body armour to
him..." as there wasn't enough to go round, with disastrous results?

What would you know? The nearest you've got is watching it on Sky News.



Don't judge others by your "contribution". My discharge papers prove
otherwise.

The ones that cost you a weeks wages and have PVR stamped on them in
big letters?

--
Conor

Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright
until you hear them speak.........

®i©ardo wrote:

Conor wrote:

In article , ®i©ardo
says...

Fine observation: "The MOD issue kit is fit for purpose", provided
you end up being issued with it, or you're allowed to keep it
following its issue to you. Wasn't there a case of "Hey you, give
your body armour to him..." as there wasn't enough to go round, with
disastrous results?

What would you know? The nearest you've got is watching it on Sky News.



Don't judge others by your "contribution". My discharge papers prove
otherwise.

Did you get penicillin for that?

Gizmo. wrote:
"Doug" wrote in message
ps.com...
On 19 Mar, 13:15, wrote:

Not me. These highly polluting showoffs are an expense we could well
do without.


Hurry up and die you sad old ****
Then we would have to bury him & polute the water table or burn him a
produce more CO2,
What a choice.


--
Tony the Dragon

Tony Dragon wrote:
Gizmo. wrote:
"Doug" wrote in message
ps.com...
On 19 Mar, 13:15, wrote:

Not me. These highly polluting showoffs are an expense we could well
do without.


Hurry up and die you sad old ****
Then we would have to bury him & polute the water table or burn him a
produce more CO2,
What a choice.

No problem, just leave him under one of the fridges in his back garden and
let him rot.