Charles did his time in the air force and the navy. He also earned his jump wings but did not complete P Coy so can't refer to himself as a paratrooper. But I doubt he ever does and probably does not consider himself one.
Falklands
- Thread starter Robbo
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Charles did his time in the air force and the navy. He also earned his jump wings but did not complete P Coy so can't refer to himself as a paratrooper. But I doubt he ever does and probably does not consider himself one.
It had nothing to do with oil. Mrs Thatcher didn't like the idea of a foreign army invading British territory.
30 years ago 10,000 British troops could have ended up on the bottom of the South Atlantic. Which might easily have happened if Reagan hadn't acted against the national interests of the US and supplied Thatcher with air to air missiles, which enabled the RAF to repulse the Argie air force, and kept the fleet on the ocean rather than beneath it.
It was a desperately risky undertaking and was done out of principle, not some mercenary calculation about - at the time - the remote chance that the Falklands might become oil rich.
I may have already posted this, but a bloke I knew who'd served during the war told how loads of blokes grabbed all kinds of souvenirs from the battlefield to bring home with then. They all came back on the Canberra and just as they were getting into Southhampton an announcement was made that all bags would be searched for illegal contraband. He told me that blokes were throwing grenades, rifles and pistols over the side as fast as they could and that the Solent seabed must be littered with all kinds of hardware.
Then he shouldn't dress up as one and call himself their colonel-in-chief.
I believe he was invited to be the C-in-C...it's also only a ceremonial position. The Colonel of the Regiment is somebody else who has done all the training. It's just a tradition, but the fact remains that Charles has served his country...have you?
All sorts of exceptions were made, and privileges granted, for him to 'serve' his country at his leisure. It's all very meaningless. Also, the royals 'serve' their country because they've got nothing better to do. It's usually just a time filler so that they don't appear to be the scroungers and layabouts that they are. They treat the institutions of the armed forces as their own personal play things, and don't the little royalists just love it.
And yes, I spent 5 long days completing an Army Insight Course with the Royal Fusiliers when I was at school - assault courses, paint balling, camping in the woods, jogging on the spot in nippy weather, computer simulated shooting lessons...you name it. But you don't see me bragging.
Just as I thought....you sneer at others for doing what you couldn't be bothered to do yourself.
I wouldn't sneer at anyone for joining the armed forces, quite the opposite. My issue is with Charles playing dress-up as a paratrooper without actually ever having been a paratrooper. If he had joined the regiment and served, then that would be fair enough. He could wear the uniform and show off his medals as much as he likes - but only on merit, none of the ceremonial bullshit that is handed out to royals like sweets.
Nobody thinks Charlie actually leads the men into battle mate, he's a figurehead.
The mummies and the daddies and the aunties are well pleased when they see him up there doing the ceremonial bit, and no harm done by it, so let him carry on.
They'd never put up with anything like it in the US. It would be seen as disrespectful to the armed forces. Imagine Barack Obama (or a former president/statesman) dressed up as a Navy SEAL or Ranger, boasting all sorts of medals he didn't earn?
They call the president 'the Commander in Chief' outside of context on a daily basis, when in the United Kingdom have you ever heard the Queen or the PM referred to in general parlance as CiC of the British Armed Forces?
You don't remember Bush in that silly flight suit when his wartime services was in the Texas Air National Guard?
I rarely hear the 'CIC' title being used out of context to refer to the President. Usually it's only used when in relation to the military. Not that it's the same as dressing up in combat uniform and donning dozens of unearned medals - the POTUS is elected by the people to be CIC, and of course it is not just a ceremonial role.
Didn't he get a lot of stick for that? And was he wearing a uniform of a regiment in which he did not serve (presumably the flight suit belonged to the Texas Air National Guard)?
Imagine Bush, either as POTUS or post-POTUS, dressed up as a medal-clad US Marine and think how ridiculous it would be.
The president is always referred to CiC out of context, the amount of times I am watching American television coverage and they say something like 'we are now going live to White House, where the Commander in Chief is taking questions from the media'...
Now relative to the UK, when have you ever heard the PM or the Monarch referred to be such a title? The vast majority of the population wouldn't know who the CiC is or know that there even is such a position in the United Kingdom at all.
With regard to the Prince of Wales he served in the military and is Heir Apparent to the throne and as such will be the Commander in Chief of the British Armed Forces. This idea that the Royal Family just parade around in military uniforms without serving is ridiculous - The Prince of Wales, The Duke of Edinburgh, The Duke of Gloucester, The Duke of York, The Duke of Kent, Prince Harry and the Queen herself have all served in the military and on many occasions have been to war.
Well I just wiki-ed 'commander-in-chief', and a state of rigid boredom ensued, but before the eyes glazed over I learned that the King of Jordan is apparently colonel-in-chief of the Light Dragoons, and the Queen of Denmark is colonel-in-chief of the Queen's and Royal Hampshires.
What part of ceremonial do you not understand?
So what if they've served in the military. That does nothing to counter my argument whatsoever. I have acknowledged that the royals are well within their rights to use titles, uniform and medals earned as a result of service, just as any other member of the population is. Charles served in the Navy and the Air Force. Good for him. So what exactly is he doing donning Para uniform and the unearned beret?
