IDF or the RIR?

Achilles1599

bit of a toughy for me after a week in the local barracks(aiken barracks) for work experience ive decided a career in the army way of life is perfect but my tough choice is should i stay with the defence forces or leave for england to join the royal irish regiment any comments or advice?

It wasn't me!

The charter is pretty explicit on this one. If you read it, you'll understand that nobody is allowed suggest RIR or any other foreign force to you. Now, you can look for information, but if you ask which to join, according to the Boards interpretation of Irish law, nobody can suggest the BA to you.

DipStick McSwindler

This post has been deleted.

thecommietommy

Achilles1599 wrote: »

bit of a toughy for me after a week in the local barracks(aiken barracks) for work experience ive decided a career in the army way of life is perfect but my tough choice is should i stay with the defence forces or leave for england to join the royal irish regiment any comments or advice?

:eek: Another British army recruitmet thread Do the British forces recruitment sponsor this forum or give backhanders to someone in boards.ie !!!!!!

RMD

Research both thoroughly, make an informed decision. There's a very good book called Callsign Hades written by Patrick Bury, an Officer from Wicklow who served in RIR. Gives a good indication into daily life, certainly seems like a unique place.

Problem with the PDF is a lack of clear information. Make sure though you're making an informed decision, see if you can talk a few soldiers in the PDF about their career.

KickstartHeart

Yeah man,
Look into it. Military.ie is full of info. But definitely try to speak to some people in both armies. And its up to you on what you want. The PDF is particularly hard to get into at the moment because the government is keeping it at 9500 and there's very limited recruitment.


Do you wan't to go to college and become an officer or do you want to finish school and join up as a recruit to become a soldier?

Also, as an Irish person, your'e not just restricted to joining the RIR if you want to go to the British. Infantry isn't your only option. Just for your info.

Achilles1599

thanks any way lads for all replies but for added information i am looking to going along the officer route

DipStick McSwindler

This post has been deleted.

Achilles1599

same here man but i was talking to some of the soldiers today in my local barracks today and they were saying how the same story with the irish army is that were under funded, under equipped and under staffed so this is why i was asking should i consider the royal irish regiment even if are fighting men are some of the best still need some heavy equipment. One lad told me how how hes seen a 7.62mm round pierce the side of a MOWAG so that was a bit shocking to say the least

Turbine

Achilles1599 wrote: »

same here man but i was talking to some of the soldiers today in my local barracks today and they were saying how the same story with the irish army is that were under funded, under equipped and under staffed so this is why i was asking should i consider the royal irish regiment even if are fighting men are some of the best still need some heavy equipment. One lad told me how how hes seen a 7.62mm round pierce the side of a MOWAG so that was a bit shocking to say the least

6 British soldiers were blown up in an armoured vehicle in Afghanistan on Tuesday, so joining the British Army won't protect you from getting killed. Joining any army will always involve the risk of being sent into a warzone at any time, where there is always the risk of being killed or maimed.

If you talked to soldiers in the US Army or British Army, they'll probably tell you they're under-equipped and under-funded as well.

SIRREX

Achilles1599 wrote: »

One lad told me how how hes seen a 7.62mm round pierce the side of a MOWAG so that was a bit shocking to say the least

A lad by the name of Walter Mitty by any Chance?

Achilles1599

no actually a corporal in the 27th infantry

goldie fish

Achilles1599 wrote: »

no actually a corporal in the 27th infantry

Sure he's never seen a Mowag so.

Achilles1599

goldie fish wrote: »

Sure he's never seen a Mowag so.

well am sure hes pretty familiar with them since they spend alot of time working with them soo...

CZ 453

Achilles1599 wrote: »

same here man but i was talking to some of the soldiers today in my local barracks today and they were saying how the same story with the irish army is that were under funded, under equipped and under staffed so this is why i was asking should i consider the royal irish regiment even if are fighting men are some of the best still need some heavy equipment. On e lad told me how how hes seen a 7.62mm round pierce the side of a MOWAG so that was a bit shocking to say the least

Did someone replace the door with a paper one???

goldie fish

Achilles1599 wrote: »

well am sure hes pretty familiar with them since they spend alot of time working with them soo...

