Latest / UK Column Radio / Military Matters, Episode 12

Transcript

Military Matters, Episode 12 · UK Column Radio

0:00
Speaker 1: Thank you.
0:24
Speaker 2: Welcome back for episode 12 of Military Matters with UK Column.
0:30
Speaker 2: I'm Charles Mannett and I have Brian Gerrish with me again. Brian,
0:32
Speaker 2: it sometimes feels like we hardly get out of the
0:35
Speaker 2: studio at all. Here we are again.
0:37
Speaker 3: Well, it's true, but it's always enjoyable because a lot
0:41
Speaker 3: of this is very much off the cuff and what
0:45
Speaker 3: we've individually seen. And it is interesting just bringing it
0:49
Speaker 3: together to have a chat through Yeah, what's happening out there?
0:54
Speaker 2: Yes, and as we continually point out, the rate of
0:59
Speaker 2: change of things happening that I suppose to a certain
1:05
Speaker 2: extent we might have imagined would, but they still seem
1:08
Speaker 2: to be somewhat unbelievable. There is always so much to discuss,
1:12
Speaker 2: to consider, you know, things that do get tossed out there.
1:15
Speaker 2: Where we ended up with the last episode was talking about,
1:20
Speaker 2: to a certain extent, the future. What does the future
1:22
Speaker 2: hold for the armed forces of the United Kingdom? And
1:25
Speaker 2: I certainly don't say that with a desire for there
1:30
Speaker 2: to be a conflict that we can go and get
1:32
Speaker 2: ourselves involved in. I think that sounds like an absolutely
1:35
Speaker 2: terrible idea. But there is this, in effect, a trap,
1:40
Speaker 2: of course, because you and I have both served in
1:44
Speaker 2: the armed forces and despite the content of these discussions
1:50
Speaker 2: we we can absolutely see where there is um a
1:55
Speaker 2: positive to be had from spending time in in the
1:59
Speaker 2: army navy air force you know they you know they
2:01
Speaker 2: are environment there can be environments that are conducive to
2:03
Speaker 2: a lot of good and i think it's really important
2:05
Speaker 2: that we make that point first of all because we
2:08
Speaker 2: both believe it to be true but also because there
2:10
Speaker 2: are still people serving in the armed forces and we
2:12
Speaker 2: we definitely don't want our conversations to be coming across
2:15
Speaker 2: as in some way sort of damning for the individuals
2:18
Speaker 2: concerned or demeaning, exactly. And yet there is this trap
2:23
Speaker 2: in that, in effect, in army terms, I mean, a
2:28
Speaker 2: garrison army just sort of sits there doing nothing, doesn't
2:31
Speaker 2: improve its skills, doesn't in effect develop. I mean, it
2:36
Speaker 2: becomes rather stagnant. And you made the very good point
2:39
Speaker 2: in the last episode that Ukraine... having initially been apparently
2:46
Speaker 2: grateful to receive training from the british army in particular
2:50
Speaker 2: is now presumably looking four and a half years on
2:54
Speaker 2: thinking well what can we really learn from you you
2:56
Speaker 2: guys haven't been doing anything and therefore that begs the
2:59
Speaker 2: question partly about that relationship but mostly about about the
3:03
Speaker 2: british armed forces what what sorts of things are they
3:07
Speaker 2: going to become involved in we're constantly reminded by specifically
3:12
Speaker 2: the likes of um Rayleigh Walker and Gwynne Jenkins, heads
3:15
Speaker 2: of the Army and Navy, that we're sort of increasing
3:19
Speaker 2: lethality and we've got hybrid forces and stuff that frankly
3:23
Speaker 2: doesn't really stack up and it doesn't really mean anything
3:26
Speaker 2: for the people that are involved in those services. So
3:30
Speaker 2: what do we think? Where are we going?
3:35
Speaker 3: I think the pool says it all, doesn't it?
3:38
Speaker 2: It does, yes.
3:41
Speaker 3: I think one of the key issues is that the
3:43
Speaker 3: military have no idea where they're going. And so at
3:46
Speaker 3: the moment they're not going, they're not going anywhere at all. They, well,
3:54
Speaker 3: the first thing that has caused the problem is what
3:57
Speaker 3: I'm going to call the hollowing out of the armed
4:00
Speaker 3: forces themselves. So we have seen over a very long
4:05
Speaker 3: period of time, not only a reduction in size of
4:08
Speaker 3: the armed forces, but, um, what has been a clear
4:12
Speaker 3: attack on capability, professional capability of the armed forces in
4:18
Speaker 3: favour of, I'm going to say this because I mean it,
4:23
Speaker 3: but I no doubt be provocative to some people, you know,
4:27
Speaker 3: the dangers of the woke agenda. So we've seen across
4:32
Speaker 3: all three of the services the fact that if we've
4:38
Speaker 3: got manpower problems, which has been a, continual thing. We've
4:46
Speaker 3: got manpower problems in putting people in the frontline positions
4:50
Speaker 3: doing the, you know, the vital military job. We haven't
4:54
Speaker 3: got those all filled, but we can still put people
4:57
Speaker 3: into very, very secondary or third rate positions, which are
5:02
Speaker 3: to do with gender equality, LGBT community, women in the
5:09
Speaker 3: armed forces. the armed forces are awash with people in
5:15
Speaker 3: these roles. And I think I'm correct in saying there's
5:18
Speaker 3: even the head of one RAF station who has had
5:24
Speaker 3: a career through that woke agenda in the armed forces.
5:30
Speaker 3: And she's now heading up an RAF station. And to me,
5:34
Speaker 3: this is not credible.
5:35
Speaker 2: So I.
5:37
Speaker 3: Think that one of the reasons that the, are in
5:41
Speaker 3: such a mess is because they've got smaller and smaller
5:45
Speaker 3: to the point where they're barely sustainable in their own right.
5:51
Speaker 3: And then you've compounded the problems by introducing highly politicised
5:57
Speaker 3: woke agenda, which has often taken priority over operational performance
6:04
Speaker 3: and roles.
6:05
Speaker 2: Yes.
6:07
Speaker 3: And alongside that, you've also had, and it has not
6:11
Speaker 3: got away, some people are going to anticipate by saying, well,
6:15
Speaker 3: of course, Brexit's happened, to which I'm going to say, well, no,
6:18
Speaker 3: it hasn't. It's Brexit without the exit. But for a
6:23
Speaker 3: large number of years, we saw the professionalism and autonomy
6:28
Speaker 3: of the armed forces in the United Kingdom consistently undermined
6:35
Speaker 3: by are forced or by a political agenda designed to
6:41
Speaker 3: force integration on a pan-European basis. And the UK column
6:48
Speaker 3: reported this as European Union military unification. And that was
6:58
Speaker 3: a reality. Mike Robinson in particular has done some really
7:02
Speaker 3: excellent analysis on the think is the five pillars of
7:07
Speaker 3: that European system.
7:08
Speaker 2: So we saw.
7:11
Speaker 3: Our unique inherent national military capability weakened by a political
7:18
Speaker 3: agenda that we should work alongside German units or French
7:22
Speaker 3: units in a way that also undermined NATO because NATO
7:30
Speaker 3: was a structure which had proven itself NATO could conduct
7:36
Speaker 3: operations but then within NATO we started to have the
7:40
Speaker 3: bilateral treaties of of French UK French units or UK
7:47
Speaker 3: German units and I believe that this started to not
7:52
Speaker 3: only create a lot of loss of identity in the
7:57
Speaker 3: in our sovereign nation our sovereign armed forces it also
8:03
Speaker 3: started to confused the command and control structure so people
8:07
Speaker 3: didn't really know whether they were part of the UK
8:10
Speaker 3: system anymore or they were part of the European system
8:14
Speaker 3: so all of that mess was going on at this
8:21
Speaker 3: well it led and it was going on the next
8:23
Speaker 3: thing that happened is that we were having dramatic changes
8:27
Speaker 3: in technology which was going to affect the battlefield and
8:31
Speaker 3: that was everything from increasingly high tech weapons systems, missile systems,
8:41
Speaker 3: high tech surveillance and then the thing which has really
8:45
Speaker 3: been the catalyst to change so much has been the
8:47
Speaker 3: rise of the drones because the war in Ukraine has
8:53
Speaker 3: demonstrated that armoured vehicles are no longer capable of operating
8:57
Speaker 3: in large open formations which is previously how large amounts
9:04
Speaker 3: of ground has been taken very quickly. So drone warfare
9:10
Speaker 3: has now changed the battlefield back to troops in small
9:17
Speaker 3: numbers being the important point of capturing ground. So confusion
9:24
Speaker 3: on a political scale within the armed forces and the
9:30
Speaker 3: rise of technology which some of our equipment redundant or
9:36
Speaker 3: obsolete overnight. That's how I see it.
