40 Commando RM / Welsh Guards ..For the record.....

#1
Here is an extract from this month's RM magazine, The Globe and Laurel..........

Screen Shot 2018-10-11 at 19.24.04.png
 
#2
the former oc of c coy, 40 commando is upset that nobody showed up to the unveiling of a plaque? Was it him that organised it?

I expect that nobody has time to do anymore of this memorial stuff at the minute. They are rather short of man power and things like this will suffer as a result.
 
#4
Ironic, in that if 1WG had been interested in taking advice from RM personnel at all, they'd probably not have needed two companies of them at Sapper Hill.
 
#9
Yet the place clearly mentions the RM presence and casualties sustained during the action.
The place... have you been having a cheeky line or two?............
 
#12
The 2 Companies were under Command of the Welsh Guards, so that means they operate under the Welsh Guards badge! The plaque itself gives due credit to 40 Cdo, so i don't see problem here. The author of that article is now officially a whinging "tosser"
 
Last edited:
#14
The Brigadier is right to express his views in the RM publication but ought to know that the Sir Galahad was bombed at Fitzroy and not Bluff Cove.
Interestingly ask people what happened at Fitzroy and I think you will get less a response than if you ask what happened at Bluff Cove.

http://webarchive.nationalarchives....www.pcgn.org.uk/Falkland Islands-July2006.pdf

Bluff Cove Lat 5144S Long 5809W GridVC1 966 Argentine Designation Fitzroy, Hoya

A good read being......
Reasons in Writing.
Ewen Southby-Tailyour
 
#15
Ewen S-T is a very, very vocal and impassioned critic of the CO 1 WG over his actions, or more accurately inaction, on that day. Long should he remain so.
 

seaweed

LE
Book Reviewer
#16
Were the WG Officers on board Sir G ever censured in any way for getting so many of their men killed and injured? Also, l seem to remember reading that the reason the men were in Sir G n the first place was because they had not hit their fitness hard enough on the way south and therefore couldn't do the trip on foot.
 
#17
Were the WG Officers on board Sir G ever censured in any way for getting so many of their men killed and injured? Also, l seem to remember reading that the reason the men were in Sir G n the first place was because they had not hit their fitness hard enough on the way south and therefore couldn't do the trip on foot.
Hitting their fitness on the way South was never going to compensate for the phys culture of the maroon and green.

That sort of conditioning starts in the induction phases and continues in Unit.

Physical ability is a good basis for the individual to build on, but esprit de corps and flat out refusal to be defeated by any adversity is what drives people in those formations on.

That is very evident at all ranks, from the commanders making the decisions to the blokes digging out to deliver.
 
#19
Have to disagree with that one.
In 1975 my Regiment did a UN tour of Cyprus, we had 2 x Coys of 1 DWR "under command" It was called the 1 RTR group, and the RTR flag flew alongside the Union Jack, The flag of the DWR was nowhere to be seen, that's how it works. If you don't like it, fair enough, but that's how it works, the unit running the show is the unit that get's the credit. That plaque does however give due credit to 40 Cdo RM so I don't see what the fuss is all about? If the bootnecks don't like it then get them to open their wallets and put up a plaque of their own!
 
#20
It appears to be an attempt to regain some kudos, decades later for what was obviously a disasterous campaign for The Welsh Guards. Thankfully, enough Royal Marines are still about who won’t allow history to be massaged.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
M Gunners 18
Itainthalfhotmum The Intelligence Cell 1
P Gunners 4

Similar threads


Latest Threads

Top