Time has moved on.
Using “Spic” to describe a person who @Effendi has only seen in a picture.Good God.
I bet you tapped the side of your nose as you typed that? - shades of Brotherton Lad.
Cunningly, you never answered my question:
'Snippity . . . It’s ironic when two serving officers think it’s casual racism . . . snip .'
And how does that inform the debate?
So the IS troops debus and then the vehicle moves up into supporting position with its main weaponry (i.e. blows itself up)? I guess that makes it more of an IFV than an APC.The vehicle is dual purpose. It's armoured to carry personnel (hey! that's an idea) but is also loaded with various types of explosives. When one of those comes racing towards the YPG/J positions everyone and their camel is firing at the thing so the driver need protection. I assume that once the personnel are debussed the vehicle cracks on with the martyr at the wheel.
We had a look inside and there were what looked to be 2 different triggers for an IED.
Oh, the "N" word and "Pak*", I realise both can cause offence to certain people, I have never maliciously called anyone either of those.
Lets look at the "N" word first: Back when I was a trainee copper at Chantmarle, police training centre, the HO sent along a nice bloke from a university to talk to us about various things. One week it was racism and we covered everything from Sikhs refusing to wear motorcycle helmets, being aware of the diverse ethnic groups and not using words like the "N" word, or "Pak*". Being a good lad I never did, so imagine my surprise when I am out and about on the street interacting with the public and the local black yoof are loudly referring to each other using the "N" word. Then a few years later I joined the army and there I was in the NAAFI during basic after we had all been told to be nice and respect each other. A group of black lads who hung around together were forever loudly calling each other the "N" word.
My final "N" word dit; the Mrs as the CHRO oversee's recruitment and for senior roles she is recruiting she has her ex-USMC intelligence bloke who is nowadays HR check the web. He does a dive having a look for social media accounts and looking for possible warning flags that might affect the organisation if the person is hired. I found out about this last year when she was trying to fill a top level finance role with an accountant. They got it down to 2 candidates and K. did his web dive and came back with something to report. The favourite candidate had a huge faceplate, or instagram account, showing a very active social life, not a problem, but what was a problem was that she kept referring to all her black mates as "N" this, "N" that, and "N" the other. The Mrs being ever so correct about such things always has a roundtable HR meeting when it comes to eliminating potential senior staff, or firing, senior staff. Her roundtable consists of her senior managers who are a mix of black, brown, yellow and white managers, in fact the wifes number two is a lovely black lady, single mum of 2 kids, and she earns, with bonus, around $300K a year. They all decided that the candidate who referred to her mates using the "N" word was out of order and that if the "N" word rule applies to one then it applies to all..............and not selectively. The candidate they binned was black.
As for using the "Pak*" word; yes it might cause offence to some so safer to errr on the side of caution.
However, though I respect the sensitivities of individuals I have never understood why they are upset by it. It is an abbreviation of the name of the country they come from, is it not? So, with that logic, should we, as British citizens, not be equally highly offended, report people to the police, get on our high horses, and board the outrage bus when people abbreviate the word British to Brit? What do you think?
If a rule is applied to one then it needs to be applied to everyone equally without let, or favour.
So please tell all the black people to stop referring to each other using the "N" word, and also tell the world to stop calling us "Brits". And, back to my original point, again, why is it different?