Andy Mcnab
Forum
Pages: 1 ... 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 ... 297
I just meant that I understand the 2 point of views. I haven't read Asher's book yet but only know some paragraphs as they were reported in a French military magazine. I just wanted to say that the truth is somewhere in between and that, once again according to the few things I've read so far of Asher's book, I would tend to be on Asher' side and not McNab's...and i can affirm here that if you go to Credenhill and ask members of the Regiment their opinion, many will be on Asher's side!!!
>>By Phil (Tuesday, 8 Jul 2003 09:40)
Phil, re:
i can affirm here that if you go to Credenhill and ask members of the Regiment their opinion, many will be on Asher's side!!!
It would help if you'd explain to us how you got this information.
>>By Lynn (Tuesday, 8 Jul 2003 10:08)
Wow, I'm impressed with the level of activity in this forum. May it continue that way.
Lynn:
I don't question McNab's accounts regarding their captivity-ordeals of torture and interrogation.
The number of dead Iraqis isn't relevant in any way except if McNab has lied about it, ie, raising the body-count to make the story more interesting and "spectacular." But that falls into the old category of all the other "modifications" found in many SAS-books since McNab wrote B20.
By the way: are there any unwritten rules or regulations in here regarding the length of postings? I've come to realize that my postings are usually quite long.
>>By ortlieb (Tuesday, 8 Jul 2003 10:29)
From what he says in B20 it sounds like AM took american intelligence's word for it with the body count they inflicted. Which is probably a little naive but could be forgiven. I don't believe that no-one was killed (Asher's theory) that seems a little unlikely, considering one of their patrol died in a firefight. Can anyone answer a question for me, the animosity towards CR and AM is that just because of the embellishment of their stories or because their success has meant that future regiment members had to sign an agreement with the MOD?
>>By Beth (Tuesday, 8 Jul 2003 11:11)
Without going to Credenhill, (personal like) it is true that many in the Reg are anti McNab and will favour almost any one who can point to evidence of extreme embellishment of firepower and subsequent Iraqi casualties.
It is worth noting that genune Bedouin tribesmen are fiercely protective of desert water holes, while on the other hand they are a sociable bunch and known to have saved the lives of many many Westerners lost in the deserts of the Middle East - not all deserts consist of Sand Dunes as seen in the film "The English Patient"...Wadis (crevice) in rocky/stony surface are sometimes large enough to hide a whole caravan/convoy of large vehicles...
Back to the anti McNab in the Reg: effectively he set a precedence, along with Ryan, for the making of big bucks from SAS novels...
AM has a natural capacity for self publicity despite his "I want to be left alone" angle of keeping his face behind a mask!!
A few did follow in the wake of AM/CR, and those few are making good bucks too.
When the MoD/Reg went Ape-Shit and bombed the writing/exposure of the SAS some of the writers copped a lot of fallout but McNab escaped squeaky clean - in the end...
I know he denies he was banned from attending SAS do's etc., initially, but be assured Sir Peter de la Billierre was also banned, which sent him into a rage and tirades of letters sent to appropriate sources!!!
Like all things MoD, new Reg COs & ministerial backflips/ Uturns, some people just happen to be in the right place at the right time standing on the right hand of very important personage (like bodyguarding cabinet minister)
All that said, the gripe in the Reg has more to do with the fact that AM can write pretty much what he wants to write with little or no restrictions, while others are subject to strict scrutiny, (MoD vetting committee).
Outright bans on those who left the Reg before the likes of McNab are set in place, and all of you who post here know about the introduction of official secrecy act (and signing of) which prevents Mike (Kiwi) Coburn from publishing "Soldier 5" in a country where the MoD can get its hands on the money from sales(!!).
If you think the ban on publication of SAS books by ex SAS men applies only to ex military personnel, think again. Now that the MoD is so anti SAS books, any new writer who sends a manuscript to a publisher with an SAS/SIS/MI5/MI6 theme, and the publisher likes the mss and wants to take it further it has to be sent to a Whitehall committee for vetting - vetting means the mss will be checked and the writer investigated for any likely links to respective intelligence departments or SAS military personnel! That includes wives of men who served in the SAS as far back as the Malaya campaign in the 50s!!!!!!!!!!
It has been said, discussed here, that Andy McNab sits/sat on the committee which decides the fate of potential bestsellers with SAS plots (no matter how tentatively connected), and that's why men in the Reg and ex SAS men are so angry, not just for themselves, but for mates who want to write fiction not biographical content relating to specific missions!!!
Is that a form of Jealousy/Suspicion!
I guess so, but you can see their point if AM gets to see what they've written within a novel and has an element of power over its fate...