9:40
Speaker 2: I was struck, and in fact I did share it
9:43
Speaker 2: on a news programme, I suppose it would have been
9:46
Speaker 2: several weeks ago now, but the way in which the
9:49
Speaker 2: recruitment campaigns are being run at the moment, specifically for
9:53
Speaker 2: the army, that they're separated according to whether it's recruiting
9:59
Speaker 2: people into the army reserve or into the regular army.
10:03
Speaker 2: And I was just struck immediately by the sort of
10:08
Speaker 2: glamour and excitement that's presented to the potential reservists. So
10:12
Speaker 2: there was lots of footage of people jumping out of
10:16
Speaker 2: helicopters and skiing and all the stuff that frankly never happens,
10:19
Speaker 2: or at least can't these days, because there simply aren't
10:21
Speaker 2: enough people or money or time. Whereas the regular army
10:27
Speaker 2: page was a static image wasn't wasn't video. And there
10:30
Speaker 2: was the picture that sort of caught the eye which
10:33
Speaker 2: dominated the sort of join the British Army page was
10:37
Speaker 2: a bunch of soldiers mixture, men and women just standing
10:44
Speaker 2: around with their hands in their pockets, leaning up against
10:46
Speaker 2: the Land Rover. And I thought, wow, that is really
10:49
Speaker 2: not selling, you know, selling the regular army to, well,
10:53
Speaker 2: at least maybe it is, but certainly not to the
10:56
Speaker 2: person that I would have identified as a natural contender
11:02
Speaker 2: for a spot.
11:03
Speaker 3: It's very interesting you mention this, because yesterday I opened
11:06
Speaker 3: an email from a lady and she'd sent me a picture,
11:10
Speaker 3: a picture, which was from South Wales, I think. And
11:16
Speaker 3: it was an electronic advert board in a city street.
11:23
Speaker 3: And the photograph on it is a recruiting image for
11:28
Speaker 3: the army. But there are three soldiers in combat gear.
11:35
Speaker 3: And the lead man is reaching sort of out of
11:40
Speaker 3: the image to say, Come and play football with us.
11:46
Speaker 3: So it wasn't the happy, bright image of being on
11:50
Speaker 3: a football field with teams having fun and playing. It
11:54
Speaker 3: was a sort of halfway that they were on some,
12:00
Speaker 3: I'll say, dark battlefield and they'd got a football and
12:03
Speaker 3: were having a kick around. It was very dark and
12:06
Speaker 3: I looked at it and I thought, that's a really
12:09
Speaker 3: depressing image. Why would anybody respond to that? So, you know,
12:15
Speaker 3: maybe we've both seen stuff from this angle. But we
12:19
Speaker 3: talked about this before, Charles, haven't we, that who is
12:22
Speaker 3: now responsible for recruiting? It isn't the armed forces. It's
12:26
Speaker 3: private companies where the bulk of the people presumably have
12:30
Speaker 3: no experience of the military whatsoever.
12:33
Speaker 2: Exactly. Yeah. Yes. I mean, that is, again, a very
12:36
Speaker 2: good point. On that, I mean, it is interesting, just
12:40
Speaker 2: as a side note, the on the psychology because i
12:43
Speaker 2: remember we we discussed this um not not in a
12:45
Speaker 2: recorded sense we did talk about this a while ago
12:49
Speaker 2: because i found um i did send it to you
12:52
Speaker 2: there was a a video from the australian navy i
12:55
Speaker 2: think it was 1980 or 1981 and um It was
13:00
Speaker 2: hilarious because it was a song, the lyrics of which
13:04
Speaker 2: I forget, but effectively there were lines in it that said,
13:07
Speaker 2: you know, you'll be wet, you'll be miserable, you'll be homesick.
13:11
Speaker 2: It was sort of telling it like it was, but
13:13
Speaker 2: the response to it was apparently phenomenal. They, in effect,
13:16
Speaker 2: had to sort of shut it off because it provoked
13:21
Speaker 2: such a response. And it was this idea that there was...
13:26
Speaker 2: proper adversity, that it really was going to be a challenge.
13:30
Speaker 2: And I think the Royal Marines in this country experienced
13:34
Speaker 2: a similar response to their series of advertisements, which the
13:39
Speaker 2: sort of tagline was, Royal Marines, it's a state of mind.
13:42
Speaker 2: And the idea of the campaign was to make it
13:45
Speaker 2: look very, very difficult. And people responded to that. And
13:49
Speaker 2: yet you share a bunch of soldiers looking slovenly let's
13:54
Speaker 2: say standing around Land Rover not doing anything I mean
13:57
Speaker 2: who's who's going to respond to that so so there's
14:00
Speaker 2: it's it's sort of it's slightly separate but only slightly
14:03
Speaker 2: because uh people will see that and and even if
14:09
Speaker 2: it's being run by a civilian organization there will be
14:13
Speaker 2: people running the armed forces who will look at and
14:16
Speaker 2: say well that's not that's not good enough.
14:18
Speaker 3: Yeah but we're but we're still not hearing this Charles
14:21
Speaker 3: we're We haven't got enough people for the small size
14:26
Speaker 3: of the armed forces we've got. In specialist technical areas,
14:32
Speaker 3: we're short of really important key people. There's been numerous
14:40
Speaker 3: reports that Capita's work as the recruitment agency was utterly
14:46
Speaker 3: hopeless and failed. But nothing really changes. This mess just continues.
14:53
Speaker 3: And the armed forces continue to decline as a result.
15:00
Speaker 2: Let's ram it home.
15:01
Speaker 3: We recently had the situation where none of the Royal
15:07
Speaker 3: Navy's destroyers were at sea and no attack nuclear submarines
15:13
Speaker 3: as opposed to the, nuclear missile submarines, none of the
15:17
Speaker 3: attack submarines were at sea. So the Navy doesn't really exist.
15:23
Speaker 3: You can't even say that you can defend the nuclear
15:26
Speaker 3: deterrent properly if you've got no attack submarines at sea.
15:30
Speaker 3: And the Army's been in a very bad position and
15:33
Speaker 3: the RAF as well. But everything that comes out of
15:36
Speaker 3: the government and the Ministry of Defence is as if
15:39
Speaker 3: everything is okay. I find it fascinating to watch.
15:44
Speaker 2: Yes, I completely agree. It is, yeah, perverse.
15:49
Speaker 3: And we should mention Admiral Radikin, head of the Royal Navy,
15:56
Speaker 3: and very outspoken in how Russia was going to lose
16:01
Speaker 3: the war in Ukraine and the West was going to
16:03
Speaker 3: do X, Y and Z. And my mind goes back
16:06
Speaker 3: to him getting very excited in his office with a
16:10
Speaker 3: coloured map showing all the trade routes that commercial trade
16:14
Speaker 3: routes around the the world and they're all in different
16:18
Speaker 3: colors and his enthusiasm for his map was almost childlike
16:24
Speaker 3: and through the window behind him you saw the rotting
16:28
Speaker 3: hulk of one of the type 45 destroyers um hadn't
16:33
Speaker 3: been to sea for a year due to you know
16:36
Speaker 3: mechanical breakdowns and faults and everything else but he was
16:40
Speaker 3: the senior man in the Royal Navy getting excited with
16:44
Speaker 3: this sort of coloured map on the wall. It was
16:46
Speaker 3: utterly bizarre. And to some extent, this has got to
16:50
Speaker 3: be another factor, the quality of the senior officers that
16:54
Speaker 3: are now in post.
16:55
Speaker 2: Yes, I think that, very much so.
16:57
Speaker 4: And the apparent and complete reluctance of those that are
17:06
Speaker 4: serving to, as far as we're aware, do anything about it.
17:10
Speaker 2: It's always been like that. It has. And I know
17:15
Speaker 2: we've talked about that before but that does lead us
17:18
Speaker 2: on because of course what does tend to happen is
17:21
Speaker 2: that people leave and then as a veteran they will
17:25
Speaker 2: then speak out and they will often speak not just
17:28
Speaker 2: about what they're seeing now but what they saw whilst
17:31
Speaker 2: they were serving. Begging the obvious question why didn't you
17:35
Speaker 2: say something when you were there doing the job? Perhaps
17:39
Speaker 2: that would have made a difference but But there it is.