Well....

What part of the side did the supposed 7.62mm impact? The exhaust perhaps? And where?

I'm calling bull**** on this one.
Pics or gtfo.

Achilles1599

thats all this corporal told me, was giving out about equipment and mentioned it

cruasder777

Achilles1599 wrote: »

bit of a toughy for me after a week in the local barracks(aiken barracks) for work experience ive decided a career in the army way of life is perfect but my tough choice is should i stay with the defence forces or leave for england to join the royal irish regiment any comments or advice?

Depends if you want to take part in the most intense fighting since Korea or guard cash in transit vans, your call.

goldie fish

Achilles1599 wrote: »

thats all this corporal told me, was giving out about equipment and mentioned it

Well, he's lyin to ye.

Manic Moran

In fairness, 7.62mm AP is surprisingly capable (But also surprisingly expensive). You should see the swiss cheese I've seen 5.56mm AP make of APCs, it's disturbing.

The charter is pretty explicit on this one. If you read it, you'll understand that nobody is allowed suggest RIR or any other foreign force to you. Now, you can look for information, but if you ask which to join, according to the Boards interpretation of Irish law, nobody can suggest the BA to you.

We can answer your questions, if you have specifics about conditions etc. We can't say 'We think you should join...'

NTM

goldie fish

Manic Moran wrote: »

In fairness, 7.62mm AP is surprisingly capable (But also surprisingly expensive). You should see the swiss cheese I've seen 5.56mm AP make of APCs, it's disturbing.


NTM

Indeed, but they are not using Mowags as targets in the Glen yet...Not while there are still old panhards about.

KickstartHeart

cruasder777 wrote: »

Depends if you want to take part in the most intense fighting since Korea or guard cash in transit vans, your call.

Ireland, Britain, and the USA are THE ONLY countries in the world that are signed up to the NATO partnership for peace programme, that actually maintain the required 8% of forces on oversea's ops at all times. Your continuous Defence Forces bashing on this site is getting a bit annoying because you haven't a bloody clue about what the Irish Defence Forces do. Stop posting stupid posts on this site about the Irish Defence Forces because some people who don't know any better will be naive enough to believe the crap you post.

OP, You won't spend all your time guarding a transit van. I know people in the British forces, and the PDF, who mutually agree that training and exercises etc. in the PDF and the Brits are similar, and are both of the same standard, which is good. The only difference is, you'l get paid more in the Irish army, and although you will take part in operations that might be very dangerous, in very dangerous parts of the world, you probably won't see the kind of combat that British forces are currently facing. But don't join the Irish Army expecting a cushy safe number. Lots of Irish troops have lost their lives on missions. Just because the Irish army isn't involved in Afghanistan doesn't mean that you definitely won't come into contacts with belligerents oversea's on operations. Peacekeeping isn't always very peaceful. You will have to train hard and became a fit, capable, professional soldier in both the British forces and the PDF.

tac foley

KickstartHeart wrote: »

Ireland, Britain, and the USA are THE ONLY countries in the world that are signed up to the NATO partnership for peace programme, that actually maintain the required 8% of forces on oversea's ops at all times. Your continuous Defence Forces bashing on this site is getting a bit annoying because you haven't a bloody clue about what the Irish Defence Forces do. Stop posting stupid posts on this site about the Irish Defence Forces because some people who don't know any better will be naive enough to believe the crap you post.

OP, You won't spend all your time guarding a transit van. I know people in the British forces, and the PDF, who mutually agree that training and exercises etc. in the PDF and the Brits are similar, and are both of the same standard, which is good. The only difference is, you'l get paid more in the Irish army, and although you will take part in operations that might be very dangerous, in very dangerous parts of the world, you probably won't see the kind of combat that British forces are currently facing. But don't join the Irish Army expecting a cushy safe number. Lots of Irish troops have lost their lives on missions. Just because the Irish army isn't involved in Afghanistan doesn't mean that you definitely won't come into contacts with belligerents oversea's on operations. Peacekeeping isn't always very peaceful. You will have to train hard and became a fit, capable, professional soldier in both the British forces and the PDF.

+1

Good post - needs paying attention to.

AAMOI, elements of the British Army regularly exercise dealing with and containing a major terrorist incident at London Heathrow Airport.

tac

DipStick McSwindler

This post has been deleted.

OS119

feeney92 wrote: »

Just out of curiosity Is the pay that much worse? considering cost of living is less in England?...

its very difficult to do a direct comparison because of all the differences in what you have to pay for and how much - as an example the issues of service accommodation, free healthcare, the lack of 'voluntary' contributions towards school books etc all make a 'X earns A, while Y earns B, ergo X is better paid than Y' statement a bit stupid.

as for the other thing - in Ireland Death Certificates and Corroners inquests are public affairs and are reported in the press: if anyone had been killed in any of these deployments other than those declared by the DoD, we'd know about it.

KickstartHeart

feeney92 wrote: »

Just out of curiosity Is the pay that much worse? considering cost of living is less in England? I kow when they go away on tours The PDF get double what the BA get....Correct me if im wrong, but wasnt the last time (that we know about...and I stress this bit) that a member of the PDF was killed in contact In the Leb in 1998?

I think so mate. There were quite a lot of Irish troops killed in Lebanon. Its been over a decade since an Irish soldier has been KIA oversea's. Thank god as far as I'm concerned. But there has been contacts etc. since from what I've read/heard. The army has just been lucky enough to not take casualties.


As for the pay, I'm not sure. But there's pay scales on military.ie for the Irish Army, and I've seen pay scales on the BA website too. There's a fair difference. But a lot of the lads I know in the BA live in barracks so they always have money. So its hard to know what way it would work out when you consider cost of living etc. too. I'm not too sure on that one but the info is out there. Post it here if you can find it

I definitely know that a corporal in the IA can be earning roughly the same as a lieutenant in the BA. Big difference.

OS119

KickstartHeart wrote: »

...I definitely know that a corporal in the IA can be earning roughly the same as a lieutenant in the BA. Big difference.

i know Cpl's in the BA who get paid more than Lt's in the BA - its no great achievement!

KickstartHeart

OS119 wrote: »

i know Cpl's in the BA who get paid more than Lt's in the BA - its no great achievement!

Really? I guess that kinda takes from my point then

It wasn't me!

There have been fatalities in the last decade. One certainly in Liberia that I know of. Was an accident though rather than combat, but it doesn't change the fact.

cruasder777

KickstartHeart wrote: »

Ireland, Britain, and the USA are THE ONLY countries in the world that are signed up to the NATO partnership for peace programme, that actually maintain the required 8% of forces on oversea's ops at all times. Your continuous Defence Forces bashing on this site is getting a bit annoying because you haven't a bloody clue about what the Irish Defence Forces do. Stop posting stupid posts on this site about the Irish Defence Forces because some people who don't know any better will be naive enough to believe the crap you post.

OP, You won't spend all your time guarding a transit van. I know people in the British forces, and the PDF, who mutually agree that training and exercises etc. in the PDF and the Brits are similar, and are both of the same standard, which is good. The only difference is, you'l get paid more in the Irish army, and although you will take part in operations that might be very dangerous, in very dangerous parts of the world, you probably won't see the kind of combat that British forces are currently facing. But don't join the Irish Army expecting a cushy safe number. Lots of Irish troops have lost their lives on missions. Just because the Irish army isn't involved in Afghanistan doesn't mean that you definitely won't come into contacts with belligerents oversea's on operations. Peacekeeping isn't always very peaceful. You will have to train hard and became a fit, capable, professional soldier in both the British forces and the PDF.

Thats not true, 22 countries are signed up in the partnership for peace.

Can you post a link to show thats 8% posted overseas is a requirement ? Countries like Cyprus are signed up, how could they have an 8% overseas presence ?

Your claim cant be right, in many countries the US, Uk have small numbers of advisors/monitors, the republic has 7 in Afghanistan as an example.

