BATUS closing ? Or fake news

Just picked up on a news story that there is an announcement due regarding the closure of BATUS in or around 2023…

Reposted from a general online source for discussion only.

So gutted if this happens… I get the logic but I truly loved BATUS and going to Canada, and Med Hat and Calgary etc… Another sad day if it happens.

Looks like maybe fake news or someone jumped the gun or misquoted.

1 Like

Excellent… So hope it is fake… I can sleep easy now :+1:

1 Like

And you would actually believe anything this current government (word used loosely) in the UK say or promise? Hmmmmm

Afraid not John; I’ve heard it’s definitely closing too. The idea being that units can adequately train on Salisbury Plain, which we all know is a crock. More short-sightedness from the Army’s higher echelons. However, given that Ajax appears not to be viable, Chally 2 hardly to be seen (with only around 15 at unit level (within the auspices of so-called Whole Fleet Management), the Warrior upgrade cancelled, and AS 90 short of spares, one might deduce what’s the bloody point? We’ll end up with a Gendarmerie kitted out perhaps with a dozen or so Boxers if we’re lucky (and that design is over 10 years old); meanwhile, the rest of the Army will ponce around in Jackals fooling themselves that they’ll survive on the battlefield.

A recent article in the Forces Pension Society magazine “Pennant” included an article – by the Army’s “Head of Strategy” no less - describing the “Integrated Review”; a more dismal article one would be pushed to find, including the somewhat damning statement "On the traditional battlefield we no longer enjoy technical superiority”. Really? No sh** Sherlock; Because it’s all been squandered by parsimonious, egregious governments and incompetent Generals – the latter refusing to fight their corner to the degree necessary.

The article continues “ The process has involved tough choices – perhaps most significantly, cancelling the planned upgrade to our Warrior Infantry Fighting Vehicle and the reduction in size of the Army’s Regular workforce. Given the realities of resource constraints, reducing the overall size of the Army is the right thing to do. An optimal balance of personnel to capability will result in an Army that is better fit for purpose. Put simply, a smaller, well equipped and properly resourced Army will be more effective than a larger Army that lacks the resources to modernise, train and operate. We are working hard to restructure” . Effectively more woffle just masking the fact that the Army is pushed to provide any capability whatsoever, is too small, and has no resources at all.

A crying shame. And all so unnecessary; at what point I wonder, do senior officers and politicians forget that the real purpose of an Army is to fight. The sole purpose of an Army is to break things and kill people; all other capabilities are secondary to that essential task and occur only because there’s a disciplined force in existence in the first place (assuming that the discipline is, indeed there). If a succession of mealy-mouthed, vacillating Generals hadn’t started dabbling in inclusivity and diversity and all the other civilian boll**ks that makes my blood boil, (effectively turning the Armed Forces into just another civilian-type “job”) we wouldn’t be where we are today: totally and absolutely enfeebled.

I’ll go and have a lie-down now.

2 Likes

'Just got to add I’d love for all this to be untrue - ie BATUS closing; however, never, ever trust the Ministry of Defence.

1 Like

Most of my input is a rant:

Brian, sounds like you need one of the American military’s “stress cards.” Amen to what you wrote. I think of USMC being forced under the previous previous administration to allow women into infantry combat units, despite (USMC members, tell me if I remember this correctly) a year and a half of practical testing and analysis showing that the ladies degraded combat effectiveness by…60%(?).

Okay, it has been over 30 years since my last day of active duty but I’ve kept my ear to the ground via an 82nd AB paratrooper, a 28-yr USN officer (Ret) Naval Academy (USNA) graduate (who twice taught engineering classes at USNA), and a friend with kids at USNA and USAFA, with his 3rd accepted at USMA. From what I am told, we are screwed if even a troupe of rabid baboons reach our shores. The snake eaters out there are being failed by the REMFs, policy makers, and empty suits (their clothing does not deserve to be honored with the title “uniform”). In the late 70s we chaffed about the generals of the Vietnam War who could have resigned in protest but didn’t (“I will hang on because some day the political winds will change and then I can make a difference”). I’ll bet we have some Horatius Cocles out there trying to defend the bridge, but I’ve also seen what has happened to some of them. The Swamp’s alligators devour them without a trace.

Rant over.