17:44
Speaker 2: The picture and the focus and the attention on veterans,
17:50
Speaker 2: I think, and I think from a UK column reporting
17:52
Speaker 2: point of view, has increased over the years. There does
17:57
Speaker 2: appear to have been at least a realisation that whilst
18:02
Speaker 2: the destruction of the armed forces and their capabilities and
18:05
Speaker 2: everything else has been running, one of the effects of that,
18:10
Speaker 2: of course, is that the number of veterans increases because
18:13
Speaker 2: there are fewer people who are serving. They come out...
18:16
Speaker 2: I don't know how accurate it is now. I mean,
18:18
Speaker 2: certainly a year or so ago, it was reckoned there
18:20
Speaker 2: were 2.2 million veterans in the country, which is a lot.
18:25
Speaker 2: And when you do consider the... I mean, okay, that
18:29
Speaker 2: will cover people of all ages, but when you consider
18:33
Speaker 2: life experiences that people have had, the training they've had,
18:35
Speaker 2: their skill sets and whatnot, potentially... And I'm not suggesting
18:40
Speaker 2: that they could at all be one homogenous group, but
18:43
Speaker 2: I mean, there is a resource there.
18:48
Speaker 3: A tremendous resource. And I'm happy to say it's one
18:53
Speaker 3: of the things that I've been saddened by over 20 years,
18:59
Speaker 3: that you can hear unhappiness amongst veterans. They They look
19:06
Speaker 3: at their country. They look at the politics in the country.
19:09
Speaker 3: They even look at what's happening to the armed forces.
19:13
Speaker 3: And a lot of them are quite rightly very unhappy
19:16
Speaker 3: at what they see as a managed decline. But very
19:25
Speaker 3: reluctant to step forward and be counted in trying to
19:29
Speaker 3: do something. Almost, I could say, with some of them,
19:33
Speaker 3: sort of paralysed by.
19:37
Speaker 3: You used to see it, as far as I'm concerned,
19:40
Speaker 3: it was always the senior officers and particularly very senior
19:44
Speaker 3: officers who seemed to be remarkably shy of speaking.
19:50
Speaker 5: Out.
19:51
Speaker 3: One or two of them might, but as a group,
19:55
Speaker 3: they became very, in retirement, they became invisible and a
20:03
Speaker 3: big reluctant to speak out. But amongst the rank and file,
20:09
Speaker 3: non-commissioned officers you could regularly see some fire and people
20:15
Speaker 3: wanting to talk out and talk about what was wrong
20:19
Speaker 3: but I look now at the body of the we'll
20:23
Speaker 3: call it the veterans and I'm still stunned at how
20:28
Speaker 3: passive they are when you know that they're unhappy with
20:33
Speaker 3: what's going on in the country and I don't I
20:37
Speaker 3: don't actually know why this is.
20:39
Speaker 2: I have to agree. I am similarly at a loss.
20:44
Speaker 2: And I have to say, it was, I mean, looking back,
20:49
Speaker 2: it seems naive, but it was to me an enormous
20:52
Speaker 2: surprise looking back to 2020 when it was to those people.
21:00
Speaker 2: who thought it obvious it was very obvious that what
21:03
Speaker 2: the government was putting out what the health service putting
21:05
Speaker 2: out what the media was putting out in the early
21:07
Speaker 2: the first few months 2020 seemed to just not make
21:11
Speaker 2: sense there was just you know there was something about
21:15
Speaker 2: that that message that was immediately wrong and and also
21:21
Speaker 2: the the instant overtones of being told what to do
21:27
Speaker 2: I thought at that time would have really rankled with veterans.
21:35
Speaker 2: And I was absolutely stunned to find that the idea
21:41
Speaker 2: that people would just go along with what the government
21:45
Speaker 2: was saying, even if it meant not spending time with
21:48
Speaker 2: your family or not spending time with your friends or
21:51
Speaker 2: not being able to go to work. I thought that
21:54
Speaker 2: would be so obviously a bridge too far. And I
21:58
Speaker 2: was wrong, but I was wrong in, I think, two ways.
22:03
Speaker 2: First of all, it seemed that actually, and I know
22:08
Speaker 2: it's difficult because, of course, there isn't simply a sort
22:10
Speaker 2: of an off-the-shelf veteran, but nonetheless, it did seem to
22:13
Speaker 2: be the case that veterans in general, and those that
22:16
Speaker 2: I was sort of aware of or in touch with,
22:18
Speaker 2: did seem to believe the government narrative that there was,
22:22
Speaker 2: not just that there was a sort of deadly illness,
22:25
Speaker 2: but also that these are the things you should do
22:27
Speaker 2: to to sort of help or make it better. And
22:30
Speaker 2: I found, first of all, the contrast between those two
22:33
Speaker 2: things quite significant. But then the other thing, and I
22:37
Speaker 2: think this is really significant, is that there was a
22:42
Speaker 2: sense that people wanted to do something. They wanted to
22:46
Speaker 2: help because they'd been presented with the idea that there
22:48
Speaker 2: was a national emergency. They, you know, but there was absolutely...
22:57
Speaker 2: a reaction to that by people who were minded to
23:03
Speaker 2: dig in, as it were, that they wanted to get on,
23:06
Speaker 2: they wanted to help, they wanted to be involved, they
23:08
Speaker 2: wanted to be sort of part of the solution. And
23:10
Speaker 2: I can remember seeing on various platforms, I think, LinkedIn
23:16
Speaker 2: being the one, the most obvious, because it's sort of
23:20
Speaker 2: easier there to necessarily identify sort of veteran initiatives and this,
23:26
Speaker 2: that and the other. And there were, there were lots
23:30
Speaker 2: of people who were making it very public that they
23:32
Speaker 2: were trying to be involved in such and such a thing,
23:35
Speaker 2: which would, which would apparently help. And so the, you know,
23:39
Speaker 2: the bit that I totally overlooked was the way in
23:41
Speaker 2: which the, the veteran mindset, which is to, to work
23:45
Speaker 2: hard for other people for, for, for a, you know,
23:51
Speaker 2: towards a sort of shared and positive goal can be,
23:55
Speaker 2: exploited yeah and and really really exploited now six and
24:01
Speaker 2: a bit years on i don't know i've no idea
24:04
Speaker 2: how by and large people who had those sort of
24:07
Speaker 2: inclinations in 2020 actually feel about life now you know
24:11
Speaker 2: do they feel that what they did a did make
24:13
Speaker 2: any kind of difference to anything i don't really see
24:15
Speaker 2: how that's possible but also having trusted basically having put
24:20
Speaker 2: their trust in the government the establishment the media then
24:24
Speaker 2: how do they feel about that now And I can't
24:27
Speaker 2: believe that it's the same. I cannot believe people who
24:30
Speaker 2: were told there was a national emergency in 2020 are
24:34
Speaker 2: still believing the sorts of messages that the government are
24:37
Speaker 2: putting out now.
24:38
Speaker 3: Well, certainly people in the civilian world are not, many
24:43
Speaker 3: people in the civilian world are not believing it. So
24:45
Speaker 3: we might expect the same effect to be across the veteran,
24:50
Speaker 3: the group of veterans.
24:52
Speaker 2: Maybe. Maybe. But I think that's only a maybe because
24:58
Speaker 2: we have the– apparently we have the specter of threat
25:05
Speaker 2: from Russia or from Iran. All these things that are
25:09
Speaker 2: just tossed into the sort of mainstream narrative and the
25:13
Speaker 2: fact that national security has assumed such an incredibly central position.
25:17
Speaker 5: I wonder.
25:20
Speaker 2: This is the thing.
25:21
Speaker 3: Well, I mean– To me, it's clear that the government
25:26
Speaker 3: in this country has played on the military psyche and
25:31
Speaker 3: particularly the veteran psyche in the way that it has
25:34
Speaker 3: presented the war in Ukraine and, you know, very particularly
25:42
Speaker 3: the way that we are in support of Ukraine and
25:46
Speaker 3: we're in a 100-year partnership and our belief in Ukraine
25:51
Speaker 3: is unshakable.
25:52
Speaker 2: Mm-hmm.
