an earlier contributor qustioned whether we need the parachute regiment?

Question

the paras are with out a doubt an elite part of the uk forces in my opinion outwith the sas and sbs the marines and paras are our most highly trained soldiers the marines traininig is a fair bit tougher than p coy i can qualify that statement as i have trained with both learning to jump as you can guess there is a fair bit of rivalry between the two but if you were to ask them both what they think of each other they highly respect each other

that is why they will never be disbanded because they as a regiment irreplaceable are that was the point i was trying to make civvies agh.

Answer 1

These sorts of opinions are usually from people who don't understand your roll. I have several friends who are ex paras and I have the upmost respect for you. It does seem like a standing joke within the army (I have been there) to say paras are stupid, but the fact is , you're highly trained servicemen who deserve respect. Of course the paras would never be disbanded - it plays a critical roll! Those who understand the roll of the Paras would never show such disrespect! Ignore the ignorance!

Answer 2

Paratroopers make up 58 percent of the army special forces apparently. Why should they disband such an integral part of the regular and special forces? I read an article about the UK government halting parachute training for members of the Parachute Regimdent. I can't say I believe that. Recently I have been considering the Marines versus the Paras for a potential career. I'm having a hard time deciding, i can tell you

Answer 3

The Paras are the biggest waste of money in the British Army.
They are without doubt excellent soldiers and to be honest are better than some countries special forces.
Their role however is defunct. Its time they modernised, We didn't keep the Glider Pilot Regiment after the war as it was clear that they would never be used in combat again. The Paras should become Air Cavalry but keep their elite status and rigorous training. The Air Cav role is what they actually do anyway so the transition wouldn't be to hard.Just accept the fact that helicopters can put men exactly where they need to be when they need to be there - and more importantly can come and pick you up when it goes **** up.
The worst thing about Parachute training is the other arms who go on the course.

What is the point of a Para chef? Is he going to show me a better way to cook my boil in the bag rations?

Para vehicle mechanic? Its axle is broken, what can you ? Not a lot.

I could go on but wont. Get rid of the Paras. We only need to train SF in parachuting. The money we save can be spent on comfy seats in the helicopters that transport you all over Afghanistan.

Answer 4

I am an 8 year veteran of the 82nd Airborne Division with over 50 jumps and have also been awarded Canadian and German Parachute wings. So I feel qualified to answer this question. here is the Mission Statement of the 82nd:

"Within 18 hours of notification, the 82nd Airborne Division strategically deploys, conducts forcible entry parachute assault and secures key objectives for follow-on military operations in support of U.S. national interests."

What this means is that the 82nd, like most nation's para units, is the Emergency response unit of the US Army. Because of an airborne units structure, it can mobilize and deploy ANYWHERE in the world within short notice. If need be, it can also conduct forced entry operations (much like the airborne drop into northern Iraq to provide a blocking force against retreating Iraqi army units).

An airborne units main mission is to provide an airhead behind enemy lines (usually by seizing an enemy airfield) that can be expanded by flying in other units to exploit the bridgehead.

I don't know about the British Para's or any other country, but the 82nd not only has Infantry, but also, air defense, military police, artillery, and anti-tank capabilities to name a few. All of the equipment is either air-dropable or air-landed (flown in)in follow-on waves.

So, in closing, there is and will be for a long time a need for parachute infantry.

Answer 5

If their going on the bases of the name, then you might as well get rid of most of the British Army
Most regiments use name that do no full reflect their modern army function.

I.e we do not charge in to battle on horse back, but all regiments come from a long line of traditions and customs that create their corps de esprit.

We still need troops trained to there level, as for the Marines we do enjoy the compertion

Answer 6

I would take exception with the individual who suggests that Parachute units should be converted to "Air Cav".

We couldn't have gotten "Air Cav" into Northern Iraq... the Turks weren't going to let us use bases close enough to deliver helicopters to the region. The ONLY way was jumping in !!

The C-17 provides safer delivery than the C-5 or C-141.

SURE, there are times and places where a drop wouldn't be possible due to opposing air or AAA or SAM's... BUT, when we can get the Air Farce to do the counter-air, it is the best way to get a group BIGGER than a SpecWar force in SECURE a site for follow-on forces.

Answer 7

We cling to tradition and the Parachute regiment has become enshrined in our military tradition, so the name will stay, even if the reality is that deploying troops by parachute has never actually been a military success.

Answer 8

OK, but why have them as a parachute regiment ? No one uses paratroops anymore because they suffer huge casualties before they hit the ground. Might as well just have a couple more regiments of Marines.

Answer 9

i am part of the british army, we all have respect for eachother no matter what regiment. We are soldiers first and foremost, then trade second.

Answer 10

I will try and not be sarcastic... but where is the question???????? This is just another statement or rant.... Total rubbish!!!!