SoS for Defence - stay or go?

Do you have confidence in the current SoS for Defence?

  • No - he should go

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
hnhnwilliam said:
At least Mr. Browne had the guts to accept full reponsibility. I hope he stays. I am no real fan of this government but we cannot continue to play musical chairs with high Mininsterial Officers of State. I would like to see a couple of Admirals sacked, with one losing his automatic knighthood.
The Navy has always had a great surplus of these gentlemen.
I also think too much emphesis has been put on the 15 regarding the media (who,why and what caused them to be taken captive in the first place.)

"Been out 20 Years"

I would suggest that Des has been very circumspect about what he accepts respnsibility for, and has avoided any statement about why the descision to allow them to speak to the media with or without cash was made.

I think we all know why they were captured in the first place, the general lack of investment in lour defence capability over the past 10 or so years, but will any one in the present government actually own up to that one and say the buck stops here.


War Hero
OSLO said:
"Full support" like he gave Blunkett (twice), Mandelson (twice), Byers.....

Dont forget, they have to serve time in the waste lands before they can comeback to the 'How to fcuk it up and survive' bench.
In reality the window for sacking him is small, he really needs to go ASAP so that he is 'cleansed' by the time Gordy becomes prime minister, as if as expected Tone hands his letter in after the Scots election then he has to go before then. But sacking a very senior cabinet minister just before the Scots elections may make them even worse, especially as Vain Tone seems already to think he is the most important factor in those elections.
It really doesn't matter. The Navy made the decision that the Navy made, without reference to anyone but the Navy, or words to that effect. Oh yes, I did agree to it but was very uncomfortable, so I changed my mind after the 2 likely to say the most damaging things had already sold their tales and stopped the rest before they had a chance (that must amount to a restraint of trade??)

1 & 2 have not emerged covered in glory, though.


War Hero
Just a wee thought Sack the bloody lot and start again?

And this time why not make it a standing order that the Minister of Defence MUST have done some time actually in defence - either as a serving member or close support (even an ex dockyard matey would know something about it, unlike the muppets who seem to get the job - to be fair the Tories are not AS bad but....
Having served when you did get ministers who had served it wasn't really any better, getting into the HOC is a bit like becoming a crusher, just they remove even more brain, but are better with the scars.


War Hero
Interestingly, every major point that has arisen on RR on the matter of the Iranian debacle was brought up in the House in the questions following Des Browne's speech (so refreshing to hear a minister admit he made a mistake). This included the actions of the 15 prior to the seizure, the matter of what they said while in Iranian hands, the actions on their return, quesitons on the operational aspects (why did the Lynx bugger off), the matter of the seizure being the greater story, the question of the 3 small ships in Portsmouth.

What did become apparent is that the Liberal Democrat Defence Spokesman needs a rebrief on the difference between ships and boats.....

Latest Threads

New Posts