25:54
Speaker 3: This has indoctrinated service people to believe that this is
26:00
Speaker 3: a laudable, praiseworthy cause, and it also helps pull into
26:09
Speaker 3: their mindset, yes, it's those nasty Russians that we're really
26:13
Speaker 3: up against. So I have to say, and it is
26:18
Speaker 3: difficult because I have a lot of respect for other
26:22
Speaker 3: people who've served in the military because I think overall
26:25
Speaker 3: it is a pretty amazing career and there's a lot
26:30
Speaker 3: of very good veterans out there. But I think a
26:34
Speaker 3: lot of them are incredibly naive about what's actually going
26:40
Speaker 3: on in the country and what is not only going
26:44
Speaker 3: on in the country, what is targeting the military and
26:47
Speaker 3: the veterans.
26:48
Speaker 2: Yeah.
26:49
Speaker 3: And if they were to up their game, as you say,
26:55
Speaker 3: if that figure's correct, around 2.2 million people, they could
27:00
Speaker 3: really make a positive difference to what's happening in this country.
27:04
Speaker 3: But UK column has found it pretty difficult to engage
27:10
Speaker 3: with veterans. We've had odd periods where we've been able
27:15
Speaker 3: to talk to people who've been clearly worried about certain
27:19
Speaker 3: things happening in the country. And, you know, we're able
27:23
Speaker 3: to interact with them. But I can remember on one
27:27
Speaker 3: occasion in the early days when I was invited to
27:30
Speaker 3: give a talk to veterans, which was going to be
27:35
Speaker 3: up in the Midlands. And I travelled up and there
27:38
Speaker 3: was just a handful of people there. So I've got
27:44
Speaker 3: some interesting experiences going, you know, going back. But is
27:49
Speaker 3: it the fact that we see nothing from the senior
27:52
Speaker 3: officers that means that there's a lack of drive at
28:00
Speaker 3: lower levels in the veterans? Is that what it is?
28:04
Speaker 3: You see them engaging on some of the more passionate.
28:10
Speaker 2: Initiatives.
28:15
Speaker 3: I've watched with some sadness the number of veterans that
28:19
Speaker 3: have got very excited over what Mr. Tommy Robinson is
28:23
Speaker 3: or is not going to do. But it seems to
28:26
Speaker 3: me very few of them are actually using all their
28:30
Speaker 3: skills and expertise to dig in deeper to what's really
28:34
Speaker 3: happening in the country to then say, if we got
28:38
Speaker 3: our act together, we could do some positive things and
28:41
Speaker 3: make a difference. That's not happening.
28:43
Speaker 2: No, that's not. I think you're absolutely right. I think
28:50
Speaker 2: there is a very, well, certainly from what we've seen,
28:52
Speaker 2: seems to be a sort of very simplistic approach. Just
28:55
Speaker 2: thinking back to perhaps not 2020, but 2021, I think
29:01
Speaker 2: when the COVID jabs started to be pushed in earnest,
29:06
Speaker 2: there were certainly some veterans who did get involved at
29:12
Speaker 2: that particular point in sort of direct action incidents but
29:19
Speaker 2: I don't know that anyone of those really sort of
29:22
Speaker 2: stuck with it as it were and I don't think
29:25
Speaker 2: they were supported at all by the people that they
29:28
Speaker 2: would have known you know other veterans that they would
29:32
Speaker 2: have known so it was again a rather bizarre spectacle
29:36
Speaker 2: of just a few sort of isolated individuals who just
29:41
Speaker 2: took it upon themselves to do this and the other
29:43
Speaker 2: and definitely made a point of communicating the fact they
29:46
Speaker 2: were a veteran. But what was hard to determine was
29:48
Speaker 2: whether the fact that they were a veteran had anything
29:51
Speaker 2: to do with their action in the first place or
29:54
Speaker 2: their beliefs. I'm not really sure. But yes, I mean,
29:57
Speaker 2: I think you're right. The This idea playing on, you know,
30:01
Speaker 2: because one side of it is the sort of national
30:03
Speaker 2: security thing, you know, do what the state says, do
30:06
Speaker 2: what the state does, because in effect, that's what you've
30:09
Speaker 2: been conditioned to do by your service. But then the
30:11
Speaker 2: other side of it, the sort of the Tommy Robinson bit, which,
30:14
Speaker 2: and you could be, you could absolutely say that it's
30:17
Speaker 2: all part of the same thing. But that is the
30:21
Speaker 2: predicated on, you know, sort of we're losing our country.
30:24
Speaker 2: You know, it's all, it's going to go, we've got
30:27
Speaker 2: to do something about it. and then you just go
30:30
Speaker 2: through the various iterations until you finally get to, you know, well,
30:34
Speaker 2: there's actually just one problem here, and that's what we
30:37
Speaker 2: need to sort out. There is something that started, I think,
30:43
Speaker 2: quite recently that perhaps we should just watch a little
30:46
Speaker 2: bit of video from to discuss, because it is led
30:52
Speaker 2: by a veteran, I think actually a number of veterans.
30:55
Speaker 2: This is called the Frontline Alliance, which I think at
30:57
Speaker 2: the moment... still is very early days i don't think
31:01
Speaker 2: it's actually gathered really any particular traction but i think
31:05
Speaker 2: the message is interesting the the spokesman for the organization
31:10
Speaker 2: is um his ex-army he served 18 years uh alex
31:15
Speaker 2: watts i i don't know very much about him um
31:21
Speaker 2: i know we'd be pleased to talk to him if
31:24
Speaker 2: he were willing. But we'll just have a look at
31:27
Speaker 2: a couple of the videos he's put out recently, talking
31:31
Speaker 2: about his message and what he's sort of hoping to achieve.
31:34
Speaker 2: So I'll just show you some of that now. Yep.
31:39
Speaker 5: Veterans, your country needs you. The British people need you.
31:44
Speaker 5: Our children need you. I just wanted to reiterate why
31:48
Speaker 5: veterans are the key and the answer to securing the
31:52
Speaker 5: future of the UK. So this is focused on veterans,
31:55
Speaker 5: all of you. This is a warning order. I would
31:59
Speaker 5: also appreciate that all of you non-veterans, so normal people
32:03
Speaker 5: as I would call you, share this with veterans that
32:05
Speaker 5: you know and those within your community. Without being dramatic,
32:10
Speaker 5: we are facing the greatest threat to the future of
32:12
Speaker 5: our nation in modern history. Right now, if nothing changes,
32:17
Speaker 5: we simply do not have a future and neither do
32:19
Speaker 5: our children. Frontline Alliance considers all those on the frontline
32:23
Speaker 5: as critical to the UK. The armed forces, police, prison service,
32:29
Speaker 5: national health service, the fire service and of course our farmers.
32:34
Speaker 5: We need you to step up.
32:36
Speaker 2: Why?
32:37
Speaker 5: Because you know how to do this. You have already
32:39
Speaker 5: proved an allegiance of service to this great nation of
32:42
Speaker 5: ours and to the British people within. Patriotism is in
32:46
Speaker 5: your DNA. You are the fabric of the British people
32:49
Speaker 5: and they need you now more than ever. Your families,
32:53
Speaker 5: your communities and your brothers and sisters in arms. You,
32:57
Speaker 5: more than anyone, understand the importance of camaraderie. You know
33:01
Speaker 5: how to lead. You know how to communicate. You know
33:05
Speaker 5: how to inspire. You know how to teach. You know
33:08
Speaker 5: how to protect. You know the enemy. We all speak
33:13
Speaker 5: the same language. We all know the waltz and the remphs.
33:16
Speaker 5: and we don't need bond dukes. We know you have
33:20
Speaker 5: been betrayed, not by the British people, but by successive governments. We,
33:25
Speaker 5: at the Frontline Alliance, will put that right. We need
33:29
Speaker 5: you to create and lead small teams within your own communities,
33:33
Speaker 5: in partnership with civvies in those communities. We need you
33:36
Speaker 5: to bring those communities together. We will provide you with
33:40
Speaker 5: the infrastructure, the support, and eventually the funding to do this.
