Para's 'sex ordeal' at hands of 9 soldiers

DublinDes

" NINE Paras — including a Military Cross winner — face a court martial over the alleged “sexual beasting” of a fellow trooper. The soldiers are accused of stripping a Private naked, binding him hand and foot, then carrying out an “indecent assault”.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/campaigns/our_boys/article2001364.ece

Utterly horrific mistreatment of another soldier. And to think that three of them were corporals one of whom is accused of indecent assault with a broom.

lazybhoy

DublinDes wrote: »

" NINE Paras — including a Military Cross winner — face a court martial over the alleged “sexual beasting” of a fellow trooper. The soldiers are accused of stripping a Private naked, binding him hand and foot, then carrying out an “indecent assault”.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/campaigns/our_boys/article2001364.ece

Utterly horrific mistreatment of another soldier. And to think that three of them were corporals one of whom is accused of indecent assault with a broom.

Simply an over the top prank, but it wont stop those with an agenda seeking to smear the whole of the regiment :rolleyes:

Fratton Fred

DublinDes wrote: »

" NINE Paras — including a Military Cross winner — face a court martial over the alleged “sexual beasting” of a fellow trooper. The soldiers are accused of stripping a Private naked, binding him hand and foot, then carrying out an “indecent assault”.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/campaigns/our_boys/article2001364.ece

Utterly horrific mistreatment of another soldier. And to think that three of them were corporals one of whom is accused of indecent assault with a broom.

just a pathetic stunt by a small minded person to be honest.

anyway, regarding those paras......:D

IIMII

lazybhoy wrote: »

Simply an over the top prank, but it wont stop those with an agenda seeking to smear the whole of the regiment :rolleyes:

Some prank. Shows the animals they have in that outfit.

iceage

Well bugger me...lucky he was...thank god it wasn't the Royal Artillery, then he'd be rightly doodahed....:rolleyes: Bloody Paras, bored obviously....always hogging the limelight.:P












note to self must send that ditti to Mairt

lazybhoy

IIMII wrote: »

Some prank. Shows the animals they have in that outfit.

Do you know many ?

BigDuffman

lazybhoy wrote: »

Do you know many ?

The para's are renowned for being a boisterous, aggressive and hardcore unit. Obviously a sick prank gone wrong (Check out the Commando naked bar for examples of BA pranks).

Although a highly and effective professional group of soldiers. They seem to take pleasure in the scumbag mentality attributed to them.

twinytwo

did they actually think they would get away with something like this??

lazybhoy

BigDuffman wrote: »

The para's are renowned for being a boisterous, aggressive and hardcore unit. Obviously a sick prank gone wrong (Check out the Commando naked bar for examples of BA pranks).

Although a highly and effective professional group of soldiers. They seem to take pleasure in the scumbag mentality attributed to them.

So 9 out of 2000 inc 4 Para, means they are all scumbags :rolleyes:

mrtaylor1981

Fratton Fred wrote: »

just a pathetic stunt by a small minded person to be honest.

anyway, regarding those paras......:D

This is disgraceful conduct, I do not know how anyone could think it a laughing matter or for that matter, "a prank gone wrong". Now I know the OP is a Gerry Adams apologist, but nevertheless it is not a matter to scoff at. This young man will be mentally scared probably for life from this.

I have seen a programme about bullying in the army, and although it happens in all armies to some extent, unfortunately it is prevalent in the elite regiments, such as the Paras and Marines. If you think they are bad, could you imagine what the French Foreign Legion for instance are like.

Nevertheless, it is not a joking matter what this young man has gone through :mad:.

djtechnics1210

Another case involving paras
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article563163.ece

neilled

I remember reading a book called "Squaddie - A soldiers story" about a guy who joined the green jackets (now part of "The Rifles") in his 30's. In it he did mention and incident of a private getting a severe battering by two corporals for what would appear to be no justifiable reason. I'd reserve judgement until the investigation is carried out.

lazybhoy

neilled wrote: »

I remember reading a book called "Squaddie - A soldiers story" about a guy who joined the green jackets (now part of "The Rifles") in his 30's. In it he did mention and incident of a private getting a severe battering by two corporals for what would appear to be no justifiable reason. I'd reserve judgement until the investigation is carried out.

I was a 16 yr old junior leader in the RGJ, it was harsh and if you got it wrong you got beasted until you got it right. Physical assaults were the norm. It was a harsh world, up at 5.30am, before doing an hour of PT, breakfast, drill, fieldcraft, etc, etc.If we done night exercises and got in at 3am, your were still up at 5.30. A lot of the time you struggled to stay awake.

Saying that it was not just an army thing, this is the historical norm in the tribal castes of all warrior societies as are harsh initiation rights. Obviously I dont condon the above.

Ours consisted of being put in a locker and rolled around a bit then left in it for a few hours inbetween punches, kicks etc.


Saying that the 1 RGJ had a bit of a wild reputation and you had to be able to stand up for yourself, 9 of our battalion got done for armed robbery when based in Paderborn as part of the BAOR. Nigel Benn the ex middle weight world champ who fought Steve Collins is an ex Green Jacket, he said he had no problems.

Saying that they were the best days of my life. Now adays its a different army, football hooligans etc are no longer given the choice of service or jail.

