Andy Mcnab
Forum
Pages: 1 ... 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 ... 297
‘And IF they were just pissed off because of the SOP's, they would probably also be wailing away about all of the military handbooks out there being published and sold by major booksellers by the governments that wrote them... and paid for them.’
What? The US publish manuals (which are quite vague) for public consumption but the British Army doesn’t. Not above basic infantry skills level and certainly not about SF and ops that could be of interest to undesirable nations or factions. The fact is he has given a lot of techniques and ideas away that shouldn’t be in the public domain. His ‘fiction’ books are up to him, MOD doesn’t have any say at all because he calls them fiction. Irresponsible at best, he’s using hard earned experience from years of ops since WWII just to make money for himself.
No, as I said though how much do you really think is fact and how much is made to allow the publishers more of a story? This then just degenerates into a p***ing contest between Ryan, Asher and whoever else wants to jump on the bandwagon. As I said don't ever forget the people who don't write about it, don't sell it and do the job better or without glory – (soldiering, not book writing!). The problem is anything to do with SAS is now a circus and far too much attention is piled onto them. Televising the Iranian Embassy siege wasn’t the best idea either.
Again, how many men have served in the SAS/SBS/Paras/RMs/British Army and so on that have not SOLD their stories and quite rightly so. Can u imagine a unit where you spend the whole time watching what you do or say incase it ends up in some idiot's book. What is worse is that there are a lot of questions raised about what ‘Mcnab’ claims, he’s not a ‘liar’ as such but has certainly jazzed up some bits.
He’s opened up a whole can of worms, shafted his mates, p**sed off the whole SF community (as he made people realise they could make money out of it and hence all have to sign a contract not to say anything), let out operational details. Not a bad day at the office.
Again, do you really think he would be doing so well if the whole ‘I’m in the SAS thing’ hadn’t come out.
Ultimately you guys enjoy his books and that’s fine, it’s not your fault. I just wanted to give you some idea of the strength of feeling against these people.. I hope he’s enjoying his money.
>>By sp10122 (Saturday, 13 Sep 2003 13:58)
Oh Gee, I dare....Whose up for it?
How amusing it is, that Andy McNab can bring out the best and the worst in people, not least from those who idolise the man. Meantime, from His perspective, he's walking on water grinning like a Cheshire cat...;-) And good luck to him, but is he looking over his shoulder at real or imagined enemies from past ops, or is it a case of looking over his shoulder at enemies once dear to his heart? Or maybe never dear!...
From the readers' viewpoint, does it really matter if the MoD did or didn't approve Andy McNab's B20 book? It goes without saying, that he writes a damn good military/spec ops yarn from a mind-set that has been there and done "much" of what he writes about, despite not always having been the leading light at the time of reflected real-life action...Take the instance of Richard Todd (actor) who played the part of his commanding officer in a WWII movie, (to do with the D Day Landings - Arnheim etc). R.Todd in real-life is an ex Para, something few people know about, yet anyone who has seen that movie thinks of RT as a movie hero, when in fact he was a real-life hero from that very same mission...Take a similar perspective, and in years to come AM may not be revered as a one-time military hero, yet remembered for writing books about Nick Stone in the same vein as Frederick Forsyth. Incidentally, does anyone know who FF used as his technical input for his latest Spec Op book ?
Re B20: On good authority I have it that B20 was published before senior officials in the MoD got a whiff of it, (right or wrong?) that it was in fact passed off as a "rat book" by a disgruntled triple striper. Ultimately, B20 was laughed off as inconsequential by senior rank in the MoD: on the basis "McNab had written an account of a cock-up (his own doing) in which he'd refused, of his own volition, to utilise aspects of mobility available to him" (therefore no seeming serious comeback or slight on tactical aspects of overall overseers was thought could arise). And yes, it is true, that SAS mobility units in Gulf War 1 carried out many successful missions and evaded capture, yet they are not and remain unlikely to be rewarded with global recognition in the way McNab & Ryan ascertained recognition for a mission that ultimately failed.
