Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
United Kingdom Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: UK's vassal status re-affirmed?
mithradates    4/8/2007 12:56:16 PM
In this latest prisoner incident, the actual power of the U.K has clearly been demonstrated. Though the entire affair was instigated by the U.K army, it is now obvious to all that the U.K is entirely dependent upon the U.S for it's security. Without U.S military backup, the U.K cannot even attempt to deal on a basis of equality with Iran let alone superiority. Iran was able to extract written confessions and apologies from the 15 tresspassers of their guilt and then was gracious enough to pardon these criminals. While the U.K put these soldiers on TV and had them whine about mistreatment, and how much they wanted to preserve their own lives. Is there now any doubt that the U.K is but a vassal of the U.S?
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10   NEXT
UK-SubFan       4/9/2007 2:42:13 PM
Are any other British (or other for that matter) posters becoming increasingly frustrated with some recent posters rabid ramblings?

I realise all to well that (as a film I forget the name of once said), the reason and use of the internet is to slander people anonomously,  but I can't help but wonder how many of these posters would say what they write here to the faces of those they slander.


This is how I meant my post to look.

Well and truly.  Reading this bile here has made me sign in and comment.
Having lurked on this forum for a long time I can't help but get the feeling that frenchstratege quite likes doing down the brits when he gets a chance.

Please put yourself in the situation, shooting your way out when out numbered or out gunned and kicking off further conflict.  You really think Iran would have respected this and though "ooh we better not mess with Britain"?  Of course not they would have used it as a further reason to shoot a British ship or attack British soldiers, considering that we aren't actually at war with Iran. 

Am I saying that mistakes weren't made?  No.  A helo should have been over them at all times.
But to say that our vassal status has been affirmed by this action is absurd.  Are you trying to say that America told us not to do anything?

Iran extracting written confessions and apologies.  Well it is standard practice with those kinds of regimes.  Extract something even if it isn't true.  Pretty sure no one in the west believed the confessions anyway.  Whining about mistreatment and how they wanted to preserve their own lives.  Very easy for you to say.  I'd like to see you in the same situation.  Would you not say what they wanted you to say.  You think the captives were having a ******* party there?  You think they weren't put under psychological pressure?  It is so easy for you lot in your armchairs to say they should have fought their way out.

Oh and another thing people have forgotten or don't know.  The border in that area is disputed, there was never a treaty ratified by either side stating where the border exists.  The Iranians have one line on the map, the Iraqies and everyone else a different line.

The RN probably did their crew more favours by not engaging than if they had engaged.  Cornwall could easily have let loose with it's 4.5 inch gun, but also killing their own people in the process.

Where the hell are you - mithradates - from anyway?
 
Quote    Reply

Pseudonym       4/15/2007 11:09:49 AM
"I actually think that a rather witty retort, but in answer I would be more than happy to have a long sit down (stand up?) discussion face to face with those who find it all too easy to slander the British forces."

I was probably the only American whose starting position was defending your forces.

I knew that any soldier with a choice would shoot the Iranians, not let themselves be captured by them.

Don't nobody wanna go to jail in Iran.

Orders can really really suck.
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       6/1/2007 8:14:47 PM


 Also, where does the steam powered catapult technology used on French Carrier Charles de Gaul came from?

actually, I think you'll find that its US technology built under license. ;)  France has been denied access to the latest US catapult technology, but they have been licensed to build for over 2 decades. (IIRC)
 
Quote    Reply

AdamB       6/7/2007 2:37:09 PM
"First, court martial the 15 cowards"
 
What for when they were breaking no laws?
 
 
 "second , launch and accelerate your carrier program"
 
We'd actually get our carrier program up and running much later if it turns out we have to work on it closely with the French.
 
Quote    Reply

AdamB       6/7/2007 2:40:21 PM
"This is also why a certain degree of respect is given to countries like Russian and France.  Because they at least TRY to do it themselves rather than running straight to lick the American boot."
 
That's only because Russia and France have no choice.  There is much less chance of the Americans wanting to work alongside the Russians and the French than wanting to work alongside the British.
 
The Russians and French don't normally work alongside the US only for the very simple reason that 9 times out of 10 the US doesn't want to work closely alongside them.
 
Quote    Reply

Bluewings12       6/7/2007 2:40:41 PM
Adam :
""We'd actually get our carrier program up and running much later if it turns out we have to work on it closely with the French.""

Without France , you 'll end-up with a crap and very expensive ship , if it even floats ...

Cheers .
 
Quote    Reply

AdamB       6/7/2007 2:48:22 PM
"There are definately French soldiers in Afghanistan, and there have certainly been casualties"
 
There are 1900 French troops in Afghanistan, compared to 2500 Canadian, 3000 German, 6300 British (which will soon increase to 7700 until 2009) and 12,000 American.

Almost 60 British soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan so far.  The number of French killed?  9.
 
Also, French troops, unlike British, Canadian, American and Dutch troops, aren't allowed to actually fight the enemy.
******************************************
 
 
NATO nations in Afghanistan
 
The UK was one of the first countries to join the US-led coalition into Afghanistan. As of June 2007, the number of UK troops killed in Afghanistan since 2001 was 58 , 22 of which were from accidents, illness, or non-combat injuries.http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5121552.stm href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5121552.stm" rel=nofollow>[19]
The RAF has numerous planes and helicopters positioned in the country, including C130 cargo planes, CH-47 heavy lift helicopters, Nimrod surveillance planes as well as a squadron of Harrier GR9 attack planes. The army air corps also provides a number of Westland Lynx and WAH-64 Apache helicopters.
They are officially there to help train Afghan security forces, facilitate reconstruction, and provide security. But over 2006, the situation in the north of Helmand turned increasingly violent, with British troops involved in fierce firefights against the Taliban and anti-coalition militia.
British troops have been involved in heavy clashes in the towns of Sangin, Musa Qala, Kajaki and Nawzad.
US Army soldiers, under ISAF, pull security while other soldiers talk with the Afghan National Police commander at a checkpoint in Khost Province.http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d7/ISAF_Humvee_in_Khowst.jpg/200px-ISAF_Humvee_in_Khowst.jpg" width=200 longDesc=/wiki/Image:ISAF_Humvee_in_Khowst.jpg>
http://en.wikipedia.org/skins-1.5/common/images/magnify-clip.png" width=15>
US Army soldiers, under ISAF, pull security while other
 
Quote    Reply

Panther       6/7/2007 3:01:32 PM

Adam :

""We'd actually get our carrier program up and running much later if it turns out we have to work on it closely with the French.""



Without France , you 'll end-up with a crap and very expensive ship , if it even floats ...



Cheers .





Hey !!! I wouldn't talk about the De Gaulle like that:
 
Oh wait... you weren't! The rest of your countrymen were!
 
Whoops!
 
Quote    Reply

flamingknives       6/7/2007 4:01:12 PM
AdamB
 Use some critical thinking, please.

The French have one-third the numbers of the Britsh Army in Afghanistan and have not been there as long. On a pro-rata basis, their casualty rate is similar to the British.

While their committment isn't so great, it is greater than zero, which was my point. Two months ago. It's still true.
 
Quote    Reply

historynut       6/8/2007 12:04:05 PM
Since most counties (in Europe and elsewhere) have at one time or the other used the U.S.'s airlift and/or sealift the U.S. must have a lot of vassel's. Then maybe most counties decided that since it was there if needed why spend money on our own. Leaves you more money to spend on tanks, airplanes etc. vs. spending spending money on something you would seldom (maybe never) need.
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10   NEXT



 Latest
 News 		  Most
 Read 		  Most
 Commented		  Hot
 Topics