BigDuffman

lazybhoy wrote: »

So 9 out of 2000 inc 4 Para, means they are all scumbags :rolleyes:

I'm not saying that every single one of them are scumbags, as I don't know every single para to ever get his jump wings.

But what I can safely say from what I've heard from members of the BA and encountered myself, they tend to enjoy living up to their scumbag hardmen reputation.

lazybhoy

BigDuffman wrote: »

I'm not saying that every single one of them are scumbags, as I don't know every single para to ever get his jump wings.

But what I can safely say from what I've heard from members of the BA and encountered myself, they tend to enjoy living up to their scumbag hardmen reputation.

All I can say is I live half the year near Colchester garrison where 16 AA Bde are based the rep is blown out of all proportion, out and about there few incidents.

But I accept the get your revenge in first attitude does exist, it comes from being such a highly competitive unit.

In NI it manifested as asking known republicans to fights in the streets, going into republican bars turning tables over asking locals to fight, etc.



Its the flip side of the regiments competitive ethos.

neilled

I believe its been called "The Cult of the Para" in some quarters before.

iceage

As said before by Lazybhoy, it happens, we all have heard the stories and in some cases experienced it, but its a case of sorting yourself out in the pecking order, a certain amount of aggression and the ability to stand up for yourself is expected by ANY Regiment. Some guys have had a Switching on, an inproptu bout of milling say to sort you out, and getting the job done and done right, "beasting" is an unfortunate terminolgy and I am not for a second condoning this behaviour and in todays Armies and I mean ALL of them it is very counterprodutive and down right dangerous and at the end of the day this type of crap finds its way to the press. Not good.

But in all honesty guys, you can't say that this has not, or does not take place in every army it does. Your only codding yourselves if you believe so its just that it will not be tolerated anymore along with bullying.

Fratton Fred

I had a boss who was an ex para, really nice softly spoken guy. you should have seen the grief he got from some ex marine instructors we had on a company training day though:D

Lets face it though, the Paras are designed to jump out of a plane behind enemy lines, walk 30 miles carrying their own body weight and then kill as many baddies as possible. Being a hard bastard is compulsory surely.

Yeah, these guys went OTT rogering some poor bastard with a broom handle, but every knows beasting goes on and everyone takes it. If you can't take a good beating then why are you joiing a front line regiment?

The same could be said for the green Jackets as well I guess, wasn't that Andy McNabb's regiment? I think I read somewhere that after the Paras they have the highest number of candidates for SAS selection or something like that.

Craigsy

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Yeah, these guys went OTT rogering some poor bastard with a broom handle, but every knows beasting goes on and everyone takes it. If you can't take a good beating then why are you joiing a front line regiment?

I don't think that was what the poor youngfella was looking for when he joined up. That kind of think is downright unacceptable regardless of "how hard they're supposd to be"

DublinDes

lazybhoy wrote: »

I was a 16 yr old junior leader in the RGJ, it was harsh and if you got it wrong you got beasted until you got it right. Physical assaults were the norm. It was a harsh world, up at 5.30am, before doing an hour of PT, breakfast, drill, fieldcraft, etc, etc.If we done night exercises and got in at 3am, your were still up at 5.30. A lot of the time you struggled to stay awake.

Saying that it was not just an army thing, this is the historical norm in the tribal castes of all warrior societies as are harsh initiation rights. Obviously I dont condon the above.

Ours consisted of being put in a locker and rolled around a bit then left in it for a few hours inbetween punches, kicks etc.


Saying that the 1 RGJ had a bit of a wild reputation and you had to be able to stand up for yourself, 9 of our battalion got done for armed robbery when based in Paderborn as part of the BAOR. Nigel Benn the ex middle weight world champ who fought Steve Collins is an ex Green Jacket, he said he had no problems.

Saying that they were the best days of my life. Now adays its a different army, football hooligans etc are no longer given the choice of service or jail.

" I was a 16 yr old junior leader in the RGJ,......Ours consisted of being put in a locker and rolled around a bit then left in it for a few hours inbetween punches, kicks etc......Saying that they were the best days of my life. "

You should have posted this is the Walter Mitty forum :rolleyes:

DublinDes

neilled wrote: »

I believe its been called "The Cult of the Para" in some quarters before.

Perverse cult. Says a lot about the calibre of most of the people in it and those who run it. In all fairness to the ordinary regiments of the BA, I wouldn't put them in their class with the exception of the Royal Marines who would probably be much of a kind. Here's another report of the gang rape of a young soldier by the macho Paras.

" Allegations that a trainee paratrooper was gang raped by comrades in an attack filmed on a mobile phone are being investigated by military police.....One of the gang is said to have pinned down the unnamed victim as another attempted to rape him. It is claimed the solider, one of 300 trainee paras at Catterick, was accused of being gay and, after the alleged assault, was curled up on a bed crying: "Help me".

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2007/may/29/military.matthewweaver

lazybhoy

DublinDes wrote: »

" I was a 16 yr old junior leader in the RGJ,......Ours consisted of being put in a locker and rolled around a bit then left in it for a few hours inbetween punches, kicks etc......Saying that they were the best days of my life. "

You should have posted this is the Walter Mitty forum :rolleyes:

Maybe you should stick to the barstool republican forum.

