Aha - so soldiers unquestionably obey (and have to obey) orders once they are given. - Well that may well be. But soldiers enlist with the aim of defending their country. What right do politicians have to send them out on a dangerous, unnecessary, counter-productive and illegal adventure against a sovereign-state on the basis of false information? -- In such circumstances the top-brass have the duty to speak out - as I said before, publicly if necessary - against this action for the safety of the men under their command. Of course the final decision must be taken by the politicians, but a soldier should not be gagged simply because he is a soldier. Don't forget that even a soldier (!) is a citizen of a democratic state with the rights and duties that this entails.

alan, cologne,

To Sean from Leeds

I give you the famous latin tag "Dulce et decorum est......" from
Horace as a logical extension of your rant "it`s their job".
The powerful and ironic last two lines of Wifred Owen`s poem
Dulce et decorum est sums it up.

The old lie dulce et decorum est
pro patria mori

Denver Watt, Osaka, Japan

A good article and I agree wholeheartedly.
Perhaps the time has come to bring back National Service. At least the whole country would feel itself involved, and the politicians would be held to account. This is probably more important even than the other consideration: that it might civilise our 'feral' youth. And even educate them and give them a trade!
Nothing our politicians touch results in anything but chaos, incompetence, and failure at vast expense to the taxpayer! The purpose of the military is to protect the country, not to fight unnecessary 'liberal' wars with pitifullly, laughably 'contemptible' ,little bodies of men, badly equiped -if, thank God, still very well-led.
Let us build up the Forces again, give them time to recover and train, and equip them properly. And only fight wars vital to our security. And if we can save the social structure of the country and educate the young at the same time -let the Army succeed when the civil institutions have so evidently failed!

Robert Sebag-Montefiore, Geneva, Switzerland

Sir ,
An excellent and thought provoking article which highlights
the terrible conditions under which our armed forces serve
under. You are quite right to excoriate the government
especially the Treasury, i.e. Brown. However what could we
really expect from Brown who is merely a grubby grasping
grobian of a politician who lacks integrity. Brown, for 10 years
paid the piper, parsimoniously of course, bow he calls the
tune and does not want to pay for it.

A plague on Brown and his house.

Denver Watt, Osaka, Japan

Irrespective of the rights or wrongs of the action in Iraq or Afghanistan (which is a matter for the politicians), the troops in these locations have been sent to do a job. If the POLITICIANS wish to send troops to fight, then they must fund the forces accordingly. It is rather disengenuous to say that you disagree with the action, and therefore, the politicans must REDUCE the funding for it.

Our soldiers are not employed and armed to question why they are doing the job they've been sent to do. They simply do as they are required to by the politicians. It follows that those same politicians have an OBLIGATION to those they would send to battle, to ensure that there is enough money provided to ensure the best outcome.

The politicians of today must answer for their decisions, and that includes the decision to withold the necessary equipment and funding for an army they've sent to battle.

They cannot hide stupidity away from the public eye - this is not Stalin's Russia.

Myles Evans, Hastings, UK

To those who opine that "the troops be given whatever it takes to win regardless of cost"
Please tell me what a win would look like ??!
Is it a Tripartite Iraq, is it Afghanistan under a dictatorship or as a failed state again??
Is is a secure oil source or reduced poppy cultivation??
If the fight is for a minimally invasive status quo, then lets not spend the cash.
If its to "defend Western Civilization" then may providence help Western Civ for it cannot help itself.
Gone are the days when "the natives" would be content to be doormats for empire.
Neither Iraq nor Afghanistan is a classic war of attrition, its just a hard slog. If lives cost less than Multimillion dollar kit, then spending lives is the poliitic (and correct) thing to do for the whole society.
Of course decency demands we never say this to the women and children.
The real problem is the debate on these two wars is carried on by innuendo and in competition with the US superpower.
Isnt Alliance wonderful.

Jaquin, New York, NewJoisey

I agree.

Denver Watt, Osaka, Japan

I spent a little time in the British army in the late eighties / early nineties, and recall the only decent personal gear we had was privately purchased (boots, gloves, bivvy bags...). Equipment was usely vastly inferior to that of the Americans. I thought it was a disgrace then, and clearly things aren't any better now. As shameful as the current situation is, and as unimpressed as I am with the current government, I wonder if the situation would differ much if the Tories had been in power for the last decade or so? Does the standard of US military equipment vary dramatically between administrations?