Partnership for Peace (PfP) is a North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) program aimed at creating trust between NATO and other states in Europe and the former Soviet Union; 22 States are members.[1]

Former republics of the Soviet Union Armenia (October 5, 1994)[8]
Azerbaijan (May 4, 1994)[8]
Belarus (January 11, 1995)[8]
Georgia (March 23, 1994)[8]
Kazakhstan (May 27, 1994)[8]
Kyrgyzstan (June 1, 1994)[8]
Moldova (March 16, 1994)[8]
Russia (June 22, 1994)[8]
Tajikistan (February 20, 2002)[8]
Turkmenistan (May 10, 1994)[8]
Ukraine (February 8, 1994)[8]
Uzbekistan (July 13, 1994)[8]


.....................You are seriously claiming these countries must have 8% posted on overseas ops ?



Quote. I know people in the British forces, and the PDF, who mutually agree that training and exercises etc. in the PDF and the Brits are similarUnquote

......The British army units train in Kenya, Canada, Belize, the deserts of Oman etc etc.

.....Wheres the PDF jungle warfare school then ?

.....Im not trying to score points, but you keep leaving the goal wide open.

......And nowhere have I slagged off the defence forces, Im just keeping it real.......unlike you.

As I said the PDF were nothing but a professional army, but if you are going to keep posting inaccurate posts, you are going to keep walking into it.

It wasn't me!

cruasder777 wrote: »

Thats not true, dozens of countries are signed up in the partnership for peace.


Current members[edit] Former republics of the Soviet Union Armenia (October 5, 1994)[8]
Azerbaijan (May 4, 1994)[8]
Belarus (January 11, 1995)[8]
Georgia (March 23, 1994)[8]
Kazakhstan (May 27, 1994)[8]
Kyrgyzstan (June 1, 1994)[8]
Moldova (March 16, 1994)[8]
Russia (June 22, 1994)[8]
Tajikistan (February 20, 2002)[8]
Turkmenistan (May 10, 1994)[8]
Ukraine (February 8, 1994)[8]
Uzbekistan (July 13, 1994)[8]
[edit] Former Yugoslavian states Bosnia and Herzegovina (December 14, 2006)[8]
Republic of Macedonia (November 15, 1995)[8]
Montenegro (December 14, 2006)[8]
Serbia (December 14, 2006)[8]
[edit] EU members Austria (February 10, 1995)[8]
Finland (May 9, 1994)[8]
Ireland (December 1, 1999)[8]
Malta (joined April 26, 1995;[3] withdrew on October 27, 1996.[4] Malta decided to reactivate their Partnership for Peace membership on March 20, 2008;[5] this was accepted by NATO at the summit in Bucharest on April 3, 2008.[6])
Sweden (May 9, 1994)[8]
[edit] Other Switzerland (December 11, 1996)[8]
[edit] Future members

You should probably read it again. Particularly the key point.

Ireland, Britain, and the USA are THE ONLY countries in the world that are signed up to the NATO partnership for peace programme, that actually maintain the required 8% of forces on oversea's ops at all times.

cruasder777

It wasn't me! wrote: »

You should probably read it again. Particularly the key point.

The posters claims are not accurate, the republic for years has had 7 advisors/monitors in Afghanistan without having 8 % of its forces posted overseas.

OS119

cruasder777 wrote: »

The posters claims are not accurate, the republic for years has had 7 advisors/monitors in Afghanistan without having 8 % of its forces posted overseas.

i know my mother told me never to get into an argument with an idiot because they would bring it down to their level and then beat me with experience, but i have to ask:

you do know that Afghanistin isn't the only 'overseas' place in the world, don't you?

cruasder777

OS119 wrote: »

i know my mother told me never to get into an argument with an idiot because they would bring it down to their level and then beat me with experience, but i have to ask:

you do know that Afghanistin isn't the only 'overseas' place in the world, don't you?

Ok genius please enlighten me ?

Where has the republic had 8% of its forces continually posted in the last 10/15 years ?

Answer.......nowhere.

I await the poster who made the claim to provide a link.

OS119

cruasder777 wrote: »

Ok genius please enlighten me ?

Where has the republic had 8% of its forces continually posted in the last 10/15 years ?

Answer.......nowhere.

