Discussion in 'The War at Sea' started by nuvolari, Nov 16, 2005.
Anybody out there rack up any time in M.T.B.s during WW2 ?
You mean the old costly farces as the RN costal forces were known
Yep, that's the bunch. It is interesting that you take that view, which was unknown to me. Would you like to expand upon it ? It'd be great to get a view so different from the norm. I guess that the Coastal Forces may have been costly in terms of lives, but then that it the price that is often paid when the combat is fought hard and close, but certainly all the principal navies had their own coastal forces, ( especially the Germans, whose boats were big, heavy and powerful), who, generally speaking, respected and feared the coastal forces of the other navies when they met in combat. Mind you, my old man, who served in MTB's during WW2, was generally more afraid of the Americans, whose poor ship identification and shoot first and ask questions later "friendly fire" policy, managed to sink him twice, compared to the German Navy, which only managed to do it once !
Oh God, not this again. :bang:
Well,i'll see service in 2 weeks time me mate!haha.
But i do not know why you called most or many(a safe word to use as my GP tutor would say!) are geeks.Since i have time to spend having just woke up,i see us as harmless people who just have a slightly unhealthy amount of interest for this subject. As a veteran as you said you were,i would have reckon you to speak with integrity and generally,command the respect of young middle class brats like me.
I don't see how you can,imho,stay in a community and yet insult *many* of the inhabitants,though i trust that you had the best intentions.
On the other hand,Grieg old pal,i guess that was uncalled for,being Marlin's old man's personal recollection and opinion with facts,albiet unofficial,to back it up.though it did convey an unhealthy image of the American navy,but don't let nationalistic pride drown you my friend!
Nothing personal. You seem to have gone straight for the jugular after just one sentence on my part :wink: I have nothing personal against you nor have I commented unfavorably on your posts before. I apologize for making a sarcastic comment however a more reasonable response might have been to enquire "Oh God not "what" again ? I would have replied that there has been at least one long and exhaustive thread regarding the apparently common (from the British standpoint anyway) stereotype of trigger happy Americans.
I challenged anyone to produce friendly fire rates (percentages or however one wishes to express them) of other countries military forces in order to compare them with the many different estimates that have been calculated of US forces by many different historians. My point being that unless one has an objective way to compare such things, to merely state that Amercan forces are trigger happy, is entirely subjective and their is no evidence that the friendly fire rate for US forces is any higher than for any other military.
What is doubtless just a casual remark to you is an insult to all the Americans who have honorably served and one should have their facts in order before going down that road IMO.
ps..not that it makes a difference but I'm not just a computer geek fantasizing about things military. I'm 52 years old and served a tour as an enlisted Marine in the USMC from 1970 to 1974.
Re: Not this again ?
This is quite a tirade Marlin, and in all fairness against people you know very little about in real life. I certainly don't consider this a forum for deadbeat geeks and am personally slightly offended by your interpretation of the forum-goers here, not to mention that I do not fit into you stereotype in the slightest.
On the whole your posts have been well written, interesting and well recieved I believe, I don't think it's entirely fair to go off the deep end because one of the US forum members responded to what could be interpretted as an anti-US comment.
It bothers me a little when people criticize the US, and things associated with it. (It's worse when I can't argue the particular point! :-? ).
It's definitely not right when the jabs are aimed at the individual persons here, though. That's a little uncalled for.
Having retired from the USMC 5 years, 11 1/2 months ago, and served since as a law enforcement officer, I take umbrage at being called a "deadbeat geek" or a "lowlife loser."
Re: Not this again ?
personal attacks on others, especially those that are entirely speculative in nature, are not acceptable Forum behaviour.
It's a nickname I've come across. I think in this context costly meant financial cost rather than human.
I think it could be said that the idea of the small torpedo boat was a bit of an unfulfilled promise. At their inception in the late 19th century some predicated that they would render the battleship obsolete. Apart from the odd occasion they never really achieve it and they were always very vulnerable to attack from the air.
Although his father would seem to have some justification for this view! :wink:
back to the MTB i know someone who ran a MTB after the war during national service in Britain.
Re: Not this again ?
Thanks for admonishing him, Ricky; the offending post has been deleted. I haven't been in the forum lately due to a number of things going on in my life lately, including helping my mother move (that is still ongoing). I will do my best to check things out here more often.
And Marlin, please remember what he said about personal attacks.
One modeling question on British MTB's.
Revell's Vosper is a 70' Herreshof model (licence built in US). I can't find much info on these boats, except that some were used by Royal Navy, few by USN and most by Soviets. Comparing to ELCO's there is only a fraction of info floating around.
Can anyone reccomend some links whith drawings on the net.