GOV/MIL U.S. Coast Guard Fills Personnel Gap in Britain’s Royal Navy

[Housecarl]

In the "WTF?!?!?" category......

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.seapowermagazine.org/stories/20151216-coastguart-royalnavy.html

Posted: December 16, 2015 3:11 PM

U.S. Coast Guard Fills Personnel Gap in Britain’s Royal Navy

By RICHARD R. BURGESS, Managing Editor

ARLINGTON, Va. — Three dozen U.S. Coast Guardsmen are serving with the U.K. Royal Navy (RN) to alleviate a manpower shortage in the RN, not as a routine personnel exchange program.

Speaking Dec. 15 at a Special Topic Breakfast sponsored by the Navy League and PricewaterhouseCoopers, Coast Guard Commandant ADM Paul F. Zukunft said that 36 Coast Guardsmen currently are serving full-time in the Royal Navy.

“Sixteen years ago, [the RN] was looking at budget challenges and they figured that one way they could meet budget is if they bring in no new [personnel] accessions,” he said. “They did that for three years. So now, over 16 years [later], you’ve got this big hole in the Royal Navy in sea-going ratings, engineers [and] electricians.”

According to Zukunft, “the First Sea Lord, Sir George Zambellas, said ‘I would love the United States Coast Guard to come serve in the Royal Navy. We’ll take up PCS [permanent change-of-station] costs, put the folks up in homes [to] live the great European lifestyle.’”

“’Why don’t you ask the United States Navy?’” Zukunft said he asked Zambellas. “’They’re much bigger than we are.’

“He said, ’Well, you have old ships, we have old ships. Yours aren’t under warranty, ours aren’t under warranty. When they break, far away from home, the first thing you do is call is the duty engineer to come down and fix it. You don’t call a contractor.”

 

[WalknTrot]

I have no problem helping out the Brits, as long as they keep the long and sticky fingers of the EU away from our guys.

 

[Housecarl]

I have no problem helping out the Brits, as long as they keep the long and sticky fingers of the EU away from our guys.

I just found the existence of such a problem in the RN as being both an eye opener and a lesson to the US in general.

Heck Australia's personnel problems are so bad they're recruiting from just about every English speaking country for prior service personnel.

 

[Pinecone]

Did the 36 US Coasties volunteer for these assignments, or were they 'shanghaied?"

 

[Doat]

And nothing new here we have been carrying the water for them since the first world war. Them and there liberalism is why we are in the shape we are in now.

 

[Dozdoats]

"Impressed" used to be the term for Her Majesty's Navy.
========================================

http://www.pbs.org/opb/historydetectives/feature/british-navy-impressment/

British Navy Impressment

Since the French Revolution, conscription or the Draft has been how countries have found additional manpower for their armed forces in modern times.

Prior to this Britain practiced a cruel but effective way of combating the manpower shortage in their navy: impressment.

Impressment, or “press gang” as it was more commonly known, was recruitment by force. It was a practice that directly affected the U.S. and was even one of the causes of the War of 1812.

The British navy consistently suffered manpower shortages due to the low pay and a lack of qualified seamen. During wartime the navy forced unwilling individuals into service. Residents of seaports lived in fear of the press gangs that patrolled waterfronts and raided taverns, pouncing on deserters and idle mariners. Prints from the time show armed gangs kidnapping men in their beds, or barging into weddings and hauling the groom out much to the distress of the bride.

But generally “pressing” took place at sea where the armed gangs would board merchant ships. These ships were ransacked of their men and often left without sufficient hands to take them safely into port.

Impressment was first made lawful during Elizabethan times, though it had been a common practice of drafting soldiers dating back to the 13th century. In 1563 Queen Elizabeth passed "an Act touching politick considerations for the maintenance of the Navy" which defined more clearly the liability of sailors who may be forced to serve as mariners.

The legalization was taken further in 1597 when the Vagrancy Act was passed, which now allowed for men of disrepute to be impressed for service in the fleet.

While essential for the strength of the British Navy, the brutal nature of impressment was deeply unpopular. Many viewed it as an inhumane and unconstitutional system.

In the 18th century a raft of legislation was introduced aimed at moderating the practice. A 1740 act declared that all men under 18 and over 55 and foreigners who served on British ships were declared exempt from enforced service.

In reality, however, these laws were ignored and impressment of foreigners was commonplace. In fact, only 40-years later the exemptions from impressment were withdrawn, so desperate was the British Navy for seamen.

American merchant vessels were a common target. Between 1793 and 1812, the British impressed more than 15,000 U.S. sailors to supplement their fleet during their Napoleonic Wars with France. By 1812 the United States Government had had enough. On 18 June, the United States declared war on Great Britain, citing, in part, impressment.

After the Napoleonic Wars impressment was ended in practice, though not officially abandoned as a policy. The last law was passed in 1835, in which the power to impress was reaffirmed. It limited the length of service of a pressed man to five years, and added the provision that a man couldn't be pressed twice.

 

[cjoi]

Two thoughts: One, isn't queenie head of the U.S.A Corporation? Two, probably couldn't find that many real men to fill the uniform in her socialist paradise.