Discussion
wildcat45 said:
Are we guilty of losing definition here of council?
Working class and council are different to me. For me council is an attitude a way of life of the lumpen proletariat if you like.
I think that many of the posts on this thread have stretched the definition of council (if there is one) to encompass people of a different (lower) class to theirs. I suppose its a superiority thing. Anyway I quite agree that being a low ranking member of the armed forces doesn't automatically make you 'Council' nor does a lot of the things/behaviour mentioned in this thread.Working class and council are different to me. For me council is an attitude a way of life of the lumpen proletariat if you like.
wildcat45 said:
The military as a guess. Maybe also 'end of'
I could see it being shouted out of the mouth of a training sergeant to new recruits at the end of a b
king.
There are other examples (not necessarily council) of military language leaking out into society. The branch of the military I am most familiar with is the Royal Navy and 'Jackspeak' has some brilliant terms or phrases.
Nutty - sweets, chocolate etc.
Goffer - fizzy drink Coke Fanta and the like.
Other 'communities' where the language has leaked out include prisons:
Snout
Nonce
Calling someone 'Boss'
and the gay community who used a language called Piolare? Back when being gay was illegal:
Hunk
Queen
The travelling community too:
Chav or Charver is a young boy.
Council types, especially in the North East use quite a bit of gypsy slang.
Even TV shows like Minder and Only Fools and Horses have impacted and added to the language.im not saying any of the above are council and I've given pretty poor examples because it's early and I'm tired, but I wonder if a lot of council phrases come from certain specific communities or lifestyles which connect with council people more than other social classes.
I wouldn't say it's council but as you say TV shows have given us a lot of phrases that have become commonplace.I could see it being shouted out of the mouth of a training sergeant to new recruits at the end of a b
king. There are other examples (not necessarily council) of military language leaking out into society. The branch of the military I am most familiar with is the Royal Navy and 'Jackspeak' has some brilliant terms or phrases.
Nutty - sweets, chocolate etc.
Goffer - fizzy drink Coke Fanta and the like.
Other 'communities' where the language has leaked out include prisons:
Snout
Nonce
Calling someone 'Boss'
and the gay community who used a language called Piolare? Back when being gay was illegal:
Hunk
Queen
The travelling community too:
Chav or Charver is a young boy.
Council types, especially in the North East use quite a bit of gypsy slang.
Even TV shows like Minder and Only Fools and Horses have impacted and added to the language.im not saying any of the above are council and I've given pretty poor examples because it's early and I'm tired, but I wonder if a lot of council phrases come from certain specific communities or lifestyles which connect with council people more than other social classes.
Minder spawned
Nice little earner
VAT on the slate
Er indoors
Arthur Daley (bit of a )
Even the term "Minder"
Only fools gave us
What a plonker
Lovely jubbly
Del Boy (bit of a )
Triggers broom
And I'm sure dozens more.
24lemons said:
wildcat45 said:
Are we guilty of losing definition here of council?
Working class and council are different to me. For me council is an attitude a way of life of the lumpen proletariat if you like.
I think that many of the posts on this thread have stretched the definition of council (if there is one) to encompass people of a different (lower) class to theirs. I suppose its a superiority thing. Anyway I quite agree that being a low ranking member of the armed forces doesn't automatically make you 'Council' nor does a lot of the things/behaviour mentioned in this thread.Working class and council are different to me. For me council is an attitude a way of life of the lumpen proletariat if you like.
The officer, lower ranks comments are interesting.
One of the aspects of the British army, possibly more so in the past, was the poor attitude to the lower ranks. For example it wasn't until the introduction of the SA80 assault rifle that rank and file soliders had access to a fully automatic weapon. The reason for this was that it was not though that an ordinary soldier could be trusted with such a weapon and they would simply waste the ammo. We were pretty much the last military force to give our soldiers a fully automatic weapon. In the 2nd Wold war there was very much a stong class divide between the officers and the men and the officers were treated far better. In the book "Band of Brothers" it was commented on by the US forces, who noted that significant recources were put into keeping the UK officers comfortable but not the men, who were generally treated poorly compared to their US counterparts. Another view I read once was in comparing the general abilities of the German forces to the British. In the german army in WW2 everyone was trained how to take comand of the unit in the event that the officer in charge was killed. This meant that German soliders had far more ability to think for themselves in the field. In contrast UK soldiers were a lot more dependant on their officers, because they weren't thought capable of leading. The idea of a glass ceiling and that you don't promote rank and file beyond a certain point was very strong in the UK armed forces. The result was that in general terms a typical German soldier out performed his UK counterpart. Obviously this didn't include special forces.
I really don't have any time for people deriding the lower ranks of the UK armed forces in favour of the officers because on that score, in the past certainly, we have had a lot to learn from others. It's an opinion that should have been consigned to history long ago.
Edited by Devil2575 on Thursday 10th March 13:23
Devil2575 said:
Absolutely. This thread is just about finding ways to look down on others
The officer, lower ranks comments are interesting.
One of the aspects of the British army, possibly more so in the past, was the poor attitude to the lower ranks. For example it wasn't until the introduction of the SA80 assault rifle that rank and file soliders had access to a fully automatic weapon. The reason for this was that it was not though that an ordinary soldier could be trusted with such a weapon and they would simply waste the ammo. We were pretty much the last military force to give our soldiers a fully automatic weapon. In the 2nd Wold war there was very much a stong class divide between the officers and the men and the officers were treated far better. In the book "Band of Brothers" it was commented on by the US forces, who noted that significant recources were put into keeping the UK officers comfortable but not the men, who were generally treated poorly compared to their US counterparts. Another view I read once was in comparing the general abilities of the German forces to the British. In the german army in WW2 everyone was trained how to take comand of the unit in the event that the officer in charge was killed. This meant that German soliders had far more ability to think for themselves in the field. In contrast UK soldiers were a lot more dependant on their officers, because they weren't thought capable of leading. The idea of a glass ceiling and that you don't promote rank and file beyond a certain point was very strong in the UK armed forces. The result was that in general terms a typical German soldier out performed his UK counterpart. Obviously this didn't include special forces.
I really don't have any time for people deriding the lower ranks of the UK armed forces in favour of the officers because on that score, in the past certainly, we have had a lot to learn from others. It's an opinion that should have been consigned to history long ago.
I've spent nearly all of my adult working life in uniform. Rarely have I read such utter tripe. The officer, lower ranks comments are interesting.
One of the aspects of the British army, possibly more so in the past, was the poor attitude to the lower ranks. For example it wasn't until the introduction of the SA80 assault rifle that rank and file soliders had access to a fully automatic weapon. The reason for this was that it was not though that an ordinary soldier could be trusted with such a weapon and they would simply waste the ammo. We were pretty much the last military force to give our soldiers a fully automatic weapon. In the 2nd Wold war there was very much a stong class divide between the officers and the men and the officers were treated far better. In the book "Band of Brothers" it was commented on by the US forces, who noted that significant recources were put into keeping the UK officers comfortable but not the men, who were generally treated poorly compared to their US counterparts. Another view I read once was in comparing the general abilities of the German forces to the British. In the german army in WW2 everyone was trained how to take comand of the unit in the event that the officer in charge was killed. This meant that German soliders had far more ability to think for themselves in the field. In contrast UK soldiers were a lot more dependant on their officers, because they weren't thought capable of leading. The idea of a glass ceiling and that you don't promote rank and file beyond a certain point was very strong in the UK armed forces. The result was that in general terms a typical German soldier out performed his UK counterpart. Obviously this didn't include special forces.
I really don't have any time for people deriding the lower ranks of the UK armed forces in favour of the officers because on that score, in the past certainly, we have had a lot to learn from others. It's an opinion that should have been consigned to history long ago.
Edited by Devil2575 on Thursday 10th March 13:23
CharlesdeGaulle said:
I've spent nearly all of my adult working life in uniform. Rarely have I read such utter tripe.
Well the comments were from history books or soldiers accounts from the time. You may or may not agree, but that's life. I've spent quite a lot of time studying military history so I am not new to the subject.Why did it take the British army so long to adopt a fully automatic rifle for it's infantry?
I've read more than one account that indicated that one reason was a concern that the rank and file would simply spray away all their ammo. It certainly wasn't cost, the Argentine forces had the same rifle as our boys in the Falklands but they had the full auto versio whereas we had a semi auto.
Edited by Devil2575 on Thursday 10th March 14:10
I said:
Arguing with other posters - Council. I'll get my coat ...
CharlesdeGaulle said:
I've spent nearly all of my adult working life in uniform. Rarely have I read such utter tripe.
You said:Devil2575 said:
I've spent quite a lot of time studying military history so I am not new to the subject.
I'll let my own experience trump your reading thanks. Others can make-up their own minds. Arguing with other posters - Council. I'll get my coat ...
CharlesdeGaulle said:
Devil2575 said:
Absolutely. This thread is just about finding ways to look down on others
The officer, lower ranks comments are interesting.
