British Army going soft!

No longer will you hear the shout of "You Horrible little man" on the parade grounds of the UK. Under a new order Sgt Majors are instructed to adopt a more polite approach to new recruits .

Excuse would you mind awfully if I told you to get a haircut .
Full article in todays Daily Mail.

I'm afraid it's the sign of the times, I actually enlisted at the height of the bullying fiasco back in 1987, I personally didn't see anything wrong with the way the new recruits were treated, it was even explained to us, "you are being prepared for a war-zone" if you're gonna break-down and cry everytime you're shouted at, what chance have you got when captured by the enemy, better you run home to mammy now while you still can". We all had a one-way ticket handed to us called PVR (premature volunteer release). I think the system worked well, a usual intake of 30 would normally dwindle to 20-21 by the end of the 9 weeks. Those that sat on the fence and found it hard to stay in the early days eventually hardened up, helped along by pier pressure and team moral. So mission accomplished the weak ones went home and the rest made the grade. Do we really need weak-minded soldiers watching our back in the middle of a battle field.

I say political-correctness has no place in the Armed Forces, and the millitary should be allowed to continue their methods of weeding out the weak as they have done for generations.

In my day most of the recruits were conscripts so didn't have the choice of a ticket home. They had to stand there and take it. it was quite embarrassing to see 18 year olds cry , but it was also nice to see them changing from classic Mummies boy to men in just 12 weeks .In my view a bit of the old army discipline wouldn't go amiss in today's society .We need more of it , not less .

I joined the Navy in 1975 with 59 other intakes that month. We were given everything for the first 12 weeks from being tipped out of bed in the morning to being woken at 1am to scrub floors for 2 hours, and having to pack your whole Kit strap them over your shoulders, hold your Rifle over your head and Double time around the strip until told to stop (quite often 2 hours or more). At the end only three went home, we was right Aard in those days

Technology has changed the Army greatly over the last few years.
While, undoubtedly, there will always be a need for people risking their lives going from doorway to doorway a great many soldiers are more likely to need a computer screen than a rifle. "Old style" training was intended to produce a force that would obey orders instantaneously with no thought involved. The 'intelligence' would be provided by the officers. The wars being fought today are VERY different from those in the past. Soldiers are far more likely to be in a residential area where it is virtually impossible to differentiate between who is tying to kill you & who are ordinary men, women or children going about their daily task. The man with the gun needs to be able to assess the situation that he is in & make informed judgments. Following 'orders' is just not enough any more.
That the army have found it necessary to change their training methods does not surprise me 1 iota - every other profession in the UK has had to do so as well.
I do despair at the British media though. No matter which side of the political divide that they are on they trivialise serious items like this for their own political agenda.
The real news story here is the impossible task that the Army is facing thanks to Politicians and "gung-ho" media who can sleep easy in their beds at night.

I'm surprised the Health and Safety crowd would allow these UK citizens into places like Iraq or Afghanistan. Don't they realize the soldiers might get a splinter or chip a fingernail?

Mummy! Mummy! That bad, evil PM of ours has let this happen!

While I do see where you are coming from Bob, being hard enough to withstand a balling or being pushed and shoved, or even tipped out of your bunk, doesn't mean you are not capable of using/or being trained to use the latest technology. And while the military could well be ridding themselves of some highly intelligent people with its old-fashioned weeding methods, logistics would be very difficult if we had weak-minded soldiers that could only be used for certain job criteria, and not for others.

To compare the army with any other organisation in normal civi-street would be impossible. In my day we had the Geneva Convention rules to protect POWs, but with today's war there are no rules, therefore our soldiers need to be harder not softer.

My experience of drill CPO's M'at Arms etc in the Navy saved my life. I never thought it was to weed out softies. It instilled disipline and during a fire on board i carried out orders from my PO without hesitation and lived because of it. I was just 16 at the time and these older/senior hands went from screaming orders and dishing out pointless and unfair punishments to guardians of the junior hands.

Well I must say I would rather have a soldier or even any memebr of the armed forces standing behind me from the old days rather than the current softies.
yes the training was hard and yes many cried at night, but that was life. I joined just at the end of Conscription, it had ended but in my regiment there were still some old boys. Training hard, whether you had a computor screen or just a rifle the basics need to be taught. In the end your trianing would help you to deal with death/destruction and watching ones freind being blown up, like my father before me, there was NO pampering of sioldiers with psycologists masking those stupid questions...For example ' How did you feel when you saw your mate shot'' Answrs like, Bloody glad it wasn't me' are not acceptable.

Wrell my tirade is over, bring back the Sgt major, the hard times etc, we need men not babies, God what is this world coming too, just glad I am now too old to worry too much.

Hmmm, "weak-minded", yes, they might be the more sensitive people. But, I think you should consider that if you stuck those "strong-minded" ones in a room for three months and told them to solve a complicated engineering problem, they might break down, whilst those "weak-minded" ones might not. The future of warfare is changing. You think the Chinese that are breaking into website all over the world are more the "weak-minded" or "strong-minded" types, as per your definition???? The USA is turning out 50,000 (many of which are no doubt foreign born and possibly repatriating later) engineers a year, whilst China turns out 500,000. This is a bad omen for any future war in my opinion. Perhaps "tough" isn't what it used. Tough is no longer just tattoos and muscles. Ever see "Good WIll Hunting"

P.S. I did my stint, and no, I didn't cry, even when a guy from the sister flight tried to commit suicide by jumping out window (silly boy).

"Tough is more than Tattoos and Muscles" I didn't see that reference in any of the Post's rjj04, so I must assume it's how you perceived it. There has always been room for intelligence in every part of the Armed Forces and always will be, but I think what most people are saying is that less of the namby pamby approach is needed while preparing some one for War !!

Yes of course the war machine in general is getting more technical, so the skills required are different to before . We are not talking about that. The worry for me is the lack of discipline. The ability to conform . To obey an order, immediately without question. These are the things any military unit needs to function.These are all installed in the new recruit during the first 3 months of service. It doesn't matter whether he goes on to being a technician or a cook, trade training takes care of that. He must react immediately to a given command . His life and that of his comrades could depend on it .The barked order gets an immediate response, try it. If a senior rank shouts "move' you bloody well move . I can tell you . If an officer was to say " Please can you hurry up" There's a good chance you'll all be dead before he reacted .
Remember the square bashing as its called, is not confined to just the foot soldiers. I went through it more than 50 years ago as did everyone else entering the RAF, regardless of future career or rank.

Umm, never tried to reference that statement to anybody, but yes that is sort of how I perceive your sense of what toughness ought to be. Put in my simplistic terms, but perhaps I am mistaken. I understand your point as far as I would not want somebody next to me in a foxhole who might be inclined to break and run. Just trying to point out that things are changing in warfare (see drones, stand-off weapons everywhere) and physical, in your face type toughness, is becoming less and less significant. I don't think being able to not break down when a drill sergeant screams in your face shows that you are more capable of repairing a backpack nuke, for example.

No idea what the British Army is thinking though. Perhaps they think that some of those N% that get drilled out during basic training might be the very ones that can take on the technical type roles in warfare? I always thought the British military were more professional than the American side, at least from my tour and not seeing inside of the British side. Just have stories from my pop about eating in the RAF mess hall, he sees a big worm in his potato and the sergeant walking past tells him to eat up.. so he does of course. The British military must have some reason for changing. What then?

Maybe they don't have the stomach for fighting. They're too professional.