Read this shit, what a prick he is.

http://www.modoracle.com/news/Soldiers-are-Wimps_15857.html

Posh actor Rupert Everett has branded British soldiers 'whining wimps'...

Read this shit, what a prick he is.

http://www.modoracle.com/news/Soldiers-are-Wimps_15857.html

Meh. Actors.

"Son of a retired major"
"Ex-army cadet".

Not exactly the best military credentials there. What the fuck does he know?

Fuck all, hes a cunt.

I don't know if he's that wrong. There is , here in the UK, a lot of whinging going on , although not usually by the soldiers themselves (they aren't allowed that much freedom of speech).

On the whole its the families who seem to be on the airwaves everyday whinging because their son died.

Although sometimes its justified...on those days the americans manage to kill more of our troops than the Taliban do. Never can understand how a nation so gun obsessed can produce such badly trained soldiers and pilots when it comes to being able to fucking aim at the right target.

But that said, if your kid joins the army then you have to accept the fact he may get killed. Hopefully not because the government tried to save money and left him poorly equiped and hopefully not because Private OOrah from Chicken Shit Nebraska didn't know how to use a gun. But if your kid joined up then everyday he doesn't come home in a body bag is a good day.

It seems the USAF is the #1 predator of tommies at the minute, but that's probably because the Brits won't spend enough cash on support themselves.

In the 19th and early 20th century life sucked, and a lot of people accepted death and may even have wanted to die. This was in the eras of smallpox and infant mortality, before welfare states and "rights" and internet porn. Some places are still like that, like Iraq and Africa. But at the minute you'd want to be crazy to die, we've got it so damn good we barely even realise it.

Maybe when the oil runs out all our metropolitan welfare-state brats will turn back into blood-crazed vikings, but until that we can get used to hearing moms on radio whinging about how their brat got minced in bumfuck nowhere.

If you look at demographics though you'll understand part of the problem. In Britain (which is really the only place you can trust for these things) during the 1800's women had 5-7 kids, in the 1900's it was more like 2-3. Naturally losing kids in wars matters a lot more now than it did back then. The two world wars just pissed people off even more and created an atmosphere that was positively anti-military death. Before armies just laughed at casualties (not really but almost).

Sounds like a real twat. Who would've thought that some actor who has no idea about what he speaks of would spout off though? That never happens I tell you!

BTW every blue on blue fuckup weakens relations with your allies. The yanks would be smart to secure that shit quickly if they want partners in anymore invasions in the years to come.

Never can understand how a nation so gun obsessed can produce such badly trained soldiers and pilots when it comes to being able to fucking aim at the right target.



Badly trained? compared to who? I know some people that have worked with yanks that rate them quite highly.

He is an idiot. I'm sure he failed to get into the forces.


BTW every blue on blue fuckup weakens relations with your allies. The yanks would be smart to secure that shit quickly if they want partners in anymore invasions in the years to come.

Hm, I wonder what the Danes think of you then?

Anyway, all of the interviews with British soldiers I've seen show them grateful for American air support despite extremely rare and insignifcant blue on blue incidents. Every soldier there knows casualties are a fact of life in war, and without air support the Taliban could parade right through their bases.

I didn't know the Aussies had done anything untoward to the danes.

Everyone likes air support, but there's always room for improvement. I'm sure the canadians firing on the rifle range appreciated the 'air support' they received.

Never can understand how a nation so gun obsessed can produce such badly trained soldiers and pilots when it comes to being able to fucking aim at the right target.

Quit being such a damn media pawn. You only hear about the typical air strikes that happen everyday in Iraq and whatnot when something went wrong, like blue on blue action. It's sort of like crime or school shootings. Everyday they don't tell you on the nightly news that "At every elementary, middle, and high school, and university, there was no shooting today". If it bleeds, it leads, and this is very true in regards to military news. They would sooner report one pilot fucking up than hundreds of pilots right on target.

