Parachute Vs Amphibious Capability

If you were in government and had to take away one of the two, what would you keep, Amphibious Or Parachuting?

 

If I were in government, I would be looking to make cuts to benefits/overseas aid/MPs expenses, anything non productive, rather than lose good quality capabilities from our defence structure.

The opening question IMO is stupid, therefore very possible considering the twats in the HoC, both parties.

 

Airborne is probably better for short/medium entry, you need AAR / friendly bases.

There are relatively fewer landlocked countries and the amphibious troops bring their own base (the ships).

 

Why not tell us who you are, what your initial thoughts are (& why) rather than having us do all of your research / homework etc?

 

Heavens that is some bite for someone who has only posted once, respect.

 

Here's a question. How do you inculcate the ethos of the Parachute Regiment into the British line regiments? As they slim down, you probably just need a lot PARA type blokes with their nails ethos sans parachutes; but as regards capability, I would support the Marines.

 

are Marines, surely?

 

Marines have a tendency to think, I am led to believe, but I really do stand by to be corrected... must change my location status...

 

Yes, I'd noticed that.

 

Out of those two I'd take away pigeons.

 

Pigeonist.

 

Me too, get wasted or give away your Ipod... and they chose...\

Really must grab my coat... and flee this country.

 

I'd take way all Marines from the Parachute Regiment.

 

Bungabunga has been at it on RR too with questions about Naval Surface Combat, Royal Marines role after Afghan and ....... The STC branch.

Me smells journo. And a rubbish one a that.


Sent via Heliograph from the Jebel Birkenhead

 

Or just special needs troll..... Not sure there is much difference there however.


Sent via Heliograph from the Jebel Birkenhead