>>By buddy (Tuesday, 8 Jul 2003 11:16)
buddy:
As it appears that you're very much in the know of the workings of the Regiment, I can't help but wonder about your background? Someone who's had something to do the SAS in real-life, or just very well read and "educated" on the subject? I'm especially curious as I've read briefly through Pacemakers postings of compliments in your direction, roughly in relations to your capasity as a spiritual advisor (or something). The latter was a bit confusing reading, so unfortunately I haven't been able to grasp the plot yet.
And lastly, one more question if I may: Ever since I first read B20 and TOTGA, I heard about the (alleged?) conflict that arose between CR and AM after CR's publication of TOTGA. Is that correct?
Beth:
I agree with you about not believing Asher's theory of 0 kills, especially (as you also said) since Bob Consiglio died in a firefight. Apparantly a bullet hit one the 40mm grenades attached to his webbing.
>>By ortlieb (Tuesday, 8 Jul 2003 12:13)
Hello, All....
Excellent discussions, so many threads! I'd like to address one point that personally rankles:
"There had been many more troops than we'd expected in the area. In fact, we now learnt that what we had gone into was one large military holding area: two Iraqi armoured divisions were positioned between the border and our first LUP. .... All the same, we gave a good account of ourselves: it was established by intelligence sources that we had left 250 Iraqi dead and wounded in our wake." (B20)
The (in)famous dead and wounded count is not a number fabricated by AM; he is quoting the number established by intelligence sources. As with any such numbers, however, it always seem to be a matter of we say/they say -- high figures denied, low figures refuted.
I agree completely with Lynn, however, that the exact numbers and details are secondary. For me, B20 is not so much about firefights, enemy contacts, and casualty counts. It is about how it feels inside, mentally and emotionally, to be involved in such fighting. And then, taking it that next horrific step, it is about the physical and emotional nightmare of capture and interrogation.
Not only with B20, but also with so many of the other SAS-related books I've read recently, while I am fascinated with the soldiering skills, bold missions and brave acts of derring-do of these men, it is their incredible inner strength, determination, self-sacrifice, fortitude, and courage which I find far more compelling. For me, the most impressive thing about B20 as I read it was that I knew that five of these men were still alive, but it was almost incomprehensible that they could have managed to survive....
>>By am-i-binned (Tuesday, 8 Jul 2003 14:38)
I knew I could count on you here AIB !
>>By Lynn (Tuesday, 8 Jul 2003 15:03)
Buddy
That answered a lot of questions. Unfortunately it seems that the old 'it's not what you know it's who you know' saying applies here. And I agree all should be treated equally one way or the other. Was the bodyguarding comment a subtle hint?
AIB
You're right the figures don't matter and would be near impossible to prove who was more accurate. For me, what stands out from all the non-fiction written by these guys is their mental attitudes. The way that their friendship (wrong word??) keeps them together and functioning as a unit, particularly obvious for me when Dinger and AM were kept in the cell together.
>>By Beth (Tuesday, 8 Jul 2003 15:06)
hi all,
AIB - i tried that xref characters when i first read the books mentioned, with little success unfortunately. in my opinion, there has to be a further link for it to work so keep trying!
ortlieb - like others have mentioned, 'barry' the asqn ssm could not have been mr davies the celebrated author. as far as i'm aware, regimental personnel serving in the field have to be the 'right' side of 40 - mr ratcliffe only just made it and as rsm wouldn't have been expected to take on the active roll that he actually did.
perhaps others can confirm this?
buddy - can't help responding to your comment 'sas humour (touch of cynical insanity)' - don't you think the choice of actor chosen to play the blue team leader in ultimate force, alongside mr ryan, was so tongue in cheek?
think about it!
back to mr mcnab - if i did decide to read some of his fictional works where should i start please.
pe
>>By Pe Gasus (Tuesday, 8 Jul 2003 16:53)
You mean you haven't yet Pe Gasus??? Shame on you! ;-)
Start with Remote Control.
>>By Lynn (Tuesday, 8 Jul 2003 17:03)
Beth: ah, if only I could reveal more, so much more, but as mentioned before on the board, legal writs might fly, so too that of "time honoured" discretion is a major component in my personal make-up bag.
Am-I-Binned: to let such minor discrepancies as to who shot who and how many in B20 is to worry, needlessly.
You said: "it is their incredible inner strength, determination, self-sacrifice, fortitude, and courage which I find far more compelling. For me, the most impressive thing about B20 as I read it was that I knew that five of these men were still alive, but it was almost incomprehensible that they could have managed to survive...."