I await the poster who made the claim to provide a link.

the Irish DF has had a presence in Afghanistan, Lebanon, Chad, Liberia and Kosovo in the last eight years.

i don't know the numbers involved in each deployment and i don't know if it went to/passed 8% - and i really, really don't care - but it is absolutely incontrovertable that Afghanistan is not the only overseas place in the world, however much you seem to think that it is.

KickstartHeart

Good god crusader777 your'e completely p***ing into the wind here.

Do some academic reading. Its good for the brain, in that you will actually know what your'e talking about before you come online and try to bash an organization that you clearly haven't a clue about.

I've attached something worth while reading.

And here are your links

http://www.military.ie/overseas

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_army#Peacekeeping_Missions

I'd like to remind readers here that crusader777 has made the claims that;

Most of the Irish Army have not been oversea's.

The Irish Army do not have significant peace enforcement experience.

If you join the army you will spend your time doing cash-in-transit security.

For people who are considering joining an army, in patricular the Irish Army, do not listen to this guy. He must have some gripe about the PDF because he continuously posts things about it, that are by definition, lies.

DipStick McSwindler

This post has been deleted.

cruasder777

OS119 wrote: »

the Irish DF has had a presence in Afghanistan, Lebanon, Chad, Liberia and Kosovo in the last eight years.

i don't know the numbers involved in each deployment and i don't know if it went to/passed 8% - and i really, really don't care - but it is absolutely incontrovertable that Afghanistan is not the only overseas place in the world, however much you seem to think that it is.

I never said the Irish army were not overseas, the posters claim is they have consistantly had 8% overseas, which is not true.


The poster is making up lies and claiming I said it.

cruasder777

KickstartHeart wrote: »

Good god crusader777 your'e completely p***ing into the wind here.

Do some academic reading. Its good for the brain, in that you will actually know what your'e talking about before you come online and try to bash an organization that you clearly haven't a clue about.

I've attached something worth while reading.

And here are your links

http://www.military.ie/overseas

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_army#Peacekeeping_Missions

I'd like to remind readers here that crusader777 has made the claims that;

Most of the Irish Army have not been oversea's.

The Irish Army do not have significant peace enforcement experience.

If you join the army you will spend your time doing cash-in-transit security.

For people who are considering joining an army, in patricular the Irish Army, do not listen to this guy. He must have some gripe about the PDF because he continuously posts things about it, that are by definition, lies.

Ok lets have it your way....The Irish army consistanly deploy 8% overseas......Can you post proof ?

"The Irish army train just the same as British infantry", perhaps you could tell the last time the PDF trained in Kenya or Belize or in a bde size operation , which the Brits do before deployment to Afghanistan ?


Still waiting for the link and for you to tell me where the Irish army jungle warfare school is ? Or where your mythical 8% made up figure has come from? Link ?



.....I never saidThe Irish Army do not have significant peace enforcement experience......please stop posting lies.

I questioned your claim they continually post 8% overseas.....which is your claim, as well as your the previous bs claim that the PDF have more peace keeping experience then the British army..

And no most in the Irish army have not been deployed overseas, thats a fact.


You are making claim after bs claim and dont like it when you are pulled up.

KickstartHeart

cruasder777 wrote: »

Ok lets have it your way....The Irish army consistanly deploy 8% overseas.

The Irish army train just the same as British infantry and have the same facilities.



Still waiting for the link and for you to tell me where the Irish army jungle warfare school is ?



.....I have never said the Irish army have never been overseas.....please stop posting LIES.

I questioned your claim they continually post 8% overseas.....which is your claim.

Are you smoking weed while typing?

There is no my way or your way, there is only true, and un-true.

I did not say the Irish Army have the same facilites as the BA, and I did not say their infantry corps's train the same. I said they are similar. Obviously not the exact same.

I did not say that you said the Irish Army have never been overseas. I said that you said, 'most of the Irish Army have not been overseas', which is what you said.

If you lose an argument you can't just go making things up about what the person opposing you said. Your'e putting words in my mouth now.

Whats your problem? Pretty much every stupid claim that you have made about the IA has been proven un-true. Why in the name of God are you still posting here, trying to sustain your flawed argument, with blatant lies, and mis-quotes? You can't change your argument now and make it look like you did or didn't say whichever. You do know that your previous posts are visible to everyone here and we CAN see the absolute untrue madness you've posted about the IA yeah?

