What's new

Vietnam Defence Forum

For the 1988 sea fight,
1) there were also unarmed Chinese soldiers standing in the water!
2) the Chinese ships used guns or artillery only in the fight. The VN ships had guns or artillery as well !
3) The Chinese ships were almost naked to air. But Vietnam at that time had SU22 already! (Vietnam had its first SU-22 in 1979). If the SU22 took off and reached the fight area, it could be almost a disaster to PLA Navy. Thanks to god, SU22 not taking off, otherwise the history might be completely changed!!!

If there is anyone should be blamed for the death of the VN soldiers, that should be the VPA leadership. They sent the soldiers that "don't want to fight"; they offered few naval protection to the soldiers; they didn't use SU-22, which could bring a nightmare to the PLA Navy. So, instead of posting nonsense here, you'd better write a letter to the son or daughter of the VPA leadership then to ask them whey their father be so stxxid in commanding the 1988 sea fight with China. Maybe you can start your letter with the following words from "The Art of War" By Sun Tzu

"Now the general who wins a battle makes many calculations in his temple ere the battle is fought. The general who loses a battle makes but few calculations beforehand. Thus do many calculations lead to victory, and few calculations to defeat: how much more no calculation at all! It is by attention to this point that I can foresee who is likely to win or lose"
you should look back at the time, when this clash happened, the year of 1988, to understand.

many factors:

  • VN was at war with China, with the PLA artillery repeaty shelling our border cities, PLA infantry making incursions into VN.
  • CN supported the remains of Cambodia Red Khmer army with money and weapons in their hideouts in Thailand.
    they posed a serious threat to the new from VN supported Cambodian government.
  • all of VN resources were nearly exhausted, with economy collapsing, inflation skyrocketing, shortages of everything from food to electricity, millions of refugees
  • total arms and economic embargo by America, Japan and the Western world
  • ASEAN members turned against VN.
  • the sense in VN, feeling the incoming collapse of the USSR and the Eastern bloc. thus, the loss of the major backbone of VN in terms of military and economy.
In short, VN had reached the end of the road. the dead end. we could not continue.

why VN did not send Su22 fighter jets, annihilating the PLA naval escort fleet, taking back the few rocks?

there was a choice to make:

escalate the conflict, prolonging VN suffering or swallow the loss, accepting the bitter pill?

Considering VN ultimate goal was to end the war and to pursue normalisation with China, you may now understand the strategy of VN after the clash in the Spratlys.

"The Art of War" is not unknown in VN.

Accepting the loss of a battle to win the war.

The bully policy of China? What a joke! China already shows a surprising "self-control" in military spending. According to SIPRI (Stockholm International Peace Research Institute), China spends only 1.9% of the GDP on military, while the spending rate of Vietnam is 2.3%, Russia 5.4%, USA 3.3%.
(FYI: For the China figure, SIPRI mentioned: The figures are for estimated total military expenditure, including estimates for items not included in the official defence budget. )

Don't try to blame China for the arm race across ASEAN. Just take an example, Thailand is investing heavily on its navy and air force, but who is a bigger concern to Thailand? Vietnam or China?

Vietnam's 2014 GDP was 186.2 billion USD, or 1,160 billion CNY. Shenzhen, a city from Guangdong Province of China, its 2014 GDP was 1,600 billion CNY. See? The GDP of the whole Vietnam is even significantly smaller than one single city of China! Why should we worry about the arm race with Vietnam?

Arm race has its own cost! The more you spending on military, the less you spend on education, infrastructure, health, scientific research, industrialization, etc, which in the long run, will harm the economic development of your country. That said, to invite Vietnam to run an arm race with us is exactly what we want!