33:44
Speaker 5: We will protect. We will reassure, we will prepare, and
33:48
Speaker 5: most importantly, we will unify the British people. And we
33:52
Speaker 5: will get our country back. This will be mirrored across
33:55
Speaker 5: the whole country, every family, every community, every county. At
34:01
Speaker 5: national level, and in collaboration with organisations across the country,
34:05
Speaker 5: veteran and non-veteran, Frontline Alliance will hold the government and
34:09
Speaker 5: all political parties' feet to the fire. backed by overwhelming
34:13
Speaker 5: support from the public, led by veterans, and force change
34:18
Speaker 5: and win the next election. As community team leaders, you
34:22
Speaker 5: will morph into UKIS, the United Kingdom Immigration Security Service,
34:27
Speaker 5: the UK version of ICE, basically. A 70,000-man force, the
34:32
Speaker 5: same size as the British Army, responsible for the detention
34:35
Speaker 5: and deportation of migrants as illegal, criminal, terrorist, and all
34:40
Speaker 5: those that wish harm, do not contribute, do not assimilate,
34:45
Speaker 5: or do not integrate with British society until we get
34:48
Speaker 5: to net zero migration. I anticipate this will take about
34:52
Speaker 5: six years. UKISS will become an additional national security force
34:57
Speaker 5: alongside the police, the prison service, and the border force.
35:02
Speaker 5: At the same time, And directly following the election, Frontline
35:06
Speaker 5: Alliance will insist on state-funded whole life support for all veterans,
35:11
Speaker 5: releasing their current reliance on charity. This will include retrospective
35:16
Speaker 5: pensions for all those committed to operational service, irrespective of
35:20
Speaker 5: the length of service. War pensions for all those affected emotionally,
35:25
Speaker 5: mentally or physically from service. Legal protection to honour the
35:30
Speaker 5: covenant for previous service. Effective lifetime treatment for those suffering
35:36
Speaker 5: from the spectrum of PTSD. National priority for housing, career
35:41
Speaker 5: management and employment. And veterans discount for all services, financial
35:46
Speaker 5: agreements and purchases as standard. And the creation of a
35:51
Speaker 5: Ministry of Veterans alongside, not within, the Ministry of Defence.
35:56
Speaker 5: So that is the outline plan. So veterans, this is
36:00
Speaker 5: your time, without ego or favour. with integrity, with honour,
36:05
Speaker 5: and that irrepressible sense of humour, with empathy and dignity,
36:10
Speaker 5: irrespective of rank. The British people, our children, and the
36:14
Speaker 5: legacy of our forefathers need you.
36:17
Speaker 2: There we go. That was a sort of call to
36:19
Speaker 2: arms video by the Frontline Alliance. And I mean, it's
36:24
Speaker 2: not so much, you know, I don't want to get
36:25
Speaker 2: too fixated on either the Frontline Alliance or Alex Watts.
36:30
Speaker 2: himself but but more the this idea that it is
36:36
Speaker 2: it's sort of incumbent upon veterans and okay he's talking
36:39
Speaker 2: about other people he talks about uh all sort of
36:42
Speaker 2: services emergency services farmers and whatnot but but he's identifying
36:46
Speaker 2: groups people who should sort of sort this mess out
36:51
Speaker 2: but i think quite notable to see that the mess
36:55
Speaker 2: itself isn't really articulated.
36:56
Speaker 3: No that that was clear although And he also talks
37:02
Speaker 3: about holding governments to account.
37:04
Speaker 2: Yes. For what? Yes.
37:06
Speaker 3: But the only thing in that particular video clip that
37:10
Speaker 3: he comes back to focus on is immigration and achieving
37:18
Speaker 3: zero net immigration in six.
37:21
Speaker 2: Years, I think it was.
37:23
Speaker 3: So clearly... Immigration is one of the things that he's
37:27
Speaker 3: concerned about. But he also talks about threats early on
37:33
Speaker 3: in the clip. So what are the threats? My question is,
37:37
Speaker 3: what does Alex Watts think he is fighting? He clearly
37:43
Speaker 3: thinks there's a need to fight, albeit we'll put inverted
37:48
Speaker 3: commas around that because he's talking about veterans. But what
37:52
Speaker 3: does he... think he's fighting that's what i'd like to
37:56
Speaker 3: know that's what i'd ask him if we have the
37:58
Speaker 3: opportunity to.
37:58
Speaker 2: Talk yeah well we were you know well we will
38:00
Speaker 2: make an approach and um and see if he's he's
38:02
Speaker 2: willing to talk no i think i found that very
38:05
Speaker 2: interesting um the a lot of that is quite um
38:11
Speaker 2: is quite similar to some of the the sort of
38:16
Speaker 2: i suppose they are really only soundbites because they're never
38:17
Speaker 2: going to come to anything but the but what rupert
38:20
Speaker 2: lowe has said with yes with restore particularly that idea
38:23
Speaker 2: of there being a sort of immigration service that would
38:26
Speaker 2: be the size of the armed forces and would just
38:28
Speaker 2: be dispatching people here and there. I do find that
38:35
Speaker 2: odd to listen to, really.
38:36
Speaker 3: I found it strange because part of my mind is saying, well,
38:40
Speaker 3: this is very interesting because you're not talking about achieving
38:44
Speaker 3: a democratic power. You're talking about creating a force in
38:50
Speaker 3: order to do something.
38:51
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah.
38:52
Speaker 3: And you're not talking about what created the problem in
38:55
Speaker 3: the first place, which is the thing I always focus on.
38:58
Speaker 2: Exactly, yeah. And I think also there is a discordance
39:01
Speaker 2: in some of the message. And again, I don't mean
39:04
Speaker 2: this in any way as a sort of personal attack
39:07
Speaker 2: or an attack on Frontline Alliance, but it's just interesting
39:10
Speaker 2: to note that whilst there's talk in that video of
39:13
Speaker 2: unity and uniting communities, there is inherent in that the
39:18
Speaker 2: suggestion that they're just going to unite no matter whether
39:21
Speaker 2: they like it. Your job is to unite the community.
39:24
Speaker 2: First of all, as we all know, that's rather easier
39:27
Speaker 2: said than done. It's almost as if that can be
39:30
Speaker 2: done by force. And then the other thing, which is
39:33
Speaker 2: in another video, but we don't need to watch too
39:36
Speaker 2: much of this kind of thing, there is the sort of,
39:42
Speaker 2: as I say, rather telling remark of, well, not everyone's
39:45
Speaker 2: going to like it. And you think, yeah, well, in
39:48
Speaker 2: which case, how is this better from the status quo?
39:56
Speaker 2: It is confusing. I'm just going to show you one
39:59
Speaker 2: more clip because I think it does create context and
40:05
Speaker 2: I think it just needs to be seen, particularly with
40:08
Speaker 2: regard to migration. So just one more brief bit. Hope
40:14
Speaker 2: is not completely lost, however.
40:17
Speaker 1: If you want a model of where this is successful,
40:19
Speaker 1: then look no further than Israel. And I know that's
40:21
Speaker 1: going to get people's backs up, but it's true. A proud, strong,
40:25
Speaker 1: prosperous and secure nation with global influence and where Judaism,
40:30
Speaker 1: Christianity and Islam live in peace side by side. And
40:35
Speaker 1: a country that's faced and resisted adversity for decades. I
40:40
Speaker 1: think that this country is worth fighting for and restoring
40:43
Speaker 1: to the once great nation it was. We do not
40:46
Speaker 1: want to be suffering like the Iranian people in 20
40:48
Speaker 1: or 30 years' time.
40:49
Speaker 2: And that will happen if this happens. What do you
40:53
Speaker 2: make of that then?
40:55
Speaker 3: Well, I found it fascinating. The key thing for me
41:02
Speaker 3: is that he should choose Israel.
41:07
Speaker 2: As the model. Yes, I, yeah.
41:12
Speaker 3: And he pauses, doesn't he? He says something to the audience. Yeah,
41:16
Speaker 3: it might put people's backs up. Yeah, it might put
41:18
Speaker 3: people's backs up. Well, there's a good starting point. Why
41:21
Speaker 3: might it put people's backs up? Because this is not
41:24
Speaker 3: a good model. So my mind now says, and I'm
41:29
Speaker 3: watching this live, first time I've ever seen it. I've
41:33
Speaker 3: seen other clips from him, but that first one of
41:35
Speaker 3: this is what's actually going on here, that he chooses
41:39
Speaker 3: Israel to be the model.
41:40
Speaker 2: Yes, quite.
41:41
Speaker 3: Is that where the money's going to come from that
41:43
Speaker 3: he's suggesting that.
