Are you a Paki?  You are NOT a native English speaker or if you are, your education is sub-chav.

I hadn?t been informed that this was a spelling competition, also as for your other comments, I?m assuming that you are american (may be wrong) but you were unfair and totally out of your depth to make comments about the British conducted their operations in Basra poorly, 178 British servicemen and women died for american foreign policy out there, and they did a damn good job for it. Basra is now a much better place since the British intervention, and just because they don?t have much taste for killing other doesn?t make them bad soldiers, they knew how to handle the situation (that being carefully) and did a fine job, i might add while avoiding the shocking civilian casualty figures that some other NATO forces have racked up (cough, cough america).

as for your comment about Britain going to the dogs, well, Britain?s government is, they are mostly incompetent fools who no nothing of war. But Britain is still a fine and proud nation, and you would do well to remember that, the whole world owes Britain a great debt.

I forgot that you were on the boat with the other Royal Navy personnel when their boat was captured by the Iranians, so you know all about it. You really don?t know much about foreign policy if you think that the Brits should have fought back against the Iranians, 1. They were outgunned 2. It would have provided Iran with exactly the opportunity that it wants to start an international incident I.E war, or to step up their uranium enriching program. 3, even the mighty americans would have acted in the same way, as would any other nation (or are they prone to letting their soldiers become target practice?), you simply can?t blow up everything that?s in your way and think you will get away with it (i think it was the americans that came up with, Shoot first ask questions later, or am i wrong?)

for your apparent comments about the British Army and navy only being able to fight as you put it "woggish pigboats", i take it you have chosen to forget about the Falklands war then??, i seem to recall that america hasn?t fought a proper enemy army since Korea. Do NOT underestimate the British, if we are on the subject of giving up without a fight should we mention the 20,000 or so american GIs that surrendered to the Germans in the Ardennes.

The British Army, Royal Navy and Royal Air Force are a match for any army, whether it?s the Taliban, the Argentineans and the so called mighty american army which i might add owes more of a debt than anyone else to the 400 or so British servicemen and women that have died fighting alongside it for Americas damn foreign policy, and not once have they faltered, it is an insult to them for you to even suggest that they are incapable, i suggest you review your knowledge of the British armed forces as you are severely mistaken about, either that or you blinded by naivety and bias

All spelt ok for you??

 

Quote    Reply

Mikko:  remarkable about the shouting, harrassment.  Have you dealt with US Marines?  Were the Brits worse?

My only contact with US Marines is through movies and documentaries. So I have only a very very filtered knowledge on them. Based on what I've seen in documentaries, no-one shouts  as much as a US Marine drill sergeant. Brits were nowhere near but I mentioned it since I experienced it first hand. I quite never understood the point in the shouting thing; it's like the NCO is publically celebrating his inability to form trusting relationships with subordinates. Maybe it builds team spirit and tests mental endurance.. 

That is more Hollywood than reality. The Marine sergeants keep tight control on their men because there is nothing more chaotic than amphibious warfare, unless it is isolated small unit warfare in a jungle, snow covered dense forest, or a built up city. The average US Marine rifleman is a teenager with all that implies. The corporals and sergeants deal with kids-very bright kids, but still many of them are just frightened kids. 

In that respect, the British kids may be inherently tougher before combat, since they are not as coddled or as much "momma's boys" as their American counterparts. As to why the British rely on set drills and top-down leadership, that is the inheritance they kept from their alliance with Frederick the Great's Prussia from what we Americans call the Seven Year's War or the French and Indian War. When Wolfe put an end to Montcalm on the Plains of Abraham, he used Frederick's training methods for the British Army. Those robot soldier methods worked. The British kept winning with those methods, so they didn't change methods.  

 

And trigger-happy? Really?

I've heard this about American troops. I've never heard it about the British.

Well I suppose I have to explain that a little. See, the training we did with the Brits concerned all sorts of peace-keeping and peace-forcing duties. In a real shooting war there hardly is such a thing as a "trigger happy doctrine" (just bad aim). The Brits were trained to use their rifles and solve all sorts of situations either with force or through demonstrating force. We always used such means as the last effort, trying to keep situations cooler. 

 

2. The Luftwaffe Night Fighter force DIED fighting the 8th Air Force April to September 1944 because USAAF fighter swarms tore the German day fighter force apart in February and March. The Germans had to put something else up to intercept Doolittle's hordes. When the night fighters then came up, the Mustangs and Lightnings killed them. That was the point of Operation Argument, for the USAAF to do, what the RAF at night could not do, kill BOTH German fighter forces as an effective defense. RAF Fighter Command participated somewhat as US bomber formation day escorts, Harris though resisted his part of the operation (Bomber Command) which was supposed to be the night bombing of German fighter production. It took Churchill to bring that damned fool into line with USAAF strategy. The 8th Air Force bomber fleet was the BAIT.         

 

Singapore was still British when Admiral Philips outran his RAF fighter cover.  And the RN disaster at Balikapan was the very reason that Nimitz kept the British Pacific Fleet out of real harm's way. The RN Fleet Air Arm just couldn't handle the Japanese naval air forces even as diminished then as they were. RN Pilots were outstanding, but the training and the equipment was not up to Pacific War fleet defense standards. The few kamikazis that were aimed the British way broke through rather easily. Armored flight decks also didn't save carrier hulls that had to be scrapped postwar as deframed after ONE hit.       

 

 

 

Pretty much "ditto" on Hamilcar's remarks.  I thought I was clear it was chiefly the donkeys dragging you down.  But whoever's fault it is that "England is going to the dogs," it is a problem.  I also think that modern communications strip initiative from local command - your RN captain left to his own discretion, in a culture where RN captains are left to their own discretion, would have certainly taken action to prevent the capture of your swabbies.  Ideally, though, he would have disposed of his forces so as to prevent the incident in the first place.

 

As for your language skills, it is gratifying that you can indeed improve when you set your mind to it.  As an Englishman yourself, speaking the language known as "English," (not "American," after all), one would think you'd take more pride in it.   You have been doing better.  But do keep in mind the paragraph mark.  It is your friend. http://www.strategypage.com/CuteSoft_Client/CuteEditor/Images/emwink.gif" align="absmiddle" border="0" alt="" />

I don't say you'd win - certainly not that you'd wish to push the bear around gratuitously.  If they want Helsinki they'll take it.  But I expect they'd bleed out of all proportion to expectations.  I'm surprised to hear that you don't think you have their respect.

Whether  the high ranking professional soldiers respect Finns.. no idea. Maybe they do; I do know Finnish soldiers respect their eastern colleagues and only possible adversaries in a full-scale war. But there is this massive stigma of showing weakness, the massive paranoia in Russian politics, that any actual respect shown behind closed doors is sure not to find it's way out to the public.

 

Sorry for taking this sidestep off the topic but the issue is close to me. And I want to address the fact that I criticize only the Russian government, not the common Russians to whom a great deal of Finns bear a close sense of kinship.

 

M

 

PS. Hamilcar, it was a good revelation of the British peace-keeping doctrine. It made perfect sense. 

Thanks Hamilcar

 

Canadian ww2 participation is not cited offen. I am even more surprise to see that some still remember Dieppe outside Canada. I would like to add that there is even more to say about our effort in WW1.

that was a disaster to send almost 5000 brave canadian soldiers to their deaths, it was totally the wrong decision, it couldnt have gone worse, our thanks should go out to those brave men and all the others who died fighting in the commonwealth and allied forces in both world wars.