For China, we have a strong manufacturing base, therefore the money we spend on new military equipment, the money we spend on J10, J11, J15, J16, J20, 052C, 052D, submarines, Dongfeng-family missiles, different kinds of satellites, etc, will eventually be kept within our own economy circulation. The money we spend on these equipment
- will turn to be the wages of our scientists, engineers and workers, so better talents could be attracted;
- will turn to be the funds for the defense industry to upgrade their manufacturing equipment
- will turn to be the profits of the defense industry so they could invest more on new weapons R&D
- will turn to be the taxes paid to government so the money becomes the government budget again

But for Vietnam, the money you spend on new military equipment unfortunately turns to be
- wages of Russian scientists, engineers and workers
- funds for the Russian defense industry to upgrade their manufacturing equipment
- profits of the Russian defense industry
- taxes paid to Russian government

You must be thrilled to see this! Right?
ok what you say with some nuances I don´t agree is correct. but I missed the point you wanted to make.

state your point!

what is your conclusion?
 
What is Russia position on the current mess in the SC Sea?
Will Russia intervene in a military clash between China and Vietnam or between China and the United States?

more questions than answers

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeremymaxie/2016/05/09/russias-south-china-sea-conundrum/#34877f964fc6

pictures of the Russia destroyer "Admiral Panteleyev" port call to Da-Nang.

960x0.jpg


vov_hai_quan_1_TPUE.jpg


vov_hai_quan_8_AXIH.jpg



vov_hai_quan_6_UCBO.jpg


vov_hai_quan_4_BHGX.jpg
 
a selection of ships produced by the domestic shipyard SÔNG THU

HSV111.jpg



MPV.jpg


in_006.jpg



DST.JPG



SPA.jpg



XUONG1.jpg



DN2000.jpg



TSHD.jpg
 
Can you fire a shotgun without buttstock or grip? Technical, Yes - "GIVEN YOU CAN ACHIEVE THAT GRIP FORCE without the actual butt and grip", but it will be all over the place and funny enough, the only way you can fire a shotgun without the butts and grip would be pointing it directly upward which would give you the maximum grip of the barrel and the slide.

Fire a shot gun that way is "UNSAFE" and that would be the biggest safety there were that actually concern you, you don't fire a weapon unless you know it is safe to fire, now imagine you are doing this to a M203 launcher, would it be safe to fire a M203 Launcher that way? I mean if I fire a round, I want to know where it lands, if you do it with a M203, it will simply goes everywhere, depending on the recoil or where you finger and palm is gripping the weapon.

Have you actually used a M203 before? Strange that you will say this



Can you tell me what is the last point on handling a M203 in a firing positions in the M203 qualification course??


The question was simple...Can we shoot a M203 alone without support?. I said you can because there is no form of safety to prevent it being fired and correct your error, and I also said it horrible and crazy to fire it because of the recoil so why you just repeating the same thing I wrote but with different words? I gave the correct answer and you questioning my knowledge and qualifications? Let me remind you that you gave the wrong answer to that question, logically I should questioning your knowledge and qualifications .

Did I said use your imagination if you only have M203 alone and want to fire it? People already build improvised grenade launcher, what make you think that we can’t improvise something (handmade grip or support) around a M203 to fire it. I saw a picture someone attach M203 on a revolver and it work

For the 1988 sea fight,
1) there were also unarmed Chinese soldiers standing in the water!
2) the Chinese ships used guns or artillery only in the fight. The VN ships had guns or artillery as well !
3) The Chinese ships were almost naked to air. But Vietnam at that time had SU22 already! (Vietnam had its first SU-22 in 1979). If the SU22 took off and reached the fight area, it could be almost a disaster to PLA Navy. Thanks to god, SU22 not taking off, otherwise the history might be completely changed!!!