I am in no way decrying the anguish, fear, and awful degradation the B20 mission captives were subjected to, at the same time as much as I enjoy AM's books (fiction) I do wish more people would recognise and admire the unheard heroes of Gulf War 1, like the RAF pilots who flew the B20 mission, the very same pilots who were subjected to post mission oral flak in the face of their not having flown a chopper in to extricate the B20 lads, and unfair suggestion/speculation that the chopper lads dropped the B20 boys in the wrong place (not true). The air crew were not responsible for any error, but in some respects it has to be realised that the B20 lads were ill prepared (inexperienced) for desert warfare - didn't have a clue as to the type of terrain they were entering nor that of nighttime temperatures, often below zero with daytime temps at the other end of the scale (regardless of worst weather on record). Lack of intelligence? Whose intelligence? It wasn't a case of shifting sands, (as in sand dune type desert) It was rock encrusted stony desert criss-crossed with wadis (dried up river beds), lands the British army (old boy network) had vast experience of - barely changed in a hundred years, which leads me to think the Army (SAS) need to give more thought to regular "geographical" studies to ensure their operatives are fully conversant with locale, even if that means no "beer swilling" the night and day before deployment...
Unfortunately, for the MoD, everyone underestimated AM's voracity for publicity as a "featured shadow" unlike Chris Ryan, who also hit the bookstands with TOTGA which was (tchnically) more acceptable to the MoD as a hero who came out for all to see (the only member of the B20 mission who actuated escape from hostile territory in the recognised SAS stance: "evade capture at all costs to go fight another day!!!" Grim line, but true all the same, and means what it says: no compromise, no emotion in doing what you have to do whilst operational. The many discrepancies of who saw and did what before the split of the B20 group, plus latter input: P. Ratcliffe (RSM) and M.Asher, not to mention comments in passing by Gen Sir Peter de la Billiere, much taken wholly out of context by journalists, which has become, more or less, grist to the mill of AM's notoriety - as regular as Kellogs Special K...
I know many here will want to strike at this post, in particular, as to written quotes in newpaper articles pointing to the MoD having sanctioned the writing of B20. However, before you leap, think on this: who told the journos any of that? Please, if you can, put forth fact not supposition on this point of order, as in, back up proof from the MoD horse' mouth, and that way anyone reading it will know the real truth.
If you think British government SPIN verges on lunacy, then take a quick look at Celeb SPIN in the tabloid press, most of it instigated by "agents" and "publicity gurus". On the subject of AM as the most highly decorated "British" soldier upon his exit from military service, hmm, there are many men who take umbrage at that, (chests full of "campaign" medals and bravery awards) many with a VC (Victoria Cross) to their name, inclusive Special Highests awards from other nations!!! Who and what official source ever confirmed McNab's status as most highly decorated British soldier? Could someone please tell me what he's been awarded with that no one else has? Might it not be, that in truth, he was the most highly decorated SAS soldier at time of voluntary demobilisation, though as far as I know he is not a holder of the VC, few awarded to SAS personnel (last count 3).
May I remind you all, a VC is awarded to someone who exerts unbelievable bravery whilst under fire: (often at own expence) as in holding a position to afford escape of other men. VCs are also awarded for the saving of a life against the odds of storming through a hail of firepower to extricate, etc., extreme bravery...Had Chris Ryan strapped Vince Phillips to his back and managed to keep him alive until he crossed the Syrian border, no doubt he would have been up for a VC, though I doubt Ryan would have made it himself with a man as a backpack in freezing conditions, which would have dragged him down on physical exhaustion due to lack of food and inevitable hypothermia, his state of mind already closing down long before he reached the border. No matter what you as Andy McNab fans think of Ryan, he did exactly that expected of all SAS men in a bad situation. He avoided capture and got himself back to his unit, albeit as initial sanctuary sought on relatively neutral (at the time) foreign soil!!!
Of course, this is a forum for Andy McNab fans, those who love and read his books, and yes, many people (military/otherwise) will locate the site unintentionally, simply because key words used at Yahoo or other (search engines) will turn up anything from Winnie the Pooh to Michael Angelo to "Cable laying ships" (the * S Hooper) and, LO and behold: Andy McNab, who seemingly has a key word alphabet and thesaurus rammed up his cyber jacksy...
Finding yourself at Gnod is a one in ten chance on Yahoo, and if surfers keep hitting three symbols on the Yahoo fruit machine, chances are they'll look in and might end up posting a message - some funny, some slightly critical, while others enthuse and go into great detail on plots and characters, and some just post seeming waffle of little or no consequence to anyone. When disagreeable elements/comments hit like strafer fire, it's a pity but that's what freedom of speech is all about = other peoples' perspectives/takes on a subject matter. No one has to respond to alien elements, and one can ignore or join in with jelly-bean talk, (kiddy aspect) and OK, if your ass is set on fire by long-term posters (as happens when comments are often taken as out-and-out criticism plus deviation from Mcnab as prime subject matter) you can either fight back with a good case study or (metaphorically) say "f**k you" and bum off to cool down in good old loner McNab style. But, is it good manners for a regular poster to tell someone to "b****r off" just because the newcomer puts forth a disagreeble argument/debatable aspect?
