Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Simple Question, Is Mr Calvert, The Man Who Shot Bin Laden, A Tank?

what? I really dont understand

Tank is used as slang for hard-as-nails... more or less it doesn't really translate well...

Oh right, built like a gak brick house is what we use. Why would he be a tank?

A mates dad was in the french foreign legion, he had some polish lad in his squad who got shot in the chest by a sniper, he got up and acted like nothing happened, then he got shot again and started laughing! Needless too say he survived.
He sounds like more of a tank than Calvert

Yeah we use a bunch of different ones but tank is fairly common.
I wouldn't say he's tank... a bit of a legend maybe but not a tank.
He does sound ike more of a tank...

More like DPS, imo.

Did he even get shot? all the reports I read, they stormed the place, shot everyone and legged it, He isnt a tank

Maybe he was in the helicopter that decided to crash...

Toastedandy wrote:Did he even get shot? all the reports I read, they stormed the place, shot everyone and legged it, He isnt a tank

If you're good enough to not get shot while storming an enemy held building, you're doing something right. The polish guy made a mistake and got shot, sure he laughed it off but he messed up in the first place.

There's a bunch of tough guys in the world, and it would be tough to find the most badass of them all because everyone has their own opinions of what makes a person tough. Is this guy a tank, maybe to some but maybe not others.

purplefood wrote:Yeah we use a bunch of different ones but tank is fairly common.
I wouldn't say he's tank... a bit of a legend maybe but not a tank.
He does sound ike more of a tank...

Tank is the new british word for saying someone is really tough

GoDz BuZzSaW wrote:

purplefood wrote:Yeah we use a bunch of different ones but tank is fairly common.
I wouldn't say he's tank... a bit of a legend maybe but not a tank.
He does sound ike more of a tank...

Tank is the new british word for saying someone is really tough

It is? I was not informed. I was under the impression it was role-playing game short hand. Perhaps sir would like to cite the academic journals in which it was first published?

Honestly, kids these days, using new words. I'll have none of it!

We've been using the term for awhile, if someone's diesel then they're a tank.

htj wrote:

GoDz BuZzSaW wrote:

purplefood wrote:Yeah we use a bunch of different ones but tank is fairly common.
I wouldn't say he's tank... a bit of a legend maybe but not a tank.
He does sound ike more of a tank...

Tank is the new british word for saying someone is really tough

It is? I was not informed. I was under the impression it was role-playing game short hand. Perhaps sir would like to cite the academic journals in which it was first published?

Honestly, kids these days, using new words. I'll have none of it!

From one 16 year old to another, we apoligise!

Stop stealing US vernacular, stealing grammar and vocabulary from other languages is our thing.

halonachos wrote:Stop stealing US vernacular, stealing grammar and vocabulary from other languages is our thing.

Stop Stealing Words, How about stop stealing our language!

Yes, he just said it was their thing.

Also, what do you mean from one 16 year old to another? Sixteen is but a fuzzy memory for me, I'm afraid. But then, so is yesterday...

biccat wrote:More like DPS, imo.

I love you.

Actualy, wait a minute, we've been pinching words off of other countries since you country was in diapers. You stop stealin' our thing!

htj wrote:Actualy, wait a minute, we've been pinching words off of other countries since you country was in diapers. You stop stealin' our thing!

You've been stealing words far longer than that. Almost as long as the Vikings have been stealing your land... now THAT'S a coincidence!

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

htj wrote:Actualy, wait a minute, we've been pinching words off of other countries since you country was in diapers. You stop stealin' our thing!

You've been stealing words far longer than that. Almost as long as the Vikings have been stealing your land... now THAT'S a coincidence!

Ah, they taught us everything we know about forceably appropriating things. Worked rather nicely. (xref: British Empire)

I think 'illegal insurgent involved in murder' is more appropriate.

halonachos wrote:
If you're good enough to not get shot while storming an enemy held building, you're doing something right. .