41:46
Speaker 2: I don't know. But you see, I do find this
41:48
Speaker 2: really interesting. This is why I do hope, I genuinely
41:52
Speaker 2: hope that he will talk to us because his personal situation, again,
41:56
Speaker 2: I don't want to necessarily dig into his personal life,
42:00
Speaker 2: but this is stuff he's said publicly. He lived and
42:03
Speaker 2: worked in West Africa for, I think, at least a
42:07
Speaker 2: decade and therefore absolutely... understands in that limited context how
42:14
Speaker 2: Islamic countries or countries that have a largely Islamic population operate.
42:18
Speaker 2: And he does not have an issue with Islam. This
42:22
Speaker 2: is not, in his words, sort of where this is
42:24
Speaker 2: coming from. Equally, he's married to a Nigerian lady. So
42:30
Speaker 2: all of these things are going on at the same time.
42:32
Speaker 2: But also he's talking about net migration. So in effect,
42:37
Speaker 2: if 2 million... supposedly sort of British people leave the
42:42
Speaker 2: country and are replaced by that number from elsewhere. Apparently,
42:47
Speaker 2: that's fine. It seems odd language, net migration. But on migration,
42:54
Speaker 2: he does make, I think, a point that is correct
42:58
Speaker 2: and it's well made. And it is not ever made
43:02
Speaker 2: by the likes of Tommy Robinson or indeed Rupert Lowe
43:05
Speaker 2: for that matter, which is to look at why it
43:08
Speaker 2: is that young men in particular are coming from war-torn
43:12
Speaker 2: countries into this country and he he does explain that
43:16
Speaker 2: very well he explains the finances of it he explains
43:18
Speaker 2: the the trafficking element of it he explains the what
43:23
Speaker 2: happens to any women that get caught up in it
43:25
Speaker 2: that may end up in some sort of um you
43:28
Speaker 2: know uh sort of sex slavery so he he's he
43:32
Speaker 2: is he's very much aware of all of that and
43:36
Speaker 2: um And therefore, he can see the dangers in effect,
43:39
Speaker 2: encouraging that system, encouraging the perpetuation of that system, or
43:43
Speaker 2: the funding of it, which I think sets him apart.
43:46
Speaker 2: Because I think that the line that Tommy Robinson and
43:49
Speaker 2: Rupert Lowe are happy to promulgate is, oh, these people
43:53
Speaker 2: want to come here in order to destroy this country.
43:55
Speaker 2: I think that's fundamentally untrue. And so it's interesting, though,
43:59
Speaker 2: that he can see what he does see because of
44:02
Speaker 2: his experiences and his understanding of the sort of the
44:05
Speaker 2: migrant route. and yet then come out with, well, we
44:09
Speaker 2: should be like Israel. Those seem to me to be
44:13
Speaker 2: two very jarring positions to take, or indeed that the
44:18
Speaker 2: enemy is somehow Islam. So there's a lot. There's a
44:23
Speaker 2: lot there.
44:25
Speaker 3: The other thing I saw in one of his video
44:28
Speaker 3: clips is where he specifically focused on egos and dignity.
44:36
Speaker 3: and said that basically these are two things that cause problems.
44:41
Speaker 3: And absolutely they do. So he's spot on with that.
44:44
Speaker 3: But I was quite taken that he said, you know,
44:47
Speaker 3: people are going on marches and what you don't see
44:51
Speaker 3: is dignity in the people taking place in the march
44:55
Speaker 3: and you don't see dignity in the people supporting the march.
45:00
Speaker 3: And I thought that was quite an astute point from him.
45:04
Speaker 2: I totally agree, yeah. It is really interesting. So anyway,
45:09
Speaker 2: I just thought that would be worth looking at because
45:15
Speaker 2: in some ways I can see how veterans would look
45:19
Speaker 2: at that and think, yeah, he's right. He's right in
45:22
Speaker 2: that we can sort this mess out. And to an extent,
45:27
Speaker 2: I believe the same thing, but just for a different
45:30
Speaker 2: set of reasons. And I think to sort of manifest
45:33
Speaker 2: in a different way, And it really just goes back
45:36
Speaker 2: to people just behaving like they should. And I think
45:40
Speaker 2: that the veterans' great strength is not just having a
45:47
Speaker 2: sense of right and wrong, but also, I mean, Lee
45:49
Speaker 2: does touch on it, like this idea of dignity and
45:53
Speaker 2: upholding those sorts of things that we should be upheld.
45:57
Speaker 2: But it doesn't require a centralised and coordinated approach system
46:03
Speaker 2: to make it work it's just reasons it's just what
46:06
Speaker 2: people should do yes yeah lots of good reasons as
46:10
Speaker 2: to why you don't want a centralized system because over
46:15
Speaker 2: the years we have seen sometimes very good efforts who
46:20
Speaker 2: worked on the centralized um organizational structure they are infiltrated
46:28
Speaker 2: and destroyed from inside yes um So there is a
46:33
Speaker 2: lot to be said for very loose structures where you're
46:37
Speaker 2: putting out the information to people, but you're allowing them
46:41
Speaker 2: to form whatever units they want. So maybe that, is
46:45
Speaker 2: there a little bit of his military training coming in
46:48
Speaker 2: there that he's thinking too much in terms of a
46:51
Speaker 2: military structure? Yeah, I think this is it. Yeah, absolutely.
46:56
Speaker 2: As opposed to a guerrilla structure, which is often much
47:00
Speaker 2: harder to defeat.
47:01
Speaker 3: Much harder to defeat. Yeah, that's absolutely true. There was
47:04
Speaker 3: another point that I was going to make that's just
47:06
Speaker 3: gone out of my head.
47:07
Speaker 2: I'll tell you, what do you think about it? I'm
47:10
Speaker 2: just interested in what I perceive to be a degree
47:12
Speaker 2: of overlap because he, whilst for reasons that are by
47:18
Speaker 2: and large, you know, coming from a good place, there is,
47:25
Speaker 2: there are undertones and at times overtones of it being,
47:32
Speaker 2: in a way, a sort of military coup, that, you know,
47:36
Speaker 2: this is what will happen, people will be told what
47:39
Speaker 2: to do is sort of what's coming out in it.
47:41
Speaker 2: And I find that interesting, because somebody else who's been
47:45
Speaker 2: doing a version of this, but for quite a lot longer,
47:48
Speaker 2: is an Australian called Ricardo Bossi, who was, he was
47:53
Speaker 2: in the Australian SAS some time ago. And He was
47:56
Speaker 2: very outspoken, and I think hit all the right marks
47:59
Speaker 2: from 2020. But you see, again, he, interestingly, is an
48:07
Speaker 2: absolutely devout supporter of Donald Trump. And to me, those
48:12
Speaker 2: two things, because, sorry, the point is that Bossy's line is,
48:16
Speaker 2: you know, it's up to veterans, we've got to sort
48:18
Speaker 2: it out. But at the same time, Donald Trump's good,
48:23
Speaker 2: getting it right, this, that and the other, which I
48:26
Speaker 2: find is not really reconciled with what he then goes
48:32
Speaker 2: on to say, which is, well, we need to sort
48:33
Speaker 2: it out and veterans are going to do it. And
48:38
Speaker 2: it's a little bit like what Alex Watts is putting
48:42
Speaker 2: out there, which is that the veterans will take over.
48:47
Speaker 2: There will be sort of an element of martial law
48:50
Speaker 2: to it. And that, to me, doesn't really seem like
48:55
Speaker 2: the right sort of answer or indeed the right kind
48:58
Speaker 2: of role for veterans, if veterans are to have a role.
49:03
Speaker 3: The other thing you could say it could do if
49:07
Speaker 3: it manifests slightly in the wrong direction is it would
49:12
Speaker 3: put them in direct conflict with the state because they
49:15
Speaker 3: would be perceived as being a yes a force exactly
49:21
Speaker 3: yeah directly operating against the state yeah so does this
49:26
Speaker 3: then become a terrorist organisation exactly is that what it
49:29
Speaker 3: gets labelled as exactly which would mean anybody who's signed
49:33
Speaker 3: into it and handed over their details would also be
49:38
Speaker 3: caught in that snare.
49:39
Speaker 2: Yeah Well, this is what I think is so fascinating,
49:43
Speaker 2: is regarding the state in trying to make its mind
49:49
Speaker 2: up about how it really views veterans. Are they a threat,
49:53
Speaker 2: or are they a useful tool, or are they both?
49:57
Speaker 2: And how to make sure that you get the balance right.
50:02
Speaker 2: And I do wonder how this will play out, because
50:06
Speaker 2: there have been such overtures made, you know, the the
50:10
Speaker 2: idea that veterans should be treated differently in some way.
50:14
Speaker 2: Because for a long period of time, veterans were basically
50:18
Speaker 2: regarded as a bit of a nuisance and most likely,
50:21
Speaker 2: or at least certainly in the, I think from the
50:24
Speaker 2: late 90s onwards, sort of damaged goods. You know, people
50:27
Speaker 2: have been in theatres of conflict. They weren't quite right.
50:30
Speaker 2: They were a bit problematic. It's just kind of, you know,
50:32
Speaker 2: put them to one side and forget about them. And
50:35
Speaker 2: then it became clear that... actually largely due to the
50:39
Speaker 2: work of um charities like help for heroes it was
50:42
Speaker 2: it was hard to ignore the armed forces and therefore
50:45
Speaker 2: the veterans as well and so the the circle has
50:48
Speaker 2: turned and we now have special in a way sort
50:53
Speaker 2: of special treatment for veterans with regard to you know
50:57
Speaker 2: the nhs and uh all sorts of other things the
51:01
Speaker 2: veteran the special veterans id card which was you know
51:05
Speaker 2: sort of in a kind of gimmicky way put on
51:08
Speaker 2: as though it was a bit of a treat to
51:09
Speaker 2: have this thing and it's not not really a treat
51:13
Speaker 2: necessarily um but but of course all of that captures
51:18
Speaker 2: data puts veterans in a place where you can communicate
51:20
Speaker 2: directly with them you know is is without doubt a
51:24
Speaker 2: control mechanism and the what what i'm minded of is
51:29
Speaker 2: the um forget the sort of name of the plot
51:32
Speaker 2: but the the appeal that was made to the American general,
51:36
Speaker 2: Smedley Butler, famous for writing War is a Racket, who
51:41
Speaker 2: was asked to lead what was effectively a coup, a 5,000-man
51:46
Speaker 2: strong sort of veterans army to overthrow Franklin Roosevelt. And
51:52
Speaker 2: he said no. But it was, I think, looking back
51:58
Speaker 2: then from now, it is interesting to see how the
52:05
Speaker 2: veteran occupies the minds of the state and the corporate
52:11
Speaker 2: world and the corrupt minds out there and all the
52:15
Speaker 2: rest of it.
52:15
Speaker 3: The state is very fearful. The state is involved in wrongdoing.
52:20
Speaker 3: Let's put a foundation down.
52:22
Speaker 4: Yes.
52:23
Speaker 3: And people want to know what that is. They need
52:25
Speaker 3: to start catching up on 20 years of the UK column.
52:28
Speaker 2: Yeah.
52:33
Speaker 3: But the state is absolutely fearful of any groups of
52:39
Speaker 3: people that it feels have got inherent capability by their intellect,
52:47
Speaker 3: their professional training, and most importantly, their ability to operate
52:53
Speaker 3: together as a group. I think this is a very
52:56
Speaker 3: frightening prospect for the state.
53:00
Speaker 4: Yeah.
53:03
Speaker 3: I think I do understand their mindset because they look
53:06
Speaker 3: out the window and they know they're doing wrong and
53:09
Speaker 3: they think if somebody comes for us, who is it
53:11
Speaker 3: going to be? Well, it's going to be a group
53:13
Speaker 3: of organised, capable people. And veterans fit into this mould
53:25
Speaker 3: quite rightly, very easily, don't they?
53:27
Speaker 2: Yes, they do.
53:27
Speaker 3: Because they've gone through a life of being controlled trained
53:32
Speaker 3: and organized and organized and or organizing other people and
53:38
Speaker 3: a lot of them are qualified at arms yeah yes
53:42
Speaker 3: so that's a pretty scary prospect for a government that's
53:45
Speaker 3: involved in criminality.
53:47
Speaker 2: It is it is i mean i think the question
53:49
Speaker 2: you know looking at what what is out there which
53:52
Speaker 2: is basically very little we've we've just looked at a
53:54
Speaker 2: couple of videos from frontline lines which has a very
53:58
Speaker 2: i think at the moment only a very very small
54:00
Speaker 2: base of support. The question is, is that or something
54:06
Speaker 2: like that going to gain traction? Is somebody going to
54:10
Speaker 2: come out of the woodwork and commit a large sum
54:13
Speaker 2: of money to it? Because at the moment, it appears
54:17
Speaker 2: certainly to be being done on a relative shoestring. There's
54:23
Speaker 2: not much there at the moment. But given the way
54:26
Speaker 2: in which things are going and this idea that Yeah,
54:30
Speaker 2: the further seeding, the idea that veterans have got to
54:32
Speaker 2: do something.
54:33
Speaker 3: Well, if you were a political party that's just taken
54:37
Speaker 3: 72 million, maybe you might say, let's give them 3
54:42
Speaker 3: million and get them started.
54:44
Speaker 2: Yeah, yes. And that would be, I.
54:48
Speaker 3: Would regard that as a possibility. Okay, I've just said
54:51
Speaker 3: it off the cuff, but I could see that that
54:55
Speaker 3: could happen. That would be a pretty dangerous combination.
54:58
Speaker 2: Yeah, it would.
55:00
Speaker 3: Because you would then end up with, albeit a new
55:05
Speaker 3: political party, but I think a very questionable one, having
55:10
Speaker 3: its own private army, effectively.
55:12
Speaker 2: Exactly. Yeah, that is exactly it. And I think that's
55:17
Speaker 2: really where all of this is going. I mean, or
55:21
Speaker 2: at least the idea of it, whether affiliated to a
55:25
Speaker 2: political party or not, that is really what we're talking about,
55:29
Speaker 2: is a private army.
55:32
Speaker 3: I have believed over a great many years that this
55:38
Speaker 3: country is being destroyed from the inside. I see the
55:43
Speaker 3: troubles and the chaos as orchestrated. So when, well, it
55:49
Speaker 3: could be Nigel Farage or it could be other political
55:53
Speaker 3: commentators talk about broken Britain. I recognise the country is broken,
55:59
Speaker 3: but I don't see it. has been some sort of
56:01
Speaker 3: accidental event or series of events that's broken Britain. I
56:08
Speaker 3: see that Britain has been deliberately broken apart from the
56:12
Speaker 3: inside and chaos is desired because the more chaos there is,
56:19
Speaker 3: the easier it is to continue the decline and the breakdown.
56:25
Speaker 3: So the country is being broken up from the inside.
56:28
Speaker 3: Where is it going to go? It's going to go
56:30
Speaker 3: into a dictatorship. That's what the chaos is designed to cover.
56:35
Speaker 3: And the structure we've just described where you have new
56:41
Speaker 3: political parties, whether it's restore or reform, coming together with
56:47
Speaker 3: a veteran's army, I'm being provocative there, but.
56:56
Speaker 3: The state could win in two directions because one, this
57:01
Speaker 3: could be perceived as a major terrorist threat and the
57:06
Speaker 3: government would say, we've got all these veterans now who
57:10
Speaker 3: are plotting to overthrow the government. We need to install
57:15
Speaker 3: martial law. So the clamp down comes from that direction
57:20
Speaker 3: or what we're seeing this initiative do is it or
57:25
Speaker 3: possibly it grows and then it's taken over to achieve
57:30
Speaker 3: the similar clamp down.
57:31
Speaker 2: Yes.
57:32
Speaker 3: So there's, there's lots of questions around this. And I
57:37
Speaker 3: wonder whether Alex would give us the opportunity to ask
57:42
Speaker 3: some questions.
57:43
Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah. Well, I would hope so. I mean, you know,
57:46
Speaker 2: after all, he, he wants the chance to explain his position, his,
57:51
Speaker 2: his message. And, um, And, you know, and from what
57:55
Speaker 2: we've listened to, I certainly would not reject everything he's saying. No,
58:02
Speaker 2: because he's clearly seeing something. Yeah, exactly.
58:05
Speaker 4: Yes.
58:05
Speaker 3: And also he's stood up to try and do something,
58:08
Speaker 3: whether or not what he's going to try and do
58:12
Speaker 3: is all correct or not.
58:14
Speaker 2: Yeah. So it's interesting. It is. I think it absolutely is. Charles,
58:18
Speaker 2: there's a.
58:18
Speaker 3: Little thought in my head as we're talking through this.