What is the point of posting comments like: "hey, well, those SAS boys/men, the ones who can't publish because the MoD have shut the door on SAS books, are just jealous of McNab" (Ryan et al)? You bet some are, but do remember there are those (many SAS men) who see their allegience to the regiment and colleagues as sacrosanct = secrecy as being truly elite and honourable to their fellow men...Don't knock them for that or knock those who fight their corner, for the silent majority ar no lesser heroes than AM and others who spilled the beans on the Reg, burnt the bacon, and stained their pants same as the rest on dodgy ops!!!
Immediate Action (return fire on message boards) is sometimes less effective than silent study of what has been posted, and often as not a well thought response can defuse rather than ignite further hostile retorts...I dare say, if I propose the status quo on Iraq, and that I said a while back (beginning of GWII) that it wouldn't be all over the day the bombing stopped, and that I said American soldiers would end up fighting a guerrilla war, (something British soldiers were familiar with on the streets of NI (Northern Ireland) and that our regulars were battle hardened to cope with the dangers unlike their American counterparts. Therefore, would it be considered incendiary to say I distinctly remember one or two Americans (on this list) who said "Rubbish, Bush won't let that happen, our soldiers won't be on the streets in defensive mode" are now sensing the salt of their words on their own tongues? What I've just stated could be taken as an incendiary comment, but rational thought will see it another way...
Food for thought, or just waffle?
>>By buddy (Saturday, 13 Sep 2003 15:35)
Hello again, sp10122...
Do lighten up, please. We've heard the same before. If it is your mission to dissuade, disillusion, convert, or pervert us, here's a helpful hint -- don't bother -- mission: impossible.
Granted we are profoundly influenced by and impressed with AM, but why should we believe that everything, absolutely all there is to be known about the SAS, has been publicized (scandalized?) to the world by this one man? One author, only seven books, but with the MoD in his fictional pocket, he is able to rock the entire SAS world?!? Amazing! Unfortunately, I have two bookshelves, which do not support that theory, and I hear them groan under the weight of each newly-acquired SAS-related book -- or my reference books, as I like to think of them. :o) Uhm...btw, haven't heard of fellas named Lofty Wiseman, Barry Davies, Terry White, Steve Crawford, Chris Chant, have you? They tend to obsess quite heavily on the technical side of SAS things...
What it comes down to, SP, is that AM has messageboard, and you've found it. Grouse away if you'd like but why frustrate yourself? You might find it easier, if you’d try to understand that, bottom line, we have incredible respect and admiration for the SAS world about which we’re learning, albeit courtesy of AM, CR, DLB, PR, MC, KC, CS, PYC, FC, TR/CB, JR, SG, BD, TW, LW, SC et al....
You entered saying: "why are you all so interested in SF and these books? Either join up, put yourself on the line or, to be quite frank, bugger off." Well, allowing your statement to be more emotional than rational, but ollowing that logic, should art galleries be closed to those of us with no artistic talent? Should libraries be only for published authors? Why watch the Olympics? Or why are there movies and television for that matter? We are a species that seeks knowledge through communication, observation, imitation, and integration.
The reality of your suggestion to "join up, put yourself on the line" is not only improbable, it is impossible… but, frankly, I do not agree that I should bugger off. I fully intend to continue learning even though there is no way on God's green earth that I will ever personally experience the SAS world which fascinates me. (Oooh, what was that?!? Did I just hear a collective sigh of relief coming from the direction of Hereford? LOL!)
>>By am-i-binned (Saturday, 13 Sep 2003 17:30)
“But, is it good manners for a regular poster to tell someone to "b****r off" just because the newcomer puts forth a disagreeable argument/debatable aspect?”
Fair point and I didn’t put my point there very well. It’s not their/your fault that McNab wrote about this and that they/you enjoy his books. It’s not the people who read it that people are pissed off with. It does annoy me the number of fantasists and Walter Mittys this now produces though. Like Mike W’s profile (they’ll probably remove that - have a look before they do). Also this whole thing has turned into a circus with who said what did what and shot who, so on so on. Most people are sick of it……What other profession could your actions be dragged through the press and books where you never ask for the limelight. Personally I don’t think it’s anybody else’s business. The debriefs that go on after everything to ensure things can be done better are essential but it’s not for public consumption.
