Sunday - January 22, 2012
Taliban executes 15 Pakistani soldiers.
Nose buried in weekend papers and mags but this article comes from the net. No surprise. Less then an hour ago.
These are the folks our troops are ordered to treat ‘humanely.’
I don’t normally like to simply post an article and let it go. But heck. What can I say? The photos alone speak for themselves. I have one posted here but there are 6 more at the link below if you need that many to show what these vermin are like.
Handcuffed, blindfolded and shot in the back of the head: Taliban releases horrific video of executions of 15 Pakistani soldiers
The paramilitary troops were abducted on December 23
‘God is greatest’ the Taliban yelled as they fired AK-47 rifles
Horrific video has been copied and distributed in street marketsBy JILL REILLY
A video showing fifteen Pakistani soldiers being lined up and shot dead by a firing squad has been released by the Taliban.
The paramilitary troops were abducted on December 23 in what the terror group described as an operation to avenge the deaths of insurgents in Pakistan.
The release of the horrific video is intended to serve as a warning to Pakistan’s 600,000-member army, which has failed to break the back of the insurgents despite superior firepower and a series of offensives against their strongholds in mountain regions.
The abducted soldiers were stood blindfolded, handcuffed to each other on a barren hilltop as one of their bearded Taliban captors held an AK-47 rifle and spoke with fury about revenge.
‘Twelve of our comrades were besieged and mercilessly martyred in the Khyber Agency (area),’ said the militant.
‘Our pious women were also targeted. To avenge those comrades, we will kill these men. We warn the government of Pakistan that if the killing of our friends is not halted, this will be the fate of you all.’
Before death, one of the men described how dozens of Taliban fighters stormed their fort in the northwestern Tank district and kidnapped the soldiers.
‘They attacked us with rockets, killed a sentry. One ran away. The Taliban entered the fort and captured us with our weapons,’ he said, sitting in rows with other soldiers with their arms folded and legs crossed in front of Taliban banners.
‘They tied our hands, put us in a Datsun and took us away.’
Posted by peiper
on 01/22/2012 at 11:49 AM
Filed Under: • muslims • Terrorists • War-Stories •
• Comments (1)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Tuesday - September 27, 2011
Aargh Matey, Thar Be Tray-zure
When the SS Gairsoppa was torpedoed by a German U-boat 70 years ago, it took its huge silver cargo to a watery grave. US divers are working to recover what may be the biggest shipwreck haul ever, valued at some $210 million.
Florida-based Odyssey Marine Exploration on Monday confirmed the identity and location of the Gairsoppa, and cited official documents indicating the British ship was carrying some 219 tons of silver when it sank in 1941 in the North Atlantic some 300 miles (490 kilometers) off the Irish coast.
Valued then at 600,000 pounds, the silver today is worth about $210 million, which would make it history’s largest recovery of precious metals lost at sea, Odyssey said.
“We’ve accomplished the first phase of this project—the location and identification of the target shipwreck—and now we’re hard at work planning for the recovery phase,” Odyssey senior project manager Andrew Craig said in a statement.
“Given the orientation and condition of the shipwreck, we are extremely confident that our planned salvage operation will be well suited for the recovery of this silver cargo.”
Recovery is expected to begin next spring.
After a competitive tender process the British government awarded Odyssey an exclusive salvage contract for the cargo, and under the agreement Odyssey will retain 80 percent of the silver bullion salvaged from the wreck.
The 412-foot (125-meter) Gairsoppa had been sailing from India back to Britain in February 1941 bearing a cargo of silver, pig iron and tea, and was in a convoy of ships when a storm hit. Running low on fuel, the Gairsoppa broke off from the convoy and set a course for Galway, Ireland.
It never made it, succumbing to a German torpedo in the contested waters of the North Atlantic. Of the 85 people on board, only one survived.
The Gairsoppa was laid down in 1919 and was a 5200 ton steamer for the British India Steam Navigation Company. When it was torpedoed, it caught fire and sank in 20 minutes, which allowed all the surviving crew to escape in lifeboats. Unfortunately rough seas claimed 2 of the 3 boats, and most of the 31 on the 3rd boat died from exposure before they reached land. To add insult to injury, that lifeboat was wrecked in the surf, drowning all but 1 crew member.
The boat in charge of the second officer set sail with eight Europeans and 23 Lascars aboard, but after seven days most had died of exposure and only four Europeans and two Lascars were still alive when the boat reached land on 1 March. Sadly, it capsized in the swell and surf of Caerthillian Cove on The Lizard, Cornwall and all occupants drowned except the second officer, who was rescued unconscious by a coastguard.
The wreck was found very close to where the U-Boat logs said it was sunk.
another source article with lots of pictures
Posted by Drew458
on 09/27/2011 at 03:39 PM
Filed Under: • planes, trains, tanks, ships, big machinery, and automobiles • War-Stories •
• Comments (2)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Sunday - August 28, 2011
‘politically insensitive’ brit troops musn’t offend the enemy
How do I start on this one? I wasn’t even gonna boot today to be honest. Still dragging from yesterday, up early and think I may have a cold or something coming on. Not certain but not 100% old ranting self. Cold and damp and just want some coffee and back to a warm bed.
Our papers were delivered unusually early this Sunday morning. So when this darn thing caught my eye, well, I knew I had to turn this puter on and share.
If I had any hair left to pull out, I wouldn’t have the energy to do so this morning.
Take a look at this bit pc tom foolery.
Banned: ‘Taliban Hunting Club’ badges worn by UK troops in Afghanistan
By CHRISTOPHER LEAKEBritish soldiers in Afghanistan have been banned from wearing skull-and-crossbones badges on their uniforms that declare ‘Death To The Taliban’ and proclaim membership of a ‘Taliban Hunting Club’.
The unofficial stick-on badges are now a cult accessory among British troops fighting Taliban insurgents.
But senior Army officers visiting Helmand province in southern Afghanistan – where most UK troops are based – have ordered them to be removed because they are deemed ‘politically insensitive’.
Commanders were said to be particularly worried about the repercussions if any of the estimated 600 soldiers wearing one of the fabric badges accidentally shot a civilian in the heat of battle.
Ministry of Defence lawyers are understood to have expressed concern that any soldier wearing one of the badges who might later become embroiled in a legal case after killing an innocent Afghan would be viewed as ‘maverick’.
One of the banned emblems features a crude pirate-style skull and crossbones and a Death To The Taliban slogan, while another has a more intricate design of a skull with crossed rifles behind it and the motto Taliban Hunting Club.