Inner Strength comes from excrutiatingly painful training methods, unscrupulous training methods (some would say) beside the usual backpacking long-drags and point to pointing - to mention the more easier aspects of SAS selection acceptable for publication purposes!!!
Determination, we all have it but it's how we channel it that matters.
Self-sacrifice, we are all capable of that, and the military is no exception in terms of lack of normal family living, in battle situations self-sacrifice is less noticeable, the few honoured: highly...
Fortitude, well, see Inner Strength...
Courage, if you're trained to kill and you're being shot at you ain't gonna run and shout for HELP you's gonna shoot back.
Survival against the odds is the greatest instinct known to man and beast alike. The only difference, most animals (loose term in respect of certain species) confronted by man, will flee in the same way they flee a predator.
As for the men of B20 (captured) they suffered big time, no doubt about it, but so did many others: John Nichol and American pilots, same could be said for men from all wars past and present inclusive suspected terrorists' held at Guantanamo Bay (against Geneva Convention rules).
It is all too easy to assume they (all) survived...In truth, they all experience problems as a result of their captivity...Moral, physical, psychological, other...AM has a clownish "grin" mask, one has a "frown" mask, another a crying clown mask, need I go on...
Survived is taken as final, a chapter closed, when in fact it is only the beginning of rebuilding the main frame of their very existance!!
>>By buddy (Tuesday, 8 Jul 2003 17:10)
Pe Gasus: tongue in cheek?
Sharp!
Goddamn it it's hard work keeping time with postings...
>>By buddy (Tuesday, 8 Jul 2003 17:17)
I back buddy 100% on her last posting. Even writing something with a SAS slant can see an eager publisher suddenly decide the book 'isn't for them'
It's the age old theory that someone somewhere is always watching, and if there is a risk you might tread on someone else's toe's they'll disband you.
God only knows how Asher slipped through the net
I think AM's work is fantastic, and I'll buy every last book he ever writes, but if we are to believe that he vets and 'bins' books he doesn't 'like', then I feel that is a real shame and we may never see the 'next McNab' emerge
>>By Sheba (Tuesday, 8 Jul 2003 18:49)
Odd and Ends (some a bit overdue)....
Welcome, I'm Here...
Thanks for the compliment about this board; I don't think we could stop now if we tried -- we're very definitely self-jet-propelled these days! So now, must ask: If you're here now, where were you before? vbw!
Hello, AM....
Are you the same AM as in "Colour me dead, McNab" AM? If so, where've you been all this time? If not, would it be correct to say "Welcome, Mr. Gandolf Dalgliesh Ramsbottom"? ;o)
Ortlieb: No probs with lengthy missives -- long posts are almost a prerequisite around here! (whispered: how do you think we got to 54 pages already? vbg! vbw!)
Christina: About all your books -- you said you're reading Baptism of Fire, but what other ones did you get?
Lynn: How come you never sang for us before? You have a lovely voice!
Scouse: Where are you in your reading? Violent Delights? BoF? Other? Or have you been out pricing dvd recorders for us? You could get a pretty good thing going here, you know. There’s definitely a demand, if you want to be the supply....(wink, wink)....
Beth: I think you've struck on a very interesting dynamic we have yet to discuss -- the phenomenon of bonding and the reverse effect, alienation, that such shared experiences can create...
Paul R: As to settling disputes between authors -- for some reason AM’s description of "milling" comes to mind...
Pe Gasus: Thank you for making me feel not so bad about my struggle! And, absolutely, I second (as I believe most here will) Lynn's recommendation that you begin AM's fiction with Remote Control.
Stirling: Are you registered to log in here yet? If so, would you double-click on my name (in orange)... fanx...
Hazel: If you're still having problems with the buffer, you can register to log on here and double-click on orange names as I just asked Stirling to do...
Phil: There is a dvd of B20 with the interview available. Copies are periodically listed with "Andy McNab" items on eBay (the Product Locator below is a neat shortcut).
Sheba: I agree it would most definitely be a real shame if a biased vetting process means that new emerging authors, either ex-SAS or otherwise, have limited or no chance of their works being published – a terrible loss both for them and for us!
>>By am-i-binned (Tuesday, 8 Jul 2003 20:43)
Good to see you back buddy
Old news relevent to present thread on B20. Brigadier Andy Massey said for the SAS, the Bravo Two Zero patrol has always been seen with distinctly mixed feelings. On one hand, its most famous ever action is a tale of remarkable endurance and heroism, but it was also a clear failure, with only one of the eight-man patrol escaping death or capture.
