YES, Virginia....WW2 British Commandos PARACHUTE JUMPED in COMBAT operations. This video details a passage from 1LT Peter Masters' superb book, "Striking Back: A Jewish Commando's War Against the Nazis" which describes one parachute raid in 1943 by BRITISH COMMANDOS in WW2. Striking Back: A Jewish Commando's War Against the Nazis http://www.amazon.com/Striking-Back-Jewish-Commandos-Against/dp/0891416293 Moreover, earlier in his amazing book, he describes his jump training and an experimental high-speed (225 mph) jump he and his team of volunteers made with equipment attached to their bodies covered in a jump smock from a FAST, ARMED RAF BOMBER! We didn't start dropping Office of Strategic Services (OSS) agents from bombers until much later: http://www.combatreform.org/axisandalliedspecialoperations.htm James Bond is Real. http://www.jamesbondisforreal.com ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PagC4MCmVoE

http://www.combatreform.com/nightvision.htm http://www.combatreform.com/binos.htm http://www.combatreform.com/swdgs.htm ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akErKtg8zog

U.S. infantry weapons are in an absurd BLACK finish making them "shoot me sticks" that help the enemy see and hit our Soldiers, killