Blackhawk Down, or front-leaning rest?

[rbarger]

Alot of Rangers do look up to the guys in Delta for good reason. Although Rangers are some of the best trained soldiers in the world there is still a difference between a 19yr. old PFC in Ranger Batt. and a 30yr. old Delta Operator. That is not cutting on Rangers at all. I understand what you mean about the book, but understand alot of the perspective of the book is from a d-boy.

[Creeping Death]

I will try to answer this without going over the line. Your gut reactions are pretty much right on.

Look at it this way: if this particular unit does in fact exist, where do they get the soldiers that make up that unit? Off the street? Leg units? I don't think so. Something tells me that if I were looking at outfitting a unit like that, the Ranger Regiment just might be a place I would start looking for high quality people with Special Ops experience.

Now, if I do that, then it stands to reason that a lot of the men in this unit would be prior Rangers. So, when we trained with the Rangers, would the Rangers :

A. Bow down, and give us the "we're not worthy" salute?

or

B. Be happy to see us, and the whole thing be more like a family reunion with brothers you may not have seen for quite a while?

My guess would be "B".


The book was written that way it was to attempt to outline the difference between the Rangers and other Spec Ops unit to people who had never heard of either. I had no problem with the book/movie outlining a difference. I just didn't like the way they tried to make the Rangers looks like a bunch of terrified kids who couldn't do anything, and the other guys look like Supermen who could eat kryptonite.

Yes the Rangers are young, as a whole. But I can assure you they are not a bunch of terrified kids. Anyone who actually believes what the movie portrays not only knows nothing of special ops, but does not possess the ability to rational think through a problem for themselves. I mean, where do they think these Supermen come from, anyway?

[Creeping Death]

rbarger, I understand your arguement, and even agree to a certain extent.

There is a lot of difference between an operator and and cherry PFC. But in the book and the movie both, they illustrated that inherent difference between an operator and an E-6 Squad leader that just got promoted to chalk leader. If they would have illustrated that difference between an experienced operator, and a cherry Pfc that is wondering what in the world he has gotten himself into, I could agree more with your point. But trying to make an E-6 squad leader look like a cherry is bullshit, if you as me.

Just my $0.02

[Creeping Death]

Ding, ding, ding! We have a winner.

There's nothing like a book to let your personal biases run free. It is too tough for the other side the get their arguement heard.

[rbarger]

Hey I didn't mean to open up a can of worms here. I just meant to say the book was primarily written by the perspective of a operator. And yes, alot of Rangers look up to the d-boys because like you said, most of them were Rangers. The one individual in the book who does not speak well of Rangers came from the SF community and I personally do not think he knows what he is talking about. I was friends with Matt Eversman and I do not think the book or movie showed him in a bad way and I think he would agree with me. I was in B.Co. 3/75 for four years and left to go to R.I.P. and be a Pre-Ranger instructor right before Somalia. I new everyone involved and all the K.I.A.'s and many of the operators. I presently work with someone who was shot there and he feels the book and movie both were done reasonably well considering it came out of hollywood.

[Earthpig]

Personally, I enjoyed the book, but then I was looking at it to gain some historical perspective on TRF. I wasn't really paying attention to any subtle comments made by the author to enhance his story.

I also thought that, compared to the usual Hollywood style of portraying Rangers, the movie was excellent. Every movie I've ever watched about Rangers either shows them as Arnold Schwartzenegger types (yeah, right) or some overweight slob with an Elvis hairdoo and sideburns. This movie not only showed Rangers for what they are (slim, young, big Adam's Apple, fresh high&tights, and proud), but they even nailed some little details like pronouncing Sergeant:"Sarnt." I thought they did a good job of showing the comradery, as well.

Although I didn't know their CO, I have met many Ranger Officers with personalities just like the one in the movie. I can picture them becoming irate because a D operator is 'out of uniform,' etc.

I also agree with Ranger Plavney, that we all look up to certain mentors. I had the pleasure of serving with some individuals who I would look up to, no matter what their MOS became. They were simply stud warriors....in all aspects.

An outfit like Delta is appealing to many Rangers. It not only encompasses the high-speed missions, dangerous situations, and extreme physical endurance that Rangers seek daily, it also comes with a great deal of freedom and relaxed attitudes, as compared to Regimental standards.

I would say that any Ranger who did not look up to the D-boys, simply was not interested in that type of mission (for whatever reason). I personally never viewed them as gods, but was sure hoping that my career path took me that direction eventually.....and I damned sure looked up to them, with a little envy and alot of respect.

Remember too, Leatherneck, that most of the Rangers in Battalion are 18-19 yrs old. Hell, we had studs in my platoon who were still reading Capt. America comic books. One of the squads in 3rd platoon was called the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles...no shit! So I don't think making faces in a fire-fight or occasionally viewing a D-boy as a real Super Hero is all that far-fetched. Ranger humor is quite different from that of the common populus.

Just my opinion.....and I was not involved in TFR in any way.
RLTW
EP