In an interview for a BBC documentary on the war, the commander of special forces in the Gulf, Brigadier Andy Massey, publicly said there were errors, notably the failure to go behind enemy lines with vehicles. Without transport, the Bravo Two Zero patrol was unable to move rapidly when they were discovered, subsequently they had to try to escape from deep behind enemy lines on foot. In fact the men of Bravo Two Zero themselves chose not to use vehicles, while other patrols with the same task -finding Scud missiles - made what proved to be the right decision and took Land Rovers.
Brigadier Andy Massey said, ironically it is the least successful patrol that has become a legend.
Good one Pe for highlighting Ultimate Force the first series of which Chris Ryan appeared in person. No hiding behind pillars for Ryan.
>>By pacemaker (Tuesday, 8 Jul 2003 20:50)
WOW AIb i never new you could double click on the orange names im amazed!
i actually own the DVD B20 and the interview is quite good. hahahahahhahah i have it.
AIB too many books that i have to read:
tenth man down chris ryan
zero action chris ryan
stand by, stand by chris ryan
land of fire chris ryan
killing zone lee childs
dream catcher stepehn king
black hawk down mark bowden
six silent men gary a linderer
tornado down john peters (which you caused me to buy cause of that interview!)
ones that ordered from the libray:
all of the ones you recomended and plus oh and dark winter is pre-ordered
(and you dont call that obsessed!)
>>By christina (Tuesday, 8 Jul 2003 21:42)
Good grief, Christina! You're buying all these? Nah, I wouldn't call it obsessed -- I'd call it the beginnings of an excellent collection! Have you maybe considered becoming an independent branch of a lending library?
>>By am-i-binned (Tuesday, 8 Jul 2003 23:08)
Well we might aswell make it to page 55.
Ramaya koekoekoe ramaya.......
Arikiprrterarikipelileeee!lalalalalala!...
(remember this song)
Just to anounce I've finished B20 and started TOTGA. Not that it interests any of you!
Maybe comment it later on.
Christina : way to go. when is the day?
Lynn : remember this one : Zak eens lekker door (A. Van Duin) en : Guus kom naar hus!
AIb: very very disappointed you didn't mention me. sigh.
>>By Boris (Tuesday, 8 Jul 2003 23:36)
Hey!
I didn't make it!!!!!
>>By boris (Tuesday, 8 Jul 2003 23:37)
Anybody there????
Just isn't my day is it?
Am I Binned?
>>By Boris (Tuesday, 8 Jul 2003 23:38)
I'm here, Boris! It can be your day! Sorry, I didn't think you notice -- what with your nose buried in your books and all (vbw!). If it's any consolation, I almost did add roll call for all our MIA's but I was afraid it would be like the Oscars -- I was bound to forget somebody (yeah, kinda cowardly, I know). Okay, so now before you get too dug into TOTGA, any comments re: B20 -- you'd be absolutely on-topic right now....
>>By am-i-binned (Tuesday, 8 Jul 2003 23:57)
Cor Christina, you mentioned Chris Ryan 4 times = Cardinal Sin here on AM board, you know... (((he he)))...
Never mind Boris, join the club of the great unloved!!
Sheba, you're chancing your luck backing me = suicidal...
Pacemaker me old lover, you're up and about again I see. How was the party?
Am-I-Binned's: the phenomenon of bonding and the reverse effect, alienation, that such shared experiences can create...
Shoot me dead, if that would'nt take a few pages to discuss indepth analysis of the Ys and Ws...
>>By buddy (Wednesday, 9 Jul 2003 00:19)
Gandolf Dalgliesh Ramsbottom??
I'd consider using an alias all the same, SAS or no SAS!
To everyone:
I recommend reading Ghost Force by Ken Connor. It's a great read, and contains facts that are mostly obtained by sources from the inside of the Regiment, ie, the squaddies doing the deeds rather than your career-ambitious Rupert with an alternative agenda. It's mind-boggling to become aware of all the administrative cock-ups and totally uncomprihensible tactical decisions taken during the Regiments participation in GW1. One example:
Bravo Two Zero's op behind enemy lines would've been carried out without PNG's hadn't it been for the last minute discovery of one of the SSM's using the boxes containing the crucial optics to weigh down the edges of his tent. (!!)
>>By ortlieb (Wednesday, 9 Jul 2003 08:10)
Am-I-Binned I don’t have time to sing – catching up with all these posts leaves me breathless..
Buddy, about “but you can see their point if AM gets to see what they’ve written within a novel and has an element of power over its fate”
Why would it make a difference if it were AM who gets to see or someone else? Are you implying he might abuse his power (or implying “they” think that), like when a book is really good he would ruin it intentionally because of the competition??? If so, I think that’s not a very sympathetic thing to say unless there’s absolute prove that that has happened.
