Here is your war on Terrorism ! America !

page: 39
28
<< 36  37  38    40  41 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 09:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
 

Dimitri, I served in Company O, Arctic Rangers, 75th Infantry, and we made the first and only mass parachute jump onto the north pole. In fact, I earned my Canadian Jump Wings while in that unit.

We didn't just jump onto the North Pole, load up and pull out. We stayed for a few days.

My roommate was Joe Seitz, Larry Dolson is keeping up with everyone, and I'm next to Larry Lee in the unit photograph.

I've slept many a night on a frozen lake, traversed several glaciers, jumped into Nome, Eagle River, near Anchorage, from 130's, 141's, CH 47's, Hueys, and even an Otter.

I've participated in a lot of lost hunter recoveries, mountaineers with broken legs, plane crashes, and even helped chip out a woman frozen down in a glacier who had disappeared years earlier.

Now you tell me some **** about your "climbing" and cold weather experience.

I spent this past summer working in the high desert of Nevada with the temperatures ranging from 113-117F, so I'm not exactly unaccustomed to heat.

You still don't get it.

You've had your head filled with some crap from a wannabe, or you watch too many movies. I'm sure you're a regular badass where your come from, but you wouldn't even make the psychological round of a special ops soldier - regardless of branch.

I'm sure you're dying to ask why I would make such an assumption.

Aren't you?




posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 09:39 PM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 

BackinBlack, I was casually asked to say a few words to a graduating class of TACP's, and when I accepted, assumed it was just a small class.

BS.

I was rather shocked that this was to take place in an auditorium on base. They not only had that class there plus friends and family, but brought in two other classes. About ten times what I was expecting.

The TACP is an Air Force close air support specialist. Since they control everything from gunship strikes to Spectre gunships to B-52 strikes, they truly are the single most destructive man on the battlefield. Each TACP is assigned to and serves with an Army unit.

The fall of the Taliban in Afghanistan was choreographed by fewer than 300 American men, heavily SF, Company Branch Operatives, and TACP's.

The first time they asked me to speak, some of the men in that class were participants at Takur Gahr, and other battles. Time and again, when I'd go back to speak again, they'd mention other battles that their graduates had participated in and literally brought down hell on earth.

So no, I'm not given to exaggeration. Quite the contrary.

And yes, unequaled battlefield success in modern times.
edit on 18-1-2011 by FarArcher because: (no reason given)
edit on 18-1-2011 by FarArcher because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 09:52 PM
link   
reply to post by FarArcher
 



So no, I'm not given to exaggeration. Quite the contrary.

And yes, unequaled battlefield success in modern times.


Not much to say without knowing the details..
Not sure what you equate to "modern times" either..

But yeah, like I thought, it includes assistance...Not simply man on man..



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 11:12 PM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


Kills are kills.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 11:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by FarArcher
reply to post by backinblack
 


Kills are kills.


Not really..Saying your guys have a 300-1 kill ratio would leave many assuming it was a fair battle of man on man..
They wouldn't consider airsupport etc..
Just keeping it real.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 11:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
Saying your guys have a 300-1 kill ratio would leave many assuming it was a fair battle of man on man..
They wouldn't consider airsupport etc..
Just keeping it real.


I didn't get that out of it myself. It appears to be a ratio, a kill ratio. In that event, the "1" listed on the right is a "kill", he's dead - not the ONE guy doing the killing. It's a ratio of deaths, not a statement of how many corpses that single guy piled up before his untimely demise, and doesn't specify just what all went into the killing - just that so many died on either side under certain parameters relevant to that ratio. By relevant parameters, I mean that if you change the parameters to include, say cooks, bottle washers, balloon riggers and underwater basket weavers on the coast, that ratio is going to change. The ratio for regular troopers, who have larger numbers will change the ratio if they're included, and if the ratio applies to a single action by one dedicated group, they'll be different from the same numbers including an entire front. Doesn't necessarily mean that each and every one gored the same number of bullfighters.

The numbers left after a gunship run called in by a single RTO may not necessarily mean the guy to his left built a wall of the bodies of the enemy he personally killed to cover behind - it's the ratio of a specific grouping, not of each individual.

I'm not familiar with TACP, but if they're like the Air Fore CCTs that go in with small SpecOps units from other branches to liase and call down hell on the opposition, I personally would give them credit for the gut pile, because without their liaison and direction of the air support, those results would likely not have been achieved.