Quit being such a damn media pawn. You only hear about the typical air strikes that happen everyday in Iraq and whatnot when something went wrong, like blue on blue action. It's sort of like crime or school shootings. Everyday they don't tell you on the nightly news that "At every elementary, middle, and high school, and university, there was no shooting today". If it bleeds, it leads, and this is very true in regards to military news. They would sooner report one pilot fucking up than hundreds of pilots right on target.

If was just 'one pilot fucking up' then I might agree with you but I'm guessing yesterday's events kinda proved it ain't.

If was just 'one pilot fucking up' then I might agree with you but I'm guessing yesterday's events kinda proved it ain't.

Show me some numbers about the statistical likelihood of a US military air strike hitting an allied unit. I want rates and percentages, something that actually means something.

Show me some numbers about the statistical likelihood of a US military air strike hitting an allied unit. I want rates and percentages, something that actually means something.

Its not the 'statistical likelihood' we should be looking at, its the fact with with today's technology and training, people flying in hundreds of thousands of pounds worth of equipment SHOULD NOT be able to hit a friendly target.

Friendly fire isn't.

Its not the 'statistical likelihood' we should be looking at, its the fact with with today's technology and training, people flying in hundreds of thousands of pounds worth of equipment SHOULD NOT be able to hit a friendly target.

Oh, so I get what you are saying. You are naive enough to think that technology will somehow make war into a neat little computer game, with just some clicking and dragging and other tools, that will eliminate the undesirable elements of war while retaining the consequences. Technology almost never completely solves problems. I would bet a hell of a lot that allied units are hit with airstrikes far less in a technological war like we have today than they were hit in the Second World War. Technology helps, it rarely solves.

Friendly fire isn't.

We know, that's why you're the first person in this thread to use that term.

Rupert Everett, the guy who couldn't even handle the charity version of The Apprentice? (http://www.unrealitytv.co.uk/the-apprentice/rupert-everett-walks-off-celebrity-version-of-the-appprentice/)

The useless hypocrite needs to shut his whiny little hole.

Oh, so I get what you are saying. You are naive enough to think that technology will somehow make war into a neat little computer game, with just some clicking and dragging and other tools, that will eliminate the undesirable elements of war while retaining the consequences. Technology almost never completely solves problems. I would bet a hell of a lot that allied units are hit with airstrikes far less in a technological war like we have today than they were hit in the Second World War. Technology helps, it rarely solves.


No, i mean't, the people controlling the equipment shoudln't be allowed to if they cannot identify and fire at a target properly.

So you can stop being a condescending fucktard.

No, i mean't, the people controlling the equipment shoudln't be allowed to if they cannot identify and fire at a target properly.

So you can stop being a condescending fucktard.

I suppose police officers shouldn't be allowed to carry firearms, since there is a very rare likelihood they will use it in an unprovoked murder. Or firefighters shouldn't get firehoses since they were used against protesters in the '60s. Or soldiers shouldn't get tanks since they might run someone over accidentally.

In short, you are advocating perfection, which will never happen. Quit pretending that technology will make things perfect, or somehow changes the basic equation of war. Perhaps I wouldn't be condescending if you weren't so childish.

In short, you are advocating perfection, which will never happen.

Personally I'd be willing to settle for a bit more competence. (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/coroner-says-friendly-fire-killing-of-british-soldier-was-a-criminal-act-440573.html)

I suppose police officers shouldn't be allowed to carry firearms, since there is a very rare likelihood they will use it in an unprovoked murder. Or firefighters shouldn't get firehoses since they were used against protesters in the '60s. Or soldiers shouldn't get tanks since they might run someone over accidentally.

In short, you are advocating perfection, which will never happen. Quit pretending that technology will make things perfect, or somehow changes the basic equation of war. Perhaps I wouldn't be condescending if you weren't so childish.

You have got me completely wrong and have grasped at a concept and a personality of mine that just doesn't exist.

By saying those things to do with the Police, Firefighters and Soldiers you percieve that i believe that things 'don't just go wrong' and that its someone's fault for every thing that happens. That is not where i'm coming from. I'm saying that in the instances where blue on blue has happened in the past decade or so, it isn't because of human error such as a wrong calibration on a missile or someone's eyes playing tricks on them. I'm saying it's happened because the military is not training it's American pilots and tommies properly to identify friendly targets. Maybe if a little more time went into that, we'd get rid of some of the friendly fire incidents.

Hopefully this will stop you acting as if your word is law before you think that you have people 'sussed out' already, which unfortunatelyis the thing we're trying to counter act by reducing the the number of incidents where our own men are hit because people have reacted to quickly to a situation that they percieve to be a threat to them, when in reality it isn't.

We will never reach perfection, but we can give it a damn good try.

You have got me completely wrong and have grasped at a concept and a personality of mine that just doesn't exist.

By saying those things to do with the Police, Firefighters and Soldiers you percieve that i believe that things 'don't just go wrong' and that its someone's fault for every thing that happens. That is not where i'm coming from. I'm saying that in the instances where blue on blue has happened in the past decade or so, it isn't because of human error such as a wrong calibration on a missile or someone's eyes playing tricks on them. I'm saying it's happened because the military is not training it's American pilots and tommies properly to identify friendly targets. Maybe if a little more time went into that, we'd get rid of some of the friendly fire incidents.

Hopefully this will stop you acting as if your word is law before you think that you have people 'sussed out' already, which unfortunatelyis the thing we're trying to counter act by reducing the the number of incidents where our own men are hit because people have reacted to quickly to a situation that they percieve to be a threat to them, when in reality it isn't.

We will never reach perfection, but we can give it a damn good try.

How do you know the Americans aren't training there pilots to a sufficient standard? Have you worked with them or you just another one who's read articles on cnn and bbc then assumed it as fact.

nice point will.

if the guy was a general and was talking smack, i could understand, but he aint shit

How do you know the Americans aren't training there pilots to a sufficient standard? Have you worked with them or you just another one who's read articles on cnn and bbc then assumed it as fact.

I'm all bursaried up for the RAF and have to attend Air core training, which includes exchanges with american bases ect.

I'm all bursaried up for the RAF and have to attend Air core training, which includes exchanges with american bases ect.

And this somehow certifies you to be up to speed with American pilot training, or lack of, as you claim? You can read all you want on friendly fire incidents, and twist them all to indicate incompetence. Some such incidences are due to incompetence, others are not. Unless you have access to ALL the information and thoroughly investigate the things that lead up to the incident, you will never know the truth, and thus have no basis to claim that our pilots lack training.

And this somehow certifies you to be up to speed with American pilot training, or lack of, as you claim? You can read all you want on friendly fire incidents, and twist them all to indicate incompetence. Some such incidences are due to incompetence, others are not. Unless you have access to ALL the information and thoroughly investigate the things that lead up to the incident, you will never know the truth, and thus have no basis to claim that our pilots lack training.

So, one you're saying YOU have done ALL this research yourself and it entitles you to say that i haven't?

And two, If you've read my previous post you would have realised that i didn't say 'All friendly fire incidents are due to incompetence'. I said that some are unavoidable and some are definately avoidable.

Three, If my training WITH american pilots ON american bases doesn't let me shed at least somelight on some of their training excercises, theres not many people here who can.

Anything else jackass?

Maybe not wimps, but they are biological machines incapable of propogating a single thought of their own.

And regards to friendly fire, it's not always the pilots fault but it's always the fault of somebody in the military. Usually the fucking yanks for not telling their allies they are going to be operating in a specific area, or not getting the message to the right people when their allies tell them they are going to be working in a specific area. And I heard this from a serving officer, this isn't coming from me.

Maybe not wimps, but they are biological machines incapable of propogating a single thought of their own.



That's a funny one kid.

That guy is fucking retarded.
I've yet to serve with one Soldier/Marine/Sailor/Airman who has "whined" about the possibilty of getting killed, least of all the British soldiers I've served with in Iraq. In fact, most are hardasses.


And guys, shit happens. I can't count how many times I've nearly been shot by my own squad. When a lot of shit goes down, confusion and panic is your worst enemy.
You clear a building that's already been cleared, and you can almost have your brains blown out by the fire team that's babysitting it, when you kick or blast the door open with a shotgun and come rushing in without warning.