His service in the Navy and Air Force has nothing to do with his entitlement to pretend to be a Paratrooper. Non-royals aren't entitled to do anything of the sort. So I don't know why his prior service in the armed forces is being mentioned.
The President of the United States is Commander-in-Chief in an executive, non-ceremonial capacity. He or she earns that position by being elected. It's perfectly legitimate and reasonable for the Present to use that title.
I'm not disputing that the Queen is our CIC in ceremonial capacity. She is CIC in a meaningless, ceremonial sense, and I object to that, but it's not really the titles that I am objecting to here. It's the donning of unearned medals and uniform as a result of these ceremonial titles.
I'd love it if you could find one piece of evidence of Charles claiming he is a paratrooper. The fact is that he did the airborne training which allows him to wear the wings. He could easily have avoided doing that but he did numerous jumps which, believe it or not, are risky and take some guts. Do you think it's easy completing the jumps course?
An explanation of Charles' medals
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/6147544.stm
You don't just get medals for going into battle, you get baubles for all sorts of stuff.
An explanation of Charles' medals
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/6147544.stm
You don't just get medals for going into battle, you get baubles for all sorts of stuff.
I can't help thinking of Muttley here. There's someone who knows what a medal is worth.
Starting with the bar of medals pinned to his breast, he has the Queen's Service Order (New Zealand), awarded in 1983; the Queen's Coronation medal, awarded in 1953 when he was four-years-old; the Queen's Silver Jubilee medal, awarded in 1977; the Queen's Golden Jubilee medal, awarded in 2002; the Canadian forces decoration, awarded in 2002; and the New Zealand commemorative medal, awarded in 1990.
Given a medal by his mum when he was 4 years old. You couldn't make this shit up. Priceless.All that article tells me is that he was handed medals by the Queen for doing nothing.
Starting with the bar of medals pinned to his breast, he has the Queen's Service Order (New Zealand), awarded in 1983; the Queen's Coronation medal, awarded in 1953 when he was four-years-old; the Queen's Silver Jubilee medal, awarded in 1977; the Queen's Golden Jubilee medal, awarded in 2002; the Canadian forces decoration, awarded in 2002; and the New Zealand commemorative medal, awarded in 1990.
All that article tells me is that he was handed medals by the Queen for doing nothing.
It was this I picked up on.
That's the point you plonker...he isn't parading around with medals for gallantry or anything, it's just the usual crap medals that all soldiers get. Because you don't know what you're talking about, you think he's pretending to have been awarded VC's and the like when you are wrong. You also complain about him not being deserving of the red beret or the jump wings when I have shown you that he is.
He turns up at military events wearing a medal that was handed to him by his mum when he was 4 years old! Just think how laughable that is. That isn't the sort of medal that a normal soldier gets. It's the kind of medal that is exclusively reserved for royals. A worthless medal.
You have not shown me that he is deserving of the Parachute Regiment beret and jump wings, because he isn't. Everybody else has to complete the necessary training in order to wear the beret. He hasn't completed that training, thus hasn't been a Paratrooper. He is merely playing dress-up, along with medals given to him by mummy when he was a toddler
.There's an element of truth to a lot of jokes. You do know he was joking, right?
Securicor actually has a medal.
I'll take that as a 'No' then.
Securicor issues medals hence it is not a joke.
Keep digging matey.
What point of, this was not a joke, this is not fictional, such a medal is in actual usage don't you get? Why are you making the assumption this was a joke when all the evidence is to the contrary?
What do the Argentines hopes to accomplish by throwing a hissy fit now? The UK is under no obligation to talk to them about the islands. Bitching and moaning about it continuously isn't going to make anyone take them seriously. I imagine Kirchner picks up the phone every day and rings Downing Street to ask if they'll talk about it only to be hung up on. They may have a few South American countries on their side, but there's nothing they can do about it. Unless they try taking it by force, they aren't going to get them anytime soon. Is Kirchner struggling at home? I can't see much reason for them to keep harping on this even if it is the 30th anniversary of them losing the war.
Read through the thread before making such a post, I know full well the ins and outs of the Falklands and the war, I was talking about the current situation and the noises coming out of Argentina. Also the actions of the Sea Harrier from the navy was even more instumental in the protection of the fleet in that they showed such skill for an incredibly outnumbered group that the argentinean airforce was ordered to avoid confrontation at all costs and concentrate on any landing expeditions. We were also supplied with more air to air missiles from the French and also aided by their secret services who tampered with the stock of exocets they sold to Argentina.
Epic comment attributed to a Para in the comments section.
"Ah, thats nothing new, its certainly not the first time an Argie has been seen running out of Port Stanley."
Believe they have decided to have the Islanders vote next year which the argies don't seem happy about & the argentine president speaking to a section of the UN today. It's all getting a bit embarrassing for them now.
A lot of countries been sitting on the fence with who to support, could be interesting to see if nations like the USA now publicly support the falklands island after their referendum ended with 99.8% saying they want to remain a British overseas territory.
Surely not a surprise so I'm not sure it will change much.
I wonder who the three were who voted against?
I wonder who the three were who voted against?
Or rather why they voted against?
The Falkland Islands are so random. I'm intrigued what their accent would be like.