https://www.ozervnews.com

So the army information was incorrect?. Here is where I got the info. Guess I can't read? some one better tell the Army their webb info is wrong. Still would appreciate an answer to my Question without getting blasted as an idiot.

I think what Dot is saying is that they could assist the regular fire fighters in a supplementary role as a sort of fetch and carry situation like medical,supply,transport or what ever...They have some expertise in this ......

The army was utilized in the clean up after the last Qld floods, weren't they? I realise this is different to being front line in an emergency but perhaps being trained in a multi tasking capacity is not asking too much.

Dot wrote:Do we have army , air force navy personnel on bases in Aust? I heard on the news that the fire fighters are exhausted from fighting the fires for weeks on end. Why don't they bring in these service men & women like they used to???

Are you just screwing with me Dot? Your questions have been answered and the info would appear to be accurate and is just as I said in my earlier posts. It does not state that they relieve civil authorities of their professional duties. Clean up roles and search and rescue are not the same as relieving tired fire fighters.
Your OP asks "Do we have army , air force navy personnel on bases in Aust?" Yes was my response. You then went on to say " you heard on the news that the fire fighters are exhausted from fighting the fires for weeks on end. Why don't they bring in these service men & women like they used to???
What I took from reading that post was that you were asking if we had service men and women to take over from the tired fire fighters. My response is they will only carry out roles that they have been trained in.

Swisslulu wrote:The army was utilized in the clean up after the last Qld floods, weren't they? I realise this is different to being front line in an emergency but perhaps being trained in a multi tasking capacity is not asking too much.

no it's not asking too much. But then again, do you know what training and qualifications our defence members currently have to attain? Where do you draw the line? I could give you a list of training and qualifications I had to obtain and I think you would be shocked at the amount of multi tasking roles they currently have.

Nothing like a screw so I have heard, and thanks for the answers everyone.

Craig, I understand your point of view, but as a mere civilian who has no firefighting training, I would be there in a heartbeat, IF I could be of some help. The only help I could give would be in catering, but if that's a needed skill I would be there, without question, as I assume many of or our forces would also want to be there to help. Obviously, the help that the armed forces could be requested to do would be more in the lines of using their heavy machinery (what our taxes have been used to pay for) to build up or down some form of protective barriers. Fighting serious bush fires is a serious business and needs special training/expertise, perhaps not available in the forces these days.
Perhaps it is time to unknicker the knotters, and recognise that all of us are entitled to have an opinion without being howled down?
All opinions are welcome in a friendly context.

I must have missed something here. The question was in relation to relieving the fire fighters, not cooking them a meal. I certainly didn't howl anyone's opinion down, as none had been given I simply answered Dots questions. if people didn't like the answers I gave then tuff titty, because as you say "All opinions are welcome in a friendly context". I also never disputed the fact that the armed forces (if directed to do so) would be there to carry out other duties as required. I have been involved in many disaster relief and search and rescue tasks and as a Head of department I can tell you that I would never place my men or women in a situation that they weren't qualified to participate in. Loss of life far outweighs the cost of property. even if you think your taxes have paid for it. Also, your comment "Fighting serious bush fires is a serious business and needs special training/expertise, perhaps not available in the forces these days." when do you think that the defence force was ever trained in fighting bush fires?

I think that last line says it all.
There is no way that anyone, including fire fighters, can be trained to fight BUSH fires. GRASS fires, yes............ not bush, especially in rugged mountain country.

Over the last 30 years or so the 'terminology' has gone from 'grass fire' to 'bush fire' and now we even hear of 'WILD FIRES"??? How does a fire get wild? Maybe someone poked it with a stick like you tease a snake?
Bloody media..............
Yesterday there was a horrendous fire in Dimboola & residents were instructed to do all sorts of things. (evacuate, stay indoors, close windows etc)
Turns out it was some little old 1800's cottage got burnt down.......... go figure!!!

Tuff titty.
Love it Craig.... Quote of the week.
Bernie.