Yet another shows a skull framed by a sniper’s gun sight covered in an Arab-style scarf and, on top of it, what appears to be the dead body of a Taliban fighter stripped to the waist.
The badges are made in Britain and they are sent out to soldiers by friends and relatives, or taken out by the troops in their backpacks.
Posted by peiper
on 08/28/2011 at 02:14 AM
Filed Under: • Politically Correct B.S. • UK • War-Stories •
• Comments (2)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Tuesday - August 09, 2011
‘Allo ‘Allo and Goodbye
Listen very carefully, I weel zay thees only wance!
Blisteringly sexy, she killed Nazis with her bare hands and had a 5 million-franc bounty on her head. As she dies at 98, the extraordinary story of the real Charlotte Gray
She stares into the camera with a coquettish half-smile and an unflinching come-hither look. The eyebrows are plucked, the lips full, the long auburn hair a classic 1940s style, falling onto the shoulders of her khaki uniform. She could easily have been one of the sassy songbirds who brightened up World War II. But this was the face of Nancy Wake, one of that conflict’s bravest underground fighters against the Germans in France — and certainly the most stylish. A male comrade-in-arms in the French Resistance summed her up as: ‘The most feminine woman I know, until the fighting starts. And then she is like five men.’ She lived up to both parts of that compliment.
...
... after being parachuted into France as a Special Operations Executive agent, she disposed of a German guard with her bare hands and liked nothing better than bowling along in the front seat of a fast car through the countryside, a Sten gun on her lap and a cigar between her teeth, in search of Germans to kill.
...
Passionate and impulsive, with a tendency to draw attention to herself, she was not the ideal undercover agent. Her superiors didn’t think she would last long behind enemy lines. But Wake proved them wrong and died this week, aged 98, in a nursing home for retired veterans in London. Her death brought to an end a life of such daring, courage and glamour that she was the inspiration for the Sebastian Faulks novel Charlotte Gray, which was made into a film starring Cate Blanchett.
...
(in 1939, ) Nancy was visiting London, for, of all things, a slimming course, when war was declared in September 1939. When she tried to join up to fight she was pointed, to her disgust, in the direction of a Naafi (Navy, Army and Air Force) canteen. So she went back to France and, when that country fell to the invading Germans, she proved herself as brave and as aggressive as any man — and more than most.
...
in London she volunteered for SOE’s French section and, despite reservations that she was too much of a party-girl, she was taken on and trained in survival skills, armed combat, Morse code and surveillance. Six weeks before D-Day, she was parachuted into the heavily-forested and mountainous Auvergne region of central France to prepare local Resistance groups, the Maquis, for the job of harrying the Germans and delaying their reinforcements once the invasion began.
...
Nancy proved her mettle, arranging air drops and hiding supplies of weapons, travelling between the groups, paying out money, urging them to co-operate, knocking them, as best she could, into shape. She was as tough as the old army boots she eschewed for heels. With an escort of Maquisards, she shot her way through enemy patrols and roadblocks.
...
She led attacks on German convoys and even took on armoured cars. When asked why she insisted on travelling in the lead vehicle, she said it was because she couldn’t bear dust being thrown up in her face by cars in front. In one mini-battle, her car was strafed by German fighter planes but she crawled out of the wreck, hanging onto her prized possessions — a jar of face cream, a packet of tea and a satin cushion. When the roads were too dangerous to travel by car, she cycled more than 300 miles in three days to find a working radio set to contact London.
...
She was festooned with honours — a British George Medal, the French Legion d’Honneur and three Croix de Guerre. She remarried, returned to Australia to live, took up politics for a while, then came back to Britain to retire in 2001. Her body is to be cremated, but at her request the ashes will be scattered in the Auvergne.
read the rest
Posted by Drew458
on 08/09/2011 at 07:50 AM
Filed Under: • FRANCE • War-Stories •
• Comments (1)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Monday - August 01, 2011
britain at war … a real one … august 1st, 1941
Every day for the last few years, The Telegraph has been running a reproduction, reduced in size of course, of the lead stories and page leading up to and then including events of the 2nd World War.
Usually they are short and just the bare bone headlines and comments. They are really very interesting and I think it’s a good way to present history.
Today’s war story is from August 1st, but it’s not the phony war in Libya 2011, where modern planes, unopposed, are now strafing and bombing TV stations.
Really. You couldn’t make this up.
The newspaper and radio news say that attacks were made against Transmitters and the TV stations to, “PROTECT CIVILIANS.” So help me that is exactly word for word the quote. Oh, and a chief commander, a general who defected from Gaddafi forces and was leading the folks who previously were called rebels but are now officially recognized by Brits and French as .... the Provisional Libyan Government, well the general was shot dead by ..... wanna guess? anyone?
Hard Line Muslims! Now see ... there’s something right away wrong with that news report because the muzzies fighting against Gaddafi are supposed to be only the good muzzies. Not those other rop lice farms.
So then ..... it’s August 1st .... 1941 for awhile. This is a very interesting read. It isn’t available on line. I called the Telegraph and spoke to someone there and they very kindly emailed me the following, which btw took me more then an hour to lay out as close to the way they had it as possible here. And I also had to do it twice due to a goof I made. I have no idea what is meant by Japan’s “medical condition” unless it was a typesetting error at the paper. I have reproduced it here exactly as sent to me. Enjoy.
BRITAIN AT WAR
The Daily Telegraph and Morning Post LONDON, FRIDAY, AUGUST 1, 1941
U.S. MOVE IN ECONOMIC WAR AGAINST AXIS
ROOSEVELT SETS UP DEFENCE BOARD
INTENSIFIED Anglo–American economic warfare against the Axis and its associates, including Japan, is the primary purpose of the appointment by President Roosevelt tonight of a United States Economic Defence Board.
The Board, which is headed by the Vice–President, Mr. Henry Wallace, will maintain close contact with the British Ministry of Economic Warfare.
The establishment of the Board follows the issue of a blacklist of Axis firms in South America and neutral countries, and the embargoes against Japan.
A notable change which the President’s executive order makes is to give administrative authority to the Vice President.
Vice Presidents usually do nothing but preside over the Senate. But Mr. Wallace is looked upon by many as a Presidential possibility, and it was politically desirable to give him an important defence post that would keep him in the public eye.
SERVICE CONFERENCES
The frequency with which the President is calling in his naval and military advisors for consultation on the critical developments in the Far East is arousing especial interest in Washington because of the widely known Service opinion on Japan’s present medical condition.