Ultimately, in what are supposed to be Western Democracies and Republics, general officers serve the politicians. Want to know who to point the finger at? The voters who elect those rascals, the Swamp creatures who stack the deck with empty suit lap dogs who order their generals to sacrifice war fighting capacity, and threaten them if they do speak out or resign. I know there are brothers and sisters in arms with very different political views than mine, but most of those serving are not from the families who vote in the creatures who detest their military. Creatures who so long as their feelings are stroked, they couldn’t care less if our Horatius Cocleses are not prepared or equipped to defend the bridge.

When those willing to defend their country get screwed over by the politicos, blame the voters who voted them in as much as the empty suits unwilling to take a stand.

2 Likes

I don’t recall the percentages but they did resist as long as possible til Congress forced it. Not that some women cannot do the job, don’t change the standards and only allow those that can pass do the job. More these days the stands are watered down to make the number look good regardless of the actual combat effectiveness. That leadership has been replaced by lost leadership. They have come up winners like this.

1 Like

Don’t forget the minor matter of financing. When the voters, especially the very rich ones want lower taxes it is extremely difficult to keep spending tax payers cash on the military.

I recommend reading about the history of the US Navy and the stop-go-stop-go circus of financing the
USS Constitution.
It’s almost exclusively about the money. LGBTQ, inclusion/exclusion has very little to do with it.
If the bright and capable youth don’t see a viable career in the armed forces they will choose another career path and the armed forces will simply have to be happy with what they can get (i.e. leftovers + a few who do it as a family tradition).
If money allows or the situation forces it then conscription can provide a very different selection of recruits. This puts greater strain on the officers since many of the recruits have an IQ outclassing most of the officers (been there as a recruit and met the officers, I was smarter than 95% of them …)

1 Like

Fred, Ryan, I could weep - and do!

I did read the extract you attached Ryan, but my eyes began to glaze over once I encountered the words “cultural shift”. A very similar approach has been taken by our outgoing Chief of Defence Staff, who in his previous guise as Chief of the General Staff (ie head of the Army) was/is, in my view, responsible for many of the Army’s woes, both organizational, and even ethical. Sure, it’s fine reading for all the tree-huggers to flaunt equality, but as a Bundeswehr Colonel said to me several years ago (and we weren’t in quite such a mess back then) “Ja Herr Stoddart, it might make us equal, but does it make us better?”.

I’m not sure how any military organization within the so-called democracies (populated by the selfish and ignorant who confuse “democracy” with being able to do as they like) can ever recover; in fact the only scenario I can envisage - ie whereby the military can be military - is one of encountering resounding defeat - and blood - by which time one can argue it’ll be too late.

If, as has been reported in the British Press, President Putin intends to attack the Ukraine, I wonder what the NATO alliance and others will actually do? To my mind there’s precious little will let alone the resources to do very much at all; and you know, in a way, I admire the Russians: fiercely patriotic, (even if driven by centuries of paranoia), well equipped, well trained and with a tough, strong leader who is intent, as he sees it, in ensuring Russia’s rightful place in the world (wherever that actually is). Oh for leaders of similar resolve amongst the cavilling, fragile West!

All of this perhaps is a long way from the report that BATUS will close, but is arguably, the thin end of the wedge.

Back to weeping I fear.

2 Likes

Well, reading all the above it would appear some of the aging senior officers could do with a testosterone boost…
:smiling_imp:
Cheers,

M

3 Likes
1 Like

:face_vomiting:

1 Like

Too true. And a backbone.

3 Likes

Let me see your war face!

image

3 Likes

I’m from Calgary and I take offense to being grouped in the same sentence as Medicine Hat :face_vomiting:

Seriously though, glad you liked it here! Glad this turned out to possibly be fake news. I love our partnership with the British

1 Like

Sorry Mead, I was just generalising lol… MedHat has its own unique memories lol… Which I can’t go into here haha.
Seriously though, Calgary is a beautiful city. Spent a lot of down time there and was lucky enough to be there for the stampede one year. That was superb

Sounds like Medicine Hat!

Glad you got to experience the stampede. It’s a solid time for sure!

1 Like

Mead, I’m due south from you. If you venture into southern Montana to make a Costco run sales tax free let me know!

Whereabouts in Montana are you? I travelled across a fairly large part of Montana in my youth playing baseball and just touring.

I’ll be driving past you in January on my way to my new life in Texas!