Dave, Toronto,

Once the order is given, soldiers will unquestioningly pack their gear and board a plane into battle. I believe it is a crime that those soldiers are unable to pack the best available kit and in the event of injury, be evacuated at a moment's notice on the best available transport.

I am certain a number of other public servants hailing not from the military, but Westmister, would cry foul if private cars and private assistants are not available to ferry them between their government paid for flats and the Commons.

Mr Tony Blair. Know that this is blood on your hands.

Stan, London,

I agree that a military background may help MPs decide more wisely on the fate of their constituent sons. Clear positive action is needed to address the many appalling Afghan/Iraq shortcomings, both are complete ocean going disasters, no one (gov't) is listening or accountable. Service leaders selfishly tow the line they have no desire to challenge the government's direction, indeed in my view they are as bad as MP's. I can only admire the tiny number of 'teeth end' troops, very young, straight, honest and grossly underpaid for the hardships faced. They are to be revered, honoured and supported without fail or prejudice. The aforementioned must earn their pay by doing the decent thing, look the troops in the eye and give them what they deserve, before its too late.

O J P M , Huntingdon,

I am concerned about the lack of training afforded to the reserve forces due to cutbacks. Trying to train ourselves 'from the bottom up' changes weekly due to cutbacks to our weekend and weeknight training.

Yet vast sums of money are found for wasteful ineffective projects compared to the one million punds we have told that it costs to run the then largest TA Engineer regiment. The account of goodwill has been overdrawn for some time now and experienced soldiers and NCOs are leaving. This reduction in costs I am sure is appreciated in some quarters but there has been an exponential loss in effectiveness. I for one am withdrawing my services so I may concentrate on where I will receive some return rather than frustration. Perhaps one day someone may realise that you cannot bring back these institutions and their proud service to country and crown will be a memory not a capability

JH, Sheffield, South Yorkshire

We have a 30 billion pound defence budget, and something like 10,000 troops on front line fighting duty. If we had 20,000 troops on front line fighting duty, would that mean our defence budget would have to be 60 billion pounds or a staggering 6% of UK GDP
a) Why do we have a base in Cyprus b) Why do we still have bases in Germany c) Why is the whole of Salisbury Plain, which is prime agricultural land in the South of England, taken over by a bunch of hoorays driving around in expensive Challenger tanks, which have no relevance whatsoever to any conflict we are likely to get involved in, in the immediate future. Why not move, what in future will be called "The Bradley Fighting Vehicle Range" up to the North of Scotland, where land is about a tenth of the price. Answer these questions before you ask for more money PLEASE.

Bob, Twickenham,

It is all very well senior officers objecting to government policy in private. But none of them ever resigns over the issue. And so the coal face serviceman/woman take the brunt with death and injuries. Come on you Privileged and Responsible few if the state of the armed forces isn't a resigning matter then I fear what is. Mind you it would take courage and loyalty to support Tommy as he/she deserves.

Henry GB, Brampton, Cumbria

Ok, the military cannot comment publicly on defence matters. Fair enough. Let us also ensure the police cannot comment on crime; doctors on health care; and more importantly politicians on political matters. Add this to obsessive secrecy in the courts (to the extent of not being able to report that a case even happened); surveillance on every aspect of day to day lives; national registers of all children; DNA registration; ID Cards; severe limits on demonstrations (even using the anti-terrorism laws against individual peacefull demonstrators); manipulation of crime statistics in the same vein as the 'newspeak' in Orwell's 1984; and the domination of parliament and our elected representatives by the party machines.
Given the overall picture of life in general within the UK it would appear that the old slogan of "Socialism is really a more quiet version of Communism" is not far from the truth.