Of course, that's just me...

Edit to add: basic combat loadout for an infantryman is what, 210 rounds? be a hell of a trick to zap 300 guys with that in a single action. I suppose you could do it if they lined up just right and stood still for you, but they seem to dislike doing that. Now, over the course of several actions, and factoring in support weapons and air support, well, could happen... works even better if the opposition lines up shoulder to shoulder, 10 guys deep, and just run right at you, and keep on coming. I know a guy who dropped WELL over 100 of the opposition in just such a scenario, in a single action, in a place way south of here, south of Panama even, in a war that "wasn't happening" - didn't exist. Burnt the barrel off of an M60 doing it - but even he had an assistant gunner, who I reckon gets to take credit for half of those.

Bummer. cut his kill ratio in half right there.




edit on 2011/1/19 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 11:50 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


Bottom line...
Missleading figures....



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 12:08 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


I suppose in that sense ALL figures are misleading figures. As they say, there are lies, there are DAMN lies, and worst of all there are statistics!

I don't see whats misleading about giving credit for certain mayhem wrought to those whose actions resulted in said mayhem.

Look at the credit given "zionists" for mayhem wrought in the Levant - whether they are the "kill-ers" or the "kill-ees". They get credit for all of it just the same. Look at the credit, subject of this thread, being given US forces in Iraq, even though it's already been demonstrated that most of those credits are not due US forces at all. Folks don't mind levying THOSE credits, so how is this different?



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 12:17 AM
link   
For every SF soldier that dies in combat, they kill 100-150.

That's not misleading. Even you can't be that dense.

Personal best? Don't know if the guy late at night was counted on the previous day or the next. Tracked them for hours, and finally eased up on them as they stopped at a creek to bathe and cool off. All but one had sat their AK's against the bank when two of us opened up and there were no survivors.

Kills are kills.

Dead is dead.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 12:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by FarArcher
For every SF soldier that dies in combat, they kill 100-150.

That's not misleading. Even you can't be that dense.

Personal best? Don't know if the guy late at night was counted on the previous day or the next. Tracked them for hours, and finally eased up on them as they stopped at a creek to bathe and cool off. All but one had sat their AK's against the bank when two of us opened up and there were no survivors.
Kills are kills.
Dead is dead.


Well I guess the guy that pushed the button on Hiroshima beats all your soldiers by a long shot then..
Well over 200,000 - 1 and still counting...

Me dense FA.??
I doubt you would come close in IQ...
Killing? You are probably streets ahead..Goodie for you..



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 01:31 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 

From some of the rather 'unknowing' and mistaken assumptions exhibited by statements on your part, I'd not go bragging on the IQ thing.

I think you're just about to completely blow your credibility if you even suggest you have an IQ above room temperature.

But you do what you want.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 01:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by FarArcher
reply to post by backinblack
 

From some of the rather 'unknowing' and mistaken assumptions exhibited by statements on your part, I'd not go bragging on the IQ thing.

I think you're just about to completely blow your credibility if you even suggest you have an IQ above room temperature.

But you do what you want.


lol, no problems mate..
You carry on telling everyone how wonderfull you and the entire US defence forces are at killing..
Though you need to misslead to do that.

Any time you wish to check IQ's just post an intelligent request..

edit: Oh, and care to list these??

From some of the rather 'unknowing' and mistaken assumptions exhibited by statements on your part
,
I'll use my limited IQ and try to answer them...
edit on 19-1-2011 by backinblack because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 01:41 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 

I'm not your mate.

It takes an IQ of about ten to know what a ratio is.

Those dumbass soldiers you think you're above? Apparently they're a hell of a lot smarter than you as they understand what a ratio is. What a kill ratio is.

You've been spanked so often on this thread, isn't your ass getting a little red by now?

All you have to do is drop the ignorant statements.

Whoops. Takes an IQ to comprehend that.

Sorry.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 02:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by FarArcher
reply to post by backinblack
 

I'm not your mate.
It takes an IQ of about ten to know what a ratio is.
Those dumbass soldiers you think you're above? Apparently they're a hell of a lot smarter than you as they understand what a ratio is. What a kill ratio is.
You've been spanked so often on this thread, isn't your ass getting a little red by now?
All you have to do is drop the ignorant statements.
Whoops. Takes an IQ to comprehend that.
Sorry.


lol what a joke...
Sure, I know what a ratio is, do you??

ra·tio (rsh, rsh-)
n. pl. ra·tios
1. Relation in degree or number between two similar things.