One of the aspects of the British army, possibly more so in the past, was the poor attitude to the lower ranks. For example it wasn't until the introduction of the SA80 assault rifle that rank and file soliders had access to a fully automatic weapon. The reason for this was that it was not though that an ordinary soldier could be trusted with such a weapon and they would simply waste the ammo. We were pretty much the last military force to give our soldiers a fully automatic weapon. In the 2nd Wold war there was very much a stong class divide between the officers and the men and the officers were treated far better. In the book "Band of Brothers" it was commented on by the US forces, who noted that significant recources were put into keeping the UK officers comfortable but not the men, who were generally treated poorly compared to their US counterparts. Another view I read once was in comparing the general abilities of the German forces to the British. In the german army in WW2 everyone was trained how to take comand of the unit in the event that the officer in charge was killed. This meant that German soliders had far more ability to think for themselves in the field. In contrast UK soldiers were a lot more dependant on their officers, because they weren't thought capable of leading. The idea of a glass ceiling and that you don't promote rank and file beyond a certain point was very strong in the UK armed forces. The result was that in general terms a typical German soldier out performed his UK counterpart. Obviously this didn't include special forces.
I really don't have any time for people deriding the lower ranks of the UK armed forces in favour of the officers because on that score, in the past certainly, we have had a lot to learn from others. It's an opinion that should have been consigned to history long ago.
I've spent nearly all of my adult working life in uniform. Rarely have I read such utter tripe. The officer, lower ranks comments are interesting.
One of the aspects of the British army, possibly more so in the past, was the poor attitude to the lower ranks. For example it wasn't until the introduction of the SA80 assault rifle that rank and file soliders had access to a fully automatic weapon. The reason for this was that it was not though that an ordinary soldier could be trusted with such a weapon and they would simply waste the ammo. We were pretty much the last military force to give our soldiers a fully automatic weapon. In the 2nd Wold war there was very much a stong class divide between the officers and the men and the officers were treated far better. In the book "Band of Brothers" it was commented on by the US forces, who noted that significant recources were put into keeping the UK officers comfortable but not the men, who were generally treated poorly compared to their US counterparts. Another view I read once was in comparing the general abilities of the German forces to the British. In the german army in WW2 everyone was trained how to take comand of the unit in the event that the officer in charge was killed. This meant that German soliders had far more ability to think for themselves in the field. In contrast UK soldiers were a lot more dependant on their officers, because they weren't thought capable of leading. The idea of a glass ceiling and that you don't promote rank and file beyond a certain point was very strong in the UK armed forces. The result was that in general terms a typical German soldier out performed his UK counterpart. Obviously this didn't include special forces.
I really don't have any time for people deriding the lower ranks of the UK armed forces in favour of the officers because on that score, in the past certainly, we have had a lot to learn from others. It's an opinion that should have been consigned to history long ago.
Edited by Devil2575 on Thursday 10th March 13:23
t stuff.CharlesdeGaulle said:
I said:
Arguing with other posters - Council. I'll get my coat ...
Your own experience of what? Using weaponry or studying the reasons for its deployment? You might be a general, you might be a squaddie, I'd say depending on which you are your experience doesn't by default trump someone just because you wear a uniform.CharlesdeGaulle said:
I've spent nearly all of my adult working life in uniform. Rarely have I read such utter tripe.
You said:Devil2575 said:
I've spent quite a lot of time studying military history so I am not new to the subject.
I'll let my own experience trump your reading thanks. Others can make-up their own minds. Arguing with other posters - Council. I'll get my coat ...
Antony Moxey said:
CharlesdeGaulle said:
I said:
Arguing with other posters - Council. I'll get my coat ...
Your own experience of what? Using weaponry or studying the reasons for its deployment? You might be a general, you might be a squaddie, I'd say depending on which you are your experience doesn't by default trump someone just because you wear a uniform.CharlesdeGaulle said:
I've spent nearly all of my adult working life in uniform. Rarely have I read such utter tripe.
You said:Devil2575 said:
I've spent quite a lot of time studying military history so I am not new to the subject.
I'll let my own experience trump your reading thanks. Others can make-up their own minds. Arguing with other posters - Council. I'll get my coat ...
Devil2575 said:
Antony Moxey said:
CharlesdeGaulle said:
I said:
Arguing with other posters - Council. I'll get my coat ...
Your own experience of what? Using weaponry or studying the reasons for its deployment? You might be a general, you might be a squaddie, I'd say depending on which you are your experience doesn't by default trump someone just because you wear a uniform.CharlesdeGaulle said:
I've spent nearly all of my adult working life in uniform. Rarely have I read such utter tripe.
You said:Devil2575 said:
I've spent quite a lot of time studying military history so I am not new to the subject.
I'll let my own experience trump your reading thanks. Others can make-up their own minds. Arguing with other posters - Council. I'll get my coat ...
Spice_Weasel said:
Europa1 said:
Can we get the thread back on track?
Good idea. Fortune tellers, astrology, mediums, spirit guides and psychics. All council. idiotgap said:
Spice_Weasel said:
Europa1 said:
Can we get the thread back on track?
Good idea. Fortune tellers, astrology, mediums, spirit guides and psychics. All council. Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff