nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

British troops have poor hygiene and too many injuries - US commander

PatsytheNazi

Looks like the Americans aren't too impressed with the quality of British soldiers in Afghanistan. In an interview with the New Statesman, a US commander suggested that the British military “are cautious about the enemy and overestimate their strength”. The commander was quoted as saying: “Your standards of personal hygiene and field discipline aren’t good enough.” Maybe the British army should be training them in personal hygiene instead of square bashing ?

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article6793971.ece

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Princess Peach

ejmaztec wrote: »

They play havoc with your boiled egg.

Kinky

ejmaztec

Princess Peach wrote: »

I wouldn't say no to a dirty soldier

They play havoc with your boiled egg.

Princess Peach

I wouldn't say no to a dirty soldier

Fallen Buckshot

Agricola wrote: »

I would have thought that in warfare "being cautious about the enemy and overestimating their strength" would generally be a fairly sound strategy. Better than being gung-ho and underestimating them anyway.

hahah .. no no no .. its all about rushing in ... using all available ammo and calling it a day back to base for a tea/beer/wotever.

Agricola

I would have thought that in warfare "being cautious about the enemy and overestimating their strength" would generally be a fairly sound strategy. Better than being gung-ho and underestimating them anyway.

Fallen Buckshot

CrazyRabbit wrote: »

Being at war is 2nd nature to the American's. I think the UK should listen to them. After all, it makes sense to listen to advice from people who have almost 200 years experience in the area.

I think the Brits have been warring a lot longer .. they were at war with the French (at least 100yrs)or Spanish practically from the existence of the countries.

ejmaztec

PatsytheNazi wrote: »

Looks like the Americans aren't too impressed with the quality of British soldiers in Afghanistan. In an interview with the New Statesman, a US commander suggested that the British military “are cautious about the enemy and overestimate their strength”. The commander was quoted as saying: “Your standards of personal hygiene and field discipline aren’t good enough.” Maybe the British army should be training them in personal hygiene instead of square bashing ?

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article6793971.ece

It's unusual for you to be dishing the dirt on the British army.:P

CrazyRabbit

Being at war is 2nd nature to the American's. I think the UK should listen to them. After all, it makes sense to listen to advice from people who have almost 200 years experience in the area.

Fallen Buckshot

PatsytheNazi wrote: »

Off the top of my head America beat the British in 1776 and again in 1815 under Andrew Jackson. Beat the Mexicans a few times, beat the Spainish in 1898, where on the winning side in WW1 and WW2. In WW2 they were practically the side which defeated Japan in the Pacific. Don't know how you can say that winning wars has never been America's strong point

prolly ment Modern day wars .. Korea .. waste of time
Vietnam .. what was the purpose again ?
War on drugs ? Haha dont get me started
War on Terrorism ? America should go to war with itself .. its as big of Terrorist as any.
etc etc

PatsytheNazi

PirateShampoo wrote: »

Maybe the British should follow America policy of "if it moves kill it"

So your telling me that the British never had a policy of "if it moves kill it" ? So gunning down innocent villagers in India, Africa etc doesn't count in your book ?

PatsytheNazi

Wagon wrote: »

Winning wars has never been America's strong point though so the commander (like the rest of his army) is just another highly trained muppet.

Off the top of my head America beat the British in 1776 and again in 1815 under Andrew Jackson. Beat the Mexicans a few times, beat the Spainish in 1898, where on the winning side in WW1 and WW2. In WW2 they were practically the side which defeated Japan in the Pacific. Don't know how you can say that winning wars has never been America's strong point

My name is URL

The Americans know all about keeping their hands clean.. that's why they wore gloves while torturing those prisoners in Abu Ghraib. Pity they were too retarded to realise that taking pictures was a bad idea though innit

mike65

Most of them are injured by American helicopters I think

Fallen Buckshot

...or maybe they should tell them to feck right off and withdraw all troops/support

Wagon

Winning wars has never been America's strong point though so the commander (like the rest of his army) is just another highly trained muppet.

PirateShampoo

Maybe the British should follow America policy of "if it moves kill it"