MrMilli

The REALLY burnt out abrams shown in baghdad- the turret is facing backwards On the Fox news broadcast pretty much nicked by every TV news channel worth its name showed a tank, with its turret facing backwards and a crewmen dropping what looked like a grenade into the tank and then everyone took cover and the rest of the column moved off. My theory same tank With the addition of an a incindiery grenade and a few hours to burn. The Apache was quite funny on the back of the car transporter I have a feeling the Americans will be taking it back in the coming weeks

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2919291.stm Now, when is he leaving? <Warning, contains images of an ugly arab>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (placebo @ April 05 2003,23:21)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'> why is it though that people like this live on to preach hate and have the nerve to call it a charity, when people like this die? hmm.

There ya go I hear Yemen want him to visit though...

My advice Buy civilian spec camping meals. Much better (less of a shelf life, but they are proper food! Also please bear in mind that if they are bought surplus, then the army needed a reason to get rid of them- check the best before date Here is a place to buy em. http://www.flecktarn.co.uk/productsspec.html Really though, with a Hexi burner and enough blocks you can cook any boil in the bag meal bought at a super-market unless you plan on staying out somewhere for more than a few days.

He plays the sims Get 'im!!

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (The Sharpshooter @ April 01 2003,03:23)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'> Good stuff just a thought British side Don't use pistols. not issued. In the Army's mind why issue a pistol when you can give them a sub-machine gun and why issue a pistol if they've already got a sub-machine gun or a rifle.

A report more reliable than the Mirror (or "We hate everything the government does, anywhere, anytime") :)http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2899717.stm

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (tracy_t @ Mar. 30 2003,20:38)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">In the leftie daily mirror (mirror.co.uk) and the very right-wing News of the world (guess) there are articles about UK tanks moving into Basra, risking life and limb just to... erm, demolish a statue of Saddam Hussein. Isn't this a risky mission, given that Iraq is known to have AT-14 weapons? Is the AT-14 powerful enough to destroy a Challenger 2 tank? If so, why were the tanks risked?<span id='postcolor'> that was only one of the targets hit and in my opinion a good one. What they are trying to do is appeal to those who aren't really sure what to believe at the moment, to show them Saddam could be gone, if they help. When his face is off the streets and his voice is off the radio some will start to help the UK & US. Technically, no HEAT based missile can cause a penetrating hit to a Challenger 2. Or so it says on the sales leaflet. They will however, stop a lot of stuff and protect its crew. They are good crews They are the best tanks.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (IceFire @ Mar. 29 2003,16:52)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (MrMilli @ Mar. 29 2003,17:39)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">OK, the question is what is my opinion so here it is wannabes who couldn't stay in/couldn't join for X Y or Z reason but want to do it anyway. What exactly is the point? They call themselves soldiers but if the REAL army goes off to war where are they? If such people wanted to be in the Army they should either join out right, or join the reserves, because running around with a firearm on the weekends does not make them a soldier or anything close to it, no matter how organised they think they are.<span id='postcolor'> Mr.Milli, I disagree with you there. Â I think it's a good idea for them. Â And they are just as much "soldiers" as any Army/Marine soldier. 1) Their idea is to defend US soil, not go over seas to fight for a government they they might not agree with, as many of their ideas and philosophies disagree with alot of US policy. 2) Â I hesitate to think of them as just a weekend unit. Â Alot of the members are very dedicated and train almost all the time in whatever their specialty is, whether it it is communications, or infantry. So to say they are just a bunch of wannabes who couln't make it in the US military or couln't join is not accurate. Â They might have just gotten fed up with Government military BS/beaurocracy. Â Or fed up with policy that they disagree with. Even the IRA in Northern Ireland is a type of "militia". Â And I would say that the IRA is VERY VERY well trained, tightly knit organization even though they are not an OFFICIAL army.<span id='postcolor'> Sorry if this seems aggressive but I can't see your point of view here. They are not soldiers. Some may be ex-soldiers. A soldier is someone who is serving their country. What service do these people provide for their country? Protecting the US from the roaming bands of marauding Candians in the north and barbarian Mexicans in the south? Who are they training to fight? If they disagree with the policy of the government and are training and arming themselves then things don't look good. I fail to see the point, the motivation or the legality or these people's actions. I guess this will have to be chalked up to differing backgrounds, I am British and the thought of someone roaming the countryside with automatic weapons dressed in cams rings alarm bells to me On the IRA bit 1916? maybe you could call them a Militia. 1921? a lot of them went on to form the Irish Army. 1967-present No. Some of them recieved training in other countries, for some time they conducted training back in the 60's and early 70's but the only ones who the media points out where the highly trained highly motivated few. The many who would fumble an ambush and get ventilated by the army, blow themselves up or construct a bomb that either doesn't go off, is poorly made so it only partially detonates and harms no-one or just get caught with them at a VCP in Northern Ireland They aren't looked at for more than a few lines or seconds on the news. Would I call the IRA soldiers? NEVER. The mere thought that they call themselves that disgusts me.

OK, the question is what is my opinion so here it is wannabes who couldn't stay in/couldn't join for X Y or Z reason but want to do it anyway. What exactly is the point? They call themselves soldiers but if the REAL army goes off to war where are they? If such people wanted to be in the Army they should either join out right, or join the reserves, because running around with a firearm on the weekends does not make them a soldier or anything close to it, no matter how organised they think they are.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Akira @ Mar. 25 2003,22:28)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">If Your Are Going To Join The Iraqi Military, Join The Navy<span id='postcolor'> Excellent!

excellent

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Red Oct @ Mar. 24 2003,05:11)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Found some more amusing military related humor: CUYAHOGA FALLS -- A member of Ohio's 5694th National Guard Unit in Mansfield legally changed his name to a Transformers toy.<span id='postcolor'> <span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'><span style='color:red'>W</span><span style='color:yellow'>A</span><span style='color:blue'>C</span><span style='color:yellow'>K</span><span style='color:Blue'>O</span><span style='color:red'>O</span></span>

all that budget all that intelligence all those generals all those smart computers and they still can't come up with a better sodding name than operation Iraqi Freedom

3 months old mate, thats already been said

you'd be suprised a guy over here recently was arrested for selling radar gun jammers.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Jinef @ Mar. 12 2003,23:27)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Mar. 12 2003,21)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">As I understand the Norwegians have a sexual relationship with their flag <!--emo&<span id='postcolor'> That's just mean. What i meant with the British flag is that in reality it's a bit of cloth. I would much prefer to have all the flags in Britain burnt than Britain itself burnt to the ground. The English and Scottish flag make up the Union Jack, both countries are represented, Wales and Northern ireland are too insignifigant to be represented! Â <span id='postcolor'> Northern Ireland (and Ireland as a whole but no-ones cottoned on to that since the 20's ) is represented in the red X on the flag

anything new?

Ash, if you need any pictures of Rapier I could probably find a few; my dad went down there with an air defence regiment and was quite a amateur photographer.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Ex-RoNiN @ Mar. 08 2003,11:37)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Hit_Sqd_Maximus @ Mar. 08 2003,00:16)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The de gaulle is the only catapult nuclear aircraft carrier constructed in europe? how many does the european countries own?<span id='postcolor'> Europe has 3 British carriers, 2 or 3 French carriers, a SPanish one and an Italian one.<span id='postcolor'> All of em conventionally powered, except the De Gaulle. I don't think any of them use catapults either. (Harriers don't need em)

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Mar. 04 2003,18:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (MrMilli @ Mar. 01 2003,14)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">c) If they did find themselves on a range, with UXO's all around them, they would run like hell to get off it. The training as to what not to do on a range is so strong, even the first, youngest stupidest of recruits have it drilled into their skulls. An immediate sense of utter dread would befall them just by realising they are on the range, not some jovial "hey guys watch this" attitude. d) no-one would be that stupid to whack two grenades together. Its just not possible. It might be amusing, but it simply isn't possible that such a mind boggling level of stupidity would be allowed into any army, anywhere near anything remotely dangerous.<span id='postcolor'> During my military service, during a live firing excercise some members of my platoon discovered two guys from another unit trying to dig up an unexploded 40 mm grenade from the ground. They did it by pulling it and kicking on it. Their explanation was that they wanted a souvenir so that "they could mock the gunners of the Strf 9040, that left it there". <!--emo& Needless to say they were immediately kicked out of the military. In any sufficiently large population, you will always find a number of complete morons. The military is no exception.<span id='postcolor'> Bah, your all going to be so very picky with what I've posted As long as you get the point though Nolips, the odd snip at a dumb moment, OK thats a joke, but twice in a row starts to get on my nerves. bah, its probably because I hear it so often on the net, it pisses me off and i'm not even American!

http://www.rusmilitary.com/ Russian kit.

mate, you've got your opinion and your entitled to it, but childish comments about how shite you think the US forces i'm not too fond of. Human stupidity has no bounds, I'd agree there but fortunately the guys running these courses can sniff out someone stupid enough to play with a live grenade from about ten miles away

Battleships such a good concept really isn't it Lets build it big Lets put the biggest heaviest guns we can on top alas, being able to do something with a cheap shell just can't compete with being able to do something with an expensive unreliable slow (compared to a shell) missile these days (apparently )