Service chiefs do not advise the President on policy, but can assume as a hypothesis that a certain policy has been accepted and proceed from that to draw conclusions on how events would work out.
The hypothesis on which the Service departments are now working is that the United States would resist any attack on the Dutch East Indies by Japan.
The possibility of such an attack has been publicly referred to by the President himself when he stated that Japan has been allowed to purchase American oil in an effort to prevent it.
Thus, if a contrary policy is followed and the economic weapons recently acquired by the President are used to clamp down a tight oil embargo, a Japanese attack may be anticipated.
There are some officials who feel that a loaded economic gun should be pointed towards Japan, but should not yet be fired. Others urge that the sooner it is fired the better.
This is where the view of the Service experts becomes interesting. They start from the assumption that Japan is the third most war–weary nation in the world today, only Italy and Spain being more so. Her resources are strained and her armed forces dangerously extended.
By a great effort her army might be increased to 66 divisions, but that is held to be the limit. Even if 10 extra divisions can be sent to Siberia the Japanese forces would not be as great as the Russians, whose Siberian army is thought to comprise 30 divisions.
A drive southward might appear more promising, therefore, to Tokyo.
But Japanese warplanes are not as modern as the British, Dutch and American aircraft in that area, and her first–line strength is not placed higher than 2,000 or 3,000.
Her chief difficulty, however, is oil. If no oil can be imported and vigorous combatant work has to be undertaken, aircraft, mechanised equipment and naval vessels will use up Japan’s reserves rapidly.
This constitutes another reason for attack on the Dutch East Indies.
But naval forces engaged in such an attack would be operating far from their bases, and the land forces available are comparatively small, while bombing attacks would amount to suicide excursions, since interception would be possible both from Malaya and the Philippines.
In other words, always assuming that the United States is ready to engage in a shooting war, a Japanese attack on the Dutch East Indies would be a gamble with the dice loaded against Japan.
It is possible that the bombing of the gunboat Tutuila may have been deliberately designed to test American opinion. If so, Tokyo cannot have derived any satisfaction from the result, since the immediate reaction of Congress as well as one of the Administration was one of vigorous protest.
Copyright: Telegraph Group Ltd
Posted by peiper
on 08/01/2011 at 02:03 PM
Filed Under: • War-Stories •
• Comments (0)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Saturday - July 09, 2011
brit soldiers told not to fire on taliban.
An absolutely insane way to run a war but then, what the hell would I know about running a war.
I have to feel doubly sorry for Brits. In the last couple of days, they lost two soldiers shot by a very professional sniper. One shot got them both. Damn.
I believe the Brits know who he is, but can’t nail the bastard yet. I’m sure they will. I sure hope so. Brits are not dumb, they’re tough and they are professionals as well. But sorry to say some things are so screwed up and they are being made to fight with hands tied.
Take a look at this sad damn fix.
Soldiers told not to shoot Taliban bomb layers
British soldiers who spot Taliban fighters planting roadside bombs are told not to shoot them because they do not pose an immediate threat, the Ministry of Defence has admitted.
By Andy Bloxham
They are instead being ordered to just observe insurgents and record their position to reduce the risk of civilian casualties.
The controversial policy emerged at an inquest into the death of Sgt Peter Rayner, 34, a soldier from the 2nd Batallion The Duke of Lancaster’s Regiment who was killed in October last year by an improvised explosive device as he led a patrol in Helmand Province, Afghanistan.Wendy Rayner, 40, disclosed that in the days leading up to his death her husband been told that it was not his job to attack insurgents laying bombs.
Mrs Rayner, who lives with their young son in Bradford, told the inquest that the insurgents were being allowed to get away with the murder of British troops.
She said: “They are not allowed to fire on these terrorists. If they can see people leaving these IEDs, why can’t they take them out? One officer even told him ‘I am an army Captain and you will do your job’.“We have lost too many men out there, they had seen people planting IEDs yet could not open fire or make contact with them. I believe strongly if people had taken on board what he was saying more he might have been here today.”
Under the Geneva Convention and the nationally administered Rules of Engagement the 9,500 British troops in Afghanistan are told they can only attack if there is an immediate threat to life.A key part of the MoD’s counter-insurgency theory holds that it is more important to win over civilians by not killing innocent people than it is to eliminate every potential insurgent.
One officer who has recently served in Afghanistan said that if a soldier wanted to ascertain if an insurgent was an immediate threat, he would have to approach him and expose himself to greater risk.He said: “A British soldier manning a checkpoint at night might watch a man digging a hole for an IED 100 metres away and would not try to shoot at him. It’s a ludicrous situation.
“There has to be an immediate threat to life and that’s a hard thing to prove. An IED does not count as an immediate threat.
“The Americans are different – their Rules of Engagement are pretty liberal. If they even suspect someone of laying a bomb, they can shoot them.”
Afghans routinely dig holes in river banks to store meat because there is no refrigeration and farmers often dig at night because it is cooler to work. The Taliban bomb layers take advantage of this to spread confusion. They set roadside bombs where farmers work and villagers store meat, and they also pay civilians $10 a time to dig a hole.
If the civilian is shot, it is a propaganda victory for the Taliban, and if the hole is not discovered by soldiers, it can be used later for a roadside bomb.
The existing policy of “courageous restraint” was led by the US General Stanley McChrystal 18 months ago and has been repeatedly criticised for leaving soldiers fighting “with one hand behind their backs”.
At yesterday’s inquest, after the acting Bradford coroner Paul Marks recorded a verdict of unlawful killing, Mrs Rayner urged the MoD to “let our soldiers be soldiers”.
A spokesman for the Ministry of Defence said: “Troops in Afghanistan are required to exercise restraint when dealing with this threat as the use of deadly force is not always appropriate when there is a risk of collateral damage.
“The aim of this policy is to avoid innocent civilians who may be in the vicinity.”
Posted by peiper
on 07/09/2011 at 12:56 PM
Filed Under: • Terrorists • UK • War-Stories •
• Comments (2)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Monday - June 20, 2011
soldier hits taliban scum, soldier now in trouble, quits army.
Mind how you act now boys. Mustn’t be seen to be abusive to Taliban prisoner. Never mind the excuse he was trying to get away.
Jeesh .... the way this reads, I think some authorities on the home front seem to think that it’s a good idea to transfer muddled civilian legalistic mumbo-jumbo to a fighting front. I guess that’s old news. But this story is right now.
I’m thinking many young Brits don’t read many papers (I know I didn’t at that age), and so they enlist in the army. But if too many start to read the newspapers before enlisting, I wonder how many would find some other employment.