Instead of trawling the net all day for stories to discredit the Parachute regiment. Get a life.

Local-womanizer

DublinDes wrote: »

Perverse cult. Says a lot about the calibre of most of the people in it and those who run it. In all fairness to the ordinary regiments of the BA, I wouldn't put them in their class with the exception of the Royal Marines who would probably be much of a kind. Here's another report of the gang rape of a young soldier by the macho Paras.

" Allegations that a trainee paratrooper was gang raped by comrades in an attack filmed on a mobile phone are being investigated by military police.....One of the gang is said to have pinned down the unnamed victim as another attempted to rape him. It is claimed the solider, one of 300 trainee paras at Catterick, was accused of being gay and, after the alleged assault, was curled up on a bed crying: "Help me".

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2007/may/29/military.matthewweaver

The key word there being "allegations".Everybody is innocent until proven Guilty,remember.The "victim could have made it up,or maybe he dident,we dont know.

Poccington

Maybe you should both stick to the thread, rather than trading insults.

Poccington

DublinDes wrote: »

Perverse cult. Says a lot about the calibre of most of the people in it and those who run it. In all fairness to the ordinary regiments of the BA, I wouldn't put them in their class with the exception of the Royal Marines who would probably be much of a kind. Here's another report of the gang rape of a young soldier by the macho Paras.

The Para's are one of the best Regiments in the BA. The calibre of the people that populate it is most likely very high.

You're posting allegations involving a very small number of people and trying to discredit a whole Regiment with them. The Para's history speaks for itself, they're top drawer.

jonsnow

Poccington wrote: »

The Para's are one of the best Regiments in the BA. The calibre of the people that populate it is most likely very high.

You're posting allegations involving a very small number of people and trying to discredit a whole Regiment with them. The Para's history speaks for itself, they're top drawer.

Define "best".They are very good at killing people, they are very good shock troops.They are for example less skilled than many other BA regiments at monitoring civil rights marches.

Just because they could be classed as good soldiers it doesn,t necessarily mean they could be classified as a high calibre of people.ie.that they are good people.That goes for any elite unit in any army in my view.

IIMII

jonsnow wrote: »

They are for example less skilled than many other BA regiments at monitoring civil rights marches.

Yes, though they skilled at killing unarmed children. However, they can also be very predictable (and consequently vulnerable) such as once when some Irish terrorists read their manual and and bobby trapped the likely fall back position based on that information. They weren't that clever on that occaision. But back to the young soldier they raped with the broom - at least they didn't kill him

minidazzler

jonsnow wrote: »

Define "best".They are very good at killing people, they are very good shock troops.They are for example less skilled than many other BA regiments at monitoring civil rights marches.

Just because they could be classed as good soldiers it doesn,t necessarily mean they could be classified as a high calibre of people.ie.that they are good people.That goes for any elite unit in any army in my view.

So, that's a Cop's job. Not exactly a soldiers job. Even if they do have to be brought in on occasion. It's not a soldier's job to police his own people. Their Job is to Kill, simple as, when you jump out of an Airplane from however many thousand feet, into someone else backyard who does'nt like you. Then you are looking for a good scrap. And that they are good at.

It's a horrid thing they did to this fella, but in fairness, it's in the Sun, I am not taking it at it's word. Maybe they roughed him up a bit, but who here know's exactly what happened? who has seen the video?

Also, without trying to justify their action's, they are a front line all male unit in Afghanistan, who go weeks on end without any contact from anyone but eachother basically, they are all obviously just a little bit crazy, you kinda have to be to accept their Job. Something is going to happen, this happens to just be a very bad something. Probably started as a small prank but escalation is fast because noone realises the real distress the victim is in, because when having a laugh you are generally elated, slightly high on whatever chemical your Brain releases, seratonin?, you don't notice anyone else's discomfort.


I know that sounds like a justification, but it's not meant to. What they did was wrong and dispicable, but I can understand the escalation of it.

lazybhoy

jonsnow wrote: »

Define "best".They are very good at killing people, they are very good shock troops.They are for example less skilled than many other BA regiments at monitoring civil rights marches.

Just because they could be classed as good soldiers it doesn,t necessarily mean they could be classified as a high calibre of people.ie.that they are good people.That goes for any elite unit in any army in my view.

Monitoring civilian marches is really a Police job. What evidence do you have that serving in an elite unit makes you a bad person :rolleyes:

Heres their official role :

The Parachute regiment is the airbourne element of the british army It is an elite unit by virtue of its stringent selection process, rigorous training programme and by the requirement of its role to operate with minimal or no support behind enemy lines and against numerically superior forces. It forms the parachute infantry element of 16 air assault brigade.

lazybhoy

IIMII wrote: »

Yes, though they skilled at killing unarmed children. However, they can also be very predictable (and consequently vulnerable) such as once when some Irish terrorists read their manual and and bobby trapped the likely fall back position based on that information. They weren't that clever on that occaision. But back to the young soldier they raped with the broom - at least they didn't kill him

What unarmed children have they killed ???????????


NI was a peace keeping op, placing a (R)IED on a public road to catch a passing patrol was not rocket science.

Funny how your so concerned about this incident of an OTT prank gone wrong, why dont you show the same level of concern for the hundreds of kids the IRA has kneecapped ? Or the 220 children they murdered.

