Where's Winston?
 

Whatever the truth of this article, does it not reflect the way a large part of the world must now see us?

http://www.nypost.com/seven/04032007...lph_peters.htm

An emotive article, but I fear it will only divide the allies and harden the liberal heart bleeding masses. It hits home about the draw down of UK Forces but it is wide of the mark about the people still in. We may not be all 'Star Spangled Banner' in how we go about our work, but by god we believe in the Country and the Queen, it's all we have left.
We do not know what Rules of Engagement/Orders the Guys were using so to say they went with a whimper is crass, also to make the comparison of how the US would do it is also crass. We are taught to think then act, not shoot 1st then think. We do have strict rules of engagement and we follow them, if we are going to go into a testosterone match and the bigger one wins, well see how many US Marines are now in jail for their illegal actions in Iraq compared to ours.
But the last paragraph is so true under the Noo Labour rule

Another Article
 

Bit less strident but the same basic point:

http://www.nypost.com/seven/03282007...hur_herman.htm

Much as it boils my p1ss to hear a foreigner denigrating our country and armed forces, much as this cowboy needs a slap for his comments about Basra etc, much as his 'correct response' would get our lads executed pronto, he makes the point that thanks to Tony we're fighting with one hand tied behind our backs by being so overstretched and under-resourced. Yes, previous great leaders would turn in their graves at seeing what Tony has done to our forces.

However, I am pleased that our people are not exactly like the yanks. I am pleased that we do not rush in gung-ho to try and kick off a third war in the region (yet).

He should be careful about drawing any parallels to 1979 given the results of that Op. I'd like to see how this tosser would bear up to captivity by a hostile power.

So, yes, a grain of truth, but the guy is still a cock. And are you really allowed to use the word w@nker in American newspapers?:mad:

New US Insult
 

"So, yes, a grain of truth, but the guy is still a cock. And are you really allowed to use the word w@nker in American newspapers?:mad:"

Apparently '******' is being replaced with 'Fish and chip eating surrender monkey' in US press reports:eek:

Well I think the author is justified in attacking the attitude and complacency of our 'government' when considering how under-equipped and under-strength we are in theatre.

I could find myself somewhere hot, sandy or rocky next year and I certainly won't be volunteering for any patrols in RHIBs or in snatch land-rovers.

The sooner we stop trying to emulate a world power with matching troop-levels, the better. (Note my emphasis on quantity - nothing wrong with the quality of our people - I'm sure the 15 matelots and Marines would have felt better with more of themselves and sub-nuclear rocket launchers:O )

This Ralph Peters appears to be a military polemicist and former cold war warrior who is making an awful lot of money writing an awful lot of p1ss & wind articles in the US press.

He knows cock-all about the RoE the RN/RM Boarding Party were operating under, or what orders they had regarding the possibility of capture by Iran.

If the officers on the spot judge that confessing to being on the wrong side of a line will have a better chance of getting them and their troops out than the pig's @rse the US made of their Iranian hostage crisis, then good luck to them.

The spams have, I believe, killed more of our (and everybody else's) troops than the Iranians have. They can take their view and shove it up their ar*ses. Iran has something we'd like to have back. Very much. Let's concentrate on that. First.

CG

Any body from BA or Virgin want to provide the Royal Marines with a few tickets to NYC, so that they might pop over and have a little 'chat' with this stroker :E

Look at the stupidity displayed by the right wing fanatasists at this site.

It will make you sethe. F:mad: ing armchair heroes. Yes, some of them have suggested that it would have been better if a firefight had started, and out personnel killed instead of captured.


:mad: :mad: :mad:

I spy a pillock...
 

The thing about this cretin is that he's a disgrace to his own country, let alone an insult to ours.

The vast majority of US service people do a great job, and do not even attack friendly forces that often.

He clearly has no interest ( the upsetting thing is he probably has a clue, but chooses to ignore it for his 'angle') of the pressures involved when your buddies are threatened with torture, let alone the fact that one is a woman and has already been used as a pawn by the low-life scum.

Maybe he's the type who would just let them suffer while keeping quiet ?

In this situation, it makes sense to go along, it's doing no harm & no-one takes their talk under duress seriously.

In the long term they mght learn their mistake...

I'm most certainly no UK marine, but if you get a spare seat on that plane I'll happily come & film it !

Loose end
 

Just to prevent any ambiguity, in my previous post when I said 'they' might learn their mistake in the long term, I was certainly NOT referring to UK personnel !

Thoughts with them & their families...

I would hope that every American reading these pages is thoroughly ashamed of what utter crap their fellow countryman is spouting in their name.

It takes journalism to a new low in my book.

Good luck guys. Hope to see you home soon.

He says that Americans would have come out fighting on meeting Iranian forces; to be fair Americans come out fighting when they meet any forces at all, regardless of nationality.

He also says that "Semper fi" means something - Actually, you tw@t, it doesn't; semper fidelis, on the other hand...

c:mad: t:mad: s:mad: ing f:mad: ng ba:mad: d a:mad: ole

Peters has written some er... interesting material recently, including a deeply critical piece on UK ops in Basra. Apparently, we should have gone around killing anyone we even suspected to be an insurgent. As an advocate for re-enacting My Lai he wasn't that persuasive.

Also, although his rank and past service with the USA is often highlighted, his background is entirely in intelligence. An American officer late of my acquaintance branded him 'a REMF with no idea of how the front line works'. I've always wondered whether that was an accurate comment or a misunderstanding by said acquaintance (background in armour [it has a 'u', chaps...] and had shot at a few people)? Any knowledge from American Ppruners?

It is perhaps instructive that the headline entry regarding his military career on Wikipedia is a specialist knowledge of the disposal policy for US Army typewriters.

I'm sure the Rooskies were quaking in their boots at the mere mention of his name!:rolleyes:

AT:
'It is perhaps instructive that the headline entry regarding his military career on Wikipedia is a specialist knowledge of the disposal policy for US Army typewriters.'

That is a very, very naughty bit of spin.

What the guy did was point out that some very important documents had clearly been forged on an electric typewriter of atype that was not available to the National Guard.

If you're going to diss the guy do so for his stupid optimism and lack of understanding of Middle Eastern Politics and Muslim fundamentalism, his overtly political posturing and unrealistic expectations of the capabilities of his government.

Unfortunately the rissole is also an opinion informer and in answer to Lazer Hounds original question yes it reflect the way the world (and for the most part, the population of this country) see us now, and unfortunately it is going to happen again 'cos Iran WILL get away with this, they are experts at humiliating powers large or small, sorry, but there it is. Because this sorry situation was allowed to happen we're stuffed if we do, and stuffed if we don't.

The Usual Transatlantic Slag-fest...
 

...that we see so often on Pprune, Arrse, etc. The Mullahs must be rubbing their hands with glee!:uhoh:

Well you started this thread, what were you expecting?

To be fair, when it happened last year, they did...


TIME: A Deadly U.S.-Iran Firefight
Friday, Mar. 30, 2007

The soldiers who were there still talk about the September 7 firefight on the Iran-Iraq border in whispers. At Forward Operating Base Warhorse, the main U.S. military outpost in Iraq's eastern Diyala Province bordering Iran, U.S. troops recount events reluctantly, offering details only on condition that they remain nameless. Everyone seems to sense the possible consequences of revealing that a clash between U.S. and Iranian forces had turned deadly. And although the Pentagon has acknowledged that a firefight took place, it says it cannot say anything more. "For that level of detail, you're going to have to ask the [U.S.] military in Baghdad," says Army Lieut. Col. Mark Ballesteros. "We don't know anything about it."

A short Army press release issued on the day of the skirmish offered the following information: U.S. soldiers from the 5th Squadron 73rd Cavalry 82nd Airborne were accompanying Iraqi forces on a routine joint patrol along the border with Iran, about 75 miles east of Baghdad, when they spotted two Iranian soldiers retreating from Iraqi territory back into Iran. A moment later, U.S. and Iraqi forces came upon a third Iranian soldier on the Iraqi side of the border, who stood his ground. As U.S. and Iraqi soldiers approached the Iranian officer and began speaking with him, a platoon of Iranian soldiers appeared and moved to surround the coalition patrol, taking up positions on high ground.

At that point, according to the Army's statement, the Iranian captain told the U.S. and Iraqi soldiers that if they tried to leave they would be fired on. Fearing abduction by the Iranians, U.S. troops moved to go anyway, and fighting broke out. Army officials say the Iranian troops fired first with small arms and rocket-propelled grenades, and that U.S. troops fell further back into Iraqi territory, while four Iraqi army soldiers, one interpreter and one Iraqi border guard remained in the hands of the Iranians.

The official release says there were no casualties among the Americans, and makes no mention of any on the Iranian side. U.S. soldiers present at the firefight, however, tell TIME that American forces killed at least one Iranian soldier who had been aiming a rocket-propelled grenade at their convoy of Humvees.......