Take a look.
A special forces soldier is being prosecuted for punching a member of the Taliban during an ambush in Afghanistan.
Court martial judge questions prosecution of soldier
By Sean Rayment, Defence Correspondent
The corporal is being taken to a court martial accused of an offence already described as “minor” by a military judge - and despite the “victim” having no apparent interest in the trial.
Corporal X, whose identity is being kept secret because of his membership of the special forces unit, has now left the Army in disgust at his treatment, which came despite an umblemished record and glowing references from his superiors.
The case has raised concerns in the military that troops are being prosecuted needlessly to avoid any allegations of “cover ups”.
It has been pursued despite a court martial judge expressing concern about whether deciding to “pursue” the soldier is a good use of the “public purse”.
Senior military figures are increasingly worried at the financial burden of troops being prosecuted, both because of the legal costs and the loss of soldiers from the front line.Cpl X was charged with assault last March and will have to wait until July for the full trial to take place.
The alleged attack occurred after a joint patrol of British special forces and Afghan troops was ambushed in the Sangin area of Helmand in March last year.
Two armed men on a motorcycle rode directly at the patrol and the driver, who had a pistol, was shot dead after he ignored repeated orders to stop.The pillion passenger was captured unharmed and placed in the custody of a member of the Special Forces Support Group.
Moments later the prisoner tried to escape and was punched once by the corporal as he tried to restrain him.The soldier relayed the entire incident to a member of the Royal Military Police and is alleged to have admitted striking the suspected insurgent to prevent him from escaping and endangering the lives of members of his patrol.
At the end of the interview, Cpl X was cautioned and sent home to Britain where he was arrested, cautioned again, interviewed and later charged with assault.
Afterwards he quit the Army, despite having had years of expensive training, with an outstanding letter of reference from his unit.Even though Cpl X had left the army and the “victim”, known only as Mr Wall had disappeared, the case was pursued, to the surprise of Judge Alistair McGrigor.
During preliminary proceedings last month, Judge McGrigor, an assistant judge advocate general, questioned whether a trial was in the best interest of the taxpayer given that any sentence passed would be minimal.He demanded to know why the Service Prosecuting Authority, the military equivalent of the Crown Prosecution Service, had kept the case going.
Addressing Lt Col David Phillips of the Army Legal Service, the prosecuting officer, Judge McGrigor said: “We have a former Cpl X, now a civilian, who has a charge of battery against him in relation to an incident that took place a year ago against a Mr Wall, who appears to have little or no interest in the proceeding.“Is this, Colonel, a matter that the public purse should be pursuing in such a robust way? I raise this because in the view of the effluxion of time, the fact that Cpl X is now a civilian and the fact that Mr Wall is not to be found well may mean that any sentence passed is going to be of a minimal nature.”
Lt Col Phillips replied: “That may well be the case here but there is an overwhelming public interest in pursuing soldiers who, as asserted here — and it is an allegation to be proved in court — have allegedly abused their position to strike a detainee.”Judge McGrigor responded: “A few minutes earlier, another Afghan national was shot dead. It seems the counterpoint in this is that the allegation against Mr X is that he caused a single blow — if that is accepted — which caused a minimal injury. In the context of what was going on, it does seem minor.”
Last night Patrick Mercer, the Tory MP for Newark, and former infantry commander, said: “This case is a waste of military time, legal time and taxpayers’ money.
“We have got to stop abusing our soldiers in this way because that is what this is — abuse.”
Posted by peiper
on 06/20/2011 at 07:51 AM
Filed Under: • War-Stories •
• Comments (1)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Saturday - June 11, 2011
the face of treason
Is there anything at all that I need to add to this?
Makes me steam every time I see an ad here with her face.
I don’t suppose she does adverts back home in the USA. Not that it will break them or her but, I wish American women would not buy the product while she’s their face. There is NO FORGIVING what she did.
Posted by peiper
on 06/11/2011 at 06:31 AM
Filed Under: • Hollywood • Outrageous • War-Stories •
• Comments (11)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • coming soon to an asylum near you? libya, civil war, the movie.
I caught this a few days ago and thought I was reading 1984.
The friend may become the enemy who remains the enemy unless he becomes a friend. Got it. That’s easy. I know what they’re doing. Clever people.
Britain is getting ready to make a keystone kops movie out of the civil war in Libya.
Now why can’t America be that inventive?
Let me splain it to ya even though you may already know.
With us more or less in the background but still supportive, the Brits and French decided that the civilians in Libya suddenly had to be protected from that loon in Tripoli, MadMan Moo-a-Mar of Gaddifi. So they gathered all the saints of NATO and embarked upon a brand new crusade. It’s called Saving Civilians. A note if you please and even if you don’t. There is to be no civilian saving in the home countries.
Those slaves are for the purpose of paying for this latest incursion in another country’s affairs, as well as being victims of crime which everyone knows nobody can do anything about anyway.
ALL protesters or so called “activists” or “Rebels” are now ‘The Good Guys’ and anyone shooting at them even if they are armed, are the bad guys. All protesters who are protesting a govt. the west doesn’t like, are also ‘civilians’ and must be protected.
But a new twist announced this week makes for fairness in its game of moral high ground.
Take a look.
Apparently the allies are worried that their newest best friends will or have, taken some revenge against Gadiffi civilians who actually support him and have no problem with the monster. He’s their guy. Well of course. This is a very tribal country, innit?
So he’s bound to have some on his side. But the allies, whose motto over the past few months has become, Let’s go shelling, where they’re dwelling, have now warned their new best friends, the rebels, that they will turn their shells and missiles on them, should they muss up the hair of civilians on the other side.
Hey, looks good. This is gonna be a great movie. Already looking forward to the sequel.
Here’s the rough draft so far.
Libya rebels warned that Nato will use force to stop revenge attacks
Britain has warned Libya’s rebels that Nato is prepared to used military force against the opposition if it wages armed attacks on civilians loyal to Col Muammar Gaddafi, officials said yesterday.
By Damien McElroy, Foreign Affairs Correspondent
Whitehall officials said that the “same assets” that are currently waging air strikes on Col Gaddafi’s regime and its forces would be unleashed on the rebels should they take revenge on towns and populations that have so far remained under Col Gaddafi’s control.
It is the most explicit warning yet that the international coalition enforcing United Nations 1973 resolution has not written a blank cheque to the rebels as they launch offensives against the regime in Misurata and eastern Libya. But officials said the National Transitional Council (NTC), which represents the rebel movements had given repeated assurances that they would not seek to punish government sympathisers in the aftermath of victory.