“there are those (many SAS men) who see their allegiance to the regiment and colleagues as sacrosanct = secrecy as being truly elite and honourable to their fellow men”
Exactly and it’s not just the SAS but most British Regiments, especially combat arms who feel that way. Yes I have heard of the rest of the blokes and they are all viewed in a similar way. It is the principle that most people firmly believe in. Mcnab though has gone to another level with it all. Not writing biographies (‘Lofty’ Large –Against all odds (a v impressive man), DLB) but highly detailed accounts of SOPs on ops. Whitehall was ultimately virtually powerless to really stop people publishing .Prosecuting under OSA, when they have, it has all gone completely Pete Tong (David Shayler, Tomlinson was just a circus) so they can request to remove things but the author can virtually do what they want. Hence the introduction of a non-disclosure contract. A bigger stick to beat people with.
Am-I-Binned, I must say you’ve not really read what I’ve said and just concentrated on what I said other than one line in my first post.
>>By sp10122 (Saturday, 13 Sep 2003 18:06)
Hi Buddy, welcome back!
Short answer to a long posts. First I’d like to say that I do realise there are a lot of hero’s out there that are not given a second thought. However, this is not due to the fact that I don’t recognise them as hero’s but because I don’t know them, they don’t have a board here or elsewhere. (And when I talk about hero’s I might just as well speak in general. Not just the unknown Gulf War hero’s, SAS-hero’s, other War hero’s but also common men who are extremely committed to community and spend their lives in service of other people without any recognition or medals whatsoever). But because I don’t know them and don’t talk about them doesn’t mean I don’t appreciate them. Then about Chris Ryan. No matter what I think of his actions and TOTGA, I think he DID a remarkable job in the Gulf War, it must be remarkable since he was the only one who succeeded. The tone of his book TOTGA is what I disliked but he must have had the same feelings since he added part to his book explaining about this.
About McNab.. B20 could have been a major f**k up, but in my opinion that very fact is making the book. I doubt his book would have been as successful if it weren’t for the part of things going wrong, the part of the capture, torture and interrogation. Not the information about (secret) operations. That’s all very interesting but the human factor in a failing operation. That’s also why we hardly hear about operations that went smoothly, it’s only a ‘story ‘ when there’s something to tell. Simple (stupid) female example: when pregnant you hear all those terrible stories of things going wrong, no one’s telling anything about the millions of women giving birth without complications.
Should he have written the book? Should he have written any book? Should he have written the books the way he did, giving away detailed information? Maybe not, a lot of people seem to be concerned with all that information on the street. But he did. It’s done. And to great pleasure I have to admit to those who are not negatively effected by his books. For me it was also an eye-opener, not only because of descriptions of the way they work but also because of the problems the army obviously has to bring operations to a good ending, the danger, stress, mental problems those soldiers have to endure. (Maybe I shouldn’t have needed McNab’s books as an eye-opener but that’s an entirely different discussion.)
Anyway, what I’ve been trying to do all along with people who are trying to bring to our attention that there are people out there who are not too happy with our writer, is saying that I do understand those feelings, that I do realise there are more sides to this, that I’m fascinated with something that’s not all pretty. But that I have the luxury of not having to deal with the negative side (which does NOT mean I don’t realise that there are negative sides).
Freedom of speech… beautiful! But with respect and being heard is not the same as being agreed with. Some people seem to get angry when their ‘speech’ doesn’t change peoples minds. Why?
PS meant to be short, didn’t succeed.
>>By Lynn (Saturday, 13 Sep 2003 18:07)
AM writes damn good books but i do agree that writing his experiences of B2O is very unprofessional as a SF soldier. but who cares, he;s not the first to do so but one of the first to succeed enormously. true it's a total b*ollocks that he earned much money from this but readers are looking for new genres to enjoy. so if you are to persude us not to read his books then you, claiming as g-man, failed because you couldn't stop people like AM/ CR from writing their SF experiences.
wat does SAS stands for to a SAS soldier? surprise, ?, speed
>>By dxa111 (Saturday, 13 Sep 2003 18:15)
Nice one, Am-I-Binned, what did you say: "We are a species that seeks knowledge through communication, observation, imitation, and integration." (?)
Yeah, but you can only gain knowledge by acceptance that you learn by your own mistakes, as in communication and miscommunication, imitation and mistaken identity of self image to others, integration as tolerance of non-believers in what ever it is that you yourself believe in (avoidance of intolerance!!) and freedom of the individual to tread a chosen path in life...
It may be that the Andy McNab forum has converted non-believers, or the reverse. After all, an ounce of truth has far less impact than half an ounce of cr*p when thrown, the news media testament to misinformation and sticky brown stuff...
>>By buddy (Saturday, 13 Sep 2003 18:16)
Hey, mate, have you ever served in the Armed Forces? I bet not. You dont know what you are talking about. Your statements sound like they come from a journalist, or the internet.
I served in the Falklands, and now i drive a taxi for a living, live in a coucil flat, and have four kids to support. But, hey, i still have the memories of dead mates to get me by. So, dont talk to me about Secrecy and Honor, because i know for a fact that it doesnt exist, and is purely for people like yourself to read about.
>>By Big-Ste (Saturday, 13 Sep 2003 18:21)
Hi Big-Ste! Welcome a-board.
Buddy, something interesting..."an ounce of truth has far less impact than half an ounce of cr*p when thrown, the news media testament to misinformation" SP10122 (what's that number anyway?) mentioned something too: what's fact and what's fiction.
Speaking only for myself, when I read McNab's books I don't know what's fact and what's fiction. When he gives detailed information about spec ops I have to take his word for it. Yet, when asked 'do you know what's fact or fiction' I got a sense I'm expected to say Yes, otherwise I'm proofing the others point. But the others point is also 'fact or fiction' to me. That doesn't mean I'm not interested in reading about facts-or-fiction. I just never know who's telling the truth. Same thing with ‘do you know he’s banned from Hereford’ Some say he is, some say he’s not. So what am I to do with information like this??
>>By Lynn (Saturday, 13 Sep 2003 18:35)
Hi Lynn, I'm with you, hearing you, all the way, and I too enjoy AM's "fiction", the other stuff too borderline with content disputed and picked over in the manner of picking a chicken, too many times, so of no interest. If he would like to fill in the gaps on a personal basis, he can find me on Gnod...
In a "literary sense" (for me) he's not the best of the SAS writers, but I won't go into who I consider to be a better writer. Unfortunately, AM's publishers have sorely let him down (big time) on LL & LD, the amount of typos, grammatical errors, and general editorial hiccups is astounding (UK editions), in part, probably due to the fact that his name can sell virtually anything and he's therefore exempt from editorship = published as is. If that is not the case, I dread to think what a proof copy reads like....
If the peoples of the world could agree that peace is a better option to war, I think you would have your answer to:
Some people seem to get angry when their ‘speech’ doesn’t change peoples minds. Why?
>>By buddy (Saturday, 13 Sep 2003 18:40)
Official answer to "peace is a better option to war": Guess you are right, it's just Money and Power that blocks the ideal world.
Unofficial answer to "peace is a better option to war" (whispered): but in this case (no real casualties) peace is much less interesting!!
Just kidding, what I mean there's nothing wrong with this discussion, it's very interesting again. So, as long as there's no swearing (hurts my tender heart) by all means, the more variable the opinions the better....
>>By Lynn (Saturday, 13 Sep 2003 18:56)
I'll probably get shot for this one:
Big-Ste, you are proud that you served in the Falklands, (yes?) and you obviously honour your dead comrades, (yes?) yet a sense of anger prevails in your statement "there is no secrecy and honour", so are you saying you're willing to broadcast what happened to you and your mates in the Falklands. Have you, perhaps, already written a book ? If not would you if you were able to and offered a publishing contract? Do you feel the previous thirty-year rule on no publication of operational logistics to be outdated?
I have friends who served in the Falklands, and have heard many off-the-record stories of horrendous conditions, cock-ups, etc., yet the Falklands War, and fiction based on facts of that South Atlantic battle/s are only now really hitting the bookstands...
I don't think it fair to class B20 as a huge success because it's purely based on a story of a failed mission. And, for anyone to say that successful operations in the same Gulf war were just stories says an awful lot about the screwy mindset of lit agents/publishers, and Hollywood mentality ...What is wrong with this country, and much of Europe? We, who go to the movies and buy DVDs about American war stories that are "just stories" (fiction based on fictious events), but when it comes down to British War stories (the only ones that make it to the big screen as creditable viewing) are not about victory, such as the Falklands or endless accounts of SAS bravery in the Gulf War, they're about non-events...