58:21
Speaker 3: At the beginning of this discussion, we were talking about
58:24
Speaker 3: the future of the armed forces. And I think we
58:27
Speaker 3: might have left a little bit of that hanging because
58:31
Speaker 3: whilst I did talk about problems within the armed forces,
58:36
Speaker 3: and so they'd got to a point of coming into
58:41
Speaker 3: 2026 and beyond where they weren't equipped for what... warfare
58:47
Speaker 3: has now become yeah but the other the other issue
58:52
Speaker 3: i think we're witnessing is the the slow dissolving of
58:58
Speaker 3: our armed forces is being replaced by an ever an
59:02
Speaker 3: ever more um glossy attempt to gather nation together to
59:10
Speaker 3: work together as allies and this has now gone beyond
59:15
Speaker 3: nato or maybe nato's about to be thrown away completely
59:20
Speaker 3: we're just allied nations standing up for good and so
59:27
Speaker 3: via the americans we've got a a massive economic campaign
59:33
Speaker 3: against Russia, which every nation's got to get involved with,
59:37
Speaker 3: otherwise they're sanctioned. And where I'm coming to is it
59:41
Speaker 3: seems to me that the operation of the military, the
59:45
Speaker 3: government is now doing it not on the basis that
59:49
Speaker 3: it is a national military, but it's just a group
59:53
Speaker 3: of trained people who can be put in any situation
59:57
Speaker 3: international mix in order to do the job. And I'm
1:00:03
Speaker 3: going to say, I now get the sense that what
1:00:06
Speaker 3: we're seeing is the start of the formation of a
1:00:09
Speaker 3: world military. And of course, the thing that comes off
1:00:13
Speaker 3: the back of that is that if you have a
1:00:15
Speaker 3: one world military, the only enemy is the individual.
1:00:22
Speaker 2: Yes. Yes, I wonder. I mean, I do agree with you.
1:00:26
Speaker 2: And it does look increasingly like that. I mean, to
1:00:32
Speaker 2: a certain extent, I wonder if that's because many other
1:00:38
Speaker 2: armed forces have experienced similar declines and therefore cannot operate
1:00:46
Speaker 2: without the assistance of whoever it may be. And I
1:00:51
Speaker 2: think we've seen that. I think we see that in Europe.
1:00:54
Speaker 2: in particular, a lot. So I know, I know, I know,
1:00:57
Speaker 2: that's a little bit of a sort of chicken and
1:00:58
Speaker 2: egg point. But, but I do agree. I mean, I,
1:01:03
Speaker 2: and also in suggesting that, you know, what does that
1:01:07
Speaker 2: say for, for the United Nations? And, you know, and,
1:01:14
Speaker 2: and who, who does, which sort of body does retain
1:01:19
Speaker 2: control over what happens where, and why. So I think there's, um,
1:01:26
Speaker 2: there is a lot to play out there, but, but no,
1:01:28
Speaker 2: I would, I would agree with you. That is, um,
1:01:30
Speaker 2: that is absolutely what it looks like. So you, I
1:01:33
Speaker 2: think you were, you were talking also about, um, what
1:01:35
Speaker 2: I would have referred to as PJ HQ at Northwood
1:01:39
Speaker 2: and how that's been allied now become allied branded. Yeah. Yeah.
1:01:44
Speaker 3: No, I know.
1:01:44
Speaker 2: I mean, no, it's, it's, it's, it's certainly from, from our,
1:01:48
Speaker 2: from the British armed forces point of view, uh, We
1:01:53
Speaker 2: occasionally are told about operations that have been conducted purely
1:01:58
Speaker 2: by our own armed forces, but increasingly now things are
1:02:03
Speaker 2: done on a collaborative basis with another nation. I mean,
1:02:08
Speaker 2: out of necessity, really, because how else would we do it?
1:02:12
Speaker 2: It's simply not possible.
1:02:15
Speaker 3: So the reduction in size and the reduction in capability
1:02:18
Speaker 3: of our armed forces automatically... forces us to um partner
1:02:28
Speaker 3: with the military of other nation states.
1:02:30
Speaker 2: Yeah yeah well and i think critically not just the
1:02:33
Speaker 2: militaries i think um we are seeing you know we've
1:02:37
Speaker 2: definitely talked about this before but we are seeing partnerships
1:02:42
Speaker 2: and alliances and working relationships that i don't think we
1:02:45
Speaker 2: should be seeing which is um which is you know
1:02:49
Speaker 2: connecting um our armed forces with other agencies, other departments
1:02:55
Speaker 2: into other countries and other corporations. I mean, the blurring
1:02:58
Speaker 2: of the lines and the bleeding of our organisations into others,
1:03:06
Speaker 2: it just does not look like it's going to go well.
1:03:10
Speaker 5: No.
1:03:11
Speaker 3: And the other thing that goes along with that, of course,
1:03:13
Speaker 3: is that increasingly equipment that we have, particularly high tech,
1:03:20
Speaker 3: is created by, what is the word, a partnership of
1:03:30
Speaker 3: different nationality companies. So we've got weapons systems with German
1:03:35
Speaker 3: components and French components and Italian components. And so we're
1:03:42
Speaker 3: not even operating equipment which falls within the national system.
1:03:49
Speaker 3: the national capability or security system yeah by the time
1:03:55
Speaker 3: you've accepted all these components from other countries how do
1:03:59
Speaker 3: you know that what you've got is what you wanted
1:04:02
Speaker 3: or it hasn't come with a an extra chip you've
1:04:06
Speaker 3: no idea.
1:04:06
Speaker 2: Exactly yes i know i mean the the you know
1:04:11
Speaker 2: which takes us sort of right back to the to
1:04:12
Speaker 2: the start really which is what what is what is
1:04:15
Speaker 2: the future Because really, if push came to shove and
1:04:18
Speaker 2: you were supposed to operate in a high-tempo environment and
1:04:23
Speaker 2: actually test all these things, how would that work? I
1:04:27
Speaker 2: don't think it would. I really don't think it would.
1:04:28
Speaker 3: Well, the other one I'll throw into the pot is
1:04:30
Speaker 3: that if Andy Burnham achieves his breakup of the United Kingdom...
1:04:37
Speaker 3: What are we going to have? We're going to have
1:04:38
Speaker 3: Scotland and Wales calling for their own navy and their
1:04:42
Speaker 3: own army. And then they'll end up with a tiny
1:04:47
Speaker 3: force which is not capable of doing anything but makes
1:04:50
Speaker 3: them feel proud. And if there's any real fighting to do,
1:04:55
Speaker 3: that capability, you know, is gone and joint coordination is gone.
1:05:00
Speaker 2: Yeah. So, yeah. A mess.
1:05:03
Speaker 5: A mess.
1:05:04
Speaker 2: I'm not sure where we are with time, actually. Well,
1:05:06
Speaker 2: I think we're probably there or thereabouts, actually. Yes, I
1:05:10
Speaker 2: think that probably is our allotted hour.
1:05:14
Speaker 3: Perhaps we could just end this by throwing out a
1:05:16
Speaker 3: challenge to the audience and saying that if there are
1:05:19
Speaker 3: any veterans who do listen in to this discussion and
1:05:25
Speaker 3: you'd be interested in talking to us, we'd certainly be
1:05:28
Speaker 3: interested in talking to you. But serious times for the UK.
1:05:35
Speaker 3: as Alex Watts is intimating. And there is the need
1:05:39
Speaker 3: for discussion with veterans, I think.
1:05:41
Speaker 2: Yeah, there is. Well, I think, you know, like I said,
1:05:43
Speaker 2: I mean, I find it hard to know what people
1:05:46
Speaker 2: are thinking. And so I think just to get feedback from,
1:05:49
Speaker 2: you know, whether or not you are a veteran, but
1:05:50
Speaker 2: if you are in touch with veterans and you, do
1:05:53
Speaker 2: you think that what we're talking about is sort of,
1:05:56
Speaker 2: you know, strikes a chord? Yeah, we would love to hear.
1:05:59
Speaker 2: So that would be great.
1:06:00
Speaker 3: The last person I give a mention to is Commodore Jeremy,
1:06:03
Speaker 3: who's been speaking out and gaining quite some traction with
1:06:08
Speaker 3: what he's been talking about. So I have got some
1:06:13
Speaker 3: feelers going out at the moment in his direction, but
1:06:16
Speaker 3: if he should come across this talk, we'd love.
1:06:19
Speaker 2: To talk to him as well. Yeah, very much so. Yeah. Yeah. Great. Okay. Righto, Brian.
1:06:24
Speaker 2: Until the next one. Until the next one. Okay.
1:06:26
Speaker 5: Right.