IIMII

lazybhoy wrote: »

What unarmed children have they killed ???????????

Do you know the ages of some of those killed on Bloody Sunday?

lazybhoy wrote: »

Funny how your so concerned about this incident of an OTT prank gone wrong, why dont you show the same level of concern for the hundreds of kids the IRA has kneecapped ? Or the 220 children they murdered.

I wasn't talking about the IRA, but the point in that respect is that the British Army is an official state army and you don't expect that they would set out to deliberately kill people they claim as their own citizens. That's the type of stuff you hear of in fascist / communist countries, not in a healthy democracy. The British Parachute Regiment does not have a history steeped in glory

Edit (from wikipedia):

John (Jackie) Duddy (17). Shot in the chest in the car park of Rossville flats. Four witnesses stated Duddy was unarmed and running away from the paratroopers when he was killed. Three of them saw a soldier take deliberate aim at the youth as he ran. Uncle of Irish boxer John Duddy
Patrick Joseph Doherty (31). Shot from behind while attempting to crawl to safety in the forecourt of Rossville flats. Doherty was the subject of a series of photographs, taken before and after he died by French journalist Gilles Peress. Despite testimony from "Soldier F" that he had fired at a man holding and firing a pistol, Widgery acknowledged that the photographs showed Doherty was unarmed, and that forensic tests on his hands for gunshot residue proved negative.[22][24]
Bernard McGuigan (41). Shot in the back of the head when he went to help Patrick Doherty. He had been waving a white handkerchief at the soldiers to indicate his peaceful intentions.[3]
Hugh Pious Gilmour (17). Shot through his right elbow, the bullet then entering his chest as he ran from the paratroopers on Rossville Street.[22] Widgery acknowledged that a photograph taken seconds after Gilmour was hit corroborated witness reports that he was unarmed, and that tests for gunshot residue were negative.[3]
Kevin McElhinney (17). Shot from behind while attempting to crawl to safety at the front entrance of the Rossville Flats. Two witnesses stated McElhinney was unarmed.[22]
Michael G. Kelly (17). Shot in the stomach while standing near the rubble barricade in front of Rossville Flats. Widgery accepted that Kelly was unarmed.[22]
John Pius Young (17). Shot in the head while standing at the rubble barricade. Two witnesses stated Young was unarmed.[22]
William Noel Nash (19). Shot in the chest near the barricade. Witnesses stated Nash was unarmed and going to the aid of another when killed.[22]
Michael M. McDaid (20). Shot in the face at the barricade as he was walking away from the paratroopers. The trajectory of the bullet indicated he could have been killed by soldiers positioned on the Derry Walls.[22]
James Joseph Wray (22). Wounded then shot again at close range while lying on the ground. Witnesses who were not called to the Widgery Tribunal stated that Wray was calling out to say that he could not move his legs before he was shot the second time.[22]
Gerald Donaghy (17). Shot in the stomach while attempting to run to safety between Glenfada Park and Abbey Park. Donaghy was brought to a nearby house by bystanders where he was examined by a doctor. His pockets were turned out in an effort to identify him. A later police photograph of Donaghy's corpse showed nail bombs in his pockets. Neither those who searched his pockets in the house nor the British army medical officer (Soldier 138) who pronounced his death shortly afterwards say they saw any bombs. Donaghy had been a member of Fianna Éireann, an IRA-linked Republican youth movement.[22] Paddy Ward, who gave evidence at the Saville Inquiry, claimed that he had given two nail bombs to Donaghy several hours before he was shot dead.[25]
Gerald (James) McKinney (34). Shot just after Gerald Donaghy. Witnesses stated that McKinney had been running behind Donaghy, and he stopped and held up his arms, shouting "Don't shoot! Don't shoot!", when he saw Donaghy fall. He was then shot in the chest.[22]
William A. McKinney (27). Shot from behind as he attempted to aid Gerald McKinney (no relation). He had left cover to try to help the older man.[22]
John Johnston (59). Shot in the leg and left shoulder on William Street 15 minutes before the rest of the shooting started.[22][26] Johnston was not actually on the march, but on his way to visit a friend in Glenfada Park.[26] He died of his wounds 4½ months later. He was the only one not to die immediately or soon after being shot.[22]

lazybhoy

IIMII wrote: »

Do you know the ages of some of those killed on Bloody Sunday?


I wasn't talking about the IRA, but the point in that respect is that the British Army is an official state army and you don't expect that they would set out to deliberately kill people they claim as their own citizens. That's the type of stuff you hear of in fascist / communist countries, not in a healthy democracy. The British Parachute Regiment does not have a history steeped in glory

Edit (from wikipedia):

