Armchair warriors and R to I

Discussion in 'The NAAFI Bar' started by Certa_Cito, Apr 8, 2007.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Less than 12 hours

  2. Between 12 and 24 hours

    0 vote(s)
  3. More than 24 hours

  4. Complete non starter, cos they haven´t got the balls

  1. I´ve noticed during the last few days, that quite a lot of bar-room heroes and armchair warriors have been on here slating the RN / RM personnel for "rolling over" and not sticking to the big 4. (Funnily enough the majority of them have only got very low post counts :roll: )

    Now wouldn´t it be fun if all of these ruffy, tuffy know it alls turned up at any FIBUA site in the UK and then a certain Joint Services cadre that specialises in this kind of thing turned up to play :twisted:

    How long would these stiff upper lipped "ladies and gentlemen" last, before they fezzed up to being TB´s bezzer or worse ?

    Before these aforementioned people start flaming me, here´s a few facts: I´m an ex scaley. I wasn´t in a trade that was classed as "prone to capture", so I have no experience of R to I exercises. If however, this certain cadre "played" with me for two weeks, I very much doubt whether I´d stick to the big 4 :omfg:
  2. there must have been a lot of pressure put on for them to start talking i suggest isolation and disorientation was primarily used with a bit of a threat of violence thrown in,but what exactly did they divulge............not a lot.the iranians probably knew more than what the sailors and marines told for their apologies most of them were smurking and treating the filming as a joke.
  3. Be honest..if you were captured and taken POW, or detained and you were in danger and or being tortured many would release more info than the big 4?

    Quite a few i might think.

    Andy mcnabb didnt just give the bid 4...initially he did til they beat him to a pulp, and he was SAS who are trained in this to a very high level.
  4. alot of people on here are so quick to suggest what they would have done.

    a mate of mine got flagged down for speeding the other day, he said he had the oppertunity to escape but had fear over what might happen so he pulled over anyway. everybody immediately flamed him for not being a hero. he was happy he only got a caution and 60 quid fine not locked up following a police chase.

    a long decision time is a luxury of the armchair general. put on the spot my mate and the captured marines/navy bods made good choices. i dont think anyone else will ever know what they would do unless they actually were there.
  5. Auld-Yin

    Auld-Yin LE Reviewer Book Reviewer Reviews Editor

    It would appear to me that many people would have liked these serving sailors and marines to have been tortured and perhaps killed in order that their "righteous indignation" could have been poured on Iran.

    In my opinion, we have got 15 VALUABLE trained and experienced service personnel back with very little, if anything, being given up in exchange.

    A successful end to a fraught situation and a good solution.
  6. By the very nature of the compostion of the Boarding Teams (You'll do etc etc), that would mean every trade in the RN would be prone to capture.

    Anyways, I'm sure the Iranians would have several methods of making even a CAC trained person sing like a canary.

    Hence the 'need to know' rule that tends to be in place for classified info.
  7. Good Thread C_C.

    I doubt we will see the knobbers on here trying to defend themselves and their views - shame because they would be savaged.
  8. Some good opinions from guys who care.
    What if our guys - all of them not just THEM and proxy-THEM were told that after 24 hours (so we could change codes etc) they could say anything they wished. Go beyond no/rank etc. We - the gubmint - would give maximum publicity to this freedom to talk. Add that this is because we expect them to be pressured and see no reason for them to be flogged for not talking. That would mean that the credability of anything they say is compromised and useless. Therefore, the enemy has no gain in torture.
  9. I just wish some of them hadn't looked so bloody happy on Iranian TV. One of them looked very chirpy, almost to the point of "look at me I'm on TV". Tell them all you want but don't look like you're trying to get a job as a day time TV host.
  10. Interesting thread.

    My take on this event is that having found themselves surrounded and outgunned, they did the right thing; rather than start GW3 and a fight they couldn't win, they surrendered.

    As for CAC, I think its debatable. If you look at the standards of CAC in WW2, Korea, Vietnam, Robert Nairac, Falklands and GW1 then there can be no comparison.

    There is no allegation of physical mistreatment but it seems there was some sleep deprivation, solitary confinement and TQ. To be fair, there must have been a huge level of shock of capture, but they certainly did not "resist" in the sense that we are used to.

    Their statements and letters were stilted and gave no impression of being spontaneous or truthful. I think that most of the criticism has been levelled at them for their final comments, smiles and handshakes on the way out of Iran.

    So, do you sacrifice your pride and dignity and get out as fast as you can or do you play the hard man and get tortured and imprisoned longer as a result?

    My view is that they were right to surrender in the first place - it was right tactically, but more importantly it was right strategically. I have misgivings about the subsequent actions both in and now outside captivity, because, combined with the surrender it has portrayed the RN and the UK around the world as being weak, soft and hapless.

    Whether or not they can be held to blame for being captured in the first place or for their actions in and out of captivity is, of course a different matter, however, you can guarantee that the level of CAC training afforded to National Servicemen in WW2 and Korea was pretty minimal too.

    Its easy to close ranks against the armchair generals, but they are judging this event against the standards of another age. The question is are those standards still relevant?
  11. The 24 hr rule is what I was told when I was in many moons ago - Number, Rank, Name for 24 hrs then do your best to survive with as much honour as you can.

    Could I have withstood hard torture for 24 hrs ? f*ck knows probably not

    Could I have appeared on TV without grinning ? f*ck knows probably yes
  12. I for one am judging according to the standards in place when I was in. I would have hoped that those standards were still in place and always will be. If what we have seen on TV is the new standard I'm dismayed, but new times new rules ?
  13. Some of them did appear a bit over happ on the tv. Then again, we dont know if they were told to put oin the act.

    Mind you, one of the navy boys (not Marines) looked a bit of a tit anyway.
  14. If you have never been on TV before this could be a difficult call to make, how you would respond on the day. In JSIW they had people who could talk for days about "Leakage".

    In this kind of situation individuals may be smiling because of the sheer embarassment of their predicament or because they find the whole thing wildly sureal. Perhaps they are glad they are geting an opportunity to show they are still alive.

    Pretty sure they are not smilling "beacuse they are on the telly", I think the Armchair psychoanalysts have had their day around here.

    The Navy have been talking about lean manning for years, what if this is just another bi-product of a group of individuals who feel continually under-resourced and sold-out by the CoC?
  15. Someone (Who was better with words than me) once said "There is no such thing as extraordinary people, only ordinary people in extraordinary situations"

    Who can say how they would react until the pressure is on