Yeah I agree, but that doesnt make him tough, makes him good at storming a building for sure, good at illegally killing unarmed people without a doubt, but tough as nails?

Toastedandy wrote:

halonachos wrote:
If you're good enough to not get shot while storming an enemy held building, you're doing something right. .

Yeah I agree, but that doesnt make him tough, makes him good at storming a building for sure, good at illegally killing unarmed people without a doubt, but tough as nails?

Captain America heard somebody was jealous that their armed forces didn't take out a terrorist mastermind.

I'm not sure about everyone else but the general reaction here tended to be
"Well good for them"
Rather than the whole nationwide party you guys seemingly decided to have...

Irish armed forces? lol They couldnt hit a cows arse with a banjo

Toastedandy wrote:Irish armed forces? lol They couldnt hit a cows arse with a banjo

Yeah but if you're not at point blank range, that's pretty difficult

Phototoxin wrote:I think 'illegal insurgent involved in murder' is more appropriate.

OH PLZ. Osama bin Laden was a valid military target. Taking out a military target during a war is not the same thing as murder. Also, the SEALs wouldn't be considered insurgents, in any sense of the word.

Phototoxin wrote:I think 'illegal insurgent involved in murder' is more appropriate.

Sorry, I think you have his followers confused with a Navy SEAL. Don't remember anyone really coming to OBL's defense saying that he was a nice guy and people just took his rhetoric too far. And I'm sure that all of the people killed on 9/11 and the other terror events were all enemy combatants in an active campaign against the Taliban.

Grow up and wake up.

SoloFalcon1138 wrote:

Phototoxin wrote:I think 'illegal insurgent involved in murder' is more appropriate.

Sorry, I think you have his followers confused with a Navy SEAL. Don't remember anyone really coming to OBL's defense saying that he was a nice guy and people just took his rhetoric too far. And I'm sure that all of the people killed on 9/11 and the other terror events were all enemy combatants in an active campaign against the Taliban.

Grow up and wake up.

Im not defending OBL in anyway shape or form, but it was an assassination, not a murder.

But then, what with the US forces in the middle east, blowing up anything that looks at them funny, raping and murdering the locals (Dont pretend it doesnt happen) it does inspire the locals to join the Taliban in the hundreds.
The US military is using the Taliban as an excuse to increase their own funding to blow up the middle east.

They are doing good, Im all for Team America world police and that, but does it really help to have armed forces aggravating the locals? If they dont pull them out, then Taliban will only get stronger, thousands of innocents will die and thousands of more will have their lives ruined.

Interesting supposed fact - 303 times more civilians have been killed in the middle east by the US invasion than US citizens have been killed by terrorists. Makes you think how much good are the World Police really doing?

Anyway Calverts no more a tank then any other gun man

Toastedandy wrote:

Im not defending OBL in anyway shape or form, but it was an assassination, not a murder.

But then, what with the US forces in the middle east, blowing up anything that looks at them funny, raping and murdering the locals (Dont pretend it doesnt happen) it does inspire the locals to join the Taliban in the hundreds.
The US military is using the Taliban as an excuse to increase their own funding to blow up the middle east.

They are doing good, Im all for Team America world police and that, but does it really help to have armed forces aggravating the locals? If they dont pull them out, then Taliban will only get stronger, thousands of innocents will die and thousands of more will have their lives ruined.

Interesting supposed fact - 303 times more civilians have been killed in the middle east by the US invasion than US citizens have been killed by terrorists. Makes you think how much good are the World Police really doing?

I'm not saying that no US personnel in the middle east have committed rape or murdered locals, but don't act like it's a common, everyday thing. While we can all think of a few high profile incidents (and these are inexcusable, I'm not defending them), it ought to be noted that the vast majority of US military personnel have conducted themselves very well, especially considering the length of time that these conflicts have been going on now. The fact that it's relatively uncommon is one of the things that makes it so shocking when incidents like that come to light.