>>By buddy (Saturday, 13 Sep 2003 19:22)
I meant to say, that having an SAS book published hasn't led to untold riches for all the authors, in fact quite a few are still strugglling to make ends meet...
In any case, one would imagine AM lost a stash on alimony/s, too...
>>By buddy (Saturday, 13 Sep 2003 19:31)
Oooh, yes, it's very interesting indeed, Lynn, exciting even! (Seems the summer doldrums have finally passed... vbg! vbw!) And you've captured my feelings and opinions exactly. (Whoa, big surprise, right?)
Hello again, Buddy. Good to have your eloquence and thought-provoking comments here again... :o) You must have been posting while I was drafting...LOL! So, do we have sp10122 to thank? (Thanks, SP!)
And sorry, sp10122. I addressed a point of disagreement, but I do understand and agree with other points you made. I can see the concern of ending up in someone's tell-all book (somehow "Mommie Dearest" comes to mind). I also understand the intense "brotherhood" (excuse my lack of adequate vocabulary) of serving military -- it's not politics, just cause, glory, or acclaim -- it's the "men" (meant to include serving women too), the bonding, the shared experiences, commitment, dedication, self-sacrifice, and determination. It's a matter of being "family" and you should keeping things private within your family, right? Maybe you'll consider staying and sharing, SP? (You can see how things have sparked up with your arrival.) Terms: no brainwashing if no browbeating? Okay?
Welcome, Big-Ste. Have you been lurking or are you newly arrived? Having personally only recently begun to learn about the Falklands, I'm wondering if you would be willing to share some of your experiences/knowledge? Are there any books that you would particularly recommend?
Hi, dxa111 -- I believe (unless you are being tongue-in-cheek and I'm too dense to realize) it is Speed, Aggression, Surprise. Now, much as we're SAS-obsessed here, we generally espouse the two you mentioned: Speed (as in the mad rush to computer at every opportunity) and Surprise (as in "Ooooh!" new postings!). Aggression we try to avoid although at times it still bomb-bursts and at other times it kitten crawls.... LOL!
Thanks, All, for a very interesting and exciting day onboard! Excellent exchanges!
>>By am-i-binned (Saturday, 13 Sep 2003 20:47)
Ouch, here comes the ex-wifes again, dragged by their hair, wether they like it or not.
So what's wrong with above sentence..??? Keyword: Drama.
That's all it is, all you're talking about in my humble opinion.
People want Drama. You're good with psychology Buddy. Why do people want Drama. Because they can wipe the sweat of their foreheads after seeing/reading Drama and thank the Lord that they're not involved? As some weird need for sensation? Seeing other people struggle means 'if it's them, at least it's not me'?
Why are there 'shows' on tv like life-emergency-room? Life-police-weekends etcetera? Media/publishers are merely providing (and taking advantage) of people's needs/request.
Why do we 'need' drama?
>>By Lynn (Saturday, 13 Sep 2003 20:59)
Cross-posted AIB, why am I not surprised TZ! :o) Lynn
>>By Lynn (Saturday, 13 Sep 2003 21:01)
Hmmm... let's see, Lynn...
Speed (who's gonna reply first?) Yep
Aggression (drama and draggin'?) Yep
Surprise (us cross-posting?) Nah -- too gobby to be surprising! :o)
>>By am-i-binned (Saturday, 13 Sep 2003 22:26)
Where did sp10122, disappear to?
Time I got myself a new hound, methinks, go sniff him out!
Hey, do you all feel better for that scrum?!!
Some SBS guys call the SAS: Sorry Ass Sh*ts.
Any guesses for SAS refs to the SBS?
Oh my god, you're not hooked on live TV drama, are you, Lynn? You put up a longish list...
>>By buddy (Saturday, 13 Sep 2003 22:49)
F#*k me! I go away for a bit & there's a stack of new pages to read.
I think we should all have a B & B, that'll sort out some kinks here. Actually, nah, keep the kinks, it makes reading more interesting. But the Bourbons (or Beers) & Brawls still sounds like a go.
take care, speak soon
>>By Paul R (Saturday, 13 Sep 2003 23:36)
Hello again,
I'll make this short since I've got double shifts most of this week and next now that I consider my school days too. :P Ack! What was I thinking?!?!?
Anyway, Buddy, I'm sorry if you thought I was grousing about all of the SAS fellows not publishing like AM and being jealous. I think I said it sounded like it, from what Scouse posted. If it didn't come across that way, sorry, I'm tired after 16 hour work days on top of school.
