Thanks Thanks:  86
Likes Likes:  367
Dislikes Dislikes:  14
Page 3 of 17 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 407

Thread: New Generals?

  1. #51
    Banned User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    1,282
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by hedgehog View Post
    It's an appointment,

    With our strength there is really no need for so many generals, we should at max have two generals.
    The Swiss have the right idea- a full General is appointed only in time of war. The last was the great Vaudois Henri Guisan in WW2. Even in the modern Swiss Army titles such as Divisionnaire are used. Anyone travelling in Switzerland can only be impressed by the common sight of Swiss soldiers traveling on trains to camp with their weapons. Michael Collins wanted the New Irish Army to be modelled on the Swiss-pity he did not have time to see it through.

  2. #52
    Closed Account Goldie fish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    you already know too much
    Posts
    33,440
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by hedgehog View Post
    It's an appointment,

    With our strength there is really no need for so many generals, we should at max have two generals.
    In the Army or in the DF?
    I cannot fathom why the head of an islands defence force, is an army general. Given the state is surrounded on 3 sides by water, and covered by sky surely the proportion of defence command should reflect this? Why is the CoS position not either shared or rotated between the 3 branches?
    Brig general for Army, Air Corps and Naval service. There is no practical need why a colonel cannot command a brigade. Their role as head of corps directorates is purely a superficial one, designed so they can mark time till a Brigade command comes up. Compare it to the equivalent in the Air Corps and Naval service, where each of the 4 (2 each) colonels occupy actual technical management positions within the ORBAT. There is no overlap.

    Think of it.
    Lt commands Pln/tp
    Capt 2ic to Comdt
    Comdt commands Coy/bty/sqn
    Lt Col Commands Bn/rgt
    colonel... well er.. um...2ic to brig gen? So why do we need so many?
    Brig Gen commands Brigade...
    Simples.

  3. #53
    Private 3* Jungle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,523
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Goldie fish View Post
    Think of it.
    Lt commands Pln/tp
    Capt 2ic to Comdt
    Comdt commands Coy/bty/sqn
    Lt Col Commands Bn/rgt
    colonel... well er.. um...2ic to brig gen? So why do we need so many?
    Brig Gen commands Brigade...
    Simples.
    Interesting; we had the same arrangement years ago, then reorganized our structure. Now we have Cols commanding Bdes, and BGens commanding Areas.

    We have more Gens then we have formations; one BGen is second-in-command to the US Army III Corps, others are tasked to different international orgs. We also keep higher-level HQs and staff for tasks like assuming command of RC(S) or missions like Libya.
    "On the plains of hesitation, bleach the bones of countless millions, who on the very dawn of victory, laid down to rest, and in resting died.

    Never give up!!"

  4. #54
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,752
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Bravo20 View Post
    Is the term GOC an appointment rather than a rank?
    Quote Originally Posted by hedgehog View Post
    It's an appointment,

    With our strength there is really no need for so many generals, we should at max have two generals.
    It isn't an appointment but what does the G stay for? You have to be of General staff rank to hold the appointment.

    Ah, the establishment versus the strength! But that will change (assuming the change the establishment as well)

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldie fish View Post
    In the Army or in the DF?
    I cannot fathom why the head of an islands defence force, is an army general. Given the state is surrounded on 3 sides by water, and covered by sky surely the proportion of defence command should reflect this? Why is the CoS position not either shared or rotated between the 3 branches?
    Brig general for Army, Air Corps and Naval service. There is no practical need why a colonel cannot command a brigade. Their role as head of corps directorates is purely a superficial one, designed so they can mark time till a Brigade command comes up. Compare it to the equivalent in the Air Corps and Naval service, where each of the 4 (2 each) colonels occupy actual technical management positions within the ORBAT. There is no overlap.
    Assuming the person is qualified and has come throught the ranks (including Major General) I see no reason why not?

    The UK, NZ and Australia are all islands. I know the UK rotate it, not sure what NZ do but they have heads of the 3 services and the equivalent of the COS is a Lt General.

  5. #55
    Private 3* Jungle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,523
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    The UK, NZ and Australia are all islands. I know the UK rotate it, not sure what NZ do but they have heads of the 3 services and the equivalent of the COS is a Lt General.
    Interesting... we used to rotate the CDS between the 3 Services; now, the person best-qualified gets the job. Our current CDS is Army (Armour).

    The Canadian Army, RCN and RCAF are force generators, commanded by LGens; Canada-Command and Expeditionary Forces Command are force employers, also commanded by LGens. MGens command divisions or equivalent multi-national formations.
    "On the plains of hesitation, bleach the bones of countless millions, who on the very dawn of victory, laid down to rest, and in resting died.

    Never give up!!"

  6. #56
    Captain Truck Driver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Here And There...
    Posts
    10,172
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    It isn't an appointment but what does the G stay for? You have to be of General staff rank to hold the appointment....
    Where does it says that though ? As I said previously, officers of Colonel rank held the appointment in the past
    "Well, stone me! We've had cocaine, bribery and Arsenal scoring two goals at home. But just when you thought there were truly no surprises left in football, Vinnie Jones turns out to be an international player!" (Jimmy Greaves)!"

  7. #57
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,752
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Truck Driver View Post
    Where does it says that though ? As I said previously, officers of Colonel rank held the appointment in the past
    The establishment!

    Same way a Captain can't call himself the Coy Comdr even though there is a vacancy

  8. #58
    Serf hedgehog's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    14,499
    Post Thanks / Like
    It's an appointment not a rank,
    Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
    Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
    The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere***
    The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
    The best lack all conviction, while the worst
    Are full of passionate intensity.

  9. #59
    Lt General Bravo20's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    The Big Smoke
    Posts
    4,868
    Post Thanks / Like
    But a Captain can hold the Coy Commander appointment, if he/she is posted into that appointment.

  10. #60
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,752
    Post Thanks / Like
    From what I have been told they can't! They can in effect be the Coy Commander but will hold the appointment of 2i/c.

    Unless you hold the qualifications for an appointment (in this case the rank), you can't hold the appointment.

  11. #61
    Closed Account Goldie fish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    you already know too much
    Posts
    33,440
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by kermit View Post
    Corps Directors, O/C Colleges, etc
    You mean "jobs for the boys". Do we need corps directorates? Does the OC need to be a colonel?

  12. #62
    Corporal
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    69
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Goldie fish View Post
    From the Dail Yesterday

    1x Maj Gen(22,24feb)
    1x Brig Gen(13,20/21feb)
    6x Col(12Mar)
    12x Lt Col(??)

    A future COS will most definitely be amongst those promoted after the competitions above. Is there any bright and shining lights coming up the officer ranks, that aren't close to retirement, who can steer the DF through the White paper process, in the days of recession, while still keeping a credible and efficient Defence Force?
    There are more potential moves and promotions before a COS vacancy is there so I would think there are still plenty of cards to be dealt yet

  13. #63
    BQMS
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    674
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Goldie fish View Post
    You mean "jobs for the boys". Do we need corps directorates? Does the OC need to be a colonel?
    Be careful what you wish for Goldie. Many of the posters on this forum seem to have a severe case of myopia when it comes to the same issue as it applies to officers and o/ranks.

    Why does an Ord Room Sgt need to be a Sgt? Why do MPs need to be at least Cpls? Why does the senior NCO in an Arty Regiment need to be a Sgt Maj? The answers to those questions are the same as why a Corps Director or OC Sch needs to be a Col when the unit in that Corps are lead by a Lt Col............the authority of the rank when issuing orders/instructions/TIs etc.

    In less constrained times it was a simple approach to something which would become far more complicated otherwise. Different times suggest that a more complicated solution will just have to be found for officer and NCO appointments. Just remember that the payroll savings in any project to depress officer ranks downwards will be a fraction of the savings for same exercise among NCOs. Don't cod yourself, the case for the defence for many NCO appointments is equally under threat. The only pers safe from this are the Ptes and Lts but they will loose out on promotion opportunities.

    It's the usual persecution complex reaction of you "make the poor rich by making the rich poor". Go for the sensational example, the lads in the canteen busy bitching about the upper ranks but never taking the time to look in the mirror. Meanwhile, ignore all the elephants in the room like all the PDF pers employed as RDF cadre as just one example.

    There's no doubt that some officer appointments should be reviewed but NCOs are no postion to be throwing stones either. Some officers have looked after themselves in the past but they've also looked after NCOs too (often as a reward for an NCO looking after them so well). During the Defence Forces Review and Implementation Plan (DFRIP - can you believe no one saw that); D ARTY lost the directorship but held on to the RSM in each Regiment.

    For altogether different reasons you could question why all ARW pers being at least Cpl and why there are all the NCOs in technical appointments like the Band and workshops etc. or why the NS and AC have a very high % of NCOs. Furthermore, there are as many 'questionable' senior NCO appointments as senior Officer appointments in DFHQ.

    On a human level I will not be canvassing for any officer or NCO to be made redundant, forced to be a SWA or loose out on any promtion prospects for the rest of their career.

  14. #64
    Cpl
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Monaghan, back arse of No where
    Posts
    275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Jessup View Post
    The answers to those questions are the same as why a Corps Director or OC Sch needs to be a Col when the unit in that Corps are lead by a Lt Col............the authority of the rank when issuing orders/instructions/TIs etc.
    "Don't confuse your rank with my authority" as the saying goes.

  15. #65
    BQMS
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    674
    Post Thanks / Like
    Agreed, but imagine the 'confusion' when dealing with charges; Cpl Bloggs disobeyed a direct order from Pte (MP) Jones or Cpl Smith did not complete the task as instructed by Cpl Murphy. Maybe there's no need for rank to carry authority and everyone should be called comrade? Would be great when there's an incident and the dreaded question "who was the senior man/woman"? No one!

  16. #66
    Major General
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    3,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    Its not the authority thing as such thats being questioned,its the amount of persons holding various levels of rank in given units/corps.

  17. #67
    Cpl
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Monaghan, back arse of No where
    Posts
    275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Jessup View Post
    Agreed, but imagine the 'confusion' when dealing with charges; Cpl Bloggs disobeyed a direct order from Pte (MP) Jones or Cpl Smith did not complete the task as instructed by Cpl Murphy. Maybe there's no need for rank to carry authority and everyone should be called comrade? Would be great when there's an incident and the dreaded question "who was the senior man/woman"? No one!
    If the person who issues a legit order and holds the required authoirty, regardless of rank, such as your MP example above then where is the problem? If Cpl Bloggs didn't do what he should have done, then theres the problem. No confusion there.

    As for the senior man/woman, is it not the case within the DF that all personnel are taught to take charge if there is no one there already designated too? For example at section level, from IC to 2/IC to 1RM etc. If the IC and 2/IC are taken away, then it is up to 1RM to assume command until thier return. Seniorty does not come into it there. The problem arises when no one has the balls to do what they are trained to too!

  18. #68
    BQMS
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    674
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Vamp369 View Post
    If the person who issues a legit order and holds the required authoirty, regardless of rank, such as your MP example above then where is the problem? If Cpl Bloggs didn't do what he should have done, then theres the problem. No confusion there.

    We're going off thread here vamp, but there's four pretexts in your scenario above, each on their own represent complications. If it's there's no problem or confusion, then linking it to the question about why all the Generals and Colonels; why must PDF MPs in ireland need to be at least Cpls? If you disagree with the link between rank and authority then surely PDF MP Cpls is another example of 'jobs for the boys'. We know that's not the case, so that logic must apply when applied to Generals and Colonels who are hated even more than MPs

    As for the senior man/woman, is it not the case within the DF that all personnel are taught to take charge if there is no one there already designated too? For example at section level, from IC to 2/IC to 1RM etc. If the IC and 2/IC are taken away, then it is up to 1RM to assume command until thier return. Seniorty does not come into it there. The problem arises when no one has the balls to do what they are trained to too!

    You're making my point. In order for someone to be in charge you follow the chain of command. The reason for a Corps Director being a Col is the simplicity of the chain of command where he/she out ranks the Lt Col unit commanders, the same with D COS SP and D COS OPS out ranking the Bde OCs. The simplicity of this follows a basic rule of the military; K.I.S.S. It's not 'jobs for the boys'. In the current environment such simplicity might be seen as a luxury and more complex solutions will have to investigated across appointments in all ranks. EG the senior NCO in an Arty Reg being the most senior CS and the Unit OC is the most senior Comdt? Ok when it's case of "2 i/c take over" but can foresee all sorts of problems if that was the default configuration.
    __
    Last edited by Jessup; 13th March 2012 at 01:18.

  19. #69
    Closed Account Goldie fish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    you already know too much
    Posts
    33,440
    Post Thanks / Like
    But.. do you really need a Corps Director?

  20. #70
    Hostage Flamingo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Over the water
    Posts
    3,066
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by timhorgan View Post
    Michael Collins wanted the New Irish Army to be modelled on the Swiss-pity he did not have time to see it through.
    The only problem with his idea Tim, is that he'd also have to model the Irish people on the Swiss, and I couldn't see that succeeding somehow, could you?
    'He died who loved to live,' they'll say,
    'Unselfishly so we might have today!'
    Like hell! He fought because he had to fight;
    He died that's all. It was his unlucky night.
    http://www.salamanderoasis.org/poems...nnis/luck.html

  21. Likes terrier liked this post
  22. #71
    BQMS
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    674
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Goldie fish View Post
    But.. do you really need a Corps Director?
    Fair question. From what I've heard, "everything is on the table" now Goldie. The Infantry Corps have managed without a Corps Director and they're the 'biggest' Corps.

    D ARTY and D CAV were 'merged' years ago but units are still separate, contrary to what happens overseas with ARTY and CAV in the same sub unit. There's speculation of a combined Arty/Cav Regiment per Bde?

    The LSBs went the opposite way. The units were merged but retained their individual Corps Directors. For those folks there's speculation of a new 'D Logs' with specialist staff officers in S&T, Ordnance, Medical etc. The Corps loose their separate directors and some of the staff officers and NCOs.

    It's not nice for anyone to have their career path narrowed due to a lack of vacancies but it tough for everyone in this country at the moment. I'm advocating a bit of balance and foresight about so called 'jobs for the boys'. Any 'casualties' will not be limited to officers.

  23. #72
    Captain Truck Driver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Here And There...
    Posts
    10,172
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Jessup View Post
    Fair question. From what I've heard, "everything is on the table" now Goldie. The Infantry Corps have managed without a Corps Director and they're the 'biggest' Corps...
    Ohhh - there was one a couple of years ago - gone since ?

    Any 'casualties' will not be limited to officers.
    This is also true - the associated support staffs - NCOs and Ptes would also be lost in such a re org - meaning redeployment of same to other
    units / locations
    "Well, stone me! We've had cocaine, bribery and Arsenal scoring two goals at home. But just when you thought there were truly no surprises left in football, Vinnie Jones turns out to be an international player!" (Jimmy Greaves)!"

  24. #73
    Serf hedgehog's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    14,499
    Post Thanks / Like
    Many of the posters on this forum seem to have a severe case of myopia when it comes to the same issue as it applies to officers and o/ranks.
    Ah the old them and us defence- if in doubt throw in a curve ball- dont worry Jess its not a them and us situation now, the recent multiple senior officer appointments has made sure of that, and just in case you think it is-

    -Some of my best freinds are black,
    -Some of my best freinds are gay,
    -Some of my best freinds are officers,
    -Some of my best freinds are goths-

    that counter defence will work all the time.
    Why does an Ord Room Sgt need to be a Sgt?
    Because its the rank set out in the establishment- an Ord Room Sgt is a trmemdously responsible job- very few units have trained Adjts or Admin Officers so in a lot of Units the O Room Sgt actually does the work of the Officer who reads the Metro and gets the salute etc etc-

    You will find now because of the promotion embargo that a lot of Units dont have an O Room SGt but rather an O room Cpl doing the work of the Sgt and the Capt.(unpaid)

    Again its not a them and us myopia but I am glad that we have Col's exercising the vital function of Corp Directors and the little known job of Bde EO.



