Prev: Re: KNOCKING THE ARMY-Conversion of NAC w/berets to ball caps Next: Re: Coastal rules [DS] Hidden Units and Recon by Fire

Re: KNOCKING THE ARMY-Conversion of NAC w/berets to ball caps

From: John Leary <john_t_leary@y...>
Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 17:06:40 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: KNOCKING THE ARMY-Conversion of NAC w/berets to ball caps


--- John Lambshead <pjdl@nhm.ac.uk> wrote:
> Interesting. You do not rate the Royal Marine
> Commandoes, the Parachute 
> Regiment or The French Foreign Legion then?
> John
-----
The key is in 'inversly proportional'.
A few units makes the thing a distinction,
all units makes it general issue.
(You naturally have an argument that the FFL
IS the French army, but I digress.)

> 
> At 11:56 31/03/2002 -0800, you wrote:
> 
> >--- Scott Case <tgunner@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > As an US Army vet I'll toss my .02 in...
> > >
> > > I think the beret is stupid.
> > >
> >
> >
> >The combat ability of an army is inversly
> >proportional to the number of berets
> >worn by the troops.
> >
> >Bye for now,
> >John L.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax


Prev: Re: KNOCKING THE ARMY-Conversion of NAC w/berets to ball caps Next: Re: Coastal rules [DS] Hidden Units and Recon by Fire