I guess that post was because I am a bit perturbed by people dissing fans of an author (or movie or political figure or whatever) because they think we are missing some point or too stupid to not share their enlightened opinion.
I have every respect for "unsung" heroes of any war or disaster or tragic situation. Just because we don't know all of their names and what they did to be considered a hero doesn't mean we don't respect and appreciate the difficult jobs they did and do.
And I do respect Scouse's opinion about whether military people should publish books about their experiences... and their SOP's even. Whether it's for cash or glory or recognition. I don't happen to agree with it. I suppose I would be unhappy with someone who published a book that made me look foolish or worse, especially if it were false or misleading, but there you go. More of life. I guess I'd have something to say about it to the author. ;) Which is probably what Scouse is talking about, alot of guys who aren't happy with AM because he wrote them up in the first place.
As far as the situation of MoD (sorry, not sure if that was from dyslexic moments or I just didn't pay attention) I'm probably wrong about it. Oh well. He published, we like the books and that's pretty much the reason we are here.
I do wish people who didn't like the books, or the author, or the money he's made, or the cover art, or whatever..... I wish they didn't feel the need to disrespect the people who DO like them. We are all intelligent, considerate posters here who don't seem to have too much trouble disagreeing with each other or having different points of view and discussing them civilly. It's kind of bothersome to have a new poster make comments that come across as very insulting to those of us who DO like and admire AM. We don't even mind posters dissing AM. He's a big boy and can take care of himself! :) We may chime in with OUR opinions about the subject, but that's what boards like this are all about. And we don't expect everyone to agree with us, but it isn't too much to ask for respect. For who WE are as people, at least, if not for our choice of reading material. :)
Anyway, Take care, have a great weekend, and keep your papers handy in case you have to make a quick getaway! ;)
>>By Dare (Sunday, 14 Sep 2003 06:03)
Oh Dare, you've just hit the proverbial "nail on the head" with that little paragraph: there are quite a few SAS chaps who would like to nail down (metaphorical) coffin lids - you know, secrets still secrets, dirty laundry binned rather than hung out to air in public!!!
Dare quote>>I suppose I would be unhappy with someone who published a book that made me look foolish or worse, especially if it were false or misleading, but there you go. More of life. I guess I'd have something to say about it to the author. ;) Which is probably what Scouse is talking about, alot of guys who aren't happy with AM because he wrote them up in the first place.<<
Funny old world, though, 'cos it's AM who's prone to reach for the phone to a lawyer. A tad insecure, perhaps, in light of his vulnerability of so many ex wives and girlfriends kicking around and all thinking big bucks if they sneezed his name whilst talking about something scandalous... I would say he's got them pretty much bound and gagged, but maybe at a cost! Who knows? Who cares? You see, I'm one of those fed up with knowing what colour/type of underwear a celeb wears, who they're bedding, when they last farted in public, snap shots of cleft in buttocks, etc...I'd rather watch a monkey scratching his arse and picking his nose upside down in a tree, though maybe that's not such a bad description of SAS spec op writers....
Oh Dare, quick getaways! Been there done that for "three months" wayback when - gonna sit it out and shoot the bastard/s as they come through the door. Who knows might die with an AM book inhand, should make the local news...
Typos on here are bound to jump up and bite one on the nose during heat of the moment exchanges. After all, there are no editors at our left elbow, or spellchecker facility when posting online... Good enough excuse, huh...
Oooh, Paul R: So the compass does work upside down, then...Good on ya sport, for showing up...Did I hear the word B & B? CRs LF & G (?!) both excellent - do you do his board?!!! Have you done the LL & LD trail?
I hope to god sp10122 comes back for another try, otherwise the coincidence will look a tad suspect of you and me taking to the field in tandam....sp10122 as a Government man could be anything, (? - all eyes and ears) my present hubby is ex Home Office etc...
>>By buddy (Sunday, 14 Sep 2003 11:34)
I'm not legging it, sorry I've got other stuff to crack on with so I've got to be quick (BBQ to sort out and v hungover)
Big-ste said
"Hey, mate, have you ever served in the Armed Forces? I bet not. You dont know what you are talking about. Your statements sound like they come from a journalist, or the internet.
..... So, dont talk to me about Secrecy and Honor, because i know for a fact that it doesnt exist, and is purely for people like yourself to read about."
Yeah, right. I had to respond to this quickly........you claim to be a (British?) Falklands vet and point the finger. Why did you use the US spelling of honour then? I take it your no quite telling all (look at Mike W's profile, it's hilarious).
I'm in the British Army but I'll leave it at that, it's just standard to put your job down as HM government if asked.
I must say I've been impressed by these later posts, I'll respond properly when I get a chance.
>>By sp10122 (Sunday, 14 Sep 2003 14:31)
Sp10122, do not keep referencing the profile of someone you do not know. Some here are familiar with Mike W and aware of his situation. Do not laugh or ridicule -- you very well could be him but for the grace of God and good fortune. You (and we) actually owe him a debt of thanks (he has paid a very terrible price) so be a gentleman, thank him, offer an apology, and count your blessings, please.
>>By am-i-binned (Sunday, 14 Sep 2003 15:48)
Oooh no Buddy, no ER-live for me! Hate those bloody horror scenes. (Who recognises the ‘seeing = feeling’ misery?) On the monkey scratching thing.. I might have just what you need…
SP10122, nice to see your promise to return. Just one request. Give the Mike profile a rest. It’s everyone business to set up their profile, not someone else’s to ridicule.
Paul R, welcome back. You do know what we’re waiting for right.. Noooo pressure though haha.
And “F#*k me!” ??? Extremely risqué with all these girls around :o)
>>By Lynn (Sunday, 14 Sep 2003 16:15)
OUCH!!! We really gotta stop doing this AIB. When I'm writing my post in Word, come back and post you've just beat me to it!!
You seem to be better with the Speed thing. Give me some slack hey, I have to translate before I can post LOL !
:o) Lynn
>>By Lynn (Sunday, 14 Sep 2003 16:17)
Uhmmm... nup, no can do slack, Lynn -- after all, TZ or no TZ, you already have a 6-hour head-start on me! Add to that you have at least twice as many words at your disposal, seeing as I'm at a serious language deficit -- English only, and American English at that! A double-whammy! LOL! :oD
>>By am-i-binned (Sunday, 14 Sep 2003 17:10)
Point taken, back in corner. :o) Lynn
>>By Lynn (Sunday, 14 Sep 2003 17:28)
Omphf! Ouch! that was my foot, Lynn! Sorry, but there's not enough room in the corner for both of us, so I claim dibbs -- I was here first!
Hey, Paul R -- it's all in the spelling! Flork me! And I second Lynn's "Noooo pressure" pressure, but did you expect otherwise? It's your own fault! How's 'bout if we handle the B&B logistics, while you get crackin' on posting Part Three...
Good grief, Buddy -- the mental images you can conjure up! Well, I'm off now to check out the Animal Planet Channel on cable -- I had no idea there could be an SAS spec ops connection. Ya learn sumfink new every day! LOL!!!
Sheesh, Dare -- double-shifts and school and posting, too! High endurance, that's for sure. I understood and appreciated your perspective, especially considering your military service background! And no probs about typing dyslexia -- DoM? -- we're all a little backwards at times, including the MoD! LOL!!! :o)
>>By am-i-binned (Sunday, 14 Sep 2003 18:35)
Oh Dare, dare I pressume you don't speak Dutch??
Dutch DOM translated = Stupid, silly, foolish. Nothing to do with the MoD........... right??
>>By Lynn (Sunday, 14 Sep 2003 21:04)
Yee gods! Big-Ste, just read your profile - ex marine. Guess you served Stateside, huh? Any Royal Marine I've known in the past would punch out the lights of someone who referred to them as a mere Marine!! Nothing less than a flogging case, that's for sure...
So, you da know D and H likes the back of yer hand, right, an' you is acquainted with the local nicks for them there Royal Navy watering holes ?
There you go AM-I-Binned: the SAS do the monkey thing, (very well) whilst ringing bells at the same time. The SBS, on the other hand, do the leg-pulling, can hold their breath a lot longer, beat the drums with their flippers, and dive like a Cormorant from great heights...Oh, and on occasion, they all dress up in drag - a kinky fetish that I doubt you'll find any ref to in their risque (macho) books!!
Did anyone get a glimpse of Who Dares Wins on BBC last night? I had work to finish (2am bedtime) and needed to unwind so flipped the remote to see Lewis Collins (he from Bodie & Doyle series), not half bad male crumpet in his youth, doing a Nick Stone - wife and kid at home, shagging the enemy, and lots of abseiling men in black!!!!
>>By buddy (Monday, 15 Sep 2003 00:57)
Pages: 1 ... 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 ... 297
The discussion board is currently closed.
|
DISCOVER NEW BOOKS