If there is anyone should be blamed for the death of the VN soldiers, that should be the VPA leadership. They sent the soldiers that "don't want to fight"; they offered few naval protection to the soldiers; they didn't use SU-22, which could bring a nightmare to the PLA Navy. So, instead of posting nonsense here, you'd better write a letter to the son or daughter of the VPA leadership then to ask them whey their father be so stxxid in commanding the 1988 sea fight with China. Maybe you can start your letter with the following words from "The Art of War" By Sun Tzu

"Now the general who wins a battle makes many calculations in his temple ere the battle is fought. The general who loses a battle makes but few calculations beforehand. Thus do many calculations lead to victory, and few calculations to defeat: how much more no calculation at all! It is by attention to this point that I can foresee who is likely to win or lose"

You talk about a small skirmish like a great battle that PLA was exceptional. But I really like if you can explain how great PLA regular troop perform against Vietnamese militia units and border guard units during the 1979 conflict and the reasons for quick withdraw of PLA after a month of combat. PLA should teach all armies in the world how to win battles and wars because they have some many many great battles like Tibet invasion (how to fight against a force with obsolete weapons), the great strategy of human waves in Korea war, the 1979 fight against Vietnamese militia and border guards units and also the Tianamen square (great battle against protesters).

The bully policy of China? What a joke! China already shows a surprising "self-control" in military spending. According to SIPRI (Stockholm International Peace Research Institute), China spends only 1.9% of the GDP on military, while the spending rate of Vietnam is 2.3%, Russia 5.4%, USA 3.3%.
(FYI: For the China figure, SIPRI mentioned: The figures are for estimated total military expenditure, including estimates for items not included in the official defence budget. )

Don't try to blame China for the arm race across ASEAN. Just take an example, Thailand is investing heavily on its navy and air force, but who is a bigger concern to Thailand? Vietnam or China?

Vietnam's 2014 GDP was 186.2 billion USD, or 1,160 billion CNY. Shenzhen, a city from Guangdong Province of China, its 2014 GDP was 1,600 billion CNY. See? The GDP of the whole Vietnam is even significantly smaller than one single city of China! Why should we worry about the arm race with Vietnam?

Arm race has its own cost! The more you spending on military, the less you spend on education, infrastructure, health, scientific research, industrialization, etc, which in the long run, will harm the economic development of your country. That said, to invite Vietnam to run an arm race with us is exactly what we want!

For China, we have a strong manufacturing base, therefore the money we spend on new military equipment, the money we spend on J10, J11, J15, J16, J20, 052C, 052D, submarines, Dongfeng-family missiles, different kinds of satellites, etc, will eventually be kept within our own economy circulation. The money we spend on these equipment
- will turn to be the wages of our scientists, engineers and workers, so better talents could be attracted;
- will turn to be the funds for the defense industry to upgrade their manufacturing equipment
- will turn to be the profits of the defense industry so they could invest more on new weapons R&D
- will turn to be the taxes paid to government so the money becomes the government budget again

But for Vietnam, the money you spend on new military equipment unfortunately turns to be
- wages of Russian scientists, engineers and workers
- funds for the Russian defense industry to upgrade their manufacturing equipment
- profits of the Russian defense industry
- taxes paid to Russian government

You must be thrilled to see this! Right?

Give your advices to your Pakistan ally. Anyway, you forget that before your build your own fighters and weapons, how much China spent on Russian weapons and investing money on stealing technology?
 
Last edited:
World | Tue May 10, 2016 11:50am IST
Related: World, South Asia

Obama weighs historic decision on whether to lift Vietnam arms ban
WASHINGTON | By David Brunnstrom, Lesley Wroughton and Matt Spetalnick
Reuters


r



U.S. President Barack Obama is considering whether to lift a three-decade-old arms embargo on Vietnam, U.S. officials say, as he weighs calls to forge closer military ties with Hanoi against concerns over its poor human rights record.

The debate within the U.S. administration is coming to a head amid preparations for Obama's trip to Vietnam this month to bolster ties between Washington and Hanoi, former wartime enemies who are increasingly partners against China's growing territorial assertiveness in the South China Sea.


BALANCE OF POWER

The full removal of the embargo – something Vietnam has long sought - would sweep away one of the last major vestiges of the Vietnam War era and advance the normalization of relations begun 21 years ago. It would also likely anger Beijing, which condemned Obama's partial lifting of the arms ban in 2014 as an interference in the region's balance of power.

On one side of the internal debate, some White House and State Department aides say it would be premature to completely end restrictions on lethal military assistance before Vietnam's communist government has made more progress on human rights.

They are at odds with other officials, including many at the Pentagon, who argue bolstering Vietnam's ability to counter a rising China should take priority, according to people with knowledge of the discussions.

Boosting the security of allies and partners has been a major thrust of Obama's strategic "pivot" toward the Asia-Pacific region, a centerpiece of his foreign policy.

Even as Vietnam seeks warmer relations with the United States, though, U.S. officials are mindful that suspicions linger among Communist Party conservatives that Washington wants to undermine their country's one-party system.

One major factor in Obama's decision will be whether Vietnam will move forward on major U.S. defense deals, a potential boon for American jobs that could soften congressional opposition to lifting the weapons ban, according to one source close to White House policymaking.

There have been questions about whether Vietnam, which has relied mostly on Russian weapons suppliers since the Cold War, is ready to start buying U.S.-made systems. Diplomats have seen increasing signs that Hanoi is seeking ties with U.S. defense contractors but Washington wants tangible commitments, according to the source.

Vietnam is big buyer of weapons from Russia, its Cold War-era patron, including Kilo-class submarines and corvettes. It could look to the United States for items such as P-3 surveillance planes and missiles to beef up its naval forces and coastal defenses.

At the Pentagon, the prevailing view appears to be more in line with Defense Secretary Ash Carter's congressional testimony late last month that he would support lifting restrictions on the sale of U.S. weapons to Vietnam.

That comment raised eyebrows at the White House, where officials said Obama had yet to rule on the issue.

Obama's final decision could hinge on whatever recommendations come from ongoing visits to Vietnam by Tom Malinowski, the administration's top human rights envoy, and Daniel Russel, the Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia and the Pacific.

Speaking in Hanoi on Tuesday, Russel said the embargo lifting was still "under periodic review" and would be looked at seriously, although he made it clear Vietnam's commitment to human rights would be central to any decision.

"One of the important factors that would make a lift of the ban possible would be to continue forward momentum in meeting universal human rights standards and progress in important legal reform," Russel told reporters.

Malinowski is not scheduled to speak to media during his trip.

It was not clear whether Obama was leaning for or against ending the embargo ahead of his trip, which will make him the third consecutive U.S. president to visit Vietnam.

Obama eased the ban on lethal arms sales to Vietnam in October 2014, allowing shipments of defensive maritime equipment to help Hanoi build up its deterrent to China's pursuit of its claims in the South China Sea, which conflict with those of its neighbors such as Vietnam and U.S. ally the Philippines.


"UNDESERVED AT THIS TIME"

John Sifton, Asia advocacy director for Human Rights Watch, said lifting the arms ban would be "undeserved at this time." The group, in an April 27 letter sent to Obama, described the Vietnamese government as "among the most repressive in the world."

While a number of U.S. lawmakers favor closer military ties with Vietnam because of shared concerns about China, others have deep misgivings.

Democratic U.S. Representative Loretta Sanchez, a member of the Congressional Caucus on Vietnam who also has a large Vietnamese-American voting bloc in her California district, said lifting the embargo would be "giving a free pass to a government that continually harasses, detains and imprisons its citizens."

Obama has the power to bypass Congress to lift the embargo. But his administration would hope for support from Republican U.S. Senator John McCain, a decorated former prisoner of war in North Vietnam who backed the 2014 partial lifting.

Some U.S. officials see signs that Vietnam is starting to pay attention to human rights criticism. But concerns remain over the government's heavy-handedness toward political opponents and treatment of workers and there is worry that Washington will lose some leverage if it gives up the arms embargo without securing concessions for reforms.

One senior U.S. official suggested that it might be best for now to "set the issue of the lethal weapons ban aside."

"These things do take time," the official said. But others said the door should remain open to lifting the embargo as preparations proceed for Obama's visit.

If Obama opts against removing the ban for now, another option that might mollify the Vietnamese would be creating a "working group" to map out the path toward doing so, one U.S. official said.



