Victoria Cross holder Willie Apiata today confirmed he would take a break from the SAS in order to focus on not killing people.
Apiata will work with the youth charity High Wire, an Auckland outdoor pursuits organisation that helps at-risk children and does not kill people.
His role will involve mentoring children, teaching them life skills, and not killing anyone.
Apiata's military career spanned 23 years, and although he was trained to kill people from very early in his career, it was only during his SAS career that he became an expert in the killing of other people.
It is believed that Apiata has a partner and young child. While Apiata could have pursued a high paying role in hotspots like Iraq, it is understood that he wants to spend more time with his family and less time killing people.
A source on the celebrity speaking circuit said that Apiata's reputation for killing people meant he could command lucrative appearance fees at corporate functions.
However, such a career seems unlikely for a man who prefers to let his bullets do the talking.
Apiata will remain a reserve member of the SAS, but will be available for active service in the event more people need to be killed.
Showing posts with label SAS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label SAS. Show all posts
Thursday, July 19, 2012
Thursday, December 30, 2010
Glad I'm Not Deciding, Glad Some Others Aren't Too
We know that our SAS forces have been involved in a raid in
Afghanistan, a raid in which two Afghani security guards were killed.
There are different accounts of what happened and of who fired first. What actually occurred is unclear, and it may be difficult to get to the truth. It may be a cliche, but in war the truth is often the first casualty. We should be wary about accepting at face values any of the accounts we hear, both the official ones and the so-called eye-witness accounts.
That hasn't stopped some people on the left side of the blogosphere from leaping in, accusing the SAS of committing murder or of acting negligently. And Keith Locke has again used the event as a pretext to attack our presence in the country.
The conflict in Afghanistan is fraught with difficulty, and there are no easy solutions. The war seems from this distance to be unwinnable, and the best case scenario would appear to involve an eventual negotiated settlement with the Taleban. I don't happen to be an expert in the region's conflicts (though, thankfully, most other commentators are as ignorant as me on the topic), but another potential scenario is the eventual abandonment by the West of the nation, followed by a bloodbath. Neither appear to be particularly attractive options, which makes the moral certainty of many on the left who decry our ongoing involvement so puzzling.
It may be that victory is no longer the main military goal, but rather the objective is "hanging on" long enough to encourage some sort of settlement. If "hanging on" is the goal, then further fighting will be unavoidable. You don't bring an opponent to the bargaining table by retreating. There may be merit in the tactics being adopted by NATO and its allied forces, but I'm not qualified to make an assessment.
Total withdrawal may be the better option, if either victory or a settlement cannot be achieved. But if we withdraw we may well end up wringing our hands as CNN and the BBC broadcast atrocities by the Taleban, and demanding that something be done.
That is why I can't see how so many people who claim to be concerned about the plight of the Afghan people can be so convinced that a total withdrawal is the only answer. What if that withdrawal leads to a frenzy of killing by a resurgent Taleban? How can people have no doubts at all?
I don't know whether our forces should stay or go. I am just grateful that the decision will be made by others.
There are different accounts of what happened and of who fired first. What actually occurred is unclear, and it may be difficult to get to the truth. It may be a cliche, but in war the truth is often the first casualty. We should be wary about accepting at face values any of the accounts we hear, both the official ones and the so-called eye-witness accounts.
That hasn't stopped some people on the left side of the blogosphere from leaping in, accusing the SAS of committing murder or of acting negligently. And Keith Locke has again used the event as a pretext to attack our presence in the country.
The conflict in Afghanistan is fraught with difficulty, and there are no easy solutions. The war seems from this distance to be unwinnable, and the best case scenario would appear to involve an eventual negotiated settlement with the Taleban. I don't happen to be an expert in the region's conflicts (though, thankfully, most other commentators are as ignorant as me on the topic), but another potential scenario is the eventual abandonment by the West of the nation, followed by a bloodbath. Neither appear to be particularly attractive options, which makes the moral certainty of many on the left who decry our ongoing involvement so puzzling.
It may be that victory is no longer the main military goal, but rather the objective is "hanging on" long enough to encourage some sort of settlement. If "hanging on" is the goal, then further fighting will be unavoidable. You don't bring an opponent to the bargaining table by retreating. There may be merit in the tactics being adopted by NATO and its allied forces, but I'm not qualified to make an assessment.
Total withdrawal may be the better option, if either victory or a settlement cannot be achieved. But if we withdraw we may well end up wringing our hands as CNN and the BBC broadcast atrocities by the Taleban, and demanding that something be done.
That is why I can't see how so many people who claim to be concerned about the plight of the Afghan people can be so convinced that a total withdrawal is the only answer. What if that withdrawal leads to a frenzy of killing by a resurgent Taleban? How can people have no doubts at all?
I don't know whether our forces should stay or go. I am just grateful that the decision will be made by others.
Monday, November 8, 2010
A Happier, Smilier SAS
Gentlemen,
I am truly humbled to stand before you today. You have always been, and remain, the very elite of New Zealand's armed forces. It is a privilege as Defence Minister to be in your presence.
The New Zealand SAS has a long and distinguished history, and SAS men have performed exceptionally in every field of combat they have been posted to.
Nevertheless, no organisation can rest on its reputation and past achievements alone. The world is a changing place, and institutions must adapt to those changes or risk becoming obsolete. In that respect the New Zealand SAS has always led from the front in its training and tactics.
But in 2008 the world changed in another way. It will not have escaped your attention that we live in difficult economic times. The government is being forced to run large deficits, and we will soon be forced to make some tough decisions if we are to protect the economic viability of this nation. We need to find new sources of revenue if we are to continue funding our defence forces at current levels.
The Defence White Paper has identified that our military needs to be able to adapt to changing strategic environments. Flexibility and adaptability will be critical to our defence forces in the future. Gentlemen, I am giving you the opportunity to lead from the front, as you always have, and to embrace change eagerly. You have always been role models and an inspiration to our younger men, so I ask you to take this opportunity to enhance your standing and prestige within a new group: middle-aged corporate executives whose best days are behind them.
I want to talk to you today about your next mission. I've called it Operation Big Cheque. From next week we will be changing your rotations so that, when you are on-base, you will be working with us on revenue-gathering activities at least 50% of the time.
From recent activities involving large groups of big swinging dick executives, it's clear that corporates will pay big dollars to get to handle our toys, to shake the hands of real SAS men, and to brag to their colleagues about the SAS training they underwent. It may be tough financially for many businesses, but there's money to burn in the corporate world for this kind of thing. It's an opportunity we mustn't let slip.
I won't pretend the new emphasis on corporate entertainment will be plain sailing. It will require hard work, training, and, for some, an attitude shift. For example, I'm aware that your force has a reputation of recruiting emotionally hard men who perhaps lack social graces. This will have to change. If we're going to take cash off CEOs and company directors we have to do it with a smile. For some of you that may mean customer service training. Others many even need counselling or intense psychiatric interventions. What we must always remember is that the customer is always right. Let that be our motto.
Talking of the motto, that's another thing we need to refresh. "Who Dares Wins" may appeal to the corporates on a certain level, but it won't really reflect the new 21st Century SAS. That's why from 1 January next year the new motto will be "He Who Pays Gets To Play".
We would also be foolish to ignore the power of the SAS brand. That's why we have been in negotiations with a number of parties for naming rights. I'm pleased to announce that you will soon be known as the Vodafone Special Air Service.
There are some remarkable individuals in this group, none more so than Corporal Willie Apiata. Corporal, let me just say how much I have admired your courage and bravery. You are an asset to this organisation. Like all good business assets you need to be at front of shop, where the public can see you. We've hired you a publicist, and Brian Edwards has been engaged to give you media training. Before we unleash you onto the celebrity circuit we're going to give you a whole new wardrobe and makeover. We want to see you as a regular feature on the pages of the gossip mags and women's magazines. We've also developing a "fly on the wall" reality TV show concept for you to star in. I'm afraid this will mean no more killing, because we think the viewing public won't be keen on a TV star who spends his days shooting insurgents.
The most important thing is to ensure your corporate guests relax when they're in your company. You might be a group of highly-strung emotionally damaged ruthless killers, but don't let them see that side of you. When you are with these people you need to be able to talk in their language.
To help you with this we have compiled a new set of phrases to use. You will be required to memorise these, and to use them when you are with your guests. But I would urge you to make this the new lexicon of the SAS, and to make these words your own. Let's go through some of the key phrases you will need to learn.
Finally, let me finish with a song. To me this says everything about the new SAS business model. I want you to take this to heart.
Gray skies are gonna clear up,
Put on a happy face;
rush off the clouds and cheer up,
Put on a happy face.
Take off the gloomy mask of tragedy,
It's not your style;
You'll look so good that you'll be glad
Ya' decide to smile!
I am truly humbled to stand before you today. You have always been, and remain, the very elite of New Zealand's armed forces. It is a privilege as Defence Minister to be in your presence.
The New Zealand SAS has a long and distinguished history, and SAS men have performed exceptionally in every field of combat they have been posted to.
Nevertheless, no organisation can rest on its reputation and past achievements alone. The world is a changing place, and institutions must adapt to those changes or risk becoming obsolete. In that respect the New Zealand SAS has always led from the front in its training and tactics.
But in 2008 the world changed in another way. It will not have escaped your attention that we live in difficult economic times. The government is being forced to run large deficits, and we will soon be forced to make some tough decisions if we are to protect the economic viability of this nation. We need to find new sources of revenue if we are to continue funding our defence forces at current levels.
The Defence White Paper has identified that our military needs to be able to adapt to changing strategic environments. Flexibility and adaptability will be critical to our defence forces in the future. Gentlemen, I am giving you the opportunity to lead from the front, as you always have, and to embrace change eagerly. You have always been role models and an inspiration to our younger men, so I ask you to take this opportunity to enhance your standing and prestige within a new group: middle-aged corporate executives whose best days are behind them.
I want to talk to you today about your next mission. I've called it Operation Big Cheque. From next week we will be changing your rotations so that, when you are on-base, you will be working with us on revenue-gathering activities at least 50% of the time.
From recent activities involving large groups of big swinging dick executives, it's clear that corporates will pay big dollars to get to handle our toys, to shake the hands of real SAS men, and to brag to their colleagues about the SAS training they underwent. It may be tough financially for many businesses, but there's money to burn in the corporate world for this kind of thing. It's an opportunity we mustn't let slip.
I won't pretend the new emphasis on corporate entertainment will be plain sailing. It will require hard work, training, and, for some, an attitude shift. For example, I'm aware that your force has a reputation of recruiting emotionally hard men who perhaps lack social graces. This will have to change. If we're going to take cash off CEOs and company directors we have to do it with a smile. For some of you that may mean customer service training. Others many even need counselling or intense psychiatric interventions. What we must always remember is that the customer is always right. Let that be our motto.
Talking of the motto, that's another thing we need to refresh. "Who Dares Wins" may appeal to the corporates on a certain level, but it won't really reflect the new 21st Century SAS. That's why from 1 January next year the new motto will be "He Who Pays Gets To Play".
We would also be foolish to ignore the power of the SAS brand. That's why we have been in negotiations with a number of parties for naming rights. I'm pleased to announce that you will soon be known as the Vodafone Special Air Service.
There are some remarkable individuals in this group, none more so than Corporal Willie Apiata. Corporal, let me just say how much I have admired your courage and bravery. You are an asset to this organisation. Like all good business assets you need to be at front of shop, where the public can see you. We've hired you a publicist, and Brian Edwards has been engaged to give you media training. Before we unleash you onto the celebrity circuit we're going to give you a whole new wardrobe and makeover. We want to see you as a regular feature on the pages of the gossip mags and women's magazines. We've also developing a "fly on the wall" reality TV show concept for you to star in. I'm afraid this will mean no more killing, because we think the viewing public won't be keen on a TV star who spends his days shooting insurgents.
The most important thing is to ensure your corporate guests relax when they're in your company. You might be a group of highly-strung emotionally damaged ruthless killers, but don't let them see that side of you. When you are with these people you need to be able to talk in their language.
To help you with this we have compiled a new set of phrases to use. You will be required to memorise these, and to use them when you are with your guests. But I would urge you to make this the new lexicon of the SAS, and to make these words your own. Let's go through some of the key phrases you will need to learn.
- The chain of command will now be known as the "responsibility curve". Officers will be known as "stakeholders".
- Taking prisoners will now be known as "taking ownership".
- "Horizontal marketing" will be the term you use to describe the inflicting of casualties.
- Killing large numbers of the enemy will be "disincentivising".
- "Leveraging core competencies" will be taking the right people on a critical mission.
- "Getting all your ducks in a row" will be the technical term you use to describe ambushing an enemy column along a narrow mountain track.
- A "level playing field" will describe an area of the battlefield with no ground cover.
- "Moving the goalposts" will describe the situation where an attack goes badly wrong, requiring a sudden change in tactics.
- An "aggressive marketing strategy" will describe a firefight with the enemy.
- "Key performance indicators" will be used to describe the numbers of enemy killed.
- "Change management" will be dealing with a surprise attack.
- "Exploiting synergies" will be the term used for giving your comrades supporting fire.
- "Blue sky thinking" will be planning a parachute drop into enemy territory.
- "Low hanging fruit" will be the name for an enemy force caught on a level playing field.
Finally, let me finish with a song. To me this says everything about the new SAS business model. I want you to take this to heart.
Gray skies are gonna clear up,
Put on a happy face;
rush off the clouds and cheer up,
Put on a happy face.
Take off the gloomy mask of tragedy,
It's not your style;
You'll look so good that you'll be glad
Ya' decide to smile!
Thursday, January 21, 2010
That SAS Photo
The Herald and Stuff websites have published a photo of two New Zealand SAS soldiers in Kabul.
There is apparently a media convention (though this was denied by the Herald's John Roughan on Checkpoint tonight) of not identifying SAS men or operational matters relating to them.
This is tricky stuff. The Herald claims the picture was newsworthy. On the other hand, does it put the lives of our men at risk?
I must say I feel uncomfortable about the publication of this photo. Our men are in Afghanistan to do an important job, and publishing details of where they are and who they are has the potential to endanger their security. Well, that's one argument anyway. The other is that we ave a right to know what our troops are doing in our name.
Do you have a view?
There is apparently a media convention (though this was denied by the Herald's John Roughan on Checkpoint tonight) of not identifying SAS men or operational matters relating to them.
This is tricky stuff. The Herald claims the picture was newsworthy. On the other hand, does it put the lives of our men at risk?
I must say I feel uncomfortable about the publication of this photo. Our men are in Afghanistan to do an important job, and publishing details of where they are and who they are has the potential to endanger their security. Well, that's one argument anyway. The other is that we ave a right to know what our troops are doing in our name.
Do you have a view?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)