John (Jackie) Duddy (17). Shot in the chest in the car park of Rossville flats. Four witnesses stated Duddy was unarmed and running away from the paratroopers when he was killed. Three of them saw a soldier take deliberate aim at the youth as he ran. Uncle of Irish boxer John Duddy
Patrick Joseph Doherty (31). Shot from behind while attempting to crawl to safety in the forecourt of Rossville flats. Doherty was the subject of a series of photographs, taken before and after he died by French journalist Gilles Peress. Despite testimony from "Soldier F" that he had fired at a man holding and firing a pistol, Widgery acknowledged that the photographs showed Doherty was unarmed, and that forensic tests on his hands for gunshot residue proved negative.[22][24]
Bernard McGuigan (41). Shot in the back of the head when he went to help Patrick Doherty. He had been waving a white handkerchief at the soldiers to indicate his peaceful intentions.[3]
Hugh Pious Gilmour (17). Shot through his right elbow, the bullet then entering his chest as he ran from the paratroopers on Rossville Street.[22] Widgery acknowledged that a photograph taken seconds after Gilmour was hit corroborated witness reports that he was unarmed, and that tests for gunshot residue were negative.[3]
Kevin McElhinney (17). Shot from behind while attempting to crawl to safety at the front entrance of the Rossville Flats. Two witnesses stated McElhinney was unarmed.[22]
Michael G. Kelly (17). Shot in the stomach while standing near the rubble barricade in front of Rossville Flats. Widgery accepted that Kelly was unarmed.[22]
John Pius Young (17). Shot in the head while standing at the rubble barricade. Two witnesses stated Young was unarmed.[22]
William Noel Nash (19). Shot in the chest near the barricade. Witnesses stated Nash was unarmed and going to the aid of another when killed.[22]
Michael M. McDaid (20). Shot in the face at the barricade as he was walking away from the paratroopers. The trajectory of the bullet indicated he could have been killed by soldiers positioned on the Derry Walls.[22]
James Joseph Wray (22). Wounded then shot again at close range while lying on the ground. Witnesses who were not called to the Widgery Tribunal stated that Wray was calling out to say that he could not move his legs before he was shot the second time.[22]
Gerald Donaghy (17). Shot in the stomach while attempting to run to safety between Glenfada Park and Abbey Park. Donaghy was brought to a nearby house by bystanders where he was examined by a doctor. His pockets were turned out in an effort to identify him. A later police photograph of Donaghy's corpse showed nail bombs in his pockets. Neither those who searched his pockets in the house nor the British army medical officer (Soldier 138) who pronounced his death shortly afterwards say they saw any bombs. Donaghy had been a member of Fianna Éireann, an IRA-linked Republican youth movement.[22] Paddy Ward, who gave evidence at the Saville Inquiry, claimed that he had given two nail bombs to Donaghy several hours before he was shot dead.[25]
Gerald (James) McKinney (34). Shot just after Gerald Donaghy. Witnesses stated that McKinney had been running behind Donaghy, and he stopped and held up his arms, shouting "Don't shoot! Don't shoot!", when he saw Donaghy fall. He was then shot in the chest.[22]
William A. McKinney (27). Shot from behind as he attempted to aid Gerald McKinney (no relation). He had left cover to try to help the older man.[22]
John Johnston (59). Shot in the leg and left shoulder on William Street 15 minutes before the rest of the shooting started.[22][26] Johnston was not actually on the march, but on his way to visit a friend in Glenfada Park.[26] He died of his wounds 4½ months later. He was the only one not to die immediately or soon after being shot.[22]

I dont excuse Bloody Sunday, and it was the blackest day in the history of the Parachute regiment, but 17 is not a child as you claimed. This terrible incident nearly 40 years ago does not take away the fact the regiment has a record second to none in post WWII battlehonours.

I find it v hypocritical the way republicans bleat on about this event yet hero worship IRA hunger strikers like Francis Hughes who murdered children in cold blood and never mention the 220 children the IRA murdered.

dlofnep

Nothing new here from her Majesty's finest.

dlofnep

lazybhoy wrote: »

but 17 is not a child as you claimed.

Yes it is. 18 is the legal age for an adult. Let's face it, Bloody Sunday wasn't the only time they were trigger happy. Ballymurphy ring a bell?

lazybhoy

dlofnep wrote: »

Yes it is. 18 is the legal age for an adult. Let's face it, Bloody Sunday wasn't the only time they were trigger happy. Ballymurphy ring a bell?

Ballymurphy was different, the PIRA sent scouts or "dickers", posing as members of the public to take number plates and watch movements ouside bases, 1 Para responded by shooting them dead on sight. Obviously republican propergandists claim they were innocent civilans.

At the time the army was taking heavy casualties from such activities.

Obviously as a tactic in a civil society the tactic was flawed and not acceptable.

Hence after 71 the war became an intelligence led one.

IIMII

And I'm not knocking your pride in your armed forces, that's fair enough. But they do go way over the top. I don't think that behaving in the fashion at the top of the thread is a prerequisite for being a good soldier. But you have to understand why the Parachute regiment is hated here. They aren't angels and they and the rest of the British Army shouldn't be on this island, if for no other reason that there will always be someone ready to have a pop at them, and they aren't the most disciplined of people themselves. We can all live with different traditions etc, but there will always be potential for things to go south as long as the British Army is installed here.

I always think of one event from the nineties. I was at a Christening in West Befast and couple of young lads (minor footballers) left early as they had a match the next mornng. They were stopped at a checkpoint or on the street by some soldiers, not sure the hows as they were gone when we left a few hours later. Anyway it was the regiments last day of their tour in the north, and the soldiers that stopped them roughed them up. The stumbled back into the Christening covered in blood. It still sticks with me that they battered the two young lads a) because the could get away with it and b) because it was the last day of their tour and feck the consequences, it would be someone elses problem tomorrow.

