# Military strategy and like.



## Deleted member 32980 (Dec 5, 2014)

Someone said to start a military forum and go from there. So here you can talk about strategies, weaponry, tactics, combat, equipment, technology, and what you please within reason. 

Forbidden: 
You are NOT permitted to speak of any kind of military sessions that are current or in the process, operations that are known, or any kind of "cover-ups" of ANY kind. We don't want any trouble.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 6, 2014)

Did you serve in the Military?


----------



## Transk53 (Dec 7, 2014)

It was me that suggested in the beginners forum. I meant historical, not something that gets the authorities booting down the front door.


----------



## Deleted member 32980 (Dec 8, 2014)

@ballen0351 no my father was a green beret. 

@Transk53 oh... My bad, any ways we need a little variety to pick it up in here. 

Any takers???


----------



## Transk53 (Dec 8, 2014)

The members of my family that served were either killed in WW2 or died a while ago, so my main interest is in that era.


----------



## Deleted member 32980 (Dec 8, 2014)

Alright. I honor your family in this thread as well as others who served and sacrificed something. 

What would you like to discuss? I can do weapons. I <3 the M1 Garand and the m1 Thompson .45 . Range and power/rpm


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 8, 2014)

So where did you get your interest in the military?  From your dad?  When did he serve?


----------



## Deleted member 32980 (Dec 8, 2014)

I was never really interested until I got into special forces/special operations/ innovating tech. I don't like standard things like common foot men or military gate guards for forts and such. I like armors and specialty groups. 

My dad served in a few groups. (I forgot the term) 
He was a airborne ranger and a green beret. He served in the 80s in South Korea for three tours I believe.


----------



## tshadowchaser (Dec 8, 2014)

I will most likely have nothing to add to this thread except for my deep respect for those that serve their country.
As for weapons, those that where in use in my day have gone by the way for the most part and have been replace by what now is deemed more practical or just better.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 8, 2014)

Nate the foreverman said:


> I was never really interested until I got into special forces/special operations/ innovating tech.


Whats that?



> I don't like standard things like common foot men or military gate guards for forts and such. I like armors and specialty groups.


um ok


> My dad served in a few groups. (I forgot the term)
> He was a airborne ranger and a green beret. He served in the 80s in South Korea for three tours I believe.


I send a little time in South Korea as well


----------



## Deleted member 32980 (Dec 8, 2014)

What do you mean, "what's that"? Which part? I like new technology and teams who big damage with as little men as needed. (Understand?) 

Armors I mean like tanks and armored vehicles. 

South Korea :/ they got it rough.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 8, 2014)

My father was in Korea when it really was rough.


----------



## Transk53 (Dec 8, 2014)

tshadowchaser said:


> I will most likely have nothing to add to this thread except for my deep respect for those that serve their country.
> As for weapons, those that where in use in my day have gone by the way for the most part and have been replace by what now is deemed more practical or just better.



No I think what you mean is nothing is timeless of personal history. Never forgotten by those that matter. I know way infer that I am that.


----------



## Transk53 (Dec 8, 2014)

Nate the foreverman said:


> What do you mean, "what's that"? Which part? I like new technology and teams who big damage with as little men as needed. (Understand?)
> 
> Armors I mean like tanks and armored vehicles.
> 
> South Korea :/ they got it rough.



Well I could list some of the armour. We talking about M4 Shermans, a few Pershing M26's. Hey lets talk the war over Korea and let the community what is what? Simply intrigued here?


----------



## Deleted member 32980 (Dec 9, 2014)

What they need is a few m1 Abrams


----------



## hussaf (Dec 9, 2014)

Nate the foreverman said:


> What do you mean, "what's that"? Which part? I like new technology and teams who big damage with as little men as needed. (Understand?)
> 
> Armors I mean like tanks and armored vehicles.
> 
> South Korea :/ they got it rough.


There was no war in South Korea in the 80's, and he didn't serve "tours." He was stationed as permpers, likely with 8A.


----------



## hussaf (Dec 9, 2014)

Nate the foreverman said:


> What they need is a few m1 Abrams


Who needs Abrams and what should they do with them?


----------



## Deleted member 32980 (Dec 9, 2014)

Blow sh** up. Make sure North Korea can't retaliate.


