For the Brits on the boards.

For the Brits on the boards. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

jlf1961 -> For the Brits on the boards. (1/22/2013 2:40:23 PM)
quote: Taliban says Prince Harry has ‘mental problems’ after he compares war with PlayStation Prince Harry might have no remorse over shooting insurgents in Afghanistan, but the Taliban thinks the young royal developed "mental problems" during his four-month tour of duty. The media-savvy insurgent group on Tuesday bashed Harry, the third in line for the British throne, over his recent comparison of shooting Taliban militants with playing video games. source No I am not being snarky, but this is the first time I have ever seen a terrorist organization condemning one of the royal family. Considering the high tech of attack helicopters, I can see his point. With the targeting system in the helmet, and the guns track with head movement, I can see where it would be like a video game.

PeonForHer -> RE: For the Brits on the boards. (1/22/2013 3:12:07 PM)
This would be the same Prince Harry who got photographed in a Nazi fancy dress outfit some time ago. He's inherited the Duke of Edinburgh's natural diplomatic skills, JLF. The lad is a berk. Woe betide him should his helicopter ever get downed in enemy territory. Aside from that: I'm not sure that a member of the UK royal family has been in such a high-profile role in a war zone in recent times. Frankly, this is a balls up.

Politesub53 -> RE: For the Brits on the boards. (1/22/2013 3:23:55 PM)
Despite the odd gaff off duty, Harry has done his bit. This is his second spell in Afghanistan, both in harms way. The first time he was a spotter for his regiment. Yes he did say his role was similar to video games, then again, it is. Considering the press were partly to blame for his mothers death, he was quite cordial with them. The last Royal before him in a war zone was his uncle, Prince Andrew who flew helicopters in the Falklands conflict. William also does a dangerous job flying air sea rescue helicopters.

Moonhead -> RE: For the Brits on the boards. (1/23/2013 4:35:46 AM)
I've never bought that the press are culpable for the idiot's mother's death, Ps: they didn't encourage her to try to outrun them with a pissed up driver at the wheel of the car, and trying to pin that on the fourth estate is pretty reprehensible, imo.

Real0ne -> RE: For the Brits on the boards. (1/23/2013 5:33:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 Despite the odd gaff off duty, Harry has done his bit. This is his second spell in Afghanistan, both in harms way. The first time he was a spotter for his regiment. Yes he did say his role was similar to video games, then again, it is. Considering the press were partly to blame for his mothers death, he was quite cordial with them. The last Royal before him in a war zone was his uncle, Prince Andrew who flew helicopters in the Falklands conflict. William also does a dangerous job flying air sea rescue helicopters. gives a whole new meaning to "Keyboard Commando".

Powergamz1 -> RE: For the Brits on the boards. (1/23/2013 6:00:57 AM)
So machine guns are a good thing... in royal hands. [sm=rofl.gif]

HarryVanWinkle -> RE: For the Brits on the boards. (1/25/2013 4:40:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 quote: Taliban says Prince Harry has ‘mental problems’ after he compares war with PlayStation Prince Harry might have no remorse over shooting insurgents in Afghanistan, but the Taliban thinks the young royal developed "mental problems" during his four-month tour of duty. The media-savvy insurgent group on Tuesday bashed Harry, the third in line for the British throne, over his recent comparison of shooting Taliban militants with playing video games. source No I am not being snarky, but this is the first time I have ever seen a terrorist organization condemning one of the royal family. Considering the high tech of attack helicopters, I can see his point. With the targeting system in the helmet, and the guns track with head movement, I can see where it would be like a video game. If the Taliban say he's sick, he must have done something right. These are the same people who shoot young girls for the crime of trying to get an education. Happily, I'm not faced with this choice, but were I given the choice of living under the rule of the Taliban or under the rule of Prince Harry, it would be a no brainer.

Notsweet -> RE: For the Brits on the boards. (1/25/2013 8:18:32 PM)
My ex was EWO, and worked on the simulators that taught people how to fight. He was also a USAF instructor. He compared them to video games many times. It's no secret that those are being used.

jlf1961 -> RE: For the Brits on the boards. (1/25/2013 8:25:53 PM)
Look with the exception of direct infantry fire at a target or artillery, every other weapon system in helicopters or tanks is done though a computer enhanced image in the targeting system. So yes, it is like a video game. Personally, I preferred being a sniper and acquiring my target through a scope. Long distance, next best thing to being there.

TAFKAA -> RE: For the Brits on the boards. (1/26/2013 2:14:09 AM)
Given that the Taliban likes to murder teenage girls, I think we can safely dismiss anything they have to say about anyone's mental state.

leonine -> RE: For the Brits on the boards. (1/26/2013 4:11:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer Woe betide him should his helicopter ever get downed in enemy territory. I think that already applied before this latest reported comment. His diplomatic skills or evident lack of them would not make much difference. I doubt if any of his colleagues could talk their way out of that situation. quote: Aside from that: I'm not sure that a member of the UK royal family has been in such a high-profile role in a war zone in recent times. Frankly, this is a balls up. Not a balls up but a calculated risk, which has paid off so far. The intended target is the Daily Torygraph consitituency, and with them it's a win-win. If he lives, they love him: if he dies, they're more gung-ho than ever to keep our boys in Afghanistan to get revenge on the ragheads.