Jonathan Mills, Brighton,

All those serving in the forces do so knowing that we may be asked to provide the ultimate sacrifice if need be and for that we are paid well.....the nation also owes those serving a covenant that it will give us all we need in return.
£92 billion to an NHS that is a failure and only £32 billion to an MOD that performs miracles....do the maths;maybe a few less NHS consultants could pay for the body armour/helicopters/medics/suitable accommodation etc

almost a civvy, Germany,

While I agree with just about every assertion made in this article, it does not address the fundamental issue of public apathy. When asked if our fighting men should be better equipped, supported etc, people will generally respond: "of course". The truth however is that the war in Iraq does not impact directly upon our everyday lives only upon the families of our dead or injured soldiers. As long as we remain largely indifferent and fail to make our feelings known, Gordon Brown can take advantage of our antipathy and starve an insitution he most clearly hates. As WRM points out you have only to look at the appointment/retention of the pathetic, inadequate Des Browne to know that this is true. This callous disregard, for ten years, of brave men should disqualify Gordon Brown from any further role in public life. I reality our ignorance and indifference gives him a seemingly unassailable lead in the polls. Shameful.

Bob, London,

For years's this has been going on!

It appear's in this country we accept curruption in all walk's of life!

We need at least the recent four infantry battalion's reformed.

Our men\women must have the equipment they require!

Lets sack lots of civil servants and government lackies, I am sure it would cover the cost!

Stefan Parmenter, london, uk

Any UK citizen who feels there is some circumstance when they would support the UK armed forces being involved in a war has a responsibility to try and ensure the armed forces are funded and treated properly.

Service personnel paying the price for the UK media and public who don't support a particular war is wrong. If you disagree with a war the price should be paid by the politicians who orderd it, not the service personnel who have a duty to follow the orders of those politicians.

Nick Jones, London,

This Authoritarian government, controls everywhere it can, therefore stopping free speech is at the centre of its policies. They lie and spin, because we the voters keep voting them in we are partially to blame, for this mess. The opposition parties are content being just that, its manly the news media that allow we the people a little knowledge of what’s really going on. Meanwhile our brave lads and lasses are dying and suffering horrific injuries for what. Now GB’s banned them from even having an opinion and voicing their views. We should demand openness and not accept more cover-ups, this is where the Tories should act on the nations behalf. Alas unless they feel an election is looming they stay quite and content receiving salaries and MP status for what! Will some one please stand up and be counted before it’s to late!

Michael Mallin, Shffield,

Hive off a part of the NATO member states aid budget for Afghanistan on a program that provides free dental care, vitamins and glucose supplements for children regardless of background. Then listen to what mother has to say.

Sonnenblume, Midwoud, Holland

The situation with our Armed Forces has been developing over at least the last decade if not two. The rot started in the late 1980's when replacement platforms were not ordered to replace ageing ships, planes and vehicles and the excuse was that after the cold war there was a need to conduct various and numerous options for change in order to reduce the size of HM Armed Forces. Regrettably the programme of change and reduction did not stop and has continued during the last decade despite being involved in two conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. Now that the MOD has stated that all service personnel are now allowed to communicate with any of the media then who on earth will put the case for the decimation of our Armed Forces and will we keep going round this buoy many more times in the next decade before someone takes a stand and makes a positive decision?

Kenneth Armitage, Suffolk, England

I have lived in the suppurating squats described as child and adult and served in the Territorial Army (TA) with all the then obsolete equipment. The deal was you would be extracted from your occupation when Ivan was at the ridgeline. Your employer was aware that he or she would be unlikely to be alive let alone sans business the next day. There is no incentive to the would-be TA soldier to join, the serving TA soldier to stay nor an employer to take on such who can be called up on the whim of politicians with egregiously venal motive.

To wring hands and hide behind institution is unforgivable; the truth will out. This administration is adept at fighting fires long after they were stable matches in the drawer. Hitler lost (thankfully) because his commanders were unable to tell him the truth free of reprisal.

It is time for our senior commanders to speak out - before they leave the service. Reveal the warts and if we are at war, put us on a war footing, pay accordingly and put up.

Richard, Holt, UK

To Sean from Leeds,

Your and other countries’ soldiers might moan, but in the end they fight and get killed and maimed for countries not deserving their sacrifice.

To John Tinsley from Newark,

The chattering classes serving (!?!) on those quangos might not like your remarks, but the quicker we get rid of those selfserving apparatchiks, the quicker we’ll be able to address the real needs of our societies.

To Bruce Haig from Frankfurt am Main,

At first sight your remark may seem to the point. In the end it brings us nearer to the day that nobody will want to serve for the fools that we all are. You can’t anymore expect soldiers (i.e. people) willingly to be treated as idiots.

Eddy Verhaeghe, Ostend, Belgium

I've an idea!
Let's have a gagging order for ALL commentary about anything the government does in any domain!
Wouldn't that be ...

DavidintheUK, London,

Cancel the absurd, useless Trident system. Spend money on defence requirements, not on useless prestige projects which politicians are too frightened to cancel in case they get labelled "weak".

Edgar G., London,

These problems are common to all other NATO armies, who in most cases are more underfunded and all lack clear objectives. Somehow these things are either beyond the ‘intellectual’ powers of our politicians or not palatable to the voters of our countries.
E.g. in Belgium the situation borders the absurd. For many years the Defence budget has been frozen and the Belgian army is in a sorry state. And the presence of the Dutch army in Afghanistan exhausted that country's Defence budget and drastic cuts in other military expenditures are now being discussed.
In both countries politicians are either ‘intellectually’ incapable of giving the necessary funding and clear objectives or dare not give them for fear of telling the truth to an electorate that is totally unwilling to hear that truth : armies are costly to run and are there to fight when needed.
I'm afraid that all this is a disaster waiting to happen. An extra crisis might just break the back of your and your allies' armies.

Eddy Verhaeghe, Ostend, Belgium

If our troops were able to keep their heads down as effectively as Gordon Brown then they would have nothing to worry about. Whilst servicemen die GB (Brown) seems to be invisible! I don't think I can stand seeing that joke of a part time Defence Minister babble on for the benefit of the media one more time.

simon, uk,

Quite frankly Blair and Brown should be impeached together with the head of the MoD for committing our troops to a war without first ensuring that they had all the equipment they needed to win the battle.
Shame on the Labour Government and shame of those who voted them in again, despite the facts that had come to the fore before the election.
You too bear responsibility for this awful mess and the lives of our soldiers - now we face the same problems in Afghanistan.

Chips Westwood, SARLAT LA CANEDA, France

The present Nulab government have a good deal to answer for regarding the problems our men have with kit, rations, weapons and air support. However there is another bunch of guilty parties who are scheming away whatever party is in power. They are the Mandarins and Bureaucrats in the Civil Service ( what an oxymoron) have a cultural, inbred, reluctance to supply our men with the best of supplies. The main ones are the Ministry of Defence and the holders of the purse strings; HM Treasury no less. Those guys, year in--year out have been obscesed with saving and penny pinching; no matter that costs will be incurred later or what inconvienience, discomfort, or physical danger will be infliced on the user. Some of the details are so petty they are incredible; boots thet leak in wet grass, shirts that forever itch, etc,etc. Others are deadly serious; minimal spare part provisions such are keeping our Apache Helicopters on the ground when they should be supporting our infantry

W D Toulman, Walkington,

One man has a merit or hazard like the other sex,The Void is valuable like non-name soldiers.(In computer,Micro to compare with Writers).The hacker in endless hesitance arson

JUSUK.HAN, S.K'Dunsan, sude coree

Pity that the Royal Navy is mentioned nowhere - the naval helicopters have been active throughout! And of course (as we all know) the Royal Navy conducts many operations in the Gulf - not always succesfully!

H L Foxworthy, Forfar, Angus

Such an idiotic move, gagging the troops. I had the pleasure of hearing three of Canada's soldiers recently returned from Afghanistan last week - very informative, not necessarily always on the Department of National Defence's playbook, but hopeful and uplifting - and what little is at risk in such encounters is far more likely to be overtaken by the public saying "I didn't know that" about the balance.

It is so sad to see how much like the United States, with its double-think, Britain has become.

Bruce Stewart, Vancouver, BC

Spot-on Mr Rees-Mogg, as is alan of cologne. It is not just the defeats we have suffered in Iraq and Afghanistan which concern me - a former air officer - it is the legacy which the past years will have on our capability, as a soverign nation, to defend ourselves in the years to come. Would I again join services I have seen treated so abominably and humiliatingly by government or, more importantly, would I now recommend others to do so? For the first time in over 50 years I would caution young people to think deeply and long before making such a decision. We cannot now trust politicians and I regret to say I am not overimpressed by the actions of some of our very senior military commanders in recent times.

Terry Carlton, Chichester, UK

I'm an American. Your fighting men should be given the best of everything, if that's what's needed to win. Anything else is a disgrace. The way I'm hearing it, you had 15,000 men in Basra
doing an excellent job. Then your leaders withdrew to the point you have 5000 left. The way I understand it this move has changed your men from the hunters to the hunted. I consider this war to be in Britain's national interest. We're defending Western Civilization from people who regard murder a sort of sport. They need to exit the gene pool. Last time I checked Britain is still a part of Western Civilization. If your soldiers are being prevented from publicly discussing their experiences in Iraq you do indeed have evidence some politician is protecting his hide.

Brian Perkins Jr, Dallas, Texas

Quangos now cost £170 Billion a year and rising, providing secure highly paid jobs, bonuses and pensions for a 35 hour week. The Armed Forces enjoy a repetitive six months of 24/7 employment under threat of their lives - and are gagged from representing themselves to the public they serve. No wonder the Muslim states are unimpressed with the Democracy that we seek to impose on them.

John Tinsley, Newark,

In terms of equipment and resources, the UK will never be able to match the US, with its enormouse population, huge wealth and advanced arms industry. We have a small army that does well for a modest-sized country but is being expected to do far more than it should for its size and financial resources. Politicians know this all too well but persist in stretching things to the limit for their own reasons. Let's hope they are not trying to destroy the armed forces in favour of an EU force, which would be a disaster. The top brass should say more in public about the practical limits, and stop worrying about their pensions. It would also help if our PM spent half an hour on the subject and looked specifically at funding.

colin f, Shrewsbury,

Everyone should stop playing politics over this piece of commentary. The fact is that UK armed forces are involved in these conflicts and they are under equipped and under resourced. Who is responsible for that ? The politicians in power for the last ten years, chiefly Gordon Brown. No excuses.

chaplain, canterbury,

British soldiers will often put up with shortages in the field, but the thing that often galls the most is the lack of support back home, in particular housing and welfare services. When my own battalion moved into a barracks in 1996 they had recently been declared unfit for human habitation, yet were brought back into service for us. We received vague promises that improvements would shortly be made, but by the time we moved out in 2000 nothing had been done. This year we were posted to the same barracks, to find them unchanged. In ten years not a single improvement had been made to the accommodation!

HC, Kabul, Afghanistan

The soldiery of Britain are volunteers and professionals. As such, they have a right to expect to be supported by the government of the country they protect. Returning to the pathetic status of the armies of the 1930s is indicative of the same sort of apathy. We know where that lead. Perhaps the only answer is to submit to the imams and live in the religion of peace. Then, Alan, you could be beheaded or stoned for your "treasonous" criticism of the government rather than than chided by your peers.

Walter, Whitby, UK

I seem to remember Cherry Blair being given a car with better armour than soldiers in Basra get, merely to patrol the dangerous streets of London.

Does anyone known if she still has it? or could it possibly have been reallocated to a serviceman worthy of it?

MIke Bibby, St Albans, England -not EU

John in Calne, Wiltshire says: "The British Army is and always was far better than the Americans could ever be despite having governments that do not deserve them." Leaving aside the smear of both our governments, the article makes it clear that the British Army is woefully underfunded which makes it hard to be "better than" the US Army. The British armed forces have always been superbly trained and a credit to the nation. It's one of the reason we Americans value you in a fight - you're darn good at it. It is inexcusable that the British armed forces are not getting what they need in the way of resources and equipment quality to perform in these difficult conflicts. British blood is just as red as American blood and every bit as valuable. Get your guys the helicopters, airplanes, armored vehicles, body armor, etc. that they need.

Jill, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

Much as I detest any form of censorship, the restriction of what serving members of the armed forces may say in public, to the press or any other non-MOD agency is an appropriate measure, regardless of the 'hushing-up' issues.

If still in service, you should make your opinion known on a formal and documented basis to your line of command/ministry (and your MP?) and let the 'brains' work out how best to retain adequate, motivated, non-conscripted armed forces.

It is simply part of the job and if you cannot come to terms with it, you should resign and make damn sure you don't smack your nose on the Official Secrets Act et all when you hit civvie- street.

Bruce Haig, Frankfurt am main, Germany

How can anyone in the army, navy or airforce or anyone who has friends or relatives in the forces ever vote for Labour again?