----------



## Transk53 (Dec 9, 2014)

Yeah the Abrams a close second to the Leopard 2. As being a brit, the Challenger 2 is the best anyway. Just imagine the 5th RTR on a roll with Challenger 2's.


----------



## Transk53 (Dec 9, 2014)

Nate the foreverman said:


> Blow sh** up. Make sure North Korea can't retaliate.



You really think that NK can make a difference?


----------



## Zero (Dec 10, 2014)

Transk53 said:


> You really think that NK can make a difference?


I think they certainly can to South Korea and because of that to the immediate surroundings also.


----------



## Transk53 (Dec 10, 2014)

Zero said:


> I think they certainly can to South Korea and because of that to the immediate surroundings also.



Yeah agree. There was a computer game released called "Homefront" which had the scenario of the North invading the South and then pushing outwards. Fictitious yeah, but in this modern day world maybe a future scenario.


----------



## Zero (Dec 10, 2014)

Transk53 said:


> Yeah agree. There was a computer game released called "Homefront" which had the scenario of the North invading the South and then pushing outwards. Fictitious yeah, but in this modern day world maybe a future scenario.


Yes, by direct (which may be limited by quite a degree) or more likely by collateral impact, they do pose a very real headache in the immediate vicinity.


----------



## Buka (Dec 10, 2014)

Nate the foreverman said:


> What do you mean, "what's that"? Which part? I like new technology and teams who big damage with as little men as needed. (Understand?)
> 
> Armors I mean like tanks and armored vehicles.
> 
> South Korea :/ they got it rough.



My dad fought in WW1. Tanks looked like this.


----------



## Transk53 (Dec 10, 2014)

Zero said:


> Yes, by direct (which may be limited by quite a degree) or more likely by collateral impact, they do pose a very real headache in the immediate vicinity.



Indeed. If they mange to stick a nuke on the missiles they have, the South would be a tempting target. Like close the distance to Japan and what not.


----------



## Transk53 (Dec 10, 2014)

Buka said:


> My dad fought in WW1. Tanks looked like this.



And the Germans had this. You can kind see why Hitler had such an obsession with heavy tanks. Whether or not there is a tangible link here.


----------



## Zero (Dec 10, 2014)

Buka said:


> My dad fought in WW1. Tanks looked like this.


Come now, surely you mean great granddad.  By your photo you seem much younger than that.


----------



## Deleted member 32980 (Dec 10, 2014)

They have nullcear weapons right?


----------



## Deleted member 32980 (Dec 10, 2014)

I drew a tank and it looked so real I was amazed.when I was younger


----------



## Transk53 (Dec 10, 2014)

Nate the foreverman said:


> They have nullcear weapons right?



They have tested nuclear theory I believe, but probably a big mushroom cloud will the first evidence.


----------



## Deleted member 32980 (Dec 10, 2014)

I laughed So hard.


----------



## Transk53 (Dec 10, 2014)

Nate the foreverman said:


> I laughed So hard.



Well joking aside, I don't any human to be subjected to this. Then again the human race has a predilection for wanting kill everything in site, in a 100 years there will be something even more nasty.


----------



## Deleted member 32980 (Dec 11, 2014)

True. The most violent race is killing their own kind at wholesale and like
It.


----------



## Takai (Dec 12, 2014)

Transk53 said:


> They have tested nuclear theory I believe, but probably a big mushroom cloud will the first evidence.



Hoepfully it will be in North Korea at the time.


----------



## Transk53 (Dec 12, 2014)

Takai said:


> Hoepfully it will be in North Korea at the time.



Talking of which, has their glorious leader been seen yet?


----------



## hussaf (Dec 13, 2014)

Transk53 said:


> Talking of which, has their glorious leader been seen yet?


I heard he was assassinated by James Franco and Seth Rogen


----------



## Transk53 (Dec 13, 2014)

hussaf said:


> I heard he was assassinated by James Franco and Seth Rogen



Blimey that looks cheesy


----------



## Transk53 (Dec 13, 2014)

Takai said:


> Hoepfully it will be in North Korea at the time.



