|
Post by Jäger on Jun 28, 2017 12:11:57 GMT -5
Interesting to note HRH Harry is wearing a cap with a U.S. Flag... Combat soldiers generally don't get into the sophomoric "my country is better than your country" pissing contests that the crayon eating window lickers safe back home indulge in. At least, not with countries we're serving/training with alongside. Even Russian stuff (but after the USSR collapsed), and when I started my career I figured it was just a matter of time before we would be fighting them in Norway or the Fulda Gap. I've worn all kinds of foreign stuff overseas that I traded guys from other countries for, or was given, and not just caps and other bling. Back home, under the watchful eyes of career-minded higher, not so much. Higher frowns on such expressions of individualism while back home garritrooping. As for Harry, the Brit troops say he has a well earned reputation as a warrior among the brotherhood. Both as a treadhead, and then as an Apache pilot. His brother flies (or was flying) rotary wing SAR missions in the North Sea. Of course, his uncle didn't balk at using his helicopter as Excocet missile bait during the Falkland War in an attempt to protect warships. His dad, goofy though he seems now, spent a fair amount of time in the cockpit of military aircraft, and I think finished up commanding a minesweeper or something like that. And his grandmother (aka Queen Elizabeth II) and grand aunt both served as enlisted troops, in uniform, in London during the Blitz during WWII. Her father, King George VI, fought in WWI, first in the navy where he was Mentioned in Dispatches for his conduct during the Battle of Jutland, and then in the newly formed Royal Air Force. One thing about Brit royalty... most of them are expected to put some serious time into military service, particularly during times of war, rather than lead a life of puffery.
|
|
|
Post by CXM on Jun 28, 2017 13:50:16 GMT -5
Thanks for the mini history lesson...
Whilst I have also noticed on quite a few deployments, there is an exchange of bits and pieces of uniform (BW jager hats were usually considered very good catches) I am still surprised to see him wearing a U.S. flag hat... regardless of what his personal views might or might not be he has to adhere to more demanding standard that the average Tommy.
Male members of the Royal Family have a long history of naval and military service. HM King George VI whilst the royal spare served as a turret officer at Jutland and wanted to serve in the Battle Cruiser force but was not allowed to do so (probably a good thing from the point of view of his insurance company.) His father King George V (also the royal spare in his turn) served in the Royal Navy on both the Med station and the Channel Fleet having no expectation of being king. Likewise his father Edward VII served in the Navy. Service by Royals is expected... a duty you might say.
While the Royals would like to be just another officer that isn't the way the world works... the same way Harry's indiscretions attracted considerable attention in the media that would not have been noticed if it had been someone else.
HM Queen Elizabeth served in the Auxiliary Territorial Service for about five months during the war and was then promoted to "Honorary Junior. Commander.' She also slept each night at Windsor Castle. None the less she wanted to serve and probably would have done more had she been allowed to do so... but she was not in the Army. The ATS did useful work in jobs such as drivers, couriers, mechanical work and the like.
Finally with respect your comments about persons you think didn't contribute as much as you did in military service. I hope your comments were intended in a humorous manner... if so you might want to clarify that, there emoticons that make that fairly easy to do. It is easy to come across in the wrong tone on internet boards... In any case, I want to make it clear that in my mind everyone who served our country, from buck private to general deserves our respect and thanks, likewise everyone who served made their contribution no matter what duties they had and should be respected for that...
CHuck
|
|
|
Post by Jäger on Jun 28, 2017 14:43:58 GMT -5
There weren't any comments in my post about who did more in uniform, myself or anybody else. I don't measure my service against anyone else's. Particularly against people who had spouses and kids at home to think about first before they volunteered and signed up. So nothing that needs editing there.
Here's one thing everybody who has spent enough time in uniform to at least learn how to tie their boot laces knows: Nobody from any country gets anything done without the logistics and support services supporting them, all the way back to wherever home is. A fact of life that goes all the way back to the earliest times in history is that amateurs talk tactics and professionals talk logistics. Whether or not Hollywood makes movies about a branch of service has nothing to do with it. The crayon eating window lickers I'm referring to are the ones who run down allies serving alongside us, and I don't make exceptions for whether they're in or out of uniform. That also includes those from other countries who run the US down for not getting into other conflicts at the same time they did, and so on. That kind of crap is international, not rooted in any one country. There's a big difference between pride in your platoon, your company, your battalion, your branch of service, and your country, and just trashing another branch of service or an ally.
|
|
|
Post by pjk9hp on Sept 21, 2017 7:17:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Mister Coffee on Sept 21, 2017 12:18:15 GMT -5
Nicely stated, Jaeger. But, with respect, it should be obvious that the trade of monarchs is war and warcraft. The evolutionary cycle of a monarch is from bully to gang leader to general to king. Success and ascension are based on brute force. In other words, the guy who can beat everybody else up gets to be the leader. The professional stamp collectors and and pre-school teachers who go on to become king are, if they exist, exceptions that prove the rule. Royal families maintain power to the extent that they can maintain force. Doctrines like the divine right of kings or the divinity of the Japanese emperor are pretty words, but not as relevant as force of arms.
When the Greeks invented democracy, it moved power away from a basis in force and over to a basis in law.
Note: By the way, I am not arguing with you, or disagreeing with your statement. I think I'm just adding a gloss.
|
|
|
Post by pjk9hp on Nov 19, 2017 4:14:23 GMT -5
"German civilians in Brussels crouch in a doorway with revolvers at the ready as they prepare to resist the British who are recapturing the city. 7th September 1944. (Photo by PNA Rota)." img.gagdaily.com/uploads/posts/app/2013/thumbs/00008f63_medium.jpg www.gagdaily.com/appealing/2249-pistol-shooting-oldies.html (see 5th photo) [Note: The one standing was holding a high power]
|
|