Lance Grundy, Liverpool, Great Britain

I write in response to the person from Leeds who says im sick of soldiers moaning about going to war! ITS YOUR JOB IDIOT!!
Well I say to him and people like him that it is not the job of the people in our forces to be killed, or injured, in any war or conflict because the lack of, or below standard, kit issued to them. If this person, or people like him, want to stop them moaning then they should get off there collective backsides and support there military instead of moaning at them.
After all they risk there lifes so you can enjoy the privelidge of sparking your rot in papers such as these.

Dave Bell, Nuneaton, UK

im sick of soldiers moaning about going to war! ITS YOUR JOB IDIOT!! get on with it and do what the democratically elected government says. we need more forces and more money although it hasnt done the yanks any good they still get their arse kicked but we are better give them the resources they need

sean, leeds, uk

God how I hate this labour government who have wasted so many billions of tax payers money on complete failures such as the NHS, Education, Immigration, law and order ect, while sending our troops to war with out to proper equipment.
No matter what goes wrong all we get is the same worn out denial of any responsibility and pack of lies about how much has really been achieved.
God how I hate them all and so dearly wish to see the back of them and a party in control who know how to run things and will stop all this constant bull shine we hear day in day out.

d case, newquay,

This is the best article I've read on the subject.

I've been appalled at the kit and conditions that the British military has had to fight with. The lack of support from the public and government is also disturbing.

God bless your soldiers. They are your best and brightest.

CPT, U.S. Army, San Francisco,

Unfortunately, the price for the deliberate and continual under funding of the British military will not be borne by the authors of this disgraceful situation. Far from it - the same people who have created this absolutely appalling mess are the ones who have imposed the gag on all ranks and services of the British mlitary. They do so out of fear - fear that their unconscionable policies will come home to roost around election time. No, the price for the deliberate underfunding of the British military will continue to be carried by the soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan. Had any private company behaved in this way, this govt would have happily seen that organisation in court. So much for equality and a new and transparent govt. Its enough to make you weep.

Gavin Wilson, Toowoomba, Australia

So Bill Morgan say's we have been named as 'New France' well I have news for him! The British Army is and always was far better than the Americans could ever be despite having governments that do not deserve them. We are in the mess that we are in today simply because Blair was 'in love' with the American government of Bush. They are not our allies the Americans, they have betrayed us at every opportunity since 1918 and unless we cut loose from their apron strings they will continue to do so.

John , Calne, Wiltshire

I cant believe that they did not order more helicopters. There were headlines saying they needed them 6 years ago, they could be being delivered now. Not only that but there was a major British company trying to sell EH101 helicopters to the UK then and because none were bought it ended up being taken over by an Italian company. Who on earth is in charge? Why do they do nothing?

Leo Jones, Holyhead, Wales

Alan you have clearly no knowledge of the way soldiers comply with political decisions.Soldiers MUST not be political in anyway,although this government has tried hard enough!

Robert, Derby,

And who has been responsible for the under spend on our forces for the last 10 years? Why our Mr Brown, of course, and he would rather give billions to Africa than support the lads who his administration, and let us never forget that he was a major player in that cabinet, sent into a war on two fronts.

Mike P, Nth Lincs, England

It would have been so very nice had you made some of these excellent points about six years ago, instead of cheerleading these unsustainable wars which are of no advantage to the British national interest and rubbishing those who saw that Blair was intent on causing such harm to our armed forces and our international reputation.

Mod, London,

I was in the Radfan in 1964 and the army was in the same state then as it is now, poor equipment and as usual not the right type for the job, things will never change while people who have no experience of military service keep deciding what the fighting man can have in way of equipment.

Peter Dolan, Newton Aycliffe, Co. Durham

britain had been renamed as "new france"

bill morgan, dallas, texas / usa

Mr. Rees-Mogg says soldiers "do not object to going to war as such". Well, maybe not, if the war is justified and perceived as such. But in the case of the illegal and unnecessary attack on Iraq (a soveign member-state of the UN, and no danger to the UK), it should have been the duty of the "top brass" to object strongly to this disastrous political decision. The military leaders should at least have expressed their concern (publicly if necessary) at the foreseeable consequences of this aggression, particularly with respect to protecting the lives of the ordinary soldiers serving under them.

alan, cologne,