Well whatever happens, different scenarios could be catastrophic. Allegedly according to internet sources, the Northern army could be bigger by 5 - 1. Historically better technology does not always counter lesser technology and manpower. Asset wise, not sure if the South could counter.


----------



## tshadowchaser (Dec 13, 2014)

considering all the "upgrades" or changes in tanks from the first ones to today's what do you think the ones of tomorrow ( say 50 years from now) be like? 
will they be faster, have stealth abilities, float, etc.?


----------



## Transk53 (Dec 13, 2014)

tshadowchaser said:


> considering all the "upgrades" or changes in tanks from the first ones to today's what do you think the ones of tomorrow ( say 50 years from now) be like?
> will they be faster, have stealth abilities, float, etc.?



Depends. Current convention of having a big gun will disappear





tshadowchaser said:


> considering all the "upgrades" or changes in tanks from the first ones to today's what do you think the ones of tomorrow ( say 50 years from now) be like?
> will they be faster, have stealth abilities, float, etc.?



Well, take away the modern computer systems and fire control systems  they essentially just obsolete. If I recall correctly, the last proper tank on tank engagements were the first Gulf war. 50 years from now. Who knows. Depends on what becomes the conventional. I don't see them in their current guise. Stealth systems probably, but floating no. What need would there be. Gravity is gravity. Evolution of the helo perhaps. Bth, I would probably tred into the realm of sci-fi.


----------



## Deleted member 32980 (Dec 16, 2014)

Gosh. This almost reminded me of the twilight zone. Lol


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 16, 2014)

The British army has only a couple of tanks left and that's with just one tank regiment now, the rest are used as infantry. Drones are being used more and more combined with air attacks.


----------



## Deleted member 32980 (Dec 16, 2014)

The British always end up getting pushed back


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 16, 2014)

Nate the foreverman said:


> The British always end up getting pushed back




Really? And what do you base that on? Personal battlefield experience? If you intend to be insulting at least give an explanation.


----------



## Deleted member 32980 (Dec 16, 2014)

Alright alright calm down.

One movie explains it. I'll see if I can find a movie clip to back me up.

Quigly down under. Seen it?


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 16, 2014)

Nate the foreverman said:


> Alright alright calm down.
> 
> One movie explains it. I'll see if I can find a movie clip to back me up.
> 
> Quigly down under. *Seen it*?




No I haven't. I don't need to calm down by the way, I just find what you wrote puerile, amusingly so. If you take to using films to prove your points then that's a bit sad.


----------



## Deleted member 32980 (Dec 16, 2014)

Actually I just think that was funny and made it clear.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 16, 2014)

Nate the foreverman said:


> Actually I just think that was funny and made it clear.




No you didn't... and it isn't.


----------



## Deleted member 32980 (Dec 16, 2014)

Come on. Your not a misfit... Are you? Then you have nothing to be unhappy about.


----------



## Zero (Dec 16, 2014)

Nate the foreverman said:


> The British always end up getting pushed back



Sure, don't bother thanking us for WWI, WWII just for starters.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 16, 2014)

Nate the foreverman said:


> Come on. Your not a misfit... Are you? Then you have nothing to be unhappy about.




What on earth are you talking about?


----------



## Transk53 (Dec 16, 2014)

@nate. Stop with the disrespectful comments. Pushed back? What the f##£ you talking about. If you are thinking of Dunkirk, we retreated under fire. Hey, stop trolling, you come off worst!


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 16, 2014)

Zero said:


> Sure, don't bother thanking us for WWI, WWII just for starters starters.




That old chestnut. We paid you for that, we paid millions of dollars to you every year from the Second World War right up until 2006. The war got you out of recession by selling to everyone including the Germans before they declared war on you, and help we paid you for meant you came out rich which wasn't the case with the rest of the world. We declared war on Japan, who we weren't at war with because they declared war on you and we paid heavily in fallen as well as British POW, men women and children. So, I wouldn't go there if I were you, no disrespect to those that gave their lives but really, you don't want to go there. We lost good men in Korea because the US wanted to fight the 'commies', we lost good men and women in two Iraqi wars because the US wanted to go there, we lost good men and women In Afghanistan because the US wanted to go there after 9/11 because we are supposed to be Allies but hey if that's the best you can come up with, fine insult our troops and us but remember, when every other bugger has deserted you the Brits are still watching your back.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Dec 16, 2014)

*The US is blessed to have great allies like the British, Australians, etc*.  We, meaning all the countries allied together have relationships and goals that keep us together.  It is very important to remember that our allies are so very important.  Particularly with the new and difficult challenges that we all face in this global world.