PeonForHer -> RE: For the Brits on the boards. (1/26/2013 4:52:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: leonine The intended target is the Daily Torygraph consitituency, and with them it's a win-win. If he lives, they love him: if he dies, they're more gung-ho than ever to keep our boys in Afghanistan to get revenge on the ragheads. One real problem could be if he neither lives nor dies, but gets taken hostage. That was the balls-up that was on my mind. All explored in the Channel 4 drama The Taking of Prince Harry - as reported here by the Torygraph itself.

jlf1961 -> RE: For the Brits on the boards. (1/26/2013 5:02:56 AM)
Ok, granted I am an American. From what I understand, Prince William is not allowed in a combat zone because he is 2nd in line for the throne. That's cool, he has taken other duties in the military that can put him at risk such as flying a rescue helicopter. Prince William also seems to be the brother with the most common sense. As for Prince Harry, come on, how many guys named Harry has enough common sense to keep their mouths shut?

leonine -> RE: For the Brits on the boards. (1/26/2013 6:27:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: ORIGINAL: leonine The intended target is the Daily Torygraph consitituency, and with them it's a win-win. If he lives, they love him: if he dies, they're more gung-ho than ever to keep our boys in Afghanistan to get revenge on the ragheads. One real problem could be if he neither lives nor dies, but gets taken hostage. That was the balls-up that was on my mind. All explored in the Channel 4 drama The Taking of Prince Harry - as reported here by the Torygraph itself. What an awful thought. Weeks or months of nothing on the news but the latest on "the search for Harry" (just imagine how many dirty Bills Cameron could get passed without anyone noticing, and the Opposition not daring to argue because "we're in a national emergency,") a thousand more reservists sent to Afghanistan, and either he eventualy gets rescued by which time we're committed to be there for years, or he gets beheaded and we commit the entire Army to comb the country for the handful of bandits responsible, and eventually get a drone to kill some random guys with guns so we can claim we got them and honour is satisfied. Like I said, for the backwoods Tories and the army, it's a win-win. They even have a backup Crown Prince ready. ("A paranoid is someone who's noticed what's really going on" - William Burroughs)

Baroana -> RE: For the Brits on the boards. (1/26/2013 6:52:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer This would be the same Prince Harry who got photographed in a Nazi fancy dress outfit some time ago. He's inherited the Duke of Edinburgh's natural diplomatic skills, JLF. The lad is a berk. Woe betide him should his helicopter ever get downed in enemy territory. Aside from that: I'm not sure that a member of the UK royal family has been in such a high-profile role in a war zone in recent times. Frankly, this is a balls up. Hehe. Fancy dress party. "Glass of water for Mr. Grainger!"

JstAnotherSub -> RE: For the Brits on the boards. (1/26/2013 6:56:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer This would be the same Prince Harry who got photographed in a Nazi fancy dress outfit some time ago. He's inherited the Duke of Edinburgh's natural diplomatic skills, JLF. The lad is a berk. Woe betide him should his helicopter ever get downed in enemy territory. Aside from that: I'm not sure that a member of the UK royal family has been in such a high-profile role in a war zone in recent times. Frankly, this is a balls up. Could you translate the bolded to English please? [:D]

Baroana -> RE: For the Brits on the boards. (1/26/2013 6:57:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JstAnotherSub quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer This would be the same Prince Harry who got photographed in a Nazi fancy dress outfit some time ago. He's inherited the Duke of Edinburgh's natural diplomatic skills, JLF. The lad is a berk. Woe betide him should his helicopter ever get downed in enemy territory. Aside from that: I'm not sure that a member of the UK royal family has been in such a high-profile role in a war zone in recent times. Frankly, this is a balls up. Could you translate the bolded to English please? [:D] You mean "to American"

PeonForHer -> RE: For the Brits on the boards. (1/26/2013 7:06:27 AM)
FR I thought "balls up" was an American term? Well, you folks have lost some credit there - it's a goodie.

Baroana -> RE: For the Brits on the boards. (1/26/2013 7:08:48 AM)
Balls up? Not an expression here. Does it mean the opposite of balls down?

PeonForHer -> RE: For the Brits on the boards. (1/26/2013 7:12:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: leonine What an awful thought. Weeks or months of nothing on the news but the latest on "the search for Harry" (just imagine how many dirty Bills Cameron could get passed without anyone noticing, and the Opposition not daring to argue because "we're in a national emergency,") a thousand more reservists sent to Afghanistan, and either he eventualy gets rescued by which time we're committed to be there for years, or he gets beheaded and we commit the entire Army to comb the country for the handful of bandits responsible, and eventually get a drone to kill some random guys with guns so we can claim we got them and honour is satisfied. Like I said, for the backwoods Tories and the army, it's a win-win. They even have a backup Crown Prince ready. ("A paranoid is someone who's noticed what's really going on" - William Burroughs) Deeply cynical though all that is, it could well be right. (Apart from the 'crown prince back-up' bit - Harry is the back-up - to William - isn't he? Mind you, I don't keep up with this royal lingo.) Somebody's head will have to roll if anything untoward happens Capt Wales, but not that of anyone in government - they can blame the military.

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875