“We will protect civilians by all means necessary while the mandate is in force - that applies to everybody,” a government official said. “If the NTC was attacking civilians the mandate would give the international community the grounds to intervene. But we’ve seen no evidence that is likely to happen and the NTC has frequently address the need for reconciliation.”
Although Britain, its Nato allies and Gulf states are providing extensive support to the opposition, the resolution specifically bars deployment of troops alongside the rebels in what would effectively be taking sides in a civil war.
The government believes that Col Gaddafi’s regime is being steadily weakened after 10,000 bombing raids by fighter jets in three months. In a significant escalation, British Apache helicopter gunships and French Tigre equivalents have been deployed to attack Gaddafi’s troops on the frontline. Officials are convinced that Col Gaddafi will be ousted sooner rather than later. “He’s a trapped rat,” said one.
But as the opposition advances it is likely to be embroiled in clashes in civilian areas. As long as there is no convincing evidence that Gaddafi will fall without a fight, there is the prospect that Nato could be forced to turn on its allies. “The Nato operation has effectively mutated into regime change,” said David Hartwell, an analyst at IHS Global. “But clearly they don’t want to be caught on the hoof if Libya descended into internecine warfare”
A two-month stalemate between the rebels and the official army has frayed in recent days as rebels prepare to attack Gaddafite villages around the town of Misurata, which has successfully fought off a siege by the army. In eastern Libya preparations for an attack on the oil town of Brega are at an advanced stage and fighters are expanding their hold on the Western mountains along the Tunisian border.
A bid to convince the world that the TNC will establish a democratic government in a post-Gaddafi Libya will be made today at meeting of the 35-member Libya Contact Group in Abu Dhabi.
Leaders of the Benghazi-based body are to publish a blueprint for government alongside the official communique detailing international efforts to promote the downfall of Col Gaddafi’s regime.
Libyan rebels have accused of meting out arbitrary justice to captured Gaddafi troops and after the uprising allowing the slaughter of dozens of African migrants.
Activists yesterday accused the NTC of holding 330 civilians without trial, in conditions were many had suffered abuse.
Thinking a bit ahead, can you envision the total mess NATO and the west will be in, if they think they have to start aiming their gee whiz weaponry on the people they were originally helping. Oh boy. Now that’s a blockbuster movie if ever there was one. If they decide to make it. Lets see. Mostly muslim country, tribal, has a record of not feeling too warm and fuzzy about the west. Oh yeah. Sure thing. Lets all go in together and bomb both sides and see where that leads.
akbar snack bar, as Vilmar might say.
Posted by peiper
on 06/11/2011 at 05:33 AM
Filed Under: • muslims • War-Stories •
• Comments (4)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Thursday - March 31, 2011
Your Pound Of Beans
Forces loyal to Ivory Coast’s Alassane Ouattara have seized the major cocoa port of San Pedro, extending a nationwide offensive that has left incumbent Laurent Gbagbo isolated in the main city, Abidjan.
In a blow to Gbagbo, his army chief of staff, General Phillippe Mangou, sought refuge in the South African ambassador’s residence in Abidjan. A South African spokesman denied rumors that Gbagbo was on the way to South Africa.
Residents and combatants from both sides said the pro-Ouattara forces were in control of western port town of San Pedro, and that it was now largely calm apart from some sporadic shooting.
Reuters witnesses in the main city, Abidjan, Gbagbo’s last remaining stronghold, said the streets were virtually empty and gunfire could be heard overnight and on Thursday morning, but it was not clear who was involved.
Gbagbo has resisted pressure from the African Union and the West to step down since a presidential election last November, which U.N.-certified results showed he lost to Ouattara by an 8-point margin, sparking a deadly power struggle.
But forces loyal to Ouattara launched an offensive this week on three fronts, and towns across the country fell, mostly without resistance, one after another as they swept south.
Cocoa prices have fallen about 9 percent since on the push. The capture of San Pedro, which ships half of the top grower’s beans, could, in theory, mean a resumption in exports.
Diplomats said on Thursday that European Union sanctions, including an embargo on cocoa shipments from San Pedro, would remain in place and if any exemption were discussed it would take four or five days to come into force.
So, who cares? Well, you do, even if you don’t know it. The Ivory Coast provides nearly half the world’s cocoa, and the unrest there has caused the commodity price to skyrocket. Neighboring Ghana and Nigeria Cocoa together produce a bit less than le Côte d’Ivoire; the 3 West African nations account for a touch more than 2/3 of world production. Ghana and Nigeria are having their own political instabilities.
Cocoa bean production is not a huge business; only about 3.4 million metric tons (1000 kilos = 2200lbs) a year of beans are grown worldwide. With more than 6 billion people in the world this amounts to just about 1 pound of cocoa beans per person annually.
Politics in the Ivory Coast are typically African, tribal crossed with religious, and too complicated for outsiders to understand, but when they had a civil war there 8 years ago cocoa prices took a huge jump from which they never fully recovered. Laurent Gbagbo was president before, during, and after the war, so I guess his forces won. A few months ago they held an election and he lost, although his people obviously rigged the numbers and he claimed victory. Since then he has refused to step down, and this has plunged the country right back into civil war. Thanks a lot. At this point in time it looks like rebel leader and election winner Alassane Ouattara and his followers are winning, and with their troops seizing the one decent port in the country international market fears are easing.
This is some interesting economics, considering that there is a worldwide sanction on cocoa from the Ivory Coast right now. In theory they are not part of the current market, so how could the situation there impact global pricing? I guess the answer is that they are still growing the beans, and they have to be piled up in warehouses somewhere. World demand is fairly stable, so with only 1/3 of the product currently available from the other producer nations, this would cause a rather skittish market. But it is more complex than that, because cocoa is not created in a factory. The beans are grown on trees, and the pods ripen whenever they feel like it. This means the main harvest season lasts 7 months, and the minor secondary harvest season lasts another 3 months. Right now we are just into the no harvest at all period.
Cocoa farming is on the decline in several of the other producer nations. The trees take 5 or 6 years to mature and can produce for 50 years or more, but there just isn’t much money in it for the farmers. I find that interesting in itself, because the commodity price is more than half again as high now than it was when the Ivorian civil war started, and that price (around $2200/mt) was nearly 3 times as high as the price was just 2 years earlier in 2000 ($800/mt). Even if you ignore February’s record shattering price of over $3700/mt, a 32 year high and the current drop from there, cocoa beans are selling at more than 4 times the price they were a decade ago. Go figure. You’d think people would be planting left and right. I guess it’s just too much hard work, even though most of it is done by children.
Some analysts say that up to a quarter million of the pod pickers are small children, and there are very strong allegations that many of these children are kept as slaves. But given the typical abhorrent living conditions in Africa and their standard horrific inhumanity and barbarism, how could you tell? But before you feel all guilty and start searching for only Fair Trade chocolate to buy, you should know that the cocoa pods can usually only be harvested by children. The cocoa tree is fragile and the pods grow from the trunk, not from the branches. Adults climbing the trees damage them, and monkeys can’t be used because they don’t differentiate between the ripe pods and the unripe ones. So child labor is it. Don’t forget that the Turd World has a very different view on child labor than the spoiled and decadent west. What we see as child abuse they see as giving children the work opportunity to not starve to death.
Oh, and the root of all the problems in the Ivory Coast? You don’t even have to guess; you know what the answer is. Pisslam. Of course! When the French controlled the Ivory Coast it was a wonderland, with some of the highest per capita income and standard of living on the entire continent. This continued for several decades after independence in 1960, but at some point the Ivorians started importing foreign labor to do the scut work. And guess who showed up?
A former French colony and the world’s top cocoa producer, Ivory Coast was once regarded as a haven of peace and stability, until a 1999 coup that toppled president Henri Konan Bedie. Long considered a peaceful country, that welcomed millions of immigrant workers to sustain a booming economy after its independence from France in 1960, up to 40 percent of the 16 million population is now foreign. The immigrants inflamed political, religious and ethnic frictions between the largely Muslim north and the predominantly Christian south and west.
Until his death in 1993, these disputes were kept under control by the country’s post-independence president, Felix Houphouet-Boigny. But like Yugoslavia in the 1990s, the ancient ethnic and religious animosities were still there, and were exploited by rival politicians after Houphouet-Boigny was gone. Elections were held and Laurent Gbagbo, a southern nationalist, won. He tried to improve his control of the country by forcing northerners out of the security forces, and have millions of them declared foreigners, and ineligible to vote.
This led to the first round of fighting in 2002. The French sent in troops, to at least prevent escalation, and with UN help, a ceasefire was achieved in 2003. But in late 2004, the ceasefire was broken with government air raids on rebel bases in the north.
Until the push south this week, the worst of the violence had centered on Abidjan, where anti-Gbagbo insurgents, who do not necessarily support Ouattara, have seized parts of town.
In a sign violence could spin out of control, the army called on Gbagbo’s often violent youth wing to enlist in the military. They have been fired up with anti-French, anti-foreigner and anti-U.N. propaganda, and on Wednesday the army started openly handing out weapons to them.
Currently there are 11,000 UN Blue Helmets in the Ivory Coast, the vast majority of them being other Africans. So you know what that means ... it’s a mess. A chocolate mess.
Posted by Drew458
on 03/31/2011 at 09:33 AM
Filed Under: • Africa • Economics • Fine-Dining • Politics • War-Stories •
• Comments (4)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Wednesday - March 30, 2011
a do run,run,run a do run, run. a kind of update and a ship named Barry?
Just for fun and it’s less then an hour old .....
btw ... The USS Barry? Oh please. A war ship named Barry? How about Brucie? ok ... not too funny but I just can’t see a man of war named Barry. Can you?
Anyway, there are some very good photos HERE.
Mad Max-style rebel army runs for their lives down the same road they gleefully advanced up two days ago
By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 7:01 PM on 30th March 2011Days ago they gleefully streamed up Libya’s coastal road wearing massive grins as international air strikes flattened anyone who stood in their way.
But today Libya’s rag tag rebel army of enthusiastic amateurs was speeding down exactly the same road in the opposite direction - as they ran for their lives after coming face-to-face with what remains of Colonel Gaddafi’s army.
The increasingly shambolic rebels - who at times resemble characters from Mad Max - gained as much as 200 kilometres of territory in a two-day lighting advance from their stronghold of Benghazi earlier this week.
But today they had given up almost all of those gains following a day-and-a half of hasty retreat as they were shelled by government forces that had not been eliminated from the air.
Posted by peiper
on 03/30/2011 at 01:44 PM
Filed Under: • War-Stories •
• Comments (3)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Tuesday - March 22, 2011
newspaper here writes like the raf is flying against the luftwaffe,, and other bombasts
Ok, I agree the world would be better minus Gaddafi.
But I’m having a bit of a problem with the reportage and over hyped rah-rah school boy stuff in, of all papers, The Telegraph. I expect it of other but gosh and golly.
There’s a huge photo on the front page of the paper showing a Typhoon Eurofighter.
It’s a great photo close up as it takes to the air like a large bird of prey. It has all sorts of stuff hanging below, rockets and fuel tanks and the latest war game toys and as it leaves the ground there’s a billowing cloud of grey black exhaust spewing out it’s backside as it flies off into the wild blue yonder to do battle with, Who? Certainly not the Luftwaffe.
The paper informs us that:
Capable of flying at twice the speed of sound at 65,000ft, the Typhoon is designed as a specialist in mid-air “dogfights”.
Equipped with long-range and short-range missiles for use in air-to-air combat, its role will not be to bomb targets on the ground.
And the headline tells us that this “plane is used in combat for the first time.”
Mozzle Tov! So, where’s the combat? I mean come on people. They aren’t up against anyone with any kind of air power, what planes they do have are out of date, there hasn’t been and is unlikely to be any engagement so …. why the bombast as tho the coalition of the confused, as some are calling it, act as though they are up against a first rate power?
It’s damned embarrassing.
We are further informed that the jets took off from a field in Italy. Right. Must mention this.
There’s seems to be a bit of confusion over just how the UN mission is being understood by some. Italy threatened to close it’s airspace if the thrust is to target Gaddafi, which it doesn’t believe the mandate calls for. Then once Italian fur was smoothed and combed, two members of the Arab League which is less of a league then the word implies, were critical of the attack on Gadaffi’s compound AND, the UAE is not sending planes or war making means. Their role will be “confined to humanitarian assistance.”
Yeah, those folks are right behind us okay.
In an editorial comment the Telegraph says that RAF pilots are in “harm’s way over the skies of Libya.” Oh? So, who’s shooting at them? So far the only plane down we’re informed of is a US plane, and it had a mechanical malfunction we are told.
Pilots are safe, thankfully.
In another headline we are told:
Libya: Targeting Gaddafi ‘risks alienating Arab nations’
Military attacks targeting Colonel Gaddafi risk alienating Arab nations and splitting the international coalition on Libya, ministers have been warned.
A former Brit Ambassador to the United States, writing in the Daily Mail advises, “we must leave the Arabs to sort out Libya.” I’ll drink to that but doubt very much they would try. They could. They have a larger and better trained air force. Their planes are up to date for the most part and more then a match for anything Gaddafi’s force could put in the air. The Saudis have 349 combat aircraft.
Britain could soon be dangerously exposed. We must leave the Arabs to sort out Libya
By CHRISTOPHER MEYEROnly four days into the UN coalition’s attack on Gaddafi’s murderous armed forces — and already it appears to be standing on the cusp of either success or disaster. It calls for the most rigorous clarity in defining Britain’s role and objectives.
Without this, our country will find itself dangerously exposed at a time when we simply cannot afford an open-ended military commitment. But it is not obvious that all our ministers understand this.
There are two dangers that especially affect us. The first is what is known in the trade as mission-creep — that we get sucked into doing things militarily that were not originally intended.
The second is that we find ourselves, with the French, holding the Libyan baby, while the U.S. under Obama slips into the background.
Let us be absolutely clear: the UN coalition’s operations are governed by UN Security Council Resolution 1973. This authorises a no-fly zone and ‘all necessary measures’ to protect the civilian population of Benghazi and other Libyan towns.
It does not authorise regime-change or the targeting of Gaddafi himself, as Chief of the Defence Staff Sir David Richards pointed out last night. Yet on Sunday the Defence Secretary, Liam Fox, appeared to suggest that Gaddafi was a legitimate target, while yesterday the Foreign Secretary was notably woolly on the subject.
It is by and large not a good idea to get involved in other people’s civil wars,
So there’s no coming together on the issue among the folks in govt.? I think I’m asking if the left hand knows what the right is doing. You might want to read all he has to say at the link HERE
And amid all this our old and new adversary Mr. Putin says …
UN decision was like a medieval call to crusade
RUSSIAN Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said a United Nations resolution authorizing military action in Libya resembled “medieval calls for crusades” after Western forces launched a second wave of airstrikes.
Posted by peiper
on 03/22/2011 at 02:15 PM
Filed Under: • War-Stories •
• Comments (5)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Monday - March 21, 2011
let them fight it out and then make friends with the winners
There have been editorials and cartoons showing Obama as indecisive and unsure. Dragging his heels before being led by the hand, by Cameron (PM,UK) into action in Libya.
However, someone wrote that Obama was right not to jump in immediately. Whatever the final truth of it, the fact is that now we will surely have to target Gaddifi personally. In fact, a leading Brit has already said so. The truth actually is ….
this whole exercise wasn’t so much to defend the so called civilians (although that was a consideration) but a move to finally rid us of Gaddifi and his regime.
By the way BMEWS readers. Please take a look at a good map of the region. Tunisia and Libya both on our doorstep here, in a manner of speaking. Neither France or Italy want the refugees already appearing before this past weekend. And the Brits sure don’t want em even if France and the UK are somewhat responsible for making them.
I’m sure that for awhile the tribe (and Libya is a country of those) that comes out on top (which are the folks now called ‘rebels’) will love us for awhile. But you know, not all romances last forever and as the song says ….
THERE’S NOTHIN’ COLD AS ASHES, AFTER THE FIRE IS GONE.
(Hoyt Axton and Tracy Nelson)
Sarkozy and Cameron try to lead Obama
Why can’t we just let the Libyans fight it out (...and then make friends with the winners)By, Peter Hitchens
Politics seems to have become a sort of mental illness. We have no bloody business in Libya, and no idea what we hope to achieve there.
We are daily told that we have no money to spare. We have just scrapped a large part of our Navy.
Our Army is stuck in an Afghan war whose point nobody can explain. And now we have set out on a course that could drag us into a long, gory brawl in North Africa.And yet, when the Prime Minister announces this folly he is praised. Why? Partly it is because we all watch too much TV. Its reports simplify, then exaggerate.
Reporters, much like politicians, like to feel they are helping to make history, and get excited by subjects they knew nothing about until last Wednesday.Before we know where we are, we are taking sides in quarrels we don’t understand. Who are the Libyan rebels? What do they want? Why do we love them so?
The only sensible policy in Libya is to wait and see who wins, and then make friends with them. If you think this heartless, you are of course right. Foreign policy is heartless. Nice countries end up being conquered or going bankrupt. But it may be no more heartless than our kindly interference.I pray that this episode ends quickly and cleanly. Perhaps it will. But we cannot know.
What if our humanitarian bombs and missiles accidentally kill women and children (which is almost certain)? What if air attacks and distant shelling fail to stop Gaddafi’s forces? Will we then send in troops? Who knows? I don’t. The Prime Minister doesn’t.Some of the longest wars in history started with small-scale intervention, for a purpose that looked good and achievable, and ended up ruining millions of lives. The Soviet takeover of Afghanistan in 1979 ended with countless innocents driven into refugee camps, and the collapse of the Soviet state itself. It also left Afghanistan as a worse snake pit than before.
Why are we suddenly so worried about Muammar Gaddafi?
It’s fashionable just now to get very hoity-toity about him. But until recently many of the war enthusiasts were rather keen on him, for supposedly heeding the fate of Saddam and changing his behaviour. Liberal idealists might also consider that Gaddafi is one of the heroes of their hero Nelson Mandela (there is film on YouTube of a touching embrace between these two).There’s no principle at stake here, or we would be bombing Bahrain too, and demanding the withdrawal of the Saudi troops who arrived there in such sinister fashion last Monday. But Bahrain’s the base of the U.S. 5th Fleet, so we won’t be doing that. And as I’ve said here before, this supposed objection to rulers killing their own people is not consistent. Sometimes – as in China, Bahrain and Syria – we’re happy to let them do it.
So why are we rattling the drums of war and fuelling up for a fight in a place where our national interests would be best served by staying out?
If the Arab League members want to intervene, they’ve got plenty of weapons not currently being used to attack Israel. I can only conclude that our Government is historically ignorant, politically dim, immune to good advice and swollen with personal vanity.
Posted by peiper
on 03/21/2011 at 07:05 AM
Filed Under: • Tyrants and Dictators • War-Stories •
• Comments (3)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Sunday - March 13, 2011
BATTLING BRIT TAKES OUT TWO WITH ONE STONE AND THEY AIN’T PRETTY BIRDS.
First of all Kudos to Drew for what I think was a terrific movie review and analysis on same and current conditioning. Would that fall under social engineering?