Quit this d**k measuring one army is better than the other bull***t. They both have different defined roles. They're both s**t hot at those roles, and they are both of a very, very good standard, and both have a LOT of operational experience in their area's.

Now stop carrying on this stupid argument. Your'e tripping yourself up and making an a*s of yourself.

cruasder777

KickstartHeart wrote: »

Are you smoking weed while typing?

There is no my way or your way, there is only true, and un-true.

I did not say the Irish Army have the same facilites as the BA, and I did not say their infantry corps's train the same. I said they are similar. Obviously not the exact same.

I did not say that you said the Irish Army have never been overseas. I said that you said, 'most of the Irish Army have not been overseas', which is what you said.

If you lose an argument you can't just go making things up about what the person opposing you said. Your'e putting words in my mouth now.

Whats your problem? Pretty much every stupid claim that you have made about the IA has been proven un-true. Why in the name of God are you still posting here, trying to sustain your flawed argument, with blatant lies, and mis-quotes? You can't change your argument now and make it look like you did or didn't say whichever. You do know that your previous posts are visible to everyone here and we CAN see the absolute untrue madness you've posted about the IA yeah?

Quit this d**k measuring one army is better than the other bull***t. They both have different defined roles. They're both s**t hot at those roles, and they are both of a very, very good standard, and both have a LOT of operational experience in their area's.

Now stop carrying on this stupid argument. Your'e tripping yourself up and making an a*s of yourself.

Once again, please post evidence to back up your claim that the PDF continually post 8% overseas ?

Most of the Irish army have not been overseas, its a fact, in the last few years they have only deployed in small numbers, fact.

1 battalion was deployed in Liberia for 3 yrs.
1 battalion, around 500 was deployed to Chad for 2 years.

As well as small numbers in other places.

.....Do the maths.

DipStick McSwindler

This post has been deleted.

KickstartHeart

cruasder777 wrote: »

Once again, please post evidence to back up your claim that the PDF continually post 8% overseas ?

Most of the Irish army have not been overseas, its a fact, in the last few years they have only deployed in small numbers, fact.

1 battalion was deployed in Liberia
1 battalion, around 500 was deployed to Chad for 2 years.

As well as small numbers in other places.

.....Do the maths.

Yeah read the attachment to my post Einstein. I've already given you the evidence. You seam incapable of doing research before making your arguments. I better quote it for you. "As of 2007, only two member states (the UK and Ireland) had met the
NATO target of being able to sustain 8% of their ground forces on operations"

You do know they ROTATE battalions don't you. That one battalion of 500 guys didn't just stay in Chad for that whole 2 years.

You do the maths, and in the mean time try find out how an army works. The vast majority of the Irish army have been oversea's.

This is actually bordering on hilarious now. You don't know what your'e at.

KickstartHeart

feeney92 wrote: »

Thats Complete BS

Since 1994 Every Soldier Has To Tour Once in every 3 years
Quote from Military.ie "Today There Are Approximatly 500 Personnel Overseas"
Assuming These are in 6 months rotations it changes thats 1000 a year and the simple fact we have cut down big time in tours in the last 2 years I think its safe to say a lot more have served than you seem to think, even taking into account people who have done multiple tours.

I beginning to think we should give up on our crusading friend Feeney.

We've given him the evidence and the info. He claims to know about the military, and actually called ME and "eejet" in another thread, but yet he still hasn't figured out that deployed battalions rotate.

RMD

cruasder777 wrote: »

Once again, please post evidence to back up your claim that the PDF continually post 8% overseas ?

Most of the Irish army have not been overseas, its a fact, in the last few years they have only deployed in small numbers, fact.

1 battalion was deployed in Liberia for 3 yrs.
1 battalion, around 500 was deployed to Chad for 2 years.

As well as small numbers in other places.

.....Do the maths.

Out of curiosity what is your military experience? You seem to talk an awful lot of **** for someone who has served regardless of what force it was in. I'll make the assumption on the sheer ignorance of your theory that a battalion was stationed for 3 years without rotation you've never served and are nothing more than a civilian with failed aspirations.

