Mike
Not many I'm afraid
"It is a sad fact that any poking from outside the British Armed Forces, whether it be MoD cut or a tabloid sting, results in destructive bitch fighting between the forces themselves. You, Tourist, have just demonstrated that with a deliberately provocative and uncharacteristically offensive post. If you're fishing, I'm biting"
+2
"I, and virtually all my light blue colleagues, hold the other branches of the forces in high regard."
-1 Hmm
It is disappointing that such loyalty is often publicly not reciprocated by fusty old seniors of those services, notably Southby-Tailyour and Tim Collins whose understanding of the importance of air power is about as advanced as that of an 14 year old in the Army Cadet Force.
-1 S-T's understanding of what air power was going to do to the ships in the harbour was excellent. Tim Collins may be a tw@t, but he is the closest thing we have had to a man with true leadership ability in a while.
"I am sure that all the ground forces who bravely fought in the Falklands also took a moment to contemplate the benefits of air power (for example Chinook airlift) as they yomped or tabbed with full equipment across the Falklands moorland."
-2 They yomped because you weren't there! The fact that you triad to be doesn't cut it. "Losers do their best, winners go home and f**k the prom queen" etc
"The fact that the RAF successfully prosecuted the longest range bombing raids in history, rendering Stanley unuseable to enemy FJs, and demonstrating that Buenos Aires could get nuked, was a tremendously significant achievment and it is distinctly ungracious of you, Tourist, and certain senior members of the other services to belittle the RAF's contribution."
-4 Erm, you are surely aware, as the Argentinians were, that the RN could have Nuked BA from plymouth, with a lot more accuracy, less cost and no risk to aircrew? You know, those dasterdly underhanded underwater boats? National deterant?
The war may indeed have been lost if Argentine FJ operations had not been pushed back to the mainland by the successful targeting of the runway and its secondary effects.
-1 More a morale effect than any real military damage. Holes can be filled without any trouble, and the Argentinians were more than willing to lose aircraft in the pursuit of sinking our ships. To suggest that the fear of losing a/c in airfield strikes was the reason they did not operate from Stanley is illogical.
"Do not forget the importance of SH and how advantaged the British Forces would have been had we not lost Atlantic Conveyor and all but one of its Chinnies."
-1 Erm.. but we did.....
I for one would be delighted to see the RN with angle deck carriers full of Sea Typhoons and Maritime AEW aircraft. The fact that the Army, RN and RM have to accept some cuts and not just the RAF (which has been decimated in the last 10 years) is no justification for open aggression towards the service which has gained the primary importance in modern war fighting, in its short life.
Nearly docked you 10 for mention of a sea Typhoon (which I assume was a joke for so many reasons) We have all suffered vast cuts, and I think you would find it very hard to justify saying the RAF has taken the most pain. Primary importance would probably go to the Army at the moment, feet on the ground, apache etc, and we all have SH
"Dry your eyes princess and show a little respect for the light blues just as you demand respect for yourself! Muppet."
Nice finish though
