View Full Version : NZ military police
numbereleven
10-14-2005, 01:05 AM
Hi there Im a soldier in the NZ Army and im looking for any info in regards to uniforms in the RNZMP (military police)/provost corp. If anyone has photos or any info especially on the regimental corps belt history then I would appreciate a reply.
Thanks:)
If you are at Burnham then walk over to the Military Police center and take a look at them for yourself. They wear blue armbands with MP written on them in white and I think also have blue berets. Anyone of your sargeants/NCOs can tell you this also.
WKD
squeak
10-15-2005, 05:52 AM
Got to raise the BS flag on this post.
Go ask the plods on the front gate.
In all fairness, the New Zealand Army uses private security guards (usually bored old men) to guard the front gates at Burnham and all other facilties (pretty sure all other facilities). MPs are now just policemen who respond to crimes on military property. In fact, a lot of that sort of thing is now done by Regimental Police anyway, who are just enlisted men rostered to duty with a red armband. It's a stupid stupid system, but that's the NZ Army for you. Every five years they give themselves something to do by reorganising all the units and unit names. Good for them.
Skeletor
10-15-2005, 04:59 PM
Don't mean to hijack this thread but...
Im thinking of joining the NZ Army next year after finishing my degree. For those who have served in the NZ Army do you think it would be worth it? or should I attempt to join the British Army instead?
Aside from mustering people up to do some peacekeeping, the NZ Army dosn't do a whole hell of a lot. Peacekeeping is about it, with disaster relief thrown in, unless you want to up and join the SAS. Paul Buchannan described it as an army without a purpose, and he is pretty much on the ball. The new aquisistions are basically replacing old gear that has worn out, but people don't actually seem to know why. The Australians are concerned with Indonesia and terrorism, we just get a bunch of guys together to go drive up and down the roads of some bombed out third world city whilst doing some carpentry on the side.
catalyst
10-16-2005, 03:44 AM
sad to hear about the NZ army having no real vision!
2/1kiwi
10-16-2005, 04:14 AM
Nz Army Vision:
A world class army that has mana
Regimental police only in the infantry battalions.
All unit duty pers wear the red armband
Go down to the Mp hut you shoud be able to find what you need there
DarkCypher
10-16-2005, 04:28 AM
Don't mean to hijack this thread but...
Im thinking of joining the NZ Army next year after finishing my degree. For those who have served in the NZ Army do you think it would be worth it? or should I attempt to join the British Army instead?
It's not really worth it joining up for long-term you’re better of Training in one of the Army Apprenticeship Careers and taking what you learnt into the civvie world.
Zorro C9
10-16-2005, 05:47 AM
It's not really worth it joining up for long-term you’re better of Training in one of the Army Apprenticeship Careers and taking what you learnt into the civvie world.
That's the ****head way of doing things.
Are you a ****head?
squeak
10-16-2005, 05:50 AM
Aside from mustering people up to do some peacekeeping, the NZ Army dosn't do a whole hell of a lot. Peacekeeping is about it, with disaster relief thrown in, unless you want to up and join the SAS. Paul Buchannan described it as an army without a purpose, and he is pretty much on the ball. The new aquisistions are basically replacing old gear that has worn out, but people don't actually seem to know why. The Australians are concerned with Indonesia and terrorism, we just get a bunch of guys together to go drive up and down the roads of some bombed out third world city whilst doing some carpentry on the side.
That's why I didn't jooin. Did the tests, but thought the NZ army wasn't my cup of tea.
Skeletor
10-16-2005, 06:23 PM
Ah I see. So for arguements sake if I did join does anyone know what my chances would be of being deployed overseas? I dont plan to stay long-term in the Army just 3-4 years at the most but i would love to be sent over to Bamiyan to help with the reconstruction.
Thanks for all the replies. I appreciate any input from those who have any knowledge on the topic.
Probably pretty good, especially if you take a trade rather than straight infantry. As long as you are not useless, put your name down and wait for the go.
2/1kiwi
10-19-2005, 12:47 AM
You would be more likely to get a trip there as part of the security Plt (infantry) as most of the trades are going to the navy and airforce guys. Infantry training 6 months, tradesman not sure but its probably a lot longer. So if you want a trip in the next few years i'd go with infantry, my opinion.
Skeletor
10-20-2005, 06:11 AM
Haha alright two conflicting opinions...
Thanks for the help, i'll just have a chat with the recruiters when I sign up and see whats best.
digrar
10-20-2005, 08:54 AM
Give Ngati Tumatuenga (member.php?u=1401) a PM.
Zorro C9
10-20-2005, 11:02 AM
Remember, recruiters let you hear what they want you to hear.
Ngati Tumatauenga
11-01-2005, 11:23 AM
Aside from mustering people up to do some peacekeeping, the NZ Army dosn't do a whole hell of a lot. Peacekeeping is about it, with disaster relief thrown in, unless you want to up and join the SAS. Paul Buchannan described it as an army without a purpose, and he is pretty much on the ball. The new aquisistions are basically replacing old gear that has worn out, but people don't actually seem to know why. The Australians are concerned with Indonesia and terrorism, we just get a bunch of guys together to go drive up and down the roads of some bombed out third world city whilst doing some carpentry on the side.
How long have you served in the NZ Army?
What people 'don't seem to know why new aquisitions are replacing old' ?
What makes you an expert on current NZ Army operations?
Here's a combat indicater, MP's haven't worn blue berets for four years now. The Army beret is green, the only unit with a different colour is 1 NZ SAS group.
Zorro C9
11-01-2005, 03:19 PM
What's the reasoning behind that?
Ngati Tumatauenga
11-02-2005, 02:31 AM
What's the reasoning behind that?
The late, great, unlamented MG Maurice Dodson's bright idea of the mid to late 90's to turn us into 'one army'. One of many he had, the ****head.
Shoulder flashes on the SD's went as well. They even tried to abolish Corp belts. ****in ruperts.
All I have to say in my defence is this:
http://http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0504/S00305.htm
By this guy:
http://http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0504/S00305.htm
Also sundry conversations with servicemen. Also, someone remind me that this is the last time I get into politics online, I just don't have the energy for it anymore. And hit me if I forget.
Hell, you are probably far more widely read and informed on NZ politics, policy and strategy than I am. I concur completely. I'm going back to the beer and the ****.
WKD (tired, drunk)
Ngati Tumatauenga
11-02-2005, 02:53 PM
All I have to say in my defence is this:
http://http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0504/S00305.htm
By this guy:
http://http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0504/S00305.htm
Also sundry conversations with servicemen. Also, someone remind me that this is the last time I get into politics online, I just don't have the energy for it anymore. And hit me if I forget.
Hell, you are probably far more widely read and informed on NZ politics, policy and strategy than I am. I concur completely. I'm going back to the beer and the ****.
WKD (tired, drunk)
Whatever...
How about next time you refrain from making definative statements based on conclusions you've gained from two tenths of f$#@k all personal, first hand experience.
Feel free to get your arse out into the field with the rest of us to engage in some 'peace keeping, disaster relief, carpentry, etc' if you can handle it. I'd like to see what your views are then.
But hey, why debate when you can plead drunkeness and skulk away...
Zorro C9
11-02-2005, 04:20 PM
The late, great, unlamented MG Maurice Dodson's bright idea of the mid to late 90's to turn us into 'one army'. One of many he had, the ****head.
Shoulder flashes on the SD's went as well. They even tried to abolish Corp belts. ****in ruperts.
Sounds like a **** plan. Sounds like he was looking too much at the Yanks.
Whatever...
How about next time you refrain from making definative statements based on conclusions you've gained from two tenths of f$#@k all personal, first hand experience.
Feel free to get your arse out into the field with the rest of us to engage in some 'peace keeping, disaster relief, carpentry, etc' if you can handle it. I'd like to see what your views are then.
But hey, why debate when you can plead drunkeness and skulk away...
Hey, hold on, my post that you were replying to was concerning mainly defence policy and strategy, not first hand experience with peacekeeping. Please, as I said, inform me about defence policy and strategy. We can go point-counterpoint as I would like to learn something. I plead tiredness and drunkeness because it was true, and I don't want to flame which is what normally happens unfortunately.
So, you read the links, what do you think?
WKD
Ngati Tumatauenga
11-03-2005, 12:42 AM
Aside from mustering people up to do some peacekeeping, the NZ Army dosn't do a whole hell of a lot.
1. The NZ Army trains and exercises for a number of tasks, peace keeping and civil defence are but two. The New Zealand Army trains and exercises for conventional operations in an combined arms environment. Allways has done. At the preparation stage for every budget the Ministry of Defence delivers a list of tasks the defence Forces are to be prepared to conduct. Each of these tasks is based on a range of contingency's from Counter Terrorism to conventional combat operations. These tasks are fairly straight forward and you can view the documents in your local library.
Peacekeeping is about it, with disaster relief thrown in, unless you want to up and join the SAS.
2. East Timor was straight COIN operations. Blue beret or not, war fighting skills are still necessary to achieve the mission.
Paul Buchannan described it as an army without a purpose, and he is pretty much on the ball.
3. Paul Buchannan is a grandstanding f&^%kwit who has fallen in love with the sound of his own voice.
The new aquisistions are basically replacing old gear that has worn out,
4. Which funnily enough is the whole point...
but people don't actually seem to know why.
5. What people would these be?
The Australians are concerned with Indonesia and terrorism, we just get a bunch of guys together to go drive up and down the roads of some bombed out third world city whilst doing some carpentry on the side.
6. War is not just about hunting down 'the enemy' and killing/capturing him/her. Unless you want to find yourself or even worse your sons or daughter back doing the job in the future, alongside the combat/security operations you need to engage in some robust nation building as well. Kiwis excell at both combat and nation building.
In short there is a vast amount you don't know about the NZ defence forces in general and the NZ Army in particular. If you want to learn then ask reasoned questions instead of making definative statements.
Of course for all I know you might be Nicky Hager fishing for a bit of sh!t to sling at us again, so don't expect all your questions to be answered satisfactorily.
ed316
11-03-2005, 10:46 AM
http://img34.imageshack.us/img34/2416/texasrphoto6ze.jpg
Definitive statements? I believe I also said something along the lines of 'Paul Buchanan called it an army without a purpose and I am inclined to agree with him'. It should be noted that Ron Marks, NZ First MP and ex-army officer of 20 years experience has also been critical of the current defence plan, and especially of the LAVIII acquisitions. This has been going on since Defence Beyond 2000.
I was browsing the MoD homepage a couple of days ago and I found a lot of rhetoric and very little specifics as to what the likely threats are to be encountered and how aqusitions and training are being structured to meet them. Instead we get twice the number of LAVIIIs and a budget blow out to NZ$675m with no apparent purpose in mind.
So what are the threats and how is policy meeting them?
WKD
Zorro C9
11-03-2005, 05:54 PM
You have to remember that Mr Marks is in Opposition and it's his job to be critical.
Ngati Tumatauenga
11-04-2005, 02:54 AM
Definitive statements? I believe I also said something along the lines of 'Paul Buchanan called it an army without a purpose and I am inclined to agree with him'. It should be noted that Ron Marks, NZ First MP and ex-army officer of 20 years experience has also been critical of the current defence plan, and especially of the LAVIII acquisitions. This has been going on since Defence Beyond 2000.
I was browsing the MoD homepage a couple of days ago and I found a lot of rhetoric and very little specifics as to what the likely threats are to be encountered and how aqusitions and training are being structured to meet them. Instead we get twice the number of LAVIIIs and a budget blow out to NZ$675m with no apparent purpose in mind.
So what are the threats and how is policy meeting them?
WKD
Yeah, 'definative statements'
1. 'Aside from mustering people up to do some peacekeeping, the NZ Army dosn't do a whole hell of a lot'
2. 'Peacekeeping is about it, with disaster relief thrown in, unless you want to up and join the SAS'
3. 'Paul Buchannan described it as an army without a purpose, and he is pretty much on the ball'
I've talked with Ron Marks on a number of occasions. As Wheke C9 wrote, he in the opposition.
As for likely threats and the procurement of equipment to deal with them, who are you to analyse and judge the decisions made with regards to defence policy?
What experience and/or qualifications do you possess?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.10 Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.