Happened to spot this early today and thought good news is a good way to start a Sunday morning and post. Hope you agree.
In fact, I think I’ll stick this one on top for a few hours today, cos everything else I came across while honestly NOT looking for them, I found a few items in our paper that as usual had me hopping mad. What else is new?
Just this story. Bravo Brits!
It says Book Review at the LINK HERE but it reads more like an article based on reporting.
Dead Men Risen: The snipers’ story
By Tony Harnden
Operating from a remote patrol base in Helmand, two British snipers were responsible for killing 75 Taliban fighters in just 40 days. In one remarkable feat of marksmanship, two insurgents were dispatched with single bullet.
The arrival at the newly-established Patrol Base Shamal Storrai (Pashto for “North Star”) in late August 2009 of Serjeant (CORR) Tom Potter and Rifleman Mark Osmond marked the start of an astonishing episode in the history of British Army sniping.
Within 40 days, the two marksmen from 4 Rifles, part of the Welsh Guards Battle group, had achieved 75 confirmed kills with 31 attributed to Potter and 44 to Osmond. Each kill was chalked up as a little stick man on the beam above the firing position in their camouflaged sangar beside the base gate – a stick man with no head denoting a target eliminated with a shot to the skull.
Osmond, 25, was an engaging, fast-talking enthusiast, eager to display his encyclopedic knowledge of every specification and capability of his equipment. He had stubbornly remained a rifleman because he feared that being promoted might lead to his being taken away from sniping, a job he loved and lived for. Potter, 30, was more laid back, projecting a calm professionalism and quiet confidence in the value of what he did.
Potter had notched up seven confirmed kills in Bara in 2007 and 2008 while Osmond’s total was 23. Both were members of the Green Jackets team that won the 2006 British Army Sniper Championships.
On one occasion they killed eight Taliban in two hours, ‘I wasn’t comfortable with it at first,’ said Osborn, ‘you start wondering is it really necessary?’ But the reaction of the locals soon persuaded him. ‘We had people coming up to us afterwards, not scared to talk to us. They felt they were being protected’.
Most of the kills were at a range of 1,200 metres using the 7.62 mm L96 sniper rifle.
The snipers used suppressors, reducing the sound of the muzzle blast. Although a ballistic crack could be heard, it was almost impossible to work out where the shot was coming from. With the bullet travelling at three times the speed of sound, a victim was unlikely to hear anything before he died. Walkie-talkie messages revealed that the
Taliban thought they were being hit from helicopters. The longest-range shot taken was when Potter killed an insurgent at 1,430 metres away. But the most celebrated shot of their tour was by Osmond at a range of just 196 metres.
On September 12th, a known Taliban commander appeared on the back of a motorcycle with a passenger riding pillion. There was a British patrol in the village of Gorup-e Shesh Kalay and under the rules of engagement, the walkie-talkie the Taliban pair were carrying was designated a hostile act. As they drove off, Osmond fired warning shots with his pistol and then picked up his L96, the same weapon – serial number 0166 – he had used in Iraq and on the butt of which he had written, ‘I love u 0166’.
Taking deliberate aim, he fired a single shot. The bike tumbled and both men fell onto the road and lay there motionless. When the British patrol returned, they checked the men and confirmed they were both dead, with large holes through their heads.
The 7.62 mm bullet Osmond had fired had passed through the heads of both men. He had achieved the rare feat of ‘one shot, two kills’ known in the sniping business as ‘a Quigley’. The term comes from the 1990 film Quigley Down Under in which the hero, played by Tom Selleck, uses an old Sharps rifle to devastating effect.
Potter and Osmond’s working day would begin around 7 am and end a dozen or so hours later at last light. Up to about 900 metres, they would aim at an insurgent’s head, beyond that at the chest.
Often, Potter would take one side of a compound and Osmond the other. Any insurgent moving from one side to the other was liable to be shot by the second sniper if the first had not already got him. Each used the scopes on the rifles to spot for the other man, identifying targets with nicknames to do with their appearance.
A fighter wearing light blue was dubbed ‘the Virgin Mary’ and one clad in what looked like sackcloth was referred to as ‘Hesco man’, after the colour of the base’s Hesco barriers. Both the Virgin Mary and Hesco man were killed.
Others were given a nickname because of their activities, like Hashish man, a Taliban who doubled up as a drug dealer. Occasionally, insurgents got posthumous monikers. If one target presented himself, both snipers aimed at him simultaneously in a coordinated shoot.
“Everybody you hit they drop in a different way,’ says Potter. ‘We did a co-ord shoot on to the one bloke and he just looked like he just fell through a trap door. So we called him Trapdoor Man.”
Major Mark Gidlow-Jackson, their company commander, describes Potter and Osmond as the “epitome of the thinking riflemen” that his regiment sought to produce. “They know the consequences of what they’re doing and they are very measured men. They are both highly dedicated to the art of sniping. They’re both quiet, softly spoken, utterly charming, two of the nicest men in the company, if the most dangerous.”
Serjeant Potter and Rifleman Osmond are identified by pseudonyms for security reasons.
Posted by peiper
on 03/13/2011 at 05:43 AM
Filed Under: • War-Stories •
• Comments (8)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Five Most Recent Trackbacks:
LAAR She Blows! Part One
(2 total trackbacks)
Tracked at Planes Ideas Blog
[...] CABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEB [...]
On: 07/12/11 01:57
The Tactical Cowboy
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at Sights Service Blog
[...] E LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE [...]
On: 07/10/11 08:30
Nasty Dirty Money
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at Money Reviews Blog
[...] ONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLES [...]
On: 06/17/11 08:31
Amazing aerial images taken by daring Allied pilots on secret missions during WW 2
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at Hookers and Booze
peiper over at Barking Moonbat EWS found some absolutely kickass aerial photos from WWII. I grabbed this one because I’m a big fan of the movie A Bridge Too Far.…
On: 11/23/09 04:14
Clear Thinking and Straight Talk
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at baldilocks
Let Them Fight or Bring Them Home Read all of it--and tell every American you know to do so. (Thanks to BMEWS) UPDATE: The author of the above blog is…
On: 10/02/09 09:29
DISCLAIMER
THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.
Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:
It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.
- Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
- Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
- Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
- Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere
THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.
Copyright © 2004-2008 Domain Owner
Oh, and here's some kind of visitor flag counter thingy. Hey, all the cool blogs have one, so I should too. The Visitors Online thingy up at the top doesn't count anything, but it looks neat. It had better, since I paid actual money for it.
RSS 2.0 
Atom 