Oh, I see you’ve mentioned this too Sheba… So still question: do you or ‘they’ really believe he’d abuse his power?
Her old lover: “Ironically it is the least successful patrol that has become a legend” Not indeed if you see successful in a larger context. I do think it’s very remarkable they turned a fiasco into their advantage (let’s hope S5 makes it too). And for the girlie stuff: Is he as cute as we think he is?
Mhorag, are you still with us?
Boris, boris, please don’t mention Dutch songs like those – I’m really embarrassed now ;-)
Ys and Ws – is that something UK?? What does it mean?
>>By Lynn (Wednesday, 9 Jul 2003 09:45)
Ortlieb, usage of "vital" equipment for "other" purposes is quite common in the British Army due to lack of "supplies" which would make a Brit soldier's life more tenable in fields of imminent battle etc. Whereas, the Americans are supplied with almost everything you can think of to make their lives as comfortable as possible, even down to free condoms (so I've been told). The food alone in American camps surpasses that of the British, but when push comes to shove our boys are better able to work on empty stomachs and survive without sustenance for much longer periods of time!!! Hence the SAS will always outstretch other elite forces...
Oh, and it's sort of traditional for squaddies to knock Ruperts at every turn, but remember it's non-commissioned officers who dish out and check logistical requirements for ops...And, it is more often than not a "Rupert" or a "RSM" who will hold a post (under fire) in extreme circumstances whilst his men endeavour to escape to fight another day (Falklands War).
As for GWI - SAS trained Ruperts (fluent in Arabic) were operating undercover on the streets of IRAQI cities before and during GWI...If caught as spies, which they were'nt, what do you think they're treatment might have consisted of ?...Did you know SAS trained Ruperts were working undercover in Afghanistan? NO, probably not, but then people who dream and idolise certain aspects of the SAS, don't look to the overall picture of its key componant = secrecy!!
Come GWII the Americans deployed the spies...
>>By buddy (Wednesday, 9 Jul 2003 09:56)
Lynn, take a young politician who speaks for the people during elections, and fights for the people until he/she acquires a seat of power, and then what happens? In most cases they become all things they once fought against!
To say "abuse of power" is to simplify a very complex set of rules that apply to any cabinet/committee stance, and I bet - if publishers are anything to judge by (my neice did work experience at Harper Collins for her Masters in English Lit) -then a select committee set up to vet SAS books (inundated with the damn things) it'll be a case of deciding which to look at over coffee and doughnuts and which to throw into the pile for "return to sender" regardless of content!!!!!!!!!
Of the manuscripts read, I'm sure a few giggles, guffaws, and jibes pass the lips of the readers, and no one is perfect in the Moral Stakes...
Would you, in all honesty, put forward a book for publication if you knew the author had slighted you or had pissed you off in the past, big time? Admit it, it would take a "saint" to cast objections aside and adopt a wholly "holy" charitable stance. I dare say you'd dearly love to shred a few of my posts - right?
Lynn, you are seeing “Ironically it is the least successful patrol that has become a legend” through tunnel vision of media success and publication of books. Pacemaker I believe, meant in terms of "military success" to be archived in military history!!
Had Nelson failed at Trafalgar it would have made a few paragraphs at best in historical manuscripts, as opposed to pages and books still written about the man....I don't think Andy McNab's marriages rate important enough to place him in the same historical archive as Henry VIII, but you never know if he keeps right on upping the ratings on wife count...
>>By buddy (Wednesday, 9 Jul 2003 10:33)
Ys (texting slant) Why factors
Ws " " Wherefores...
>>By buddy (Wednesday, 9 Jul 2003 10:39)
hi all,
thanks Lyn & AIB - remote control it is!
AIB - i didn't mean impossible, just extremely difficult if no 'common denominator'. example:it took five minutes to work out steve deveraux was 'spud' ely and thereafter rationalise other (pseudo)named persons within his book.
ccb took a little longer.
btb, eots, ia & totga do have that 'common denominator'.
Pacemaker - thanks. wasn't andy massey a plain old colonel gw1, brigadier somewhat later?
pe
>>By Pe Gasus (Wednesday, 9 Jul 2003 13:15)
Bummer... Messages posted between yesterday 13:15 and today 10:40 have been lost. Sorry. Nothing I can do about it. I hate myself...
>>By mg (Thursday, 10 Jul 2003 10:40)
Pages: 1 ... 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 ... 297
The discussion board is currently closed.
|
DISCOVER NEW BOOKS