----------



## Transk53 (Dec 16, 2014)

I do not understand where that came from in the first place. Tez was only pointing out that most of our Challengers have been mothballed and be held in reserve. In fact I going to report that post, it was just stupid.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 16, 2014)

Transk53 said:


> I do not understand where that came from in the first place. Tez was only pointing out that most of our Challengers have been mothballed and be held in reserve. In fact I going to report that post, it was just stupid.




They have been mothballed because they aren't useful in the conflicts (Sierra Leone and Afghanistan) we have been in recently and most likely in the foreseeable future.
I don't think this thread is going to leads to any interesting or illuminating discussion so I'll excuse myself and leave this one to spiral down as it will. Sorry Transk, I know you were hoping for better out of it.


----------



## Transk53 (Dec 16, 2014)

Tez3 said:


> They have been mothballed because they aren't useful in the conflicts (Sierra Leone and Afghanistan) we have been in recently and most likely in the foreseeable future.
> I don't think this thread is going to leads to any interesting or illuminating discussion so I'll excuse myself and leave this one to spiral down as it will. Sorry Transk, I know you were hoping for better out of it.



Yeah I know. Oh well.


----------



## Zero (Dec 16, 2014)

Yeah this one suddenly and real quick went into crazy land!!!


----------



## Zero (Dec 16, 2014)

And I would have seen overall Sierra Leone as a success on the Brit input on things big time.


----------



## Transk53 (Dec 16, 2014)

Zero said:


> Yeah this one suddenly and real quick went into crazy land!!!



Yeah I for one do like Brit bashing. Then citing Tom Selleck and the mythical sharp shooters rifle in Oz. I am mystified over that one. Though I can become confused.com quite easily, well initially anyhow, that one is way out there!


----------



## Transk53 (Dec 16, 2014)

Not only that, since BillC dropped off the radar, a few crazies seemed to have appeared. Hope that is not down to me!


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 16, 2014)

I don't think you ever saw the worst of BillC, I left after he said that in the UK and Europe we kill premature  babies deliberately. Having lost a premature baby it was more than I could stomach along with the extremist views, sheer misinformation and being told to shut up lol. Came back when it changed and he was gone. That was the one and only time I got angry on here, the rest of the time I don't.


----------



## Transk53 (Dec 16, 2014)

Tez3 said:


> I don't think you ever saw the worst of BillC, I left after he said that in the UK and Europe we kill premature  babies deliberately. Having lost a premature baby it was more than I could stomach along with the extremist views, sheer misinformation and being told to shut up lol. Came back when it changed and he was gone. That was the one and only time I got angry on here, the rest of the time I don't.



Yeah, I was enlightened on how much of a wotsit he could be. In one thread he posted, I jumped on it because I took the bait.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 16, 2014)

Gotta cut him some slack hes just a kid


----------



## Dirty Dog (Dec 16, 2014)

A couple things...

The rules here are the same for all. There is no slack cut because of age.
This thread is about military strategy. Perhaps if people want to discuss something other than military strategy, another thread or private conversation would be more appropriate.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 16, 2014)

Dirty Dog said:


> A couple things...
> 
> The rules here are the same for all.
> .


LOL ok


----------



## Transk53 (Dec 17, 2014)

Throughout my younger years reading and viewing footage on WW2, one thing has always stood out. That would be Stalingrad (Volgograd). The 6th Army under Paulus and the 4th under Hoth (4th Panzers). One scenario that I have thought about for years is this. Despite the major thrust towards Stalingrad by the 6th, I wonder what would have happened if Hitler, or otherwise persuaded, had not decided to retask the 4th Panzers. Had he not done so, they would not have got caught up with the 1st Panzer (traffic jam) after being re-tasked. The resultant interference by Hitler meant that there was delay on the advance to Stalingrad to back up Paulas. History pretty much recognised that this was a week. A week in which the Red army were able to reinforce Stalingrad to a defensive level.

Now what if. Hitler decides not to put everything on the 6th and still sends the 4th. The scenario is that with both elements and without the week delay, the Wehrmacht could have simply walked in. The last pocket of resistance preventing the capture of the city, would not have existed. The tractor factories would have been taken, and other supplies etc. the city itself could have been reinforced with AT guns, 88’s and Stug/Panzer III’s. What do you peeps think, Possible.


----------



## Deleted member 32980 (Dec 17, 2014)

Why can you do that's special like toms symbol?


----------



## Transk53 (Dec 17, 2014)

Actually I missed out a word "I do not like Brit bashing" What are you getting at above?


----------



## CNida (Dec 17, 2014)

Nate the foreverman said:


> I was never really interested until I got into special forces/special operations/ innovating tech. I don't like standard things like common foot men or military gate guards for forts and such.



That comment right there was what did it for me. Maybe it wasn't intended, but when I read that aloud it sounded incredibly disrespectful.

That's coming from a "standard thing" (three years active duty service in the US Army). Those common foot men and gate guards deserve respect as well...

But I am certain what you said wasn't meant to sound disrespectful so no harm done.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 17, 2014)

We have the Infantry Training Centre where I am and a couple of Infantry Battalions, there is absolutely nothing 'standard' about them!


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 18, 2014)

True, standard training in any branch is nothing to sneer at where I come from. Not all get to wear the Approved Infantryman/Engineer/whatever badge either since the tests can be quite demanding







 .


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 18, 2014)

Here, the SAS is made up mostly of infantrymen who have passed selection. There's a few Paras in there too but mostly infantrymen.
'Gate Guards' tend to be soldiers on guard duty, most soldiers even Paras do this. Being on the 'gate' is one of the most important jobs on a camp, first line of defence especially in Afghan etc.


----------



## Deleted member 32980 (Dec 18, 2014)

Cnida: then if you understood what I meant, and not meaning to be degrading in any matter, why would you bother to bring it up? 

Yes, they do work too. There's nothing wrong or lowly in what they do. 

And compared to certain spec ops men they are common people. Child's play in training as we'll. I'm talking in comparison of coarse.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 18, 2014)

Nate the foreverman said:


> Cnida: then if you understood what I meant, and not meaning to be degrading in any matter, why would you bother to bring it up?
> 
> Yes, they do work too. There's nothing wrong or lowly in what they do.
> 
> And compared to certain spec ops men they are common people. Child's play in training as we'll. I'm talking in comparison of coarse.




And where do you think the 'spec ops' people come from, oh that's right the 'poor bloody infantry.' You aren't born 'spec ops, you join up and you do your basic training, you get some time in then you volunteer, then you are trained some more. Many infantry roles are specialised now, there is no plain foot soldier anymore, everyone is as highly trained in their role as a 'spec op' is. Do you know what 'forward support' is? do you know what recon teams do? Snipers? there's plenty more roles in the army that are as 'special' as the 'spec ops'. They may seem glamorous, they may seem 'harder' but you shouldn't believe everything you read or see in films. 
Infantry training in our army takes months, it continues on in the Battalions, it's hardly 'child's play', could you do it? I wonder.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 18, 2014)

Nate the foreverman said:


> And compared to certain spec ops men they are common people. Child's play in training as we'll. I'm talking in comparison of coarse.


Umm no not even close. As a Marine I trained with damn near all the "special" units at one point or another.  The training is the same they just do more of it and have better toys


----------



## Deleted member 32980 (Dec 18, 2014)

Gotta love the toys they got


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 18, 2014)

especially look at the roles the infantry do after basic training. I imagine that the US army is much the same
https://www.army.mod.uk/rolefinder/role/83/infantry-soldier


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 18, 2014)

Nate the foreverman said:


> Gotta love the toys they got


its a crutch


----------



## Deleted member 32980 (Dec 18, 2014)

Is a enhancer. They were never handicapped.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 18, 2014)

Nate the foreverman said:


> Is a enhancer. They were never handicapped.


Ok and when your old enough to actually join  the military  you can tell me about it.  Our of the two of us I'VE actually done it


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 18, 2014)

Nate the foreverman said:


> Is a enhancer. They were never handicapped.



I'm not sure you actually know what you are talking about here. What do you mean 'handicapped'? Is this some sort of veiled insult aimed at the infantry again?
Oh and I've been in the military too....


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 19, 2014)

Nate the foreverman said:


> Cnida: then if you understood what I meant, and not meaning to be degrading in any matter, why would you bother to bring it up?
> 
> Yes, they do work too. There's nothing wrong or lowly in what they do.
> 
> And compared to certain spec ops men they are common people. Child's play in training as we'll. I'm talking in comparison of coarse.



And their action figures are cooler right?


----------



## oftheherd1 (Dec 19, 2014)

hussaf said:


> There was no war in South Korea in the 80's, and he didn't serve "tours." He was stationed as permpers, likely with 8A.



You have the advantage over me.  What are permpers?

There was no war in Korea since the truce in the 50s, however there were hostilities from time to time.  For a while, the troops near the DMZ actually got combat pay.  I don't know how much hostilities in the late 60s and early 70s, but I was there when the tree was cut in 76, and life was lost.  I was also there when the patrol in the DMZ (1980 I think) walked into a minefield that nobody knew was there.  There was also an intelligence ship fired on and captured. 

I was not along the DMZ there but In Pyongtaek the first time, and in Seoul the next two times.  Of course I was there when we announced discovery of the tunnels, but there was never any hostilities associated with them.  Most of the time there was nothing going on unsafe or hostile any of the places I was at.

But it just isn't correct to say there were no hostilities (war as you put it).

As to tours, that is the common expression used for time spent overseas by the military, usually expected to mean something about 3 to 6 months or more.


----------



## Deleted member 32980 (Dec 19, 2014)

According to ballen, it's a "crutch" for some forces to have certain things at Thier disposal. 

If anyone here made a dis, it's him. 

Making it sound like they are handicapped.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 19, 2014)

"Made a dis" anyone care to elaborate on what that means?


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 19, 2014)

Kid speak these days, let me check urbandictionary. com..

ok here:

_dis_
_1.to disrespect some one 
2.this
1. she dised u so fuckin bad u turned red 
2.dis sh*t is fo sheezy_


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 19, 2014)

Oh dear! At least the thing about infantry soldiers is that they can speak their mother tongue properly, write it too. They have education in the forces!


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 19, 2014)

Tez3 said:


> Oh dear! At least the thing about infantry soldiers is that they can speak their mother tongue properly, write it too. They have education in the forces!



Your mother tongue is just not good enough anymore, ya git to say em kewl words and use da hottest toyz dawg, yo!


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 19, 2014)

Cirdan said:


> Your mother tongue is just not good enough anymore, ya git to say em kewl words and use da hottest toyz dawg, yo!




it's more impressive when you say it because English isn't your first language! Btw I spent yesterday evening watching  Norwegian television, it was watching the Northern Lights live, the Norwegian female commentator had the most gorgeous laugh! We saw a little of the lights not a lot but it was nice, liked your ads too! back on Eurosport now watching Biathlon, a fine military sport!


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 19, 2014)

Tez3 said:


> it's more impressive when you say it because English isn't your first language! Btw I spent yesterday evening watching  Norwegian television, it was watching the Northern Lights live, the Norwegian female commentator had the most gorgeous laugh! We saw a little of the lights not a lot but it was nice, liked your ads too! back on Eurosport now watching Biathlon, a fine military sport!



Speaking of Norwegian women they look very cute in "the King`s clothes" don`t they? 





The northern lights typically are strongest in january when it is really cold. This brings back memories of watching them while on maneuver with the CSS Batallion up north for the first time, was pretty cold below -30°C as I recall (still warm inside the tent) and the lights dancing all over the sky.

Here over Tromsø. (According to Norse Paganism the northern lights are actually the eyebrows of the slain giant Yme, whose dead body is the earth, and the eyebrows/aurora borealis was made into a wall protecting us from other giants)


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 19, 2014)

And speaking of military strategy, Norway`s infantry (those "common men and woman whoose training is child`s play") are extremely mobile with each rifle squad on a BV206 tracked veichle. They will really cross any mountain in any storm to get to where they need to be, visiting generals from the US have flatly refused to believe what they can do until shown._ "Ya`ll crossed Blåtind  mountain in this weather? That is just not possible son!"_


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 19, 2014)

HM King Harald V was the Colonel in Chief of our local regiment, the Green Howards, he used to come to our town (Richmond, North Yorkshire) for parades and regimental dinners. The regiment which is an infantry one was amalgamated into the Yorkshire Regiment but now a battalion, it still retains traditional links with Norway. Each year, all companies in the battalion took part in a competition, consisting of sports and military skills tests, to win the right to be named 'King Harald's Company'. The winning company was given a special flag bearing the King's personal cypher, the Company Sergeant Major is presented with a special pace stick, and all members of the company were permitted to wear a special red badge on the arm of their uniform. The last company to hold the title was B (KH) Coy.


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 19, 2014)

Actually King Olav V (Harald V`s father) had a good laugh at my sister`s expense once. She was participating in a big cross country skiing race and just as she raced past the king`s pavillion managed to slip falling flat on her face in the snow 





HAHAHAHAHA!


----------



## CNida (Dec 19, 2014)

Nate the foreverman said:


> Cnida: then if you understood what I meant, and not meaning to be degrading in any matter, why would you bother to bring it up?
> 
> Yes, they do work too. There's nothing wrong or lowly in what they do.
> 
> And compared to certain spec ops men they are common people. Child's play in training as we'll. I'm talking in comparison of coarse.



To point out to you that however you meant for it to sound, it's disrespectful.

I said something similar about Infantry while I was in AIT and the staff sergeant who had reclassed from Infantry pulled me aside later and told me how what I said was disrespectful, and he explained to me why.

The only thing I said? Somebody asked me during my presentation what particular type of unit I think would be best suited to perform a particular mission, and my answer was "plain infantry".

Just passing that advice along, take it however you want. I wasn't even infantry and I felt I was disrespectful with what I said.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## CNida (Dec 19, 2014)

When I went to BCT (basic combat training), it was ten weeks long and was fairly rigorous. Nothing near what you would go through in RIP (Ranger Indoctrination Program) or the SF (special forces) course.

All the same it was pretty rigorous, and mine wasn't even a combat MOS. I was an intelligence analyst. More or less it was the same basic training that Infantry went through, thought their's is more aggressive due to the lack of women in combat arms MOS's. ( No jab intended there towards the fairer and in most cases better gender. )

Infantry, however, did not graduate after ten weeks. They typically had OSUT, or one station unit training, where their AIT and basic was combined. AIT for each infantry MOS was generally the same, but different in the realm of their specialty (indirect fire infantryman, anti armor infantry, etc.).

Their training is very advanced and very physical. This "child's play" crap that you speak of? It's the crucible that forms a battle fighter. No special forces soldier I encountered ever proclaimed he was better or more advanced than an infantryman. Just trained to fill a more specified role, something I am sure ballen can agree with, even though he was in a different branch a lot of our mentalities are the same.

Though, our SF guys did tend to get away with a few more regulation infractions than most soldiers, LOL.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 19, 2014)

A crutch doesn't mean they are handicap.  It means they rely heavily on something in this case toys and gadgets.  I've trained with and against every type of special unit the US military has to offer.  I've seen all the fancy toys and tools.  I've used most of them.  I've played the "bad guys" and "captured" and been "killed" by these guys.  And guess what they are just that guys, men, mortal, every day guys no different then the regular old infantry.  We have sent marines from my unit to all the same special training classes that these elite guys get.  So like I said the only difference is they get to train more and have newer toys but they are no different.  Some of the best and brightest men I've ever met severed in the regular old infantry and some have given the ultimate sacrifice in that roll.  These guys were amazing highly trained in amazing shape and just all around great guys.


----------



## Deleted member 32980 (Jan 5, 2015)

Alright. We are getting somewhere. What do u guys think about medical fields relating to military. 

Btw happy new year


----------



## Transk53 (Jan 25, 2015)

Not exactly hugely amazing, but nice work anyway. Would like to see a IS 2.

*Clicky*


----------



## K50Marine (Nov 16, 2015)

ballen0351 said:


> A crutch doesn't mean they are handicap.  It means they rely heavily on something in this case toys and gadgets.  I've trained with and against every type of special unit the US military has to offer.  I've seen all the fancy toys and tools.  I've used most of them.  I've played the "bad guys" and "captured" and been "killed" by these guys.  And guess what they are just that guys, men, mortal, every day guys no different then the regular old infantry.  We have sent marines from my unit to all the same special training classes that these elite guys get.  So like I said the only difference is they get to train more and have newer toys but they are no different.  Some of the best and brightest men I've ever met severed in the regular old infantry and some have given the ultimate sacrifice in that roll.  These guys were amazing highly trained in amazing shape and just all around great guys.



I have the same opinion. I was a Marine infantry sergeant 0311 and served 10 years in the Corps and after a big break in service 2 years in the Army National Guard as an MP sergeant (LOL no jokes please. I held the 11B Infantry MOS there too!). People that are not in the military always get all excited when they hear the words "SF, Navy SEAL, Delta,etc." as if everyone else in the military is insignificant. Not to take anything away from the accomplishments of the special operators, but the fact is, it is the grunts (Army and Marine) that take and hold ground in combat and pay the heaviest price. It was grunts who took the beachheads at Tarawa, Normandy, Iwo Jima, Okinawa. It was the grunts that secured Seoul, Hue City, and Fallujah. I was a grunt and I never went to jump or dive school, but I've done pretty much everything else "high speed" you can do as a Marine: fast roping, rappelling, breaching, small boats, riverine ops, desert, jungle, cold weather, urban,explosives and demolitions, trained with all types of weapons system (US and foreign) etc.


----------



## Tez3 (Nov 17, 2015)

In the UK the men who are in the SAS have to go through normal infantry training and spend some time in a regiment before they go for selection for the SAS. In the SBS, the men go through the Royal Marine training and spend time in a Commando before trying out. You need all the skills as a so called 'basic' soldier first.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Nov 17, 2015)

When I joined the US Army in 1960, I intended to get into Special Forces (I also planned to be a famous infantry general before I retired ).  At that time, before you could apply, you had to have been in the Army for two years, be an E4 in rank, be airborne qualified, and they preferred you speak at least one foreign language.  Military Occupational Specialty was somewhat open as many different specialties were required.  Later, after President Kennedy became enamored with them, and Vietnam began to decimate the ranks, you could enlist straight in to Special Forces.  I did my time, was airborne, and an E4, with knowledge of Spanish.  I then had to take a test, or rather a battery of tests, which I completed successfully.  But I came down on orders for Okinawa, and the policy was that you could not volunteer for anything that would get you out of an overseas assignment.  While on Okinawa, I decided I did not want to stay in the military, but just days before I would have gotten on a plane to return to the USA, I re-enlisted for the military police MOS (eventually moving on to CID), and stayed in the Army.

I was of no less value to the US Army helping to maintain law, order, and discipline, than the infantryman.  But to this day I still think like an Airborne Infantryman.  Being an Airborne Infantryman, just like being a Marine; it seems it never leaves you.

I can't comment on Force Recon or SEALS, as I have never been around them.  But I know something about Airborne, Delta, Rangers, and Special Forces, having known some of them.  They are all special types of units, with special missions.  They train to those missions.  Airborne, Delta, Rangers, Special Forces, SEALS, and Force Recon, having different missions, have some different training.  Doesn't mean anyone' missions are more important in the grand scheme of things.

One thing they all have though, is a will, determination, and belief, that there is nothing that will be allowed to stop them from accomplishing their missions, whatever they may be, or however hard they may be, or whatever hardships they have to endure to accomplish their mission.  Someday you may be privileged to learn that, and more privileged to actually have that quality.

Some well led, and high esprit-de-corps "plain" infantry units (Army or Marines) develop the same determinations and reputations, as do other combat units (Engineers, Artillery, and armor).

Nate the foreverman, don't automatically put down infantry or other combat units until you have served in some of the good ones.  And remember, combat units have a long tail, which also contributes to missions, and sometimes those in the tail must also become infantrymen.

Someday you may learn.  I hope you can stand for it.


----------