You got to remember one man's army of heroes is another man's army of occupation. Fair enough that you regard the British Army as heroes, but plenty over here don't. And again, I doubt that young soldier does

lazybhoy

dlofnep wrote: »

Yes it is. 18 is the legal age for an adult. Let's face it, Bloody Sunday wasn't the only time they were trigger happy. Ballymurphy ring a bell?

So were the 17 yr old sqaddies the IRA murdered children ?

lazybhoy

IIMII wrote: »

And I'm not knocking your pride in your armed forces, that's fair enough. But they do go way over the top. I don't think that behaving in the fashion at the top of the thread is a prerequisite for being a good soldier. But you have to understand why the Parachute regiment is hated here. They aren't angels and they and the rest of the British Army shouldn't be on this island, if for no other reason that there will always be someone ready to have a pop at them, and they aren't the most disciplined of people themselves. We can all live with different traditions etc, but there will always be potential for things to go south as long as the British Army is installed here.

I always think of one event from the nineties. I was at a Christening in West Befast and couple of young lads (minor footballers) left early as they had a match the next mornng. They were stopped at a checkpoint or on the street by some soldiers, not sure the hows as they were gone when we left a few hours later. Anyway it was the regiments last day of their tour in the north, and the soldiers that stopped them roughed them up. The stumbled back into the Christening covered in blood. It still sticks with me that they battered the two young lads a) because the could get away with it and b) because it was the last day of their tour and feck the consequences, it would be someone elses problem tomorrow.

You got to remember one man's army of heroes is another man's army of occupation. Fair enough that you regard the British Army as heroes, but plenty over here don't. And again, I doubt that young soldier does

The Paras are not hated in the republic, they are hated by republicans, most people in the republic are indifferent, get your facts right.

And for the rest seems like more republican BS.

I dont regard the BA as heros, some are good some bad like in all walks of life.

Your agenda is to demonise yet turn a blind eye to republican murder and violence, thankfully people can see through your hypocrisy and tactics.

IIMII

lazybhoy wrote: »

Obviously as a tactic in a civil society the tactic was flawed and not acceptable.

ie Criminal

lazybhoy wrote: »

The Paras are not hated in the republic, they are hated by republicans, most people in the republic are indifferent, get your facts right. And for the rest seems like more republican BS.

Umm, ok. I'm from the 'republic' as you call it, and let me tell you people will tell you one thing and mean another when it comes to things like this. Anyway, what you describe as republican bs, well what can I say. It happened.

I don't hate the British Army, I don't care about them. My only opinion (albiet a s trong one) is that they shouldn't be here. We'd all get along much better without it.

Makes for better neighbourly relations when your neighbours don't have an army and all that

lazybhoy

IIMII wrote: »

ie Criminal

Republicans moaning about such things is a bit like a arsonist shouting fire.

Your hypocisy has no shame or knows no bounds.

IIMII

Fair enough. I've never made any personal assumptions about you, get the feeling you've made more than a few about me

Have you ever noticed how much more pleasant the north is since the British Army was more or less confined to barracks?

lazybhoy

IIMII wrote: »

ie Criminal


Umm, ok. I'm from the 'republic' as you call it, and let me tell you people will tell you one thing and mean another when it comes to things like this. Anyway, what you describe as republican bs, well what can I say. It happened.

I don't hate the British Army, I don't care about them. My only opinion (albiet a s trong one) is that they shouldn't be here. We'd all get along much better without it.

Makes for better neighbourly relations when your neighbours don't have an army and all that

By and large British and Irish people get on well, and most are indifferent to the north. The only people who claim they dont are the s*** stirrers on both sides with an agenda.

Obviously you are entitled to your opinion, but the GFA gives a mandate to NI from the people of Ireland.

People in Ireland have a complex attitude to the BA, most Ive met are proud of ancestors who served in the wars etc.

IIMII

Hey, I married a Brit. Didn't marry her army though. People get on with people. Armies on street corners are a different thing.

People with ancestors involved with the British Army might be proud of their relatives, but that doesn't make them proud of the British Army. And then you have those that in the Irish fashion will use that to be friendly with you as generally we are a friendly enough people.

But don't confuse all of this as being an Irish sense of affinity with broom wielding paras

lazybhoy

IIMII wrote: »

Hey, I married a Brit. Didn't marry her army though. People get on with people. Armies on street corners are a different thing.

People with ancestors involved with the British Army might be proud of their relatives, but that doesn't make them proud of the British Army. And then you have those that in the Irish fashion will use that to be friendly with you as generally we are a friendly enough people.

But don't confuse all of this as being an Irish sense of affinity with broom wielding paras

Why would you not be proud of the BA, if you are British Or have an affinity for the UK, overall it has done far more good then bad, it helped defeat Nazism, Im v proud an Irish regiment liberated the concentration camps first.

Im proud the BA took back the Falklands from a facist dictatorship, Im pround the BA helped contain and defeat the IRA, Im proud an Irish regiment was first in to defend the Muslims in Serbia, why would I not be pround of these things.

dlofnep

lazybhoy wrote: »

Ballymurphy was different, the PIRA sent scouts or "dickers", posing as members of the public to take number plates and watch movements ouside bases, 1 Para responded by shooting them dead on sight. Obviously republican propergandists claim they were innocent civilans.