OS119

RMD wrote: »

Out of curiosity what is your military experience?

22 years at Rampton, man and boy.

Rampton was/is a 'secure hospitial' for the err... 'infirm of mind' where those afflicted could bounce from wall to wall to their hearts content...

doubtless we are to be regaled by a host of links to wiki and other dodgy websites written by inaddaquates with a unhealthy sexual fixation on either the Parachute Regiment or 22SAS. gentleman, the ignore button!

KickstartHeart

RMD wrote: »

Out of curiosity what is your military experience? You seem to talk an awful lot of **** for someone who has served regardless of what force it was in. I'll make the assumption on the sheer ignorance of your theory that a battalion was stationed for 3 years without rotation you've never served and are nothing more than a civilian with failed aspirations.

I'm a civillian and I even showed him to be full of crap! I never notice that he said he served in the military.
What did he claim he used to be or is?

Maybe we're being a bit harsh, he could be just some young lad who hasen't a clue what he's on about, who wants to join the forces some day.

Still though, his DF bashing isn't OK no matter what age/intelligence level he has or is. If your'e a wannabe you don't get to put down the Army on threads where people are looking for decent info. He posted like he actually knew what he was on about. That kind of crap can be very damaging to an army's reputation because people will read his spouts and actually believe it. Its also very insulting to actual soldiers.

OS119

KickstartHeart wrote: »

...Maybe we're being a bit harsh, he could be just some young lad who hasen't a clue what he's on about, who wants to join the forces some day...

personally i doubt it it - i have a horrible, nasty feeling that he's associated with the BA though probably not serving (Army Cadet perhaps?) and that he's got a 'thing' about the IA for some reason.

i know the Mods have said that he's not, but his posting style bears a striking resemblance to Pathfinder and several other throbbers (all with fairly aggressive usernames) who frequent Irish websites posting random PARA and 22SAS video's, articles and whatnot, and who decend into slagging off the IA. even the way he writes is the same...

cruasder777

RMD wrote: »

Out of curiosity what is your military experience? You seem to talk an awful lot of **** for someone who has served regardless of what force it was in. I'll make the assumption on the sheer ignorance of your theory that a battalion was stationed for 3 years without rotation you've never served and are nothing more than a civilian with failed aspirations.

This thread is getting more and more stupid.

I never said battalions were not rotated.

2 battalion rotations (440) over 1 yr x 10 years, would mean 4,400 had been overseas out of 8,500 take away those who return for another tour or those replaced by natural wastage....proves my point.

Do the maths genuis.

Military experience, alot more then yours, just no need to brag.

cruasder777

KickstartHeart wrote: »

I'm a civillian and I even showed him to be full of crap! I never notice that he said he served in the military.
What did he claim he used to be or is?

Maybe we're being a bit harsh, he could be just some young lad who hasen't a clue what he's on about, who wants to join the forces some day.

Still though, his DF bashing isn't OK no matter what age/intelligence level he has or is. If your'e a wannabe you don't get to put down the Army on threads where people are looking for decent info. He posted like he actually knew what he was on about. That kind of crap can be very damaging to an army's reputation because people will read his spouts and actually believe it. Its also very insulting to actual soldiers.

Still waiting for the link thats says those signed up for peace for change have to deploy 8% every year (your claim) ???????????

cruasder777

KickstartHeart wrote: »

I'm a civillian and I even showed him to be full of crap! I never notice that he said he served in the military.
What did he claim he used to be or is?

Maybe we're being a bit harsh, he could be just some young lad who hasen't a clue what he's on about, who wants to join the forces some day.

Still though, his DF bashing isn't OK no matter what age/intelligence level he has or is. If your'e a wannabe you don't get to put down the Army on threads where people are looking for decent info. He posted like he actually knew what he was on about. That kind of crap can be very damaging to an army's reputation because people will read his spouts and actually believe it. Its also very insulting to actual soldiers.

Where did I bash the defence forces(exact post ?)you are posting la, la land crap, I simply pulled you up.

I actually said the defence forces were very professional, please stop making up lies.