Note the word "similar"?
So your 150-1 is similar how??
Your "1" calls in airsupport...
Man, what a pathetic joke...
150-1 against equally armed anybodies and you wouldn't be around, MATE....



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 02:45 AM
link   
reply to post by FarArcher
 



Those dumbass soldiers you think you're above? Apparently they're a hell of a lot smarter than you as they understand what a ratio is. What a kill ratio is.


Oh, and those ever so clever soldiers would be nothing without the smart guys designing their weapons..
Then what does it matter?
They're simply cannon fodder anyway...



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by FarArcher
reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
 

Dimitri, I served in Company O, Arctic Rangers, 75th Infantry, and we made the first and only mass parachute jump onto the north pole. In fact, I earned my Canadian Jump Wings while in that unit.

We didn't just jump onto the North Pole, load up and pull out. We stayed for a few days.

My roommate was Joe Seitz, Larry Dolson is keeping up with everyone, and I'm next to Larry Lee in the unit photograph.

I've slept many a night on a frozen lake, traversed several glaciers, jumped into Nome, Eagle River, near Anchorage, from 130's, 141's, CH 47's, Hueys, and even an Otter.

I've participated in a lot of lost hunter recoveries, mountaineers with broken legs, plane crashes, and even helped chip out a woman frozen down in a glacier who had disappeared years earlier.

Now you tell me some **** about your "climbing" and cold weather experience.

I spent this past summer working in the high desert of Nevada with the temperatures ranging from 113-117F, so I'm not exactly unaccustomed to heat.

You still don't get it.

You've had your head filled with some crap from a wannabe, or you watch too many movies. I'm sure you're a regular badass where your come from, but you wouldn't even make the psychological round of a special ops soldier - regardless of branch.

I'm sure you're dying to ask why I would make such an assumption.

Aren't you?


I think it's you that doesn't get it.

I don't care what your history happens to be. I don't care if you parachuted over the Arctic or if you camped in some snow. I grew up in it. Where I'm from, it goes from -40*C instant frost to +40*C forest fire season. Am I a badass where I am from? No, not really. In fact, I'm not the typical labourer type so I moved away from there so I could join this thing called the military. I was denied from the military because I apparently didn't have good enough marks in high school, so now I am studying national administration in university (and doing a damn fine job at it too).

Wannabe? Nope, I don't need to lie nor do I need to oneup anyone else if I think I'm better than them (specifically like you do). Watch too many movies? I barely watch TV anymore.

I wouldn't pass psychological testing for special forces? I think our definitions of special forces are a bit different. Perhaps you're thinking too much about elite forces, wheras I'm quite aware that special forces require a psychological profile quite unlike regular people. They also tend to have abilities quite unlike regular people too, such as extra sensory perception, intensified reflexive abilities and advanced weapon skills.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 04:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
 

Fine. I was only replying to your earlier claim that I would freeze my ass off or die of cold exposure while being chased by some folks who were accustomed to the cold.

And I knew better than that **** .

If you hadn't made those wild claims, no reply.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 

Soldiers are just cannon fodder?

BackinBlack, you're a real class act.

This war on terrorism will soon enough be here at home, and I can assure you they won't be fighting to defend your kind.

The kind I wouldn't spit on if on fire -



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 08:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
Laying it on a little thick there mate..

"unequalled battlefield success ?"..
I think that deserves a little proof..Quite the call...


US SOF, along with the Northern Allience, took over Afghanistan in 2001. Not too much else to say about that.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 08:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
Oh, and those ever so clever soldiers would be nothing without the smart guys designing their weapons..
Then what does it matter?
They're simply cannon fodder anyway...


Sorry, once again, you're wrong.

Special Operations troops aren't "cannon fodder". Far from it. Very far from it.

Young E-5s in Vietnam were commanding company-size indig troops. Two and three man teams along with either tribal warriors were infiltrated into Laos and Cambodia to do recon.

They are carrying on the same traditions now in Iraq and A-stan. And other parts of the world you don't hear about on CNN.

SOF doesn't really need cool-guy weapons. The weapons guys are trained on all manner of weapons, even stuff that's not being used anymore except by some tribesman in the boondocks.

Give a Special Forces troop World War Two weapons and he's still deadly.





top topics
 
28
<< 36  37  38    40  41 >>

log in

join