At the time the army was taking heavy casualties from such activities.

Obviously as a tactic in a civil society the tactic was flawed and not acceptable.

Hence after 71 the war became an intelligence led one.

LOL - Nonsense. Did you write your own history books?

Does a parish priest include those "PIRA scouts" who were murdered?

You're a typical apologist for the heineous murders by the British armed forces. Any innocent civilian killed (and they were unarmed civilians) - is labelled as a terrorist by your kind, so you can attempt to justify their deaths somehow.

The reality of the matter is, the British armed forces murdered innocent civilians, and no credible investigation was ever taken place. It comes at no surprise that you'd go by the story of those pathological liars in her Majesty's finest. An event that was repeated again in Derry, and once again - no credible investigation.

Ballymurphy occured so that the British armed forces would be able to intimidate the nationalist population, and control them through fear - the very definition of terrorism.

I'll let you get back to your revisionist history book that you're writing. Let me know when it's finished so I can laugh at it.

IIMII

lazybhoy wrote: »

Why would you not be proud of the BA, if you are British Or have an affinity for the UK, overall it has done far more good then bad, it helped defeat Nazism, Im v proud an Irish regiment liberated the concentration camps first.

Im proud the BA took back the Falklands from a facist dictatorship, Im pround the BA helped contain and defeat the IRA, Im proud an Irish regiment was first in to defend the Muslims in Serbia, why would I not be pround of these things.

True, true. Amazing what you can do with a good broom

neilled

IIMII wrote: »

Fair enough. I've never made any personal assumptions about you, get the feeling you've made more than a few about me

Have you ever noticed how much more pleasant the north is since the British Army was more or less confined to barracks?

Its not as simple as that. The scaling down if military presence to regular garrison size coincided with ceasefires from most paramilitary groups and a protracted political process that dragged out from the GFA. The raison d'etre for the army being on the streets was gone - the IRA and other republican splinter groups had set out to make the north so politically unstable and economically unviable that the the British would withdraw. Withdrawing troops would not have led to a de-escalation of violence, rather it would have increased it in my opinion. The British State obviously didn't want to secede the territory so it kept its troops in. So you couldn't have one without the other. Eventually it got to the stage where both sides realised they couldn't keep going any longer and sat down to talk and hence we have the former crazies, SF and the DUP sharing power. Not that I have much respect for either, but nontheless its better than things were. If only people on all sides had just shut up and done what the SDLP had suggested at sunningdale countless lives could have been saved.

Note that the current crop of dissident republicans regard both states on the Island of Ireland as being illegitimate, the Defence Forces, Gardai, courts as at best misguided or at worst stooges and traitors who deserve a traitors death..... but the fact that would set most of the population against them means they've refrained from taking action. They claim that their army council is the only legitimate government.

Conventional and current realist thinking dictates that states base military forces in all parts of their territory for many reasons, securing borders, dispersal (means an attack isn't as devastating), economic reasons (civilian support services and economic benefits from military personnel spending money in local areas - see the protests about the closure of the army barracks in lifford, monaghan etc), recruitment etc. They are also the sole branch of government apparatus that cannot go on strike or take a "blue flu" and can be ordered to step into the breech to keep vital services running during strikes such as the one by firefighters.

The troop levels in our part of the world are back to what would be known as regular garrison strength across the UK.

Compared to the Republic of Ireland, this is high, but its defence policy is that of "minimal credible deterrence" keeping the minimal numbers of troops necessary for internal security and the minimum number required so that all arms military skills can be maintained. This means that if needs be the force can be expanded in the future core skills, weapons and instructers are in place to teach the new recruits. Trying to start from scratch takes a long time - just look at all the UN training missions around the world from Liberia to East Timor, - its taken years to train the police and military.

The UK forces however are based on a different doctrine - that expeditionary warfare, fighting (for limited periods) independently or as part of a larger NATO force as well as waving the good old nuke around for Britannia.

As such the number of troops per head of population is much bigger and they have to be put somewhere and as such are spread out across all of the territory of the UK which for the moment includes Northern Ireland for the purposes I have outlined above.

Regarding the Para's - from those relatives of mine who lived through it, they were mean tough sob's trained to be aggressive. If you want somewhere smashed up, heads kicked in, an enemy wiped out - send in the Para's. Fine. Public order duties? Probably not the best idea. Send someone else, perhaps units that emphasise team work "steady boys, hold the line.... etc"

The Para's would loose the rag and do what they're trained to do and you end up with a bloody sunday. Nontheless, this type of unit has its uses - countries raise armies with the goal of fighting and winning, although the definition of winning varies. For the UK that means being going to go somewhere else in order to protect the UK's strategic interests, invade it and secure it. For Ireland it means repelling invasion but not doing any invading. Hazing, excessive force etc seems to have cropped up in Airborne units in a number of countries, allegations some proven and unproven about the US, Canadian, Belgian para units roll off the top of my head at the moment. I would suggest possibly as a result of the training involved, to be dropped behind enemy lines, be out numbered poorly supplied - you'd have to be pretty motivated and pretty aggressive to win under these conditions and training reflects that. Airborne and other shock units frequently try and create " a legend" about themselves or myths or urban legends they don't deny or confirm. I think there was one spread in the argentine press before the falklands about the Para's dyeing berets with the blood of fallen enemies or ghurka's decapitating people in close combat with khukri's - i was told the mod relased a pr piece about said unit which included a pic of them all sharpening their blades. It might be true, it probably isn't but it scares the hell out of the enemy and creates a myth in the home country.



