IrishGunner Posted August 27, 2014 Posted August 27, 2014 I am not trying to talk myself out of anything. I am willing to talk about this "mess" as long as necessary to get you to accept some responsibility.
JapanX Posted August 27, 2014 Author Posted August 27, 2014 (edited) I am willing to talk about this "mess" as long as necessary Actually you said "bye" a long time ago Have a great day! You constantly contradicts to your very self ... to get you to accept some responsibility. What are you talking about?! What responsiblility? For what? For providing new images of rare order (many of which you can`t "google") and awarding ceremony? Then yes, I accept full responsiblity for that! Edited August 27, 2014 by JapanX
Megan Posted August 27, 2014 Posted August 27, 2014 Gentlemen!!! I'm awake now and no, you are not going to bicker like this. Please stop it AT ONCE!!! Nick, do you have any further FACTS about the circumstances of the award, please? (Yes, I do read Russian by the way...)
Claudius Posted August 27, 2014 Posted August 27, 2014 Gentlemen, please! It seems I'm not allowed to go to bed: as soon as I go offline for the night you start bickering. In stating the reasons for which an award has been made you are not being political, it is only if you were unwise enough to say what you thought of those reasons that you would be treading on thin ice, GMIC rules-wise. Award ceremonies and documents help put a particular 'gong' into context, and are appropriate subject matter. I agree with Megan. But I will go further and say that I didn't read anything that would warrant Nick's censure. I had to read the thread a second time through, and what I noticed was the newly designed medal and photos of the award ceremony. An award ceremony “For the successful execution of command assignments and for displaying of courage and heroism”. No specifics. I wouldn’t want to read that the award was presented for downing of an unarmed, non-belligerent aircraft. But I didn’t read that. Nick didn’t say anything about the specifics for the awarding. Am I to infer that the award was made for that incident? Is this unit claiming it and accepting the award for successful completion? That would be tantamount to admitting guilt. What military unit could be proud of that?
JapanX Posted August 27, 2014 Author Posted August 27, 2014 Nick, do you have any further FACTS about the circumstances of the award, please? Aa far as know this order should has number 3 on reverse (all orders (not only Suvorov) with number 1 weren`t issued) Here comes original line drawings
JapanX Posted August 27, 2014 Author Posted August 27, 2014 By the way, even the best source devoted to the RF awards doesn`t have images of the actual order http://www.gosnagrada.ru/ordersuvor.htm
Megan Posted August 27, 2014 Posted August 27, 2014 Thank you, Nick. Claudius, may I very gently make a 'thin ice' warning... so far the Russians have denied their involvement in what I think we'd all agree was a tragedy, and it's not an appropriate topic for discussion on this forum. Let the accident investigators do their work. Time will tell (maybe) who was responsible for that, but there is enough debate on the matter elsewhere - visit the BBC website for some of the more restrained comments! We here are interested in a high Russian award and its recent bestowal on a unit of their military that has, in their high command's opinion, served their nation well. Shall we leave it at that? Please.... (especially as I have to go out in half an hour, which is NOT an excuse for you lot to start bickering again... )
Claudius Posted August 27, 2014 Posted August 27, 2014 Megan, I bow in obeisance to your warning. The poverty of my manners is a frequent cause for my etiquette missteps. I was referring to the tragedy-that-must-not-be-named because I was trying to draw out the nucleus of the objections to this thread’s initial posts on a Russian Federation Order and photos of its recent awarding.
Nick Posted August 28, 2014 Posted August 28, 2014 This topic is now locked. Although it would be easy for me to give the benefit of the doubt as to the motive for the post in the first place. I cannot help but feel that this has been posted to cause controversy. As rules and regulations are so often quoted : Rule 2:8 Overtly political or religious viewpoints are not considered to be suitable material for publication on this forum other than in a historical military context. It is understood that at times topical news stories or current world conflicts or events may need to be discussed and are relevant to the collecting world. Such subjects can be by their nature be very emotive and lead to tension and disagreement amongst members. Such topics may only be discussed on the proviso that they do not intentionally or indirectly cross such boundaries and if inappropriate may be subject to moderation.
Recommended Posts