The Ranger Wing and other units

discus

That video is probably the only impressive thing I've ever seen from RAF Regt.

Commando lite? Ah yes, of course, an easy mistake to make. Take into account that RM recruits do their basic training, before they become Royal Marines, and then further training to become Royal Marine Commandos. Of course, the Army Commandos aren't training to be Royal Marine Commandos, are they? RMC are the fighting companies - the riflemen, the pointiest end of the stick. You have the Army Commandos, who provide the Combat Support and Combat Service Support - the engineers, gunners, medics, naval gunfire assistants, and so on. None of which claim to be Royal Marine Commandos!

So, if the RAF regiment do their own pre-para selection, why did you do P-Company?

knucklehead6

tac foley wrote: »

1. Sorry about the lack of emoticons. My Japanese keyboard at that time did not support them as it uses a different OS than Western computers.

No need to apologise Tac, I couldn't give a monkeys about whether or not you used them. I was just pointing out that the tone of that post was "go away you annoying little civilian, don't you know that instead of asking someone who might be able to give you a knowledgeable and detailed answer, you should go and find out for yourself"

tac foley wrote: »

2. I recall, vaguely, that the name of Mr Cronin was mentioned as though we all knew who he was. I didn't then, and still don't. How on earth could could somebody - not you - be thought to take offence at my question?

No one is taking offence at your question. You are the one who asked it, you are the one who brought Jerry Cronin into that conversation, and the only reason you asked it (IMO) is because his name was on the images that The Syco used, and you (again IMO) were using that to get a little dig at The Syco for having the audacity to use someone's images while asking a question about a military movement on a military forum. And again I ask you, WHY did you want to know who Jerry Cronin is?

tac foley wrote: »

3. The sidebar indicates that you are 'Hosted moderator', hence my coment about you exercising your moderator controls. Perhaps you'll expalin to me what that actually means.

I'm moderator on a different forum, ODG, which stands for Online Dating. That forum is not a boards forum, but is hosted by boards.

tac foley wrote: »

4. With respect, you need to lighten up a mite - me advising somebody to look at the internet, and you telling me that I was 'having a little internet dig' are not connective. How on earth could you know whether I was having an 'internet dig'? IF I had been doing that - which, incidentally I was not - there would not be any doubt about it.

That's the way it looked Tac, and that's the way a number of the posts on this forum look, as I addressed in point 1. You might think i need to lighten up, maybe I do. BUT each time I look at your posts I need to ask myself are you being snotty or genuine. Mostly you are giving genuine, informative and knowledgeable answers. Sometimes you are being snotty

tac foley wrote: »

As we are constantly reminded, the internet does not allow for the interpretation of emotion, hence the use of emoticons. Without them, we all have to rely on the apparent good will of the responder to the question, or else we would all be at each other's throats every time we posted anything. As such, my responses were well-intended and, IMO, reasonable, as, indeed, all my responses have been so far.

And that's my point entirely. Sometimes your posts don't exhibit that much good will. Whatever about posters like crusader777, who by all appearances deserves to be treated with a wee bit of disdain, because he is not accepting reasoned and well thought out arguments, sometimes your posts, are a little as I mentioned, snotty!

tac foley wrote: »

If you look, you'll see that I have even offered to apologise to the person who claims to have 'done' P Coy at the age of 17, done what many millions of people must have done, and climbed Pen-y-Fan, and also to have taken part in the Croatian civil war, as he puts it - IF he can provide evidence to support it.

You'll notice that as yet, we have seen evidence in, er evidence.

tac

I'm not at all bothered about whether or not you apologise. I suspect, as you do, that there will be no evidence produced, and there no need for an apology.

Like I said, I'm not trying to pick a fight, just point out that sometimes posters on here are less than knowledgeable, and come on here to increase that knowledge. Hell, there was a poster over on the World War 2 section of this forum that asked if all the worlds navies were present at Pearl Harbour on 7-12-41 because of the war in Europe and that the RN (and other navies) assisted in the American efforts at Pearl, and that the US joined the war in Europe as a thank you.... If he/she had posted that here I shudder to think what the responses would have been

tac foley

Thanks, knucklehead6, for the reasoned tone in your response. It IS appreciated.

I don't know who Syco is, but he DID name somebody, so I naturally thought that there was some significance to it - that's all.

Let's not argue, eh?

If I had a pc that had emoticons right now, I'd put a 'pax' sign here.

tac