    Why do MPs need to be at least Cpls?
    Up to quiet recently (last ish month or two) we had PA's who did the course but because of the embargo they didnt get the stripe.

    Why does the senior NCO in an Arty Regiment need to be a Sgt Maj?
    Because they are an operational Unit and if you had 4 Btys with 4 Bty Sgts and no RSM - who exactly is in charge?



    The answers to those questions are the same as why a Corps Director or OC Sch needs to be a Col when the unit in that Corps are lead by a Lt Col............the authority of the rank when issuing orders/instructions/TIs etc.

    Nothing like it at all.>
    Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
    Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
    The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere***
    The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
    The best lack all conviction, while the worst
    Are full of passionate intensity.

  25. #74
    BQMS
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    674
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by hedgehog View Post
    Because its the rank set out in the establishment

    Up to quiet recently (last ish month or two) we had PA's who did the course but because of the embargo they didnt get the stripe.

    Because they are an operational Unit and if you had 4 Btys with 4 Bty Sgts and no RSM - who exactly is in charge?

    Nothing like it at all.>
    So let's get this straight; A question is asked about why a certain appointment carries a certain rank. If the question relates to o/ranks an acceptable justification can be "that's the rank set out in the establishment". However, if the question relates to officers that justification cannot be used? So for o/ranks the policy is, that's the way it always has been and that's the way it will be but when it comes to officers snide comments about 'jobs for the boys' are fair comment?

    As for the PA/MP example, I see you're not denying the some appointments benefit from a minimum rank to promote the authority of that appointment holder when trying to do their job. Just to be clear, that intention is organisational support when it applies to o/ranks but it's jobs for the boys when it applies to officers? Your PA/MP alumni are in diificult position made more challenging by not carrying the stripe. However, their plight is not a unique one. Plenty of officers have done the J C&S since the embargo HH. Many have not been promoted from Capt and are working a Coy Comdrs for lengthy periods while the other Coy Comdrs in the same unit are Comdts. This leads to obvious challenges when two Coy Comdrs are fighting for resources or a fair allocation of taskings for their Coy with one and Captain and the other a Comdt. Add to that that the Captain Coy Comdr might be 'junior' to the Captain Adjt, QM, Ops Officer etc.

    As for your last point, that's just a blatant double standard. The RSM must be an RSM so that he/she can be 'in charge' of 4 x BS. How is that not the same as a Maj Gen having to be a Maj Gen so that he/she can be in charge of the 3 x Bde OCs for Ops and Sp issues? Or, how is that not the same as a Col must be a Col to be 'in charge' of the 3 x Unit Comdrs. Operations, Training, Doctrine, someone has to be in charge. It's exactly the same thing..................except it's not when it applies to officers?

    BTW I presume you mis-spelled friends (freinds) on purpose. None of your best friends are black or gay or goth or officers, are they?
    Last edited by Jessup; 14th March 2012 at 11:18.

  26. Thanks kermit thanked for this post
  27. #75
    Lord Chief Bottlewasher trellheim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Cathal Brugha
    Posts
    9,121
    Post Thanks / Like
    ÓGLAIGH NA hÉIREANN
    Tá an Rialtas inniu tar éis
    An Briogáidire-Ghinearál Conor O’Boyle
    (Brigadier-General Conor O’Boyle)
    a cheapadh chun oifig Leas-Cheann Fóirne (Tacaíocht) Óglaigh
    na hÉireann, go ceann tréimshe dar tosach an 6 Márta, 2012
    agus dar críoch 28 Meán Fómhair, 2014.
    MARTIN FRASER
    Ard-Rúnaí an Rialtais
    BAILE ÁTHA CLIATH, DUBLIN,
    An 6ú lá seo de Márta, 2012. This 6th day of March, 2012.
    http://www.irisoifigiuil.ie/currentissues/IR130312.pdf
    "Are they trying to shoot down the other drone? "

    "No, they're trying to fly the tank"

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •