Captured Personnel Permitted to Tell Stories for Money
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Since people are offended on JN's behalf I've removed the post. Apologies to all.
And yet we can criticise our retired generals, politicians and others who make public their opinions? I'm sorry, but I don't think this argument holds water.
Easy to take a pop at someone who had the courage to put his name to what he wrote, isn't it, tabby, especially when you're hiding behind a nice anonymous PPRuNe user name?
I wasn't saying for one moment that JN was a paragon of the Nav's art, merely expressing discomfort at the way in which he was being derided, and expressing disagreement with the accusations of arrogance.
As to his qualifications (or otherwise) for being a 'defence expert', better a former junior aircrew officer who flew two frontline tours (in two different roles) who went to war, and even experienced being a PoW than some fascist d1ckhead like Max Hastings or some self aggrandising donkey like Lewis Page, I'da thunk.
And much better than Clarkson, or Charlie and her Dimmocks.
As to his qualifications (or otherwise) for being a 'defence expert', better a former junior aircrew officer who flew two frontline tours (in two different roles) who went to war, and even experienced being a PoW than some fascist d1ckhead like Max Hastings or some self aggrandising donkey like Lewis Page, I'da thunk.
And much better than Clarkson, or Charlie and her Dimmocks.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: wilts
Posts: 1,667
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are a funny one Jacko, you get all upset about someone being called arrogant etc then you refer to Sir Max as a fascist d1ckhead. I am still trying to work that one out. Would he be more acceptable to you if he voted Labour?
They are both very pro-military, and that ain't a bad thing in these very difficult days.
Maybe you should reconsider your own comments. Esp as you hide behind an acronym
They are both very pro-military, and that ain't a bad thing in these very difficult days.
Maybe you should reconsider your own comments. Esp as you hide behind an acronym
What makes me laugh is that everyone assumes that this lot had any conduct after capture training anyway?
Do SACs on the ground in Qatar get any? I bet they don't, and I bet the average jack doesn't either.
What did we have here? junior officers, slack handful of Royal, and odds and sods off the ship - that's not a boarding party, that is a jolly ladies and gentlemen, a jolly which turned out sour and the Andrew doesn't want to uncover the unpalatable truth that they sent out a bunch of kids - untooled up - to do a RM Platoon's job.
And as for Miss Cooked Breakfast 2007, if I was an Iranian thinking of rape, I might have taken some convincing that she was the likely candidate out of the entire party.
Do SACs on the ground in Qatar get any? I bet they don't, and I bet the average jack doesn't either.
What did we have here? junior officers, slack handful of Royal, and odds and sods off the ship - that's not a boarding party, that is a jolly ladies and gentlemen, a jolly which turned out sour and the Andrew doesn't want to uncover the unpalatable truth that they sent out a bunch of kids - untooled up - to do a RM Platoon's job.
And as for Miss Cooked Breakfast 2007, if I was an Iranian thinking of rape, I might have taken some convincing that she was the likely candidate out of the entire party.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Scotland
Posts: 664
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At the risk of sending Klingon into an apoplectic fit of late middle-aged angst; I was rather surprised to click on a link in a Telegraph piece referenced by ORAC in an earlier post. I clicked on the link in the phrase "I've been poring over the faces."
Are standards in the Telegraph slipping? The page at the link is entitled "Not a single one of these is f*ckable." It would appear that even the house journal of the Passed-over Majors set is going to the dogs.
Are standards in the Telegraph slipping? The page at the link is entitled "Not a single one of these is f*ckable." It would appear that even the house journal of the Passed-over Majors set is going to the dogs.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Page 5:
Page 6:
Just seeking clarification...
Originally Posted by Jackonicko
Easy to take a pop at someone who had the courage to put his name to what he wrote, isn't it, tabby, especially when you're hiding behind a nice anonymous PPRuNe user name?
Originally Posted by Jackonicko
or some self aggrandising donkey like Lewis Page, I'da thunk.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Nottingham UK
Age: 84
Posts: 5,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Christopher Robin wrote:- And as for Miss Cooked Breakfast 2007, if I was an Iranian thinking of rape, I might have taken some convincing that she was the likely candidate out of the entire party.
Faye Turney told The Sun how she was: STRIPPED to her knickers.
I guess her captors thought "Please stop, No more and slammed the cell door shut"
Sorry too much red vino.
Faye Turney told The Sun how she was: STRIPPED to her knickers.
I guess her captors thought "Please stop, No more and slammed the cell door shut"
Sorry too much red vino.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Financial Times: Iran debacle shows failure to understand the British services
Flogging stories of victimhood has no place in the armed forces. By initially allowing the 15 sailors and marines held captive by Iran to accept payments from the media for recounting their ordeal, the Navy and the Ministry of Defence have set a dangerous precedent. This failure to grasp the real values of service in the military goes right to the top of the MoD. The reversal of the decision does not undo the damage. In Tony Blair’s Britain, it seems every newsworthy experience must be shared – and does command a price.......
On every level, the initial government decision was disastrous. It succeeded only in keeping the spotlight on a humiliating episode in which members of the armed forces, no doubt acting under orders, were captured without firing a shot in anger and later paraded on Iranian television as meek and obedient prisoners. While the servicemen and one woman were understandably traumatised by their treatment, they nevertheless will not go down in history as heroes. To celebrate their brief spell in captivity is to devalue the many real acts of bravery that the British armed forces routinely commit in action. Imagine, for a moment, Lord Nelson being asked to describe how he felt about the loss of his right arm.
Mr Browne and the MoD have fallen into the trap – too commonplace today – of confusing victims with heroes. This strikes at the heart of the culture and morale of the armed forces. The services are founded on pride, teamwork and camaraderie. Tales of single-handed heroism can intensify these bonds: individual accounts of humiliation merely serve to weaken them.
There is now a barrier between those who have profited from speaking about their experience and their colleagues. To military personnel serving in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere – and to their families – it sends the message that society puts a higher value on describing two weeks’ detention than it does on defending the realm.
Britain has one of the few military services able to project force around the world. The government has over-stretched the armed services, but they remain a force to be reckoned with. Now the MoD has made them a laughing stock.
It is a grave error that will not readily be forgiven or quickly put right.
Flogging stories of victimhood has no place in the armed forces. By initially allowing the 15 sailors and marines held captive by Iran to accept payments from the media for recounting their ordeal, the Navy and the Ministry of Defence have set a dangerous precedent. This failure to grasp the real values of service in the military goes right to the top of the MoD. The reversal of the decision does not undo the damage. In Tony Blair’s Britain, it seems every newsworthy experience must be shared – and does command a price.......
On every level, the initial government decision was disastrous. It succeeded only in keeping the spotlight on a humiliating episode in which members of the armed forces, no doubt acting under orders, were captured without firing a shot in anger and later paraded on Iranian television as meek and obedient prisoners. While the servicemen and one woman were understandably traumatised by their treatment, they nevertheless will not go down in history as heroes. To celebrate their brief spell in captivity is to devalue the many real acts of bravery that the British armed forces routinely commit in action. Imagine, for a moment, Lord Nelson being asked to describe how he felt about the loss of his right arm.
Mr Browne and the MoD have fallen into the trap – too commonplace today – of confusing victims with heroes. This strikes at the heart of the culture and morale of the armed forces. The services are founded on pride, teamwork and camaraderie. Tales of single-handed heroism can intensify these bonds: individual accounts of humiliation merely serve to weaken them.
There is now a barrier between those who have profited from speaking about their experience and their colleagues. To military personnel serving in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere – and to their families – it sends the message that society puts a higher value on describing two weeks’ detention than it does on defending the realm.
Britain has one of the few military services able to project force around the world. The government has over-stretched the armed services, but they remain a force to be reckoned with. Now the MoD has made them a laughing stock.
It is a grave error that will not readily be forgiven or quickly put right.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Goody Bags
I have not seen any mention of what was actually in the goody bags the Iranians gave out.
If they were of value then they should have been declared for customs duty and also handed over the the men from the Ministry. If they wanted to keep the contents they should then pay the fair market value.
Then if a particular memento was a desk ornament or similar it should be checked for explosive substances, drugs, or even bugs.
Any ideas chaps?
Little model of the Sharyad perhaps? Shake it and watch the snow fall.
http://report-en.aruna.ir/pic/azadi01.jpg
If they were of value then they should have been declared for customs duty and also handed over the the men from the Ministry. If they wanted to keep the contents they should then pay the fair market value.
Then if a particular memento was a desk ornament or similar it should be checked for explosive substances, drugs, or even bugs.
Any ideas chaps?
Little model of the Sharyad perhaps? Shake it and watch the snow fall.
http://report-en.aruna.ir/pic/azadi01.jpg