Dlfoneps point Regarding 17 year olds - 17 year olds in armies generally aren't allowed to serve in frontline conditions until they are 18. Republicans on the other hand, showed no such qualms in arming 17 year olds or sending them out to riot. They were expendable and good propaganda if one of them ended up dead. In many other countries (rightly or wrongly) petrol bombing would be responded to with live rounds, whereas plastic bullets were used instead. I'm aware of some of the serious abuses that resulted in death from the use of these that should have involved sentences regarding plastic bullets that took place, however given the circumstances and the technology of the time, their use was inevitable. Anyway a rioter is a rioter and gets shot, there's no time to check their id and see if they're over 18. It is quite clear to me however that in a number of cases as has been mentioned British Troops ran amock resulting in numerous deaths and should have been court maritaled and put in the slammer in my opinion. Nontheless I can understand the reason of how the events unfolded - take a young lad from some of the most deprived area's of the UK, stick them through a tough brutal training programme, which teaches him to kill and kill effectively. Then drop the same young lad into a hostile situation, into a place he'd probably rather never visit given the opportunity, an enemy that won't come out and fight and you, who may have killed on or two of your mates have a recipe for paranoia and frustration and some lash out and you get the resultant mess. I found bernard O'malley's "Soldier of the Queen" a good insite into the mindset of someone who might have been stationed in N.Ireland at the time. The fact that I know of, or know the people and places that the author spent his time harassing and hunting in his book brought "the other side" of the story to me.

The case here folks is not so black and white, despite what people would have you believe.

We still don't know the truth of what happened in Afghanistan so I'll reserve judgement. I believe the events that happened are within the realms of possibility, it wouldn't be the first time something like this has happened within an airborne unit, however the sun is well known for publishing blatant untruths.

IIMII

neilled wrote: »

Its not as simple as that.

Yes but what keeps the peace is that the British troops aren't on the streets. It would help if they were also off the island, and any issues that had to be dealth with could be done so by the PSNI

lazybhoy, in relation to the British Army and Ireland. It might be worth your while checking out the wee pill boxes along the Boyne, and on the Dublin Belfast railway line pointing north in case of British Army invasion. It wasn't just Germany England wanted to invade in the second world war. That warm response that you get from Irish people fondly recounting their inherited memory of the British Army may not be as warm as you think

cyrusdvirus

military and politics forum ffs

minidazzler

gatecrash wrote: »

military and politics forum ffs

I agree. Why is it that any thread about the British Army here turns in to a debate about why they should and shouldn't be here?

neilled

IIMII wrote: »

Yes but what keeps the peace is that the British troops aren't on the streets. It would help if they were also off the island, and any issues that had to be dealth with could be done so by the PSNI.

Lazybhoy, in relation to the British Army and Ireland. It might be worth your while checking out the wee pill boxes along the Boyne, and on the Dublin Belfast railway line pointing north in case of British Army invasion. It wasn't just Germany England wanted to invade in the second world war. That warm response that you get from Irish people fondly recounting their inherited memory of the British Army may not be as warm as you think

Not at all - the repeated targeting of PSNI officers who have the support of the vast majority of the community in Northern Ireland shows that dissident republicans have no time for peace. They'd love the army back on the streets to have some nice juicy targets to hit and even better if soldiers fire back and hit a granny or a kid. Great propaganda and the dead civillian will have done their bit for "the cause". Read my post regarding why countries have military forces and why they have them. The British are unlikely to abandon realist theory any time soon. Also remember that there is a sizeable portion of the NI population who would be terrified if the BA were to withdraw and who actively want them stationed there and for the moment they constitute the majority of the population in N.Ireland.

Regarding WWII, most of the Paranoia about Ireland actually came from the yanks who poured into NI in their hundreds of thousands. The older generation around my county still recall the arrival of "the yanks" and their departure for normandy and beyond and those who never came back. The US brass in NI were terrified about a threat from the south and pointed most of their artillery across the border at the then free state. It didn't help that the ambassador of the US in Ireland wasn't that overly keen on govt policy and the refusal to expel the german ambassador. You should also do some reading about Plan W - a joint British Irish Plan to repel a German invasion. Robert Fisk has an interesting book that has some interesting information on the subject. It might also be useful to look at the deployment of troops in Ireland during the war. If the threat from the UK was imminent I think there would have been far heavier fortifications constructed and more than two brigades at the northern border. I'd also imagine that allowing Catalina's and Sunderlands at RAF Castle Archdale in Co.Fermanagh to fly over donegal wouldn't have been permitted either if the British State was judged a threat. Nontheless I think the BA might have been sent across the border if the UK perceived its survival to be at stake.

As I said, its not so black and white despite what people would have you believe. It makes it so much easier for them to peddle whatever sides adgenda they are pushing.