(Additional reporting by My Pham in HANOI and Phil Stewart in Washington; Writing by Matt Spetalnick; Editing by Stuart Grudgings and Nick Macfie)
 
Last edited:
Not officially released, still keeping secret: the new 4,000 tons vessel for the Coast Guard. DN-4000 class built by Sông Thu Shipyard. the new vessel can have a look like this.

tap-doan-damen-gioi-thieu-tau-tuan-tra-moi-141118274-1441911134625-11-0-266-500-crop-1441911193377.jpg
 
new in service: a fleet of replenishment vessels, H222 class, for the Navy

specs:

assembled by the domestic shipyard Hồng Hà
displacement 4,300 tons, length 90m, wide 14m, speed 13.5 knots, range 6,000 miles
can operate 6 days and nights at sea, storm conditions 9-11
capacity: 2,000m3 fuel, 500m3 fresh water, 300 tons food, 30 tons frozen food, 80 tons vegetables


216205_e7e5b63fd91a5bdd374fd65d4f654d7d.jpg


nghiem-thu-tau-tiep-dau-lon-nhat-cua-csb-viet-nam_9622418.jpg



nghiem-thu-tau-tiep-dau-lon-nhat-cua-csb-viet-nam_9623295.jpg


nghiem-thu-tau-tiep-dau-lon-nhat-cua-csb-viet-nam_9624704.jpg



nghiem-thu-tau-tiep-dau-lon-nhat-cua-csb-viet-nam_962492.jpg


nghiem-thu-tau-tiep-dau-lon-nhat-cua-csb-viet-nam_9622139.jpg



nghiem-thu-tau-tiep-dau-lon-nhat-cua-csb-viet-nam_9623196.jpg


nghiem-thu-tau-tiep-dau-lon-nhat-cua-csb-viet-nam_9623379.jpg
 
The question was simple...Can we shoot a M203 alone without support?. I said you can because there is no form of safety to prevent it being fired and correct your error, and I also said it horrible and crazy to fire it because of the recoil so why you just repeating the same thing I wrote but with different words? I gave the correct answer and you questioning my knowledge and qualifications? Let me remind you that you gave the wrong answer to that question, logically I should questioning your knowledge and qualifications .

Did I said use your imagination if you only have M203 alone and want to fire it? People already build improvised grenade launcher, what make you think that we can’t improvise something (handmade grip or support) around a M203 to fire it. I saw a picture someone attach M203 on a revolver and it work

oh well, yet another faker..............If you care to read my previous post again, you will know I have been leaving crumb for my question.

You cannot fire a M203 without grip, simply because there were NO SAFETY to control the launcher. One important step on firing a M203 is to have your launcher in "SAFE" position before you open the breech and insert a grenade. You cannot "Lock" the trigger and make safe if you do not have the back bits of the M203. If you cannot lock the launcher, you cannot safely load a round in it.

By the way, if you are really trained in whatever purpose and capacity to use a M203 in the field, you would have answer my question with a question. You should ask which FP I am referring to. And to really answer my question, you would have known that the last part of firing an M203 in a supported position is that the launcher should not touch the support.

I wasn't so sure about you are faking your "Military" experience before, but now It's am quite clear, your post with the word you choose to use does not seems professional to me. Nobody with any amount of training would use the word "Cannon" when you are talking about a shotgun. It's like a fighter pilot yell "Fire" when he fired a missile. Word have some other meaning when you are using it in the field. And even tho any given service member may not know all the vocabulary, you would still be briefed with what was called what if you have gone thru basic training, so that you will never call your sidearm a "gun". From that and the content of your post, I can conclude that you are not Military.
 
Vietnam’s Cam Ranh Airport Developments
May 9, 2016

By Chris Biggers


CSBiggers-Cam-Ranh-Bay-APT-Annotated-1024x538.png



The latest commercial satellite imagery available in Google Earth shows some new developments at Vietnam’s Cam Ranh (Nha Trang) Airport (CXR). In March, the north eastern support area appeared complete and new aircraft environmental shelters were erected on the parking apron. The southwest support area still showed construction activity at several new support and administrative buildings.

