Re: NAC units, was Odd FT Idea

You wrote: 

>Speaking as an Englishman, I can't really see they Gurkhas becomming 
part >of the ESU.  Although the British Army has made drastic cuts in 
Gurkha >units the Gurkhas are still an important unit with a rich 
history.

Why not?  Since getting cut, there are more Gurkhas in the Indian Army 
than the British.

>US forces actually merge.  th etactical doctrines for the Royal 
Marines and >Paras are so completely at odds with those for the 
American forces (hey, it >would mean that the US troops have to start 
tabbing with bergens [walking >places with a big backpack] instead of 

Do note that the Royal Marines and Paras are LIGHT infantry.  Our LIGHT 
infantry walks just as far, just as fast, with just as large a load.  
Granted we like to involve helicopters--but the Brits do too, it's just 
that during Corporate all the helicopters were on a ship that sank.  
Your Mechanized types integrated pretty well ours during Desert Storm.	
And as far as a lot of support types, it's pretty much interchangable.	
All those years of STANAGs.

John M. Atkinson