As noted previously, the aircraft shelters erected on the southern section were complete by last July and at least two Ka-28 ASW helicopters have been observed in front of the hangars. The helos are thought to support the Russian-built Gepard class frigates and other coastal patrol vessels berthed at the nearby naval base. The Gepard class does not have a built-in hangar for its deployed helos.

Perhaps most importantly, the recent imagery shows a new POL area, maintenance on the parallel taxiway and leveling activity for a second runway. Back in 2014, the press reported that the Vietnam Airlines Corporation had been planning to expand the airport due to the arrival of an increasing number of passengers. The airport, designed to receive 1.6 million per year, was nearing capacity according to the Civil Aviation Authority of Vietnam.

The last report regarding the tender said US-based ADC-HAS Airport had received OPIC approval for a $250 million project for the airport. A quick search over at OPIC’s site however yielded no results.

Apart from ADC-HAS Airports, another US-based airport investor Airis Holdings previously announced plans to put investment dollars into Danang (DAD) and Noi Bai (HAN) airports under the public-private partnership model. Satellite imagery has shown no change with Danang while Noi Bai has received an extensive 139,000 sq meter terminal. The new facility reportedly cost $900 million and doubled the airport’s capacity to 10 million passengers a year. It went into operation by January 2015.

Vietnam has 24 airports and most need to be upgraded to meet growing air transportation demand. Despite the lack of reform, U.S. firms remain increasingly bullish on the country which could provide other opportunities for collaboration.
 
Vietnam’s Cam Ranh Airport Developments
May 9, 2016

By Chris Biggers


CSBiggers-Cam-Ranh-Bay-APT-Annotated-1024x538.png



The latest commercial satellite imagery available in Google Earth shows some new developments at Vietnam’s Cam Ranh (Nha Trang) Airport (CXR). In March, the north eastern support area appeared complete and new aircraft environmental shelters were erected on the parking apron. The southwest support area still showed construction activity at several new support and administrative buildings.

As noted previously, the aircraft shelters erected on the southern section were complete by last July and at least two Ka-28 ASW helicopters have been observed in front of the hangars. The helos are thought to support the Russian-built Gepard class frigates and other coastal patrol vessels berthed at the nearby naval base. The Gepard class does not have a built-in hangar for its deployed helos.

Perhaps most importantly, the recent imagery shows a new POL area, maintenance on the parallel taxiway and leveling activity for a second runway. Back in 2014, the press reported that the Vietnam Airlines Corporation had been planning to expand the airport due to the arrival of an increasing number of passengers. The airport, designed to receive 1.6 million per year, was nearing capacity according to the Civil Aviation Authority of Vietnam.

The last report regarding the tender said US-based ADC-HAS Airport had received OPIC approval for a $250 million project for the airport. A quick search over at OPIC’s site however yielded no results.

Apart from ADC-HAS Airports, another US-based airport investor Airis Holdings previously announced plans to put investment dollars into Danang (DAD) and Noi Bai (HAN) airports under the public-private partnership model. Satellite imagery has shown no change with Danang while Noi Bai has received an extensive 139,000 sq meter terminal. The new facility reportedly cost $900 million and doubled the airport’s capacity to 10 million passengers a year. It went into operation by January 2015.

Vietnam has 24 airports and most need to be upgraded to meet growing air transportation demand. Despite the lack of reform, U.S. firms remain increasingly bullish on the country which could provide other opportunities for collaboration.

Good article, but wrong about Danang where it says: "Satellite imagery has shown no change with Danang while Noi Bai has received an extensive 139,000 sq meter terminal".

The Danang airport is undergoing a major expansion right now with the building of a new terminal.
 
Good article, but wrong about Danang where it says: "Satellite imagery has shown no change with Danang while Noi Bai has received an extensive 139,000 sq meter terminal".

The Danang airport is undergoing a major expansion right now with the building of a new terminal.

I saw that expansion last Nov. Cause we booked Jetstar tickets so, we must take bus to the aircraft and by that we could see something expanding.
 
I saw that expansion last Nov. Cause we booked Jetstar tickets so, we must take bus to the aircraft and by that we could see something expanding.

Yes, the expansion its quite large right now.
 
oh well, yet another faker..............If you care to read my previous post again, you will know I have been leaving crumb for my question.

You cannot fire a M203 without grip, simply because there were NO SAFETY to control the launcher. One important step on firing a M203 is to have your launcher in "SAFE" position before you open the breech and insert a grenade. You cannot "Lock" the trigger and make safe if you do not have the back bits of the M203. If you cannot lock the launcher, you cannot safely load a round in it.

By the way, if you are really trained in whatever purpose and capacity to use a M203 in the field, you would have answer my question with a question. You should ask which FP I am referring to. And to really answer my question, you would have known that the last part of firing an M203 in a supported position is that the launcher should not touch the support.

I wasn't so sure about you are faking your "Military" experience before, but now It's am quite clear, your post with the word you choose to use does not seems professional to me. Nobody with any amount of training would use the word "Cannon" when you are talking about a shotgun. It's like a fighter pilot yell "Fire" when he fired a missile. Word have some other meaning when you are using it in the field. And even tho any given service member may not know all the vocabulary, you would still be briefed with what was called what if you have gone thru basic training, so that you will never call your sidearm a "gun". From that and the content of your post, I can conclude that you are not Military.

For you questioning my military background is just show you have a simple mind. You are not as smart as you think you are. I speak 3 languages, Vietnamese is my 1st language and French is my educational and professional language. You are right about 1 thing, I didn't served with an anglophone unit, but instead I was in a Francophone combat unit. My young brother is in an Anglophone unit, maybe I should ask him to translate every time I reply to you so you can understand and feel comfortable with your familiar terms? Who care I didn't use the right word, just as long people get the meaning of it and What I will do and what I want. You can't have a discussion without given a long and boring explanations (that I never read all), then get upset because people doesn't agree with you and then calling names. Yeah a true professional! There is not 1 way of thinking and 1 way doing thing, you don't have all the answer and certainly not all the true. This forum is to share knowledge, sometime we disagree but we can always have a dialogue without end up insulting each other.
 
For you questioning my military background is just show you have a simple mind. You are not as smart as you think you are. I speak 3 languages, Vietnamese is my 1st language and French is my educational and professional language. You are right about 1 thing, I didn't served with an anglophone unit, but instead I was in a Francophone combat unit. My young brother is in an Anglophone unit, maybe I should ask him to translate every time I reply to you so you can understand and feel comfortable with your familiar terms? Who care I didn't use the right word, just as long people get the meaning of it and What I will do and what I want. You can't have a discussion without given a long and boring explanations (that I never read all), then get upset because people doesn't agree with you and then calling names. Yeah a true professional! There is not 1 way of thinking and 1 way doing thing, you don't have all the answer and certainly not all the true. This forum is to share knowledge, sometime we disagree but we can always have a dialogue without end up insulting each other.

A bunch of BULLS...blame it on Francophone Unit.

This is not about what language you speak, nor about how you train with your weapon. I spoke 4 different languages myself, Chinese, English, Spanish and Swedish. Which is the mother tounge of my mother, my birth place, my dad and my wife.

The problem is, you won't be "Confused" by the parts of a shotgun no matter which language you learn from, the barrel of a shotgun would always be a barrel, it would be pipa in Swedish but you will never call it kanon because a barrel is a barrel. That is the basic professional knowledge of a weapon, and that thing will never change. I am not saying you said Fat "Barrel" instead of Pipa "Gun Barrel" which is simply a confusion of word when you translate to a different language. It never about the choice of word, it's about the knowledge and the understanding of any given subject.

I never get upset with someone disagree with me, in all my military related post, I always say there are more than one way to achieve your objective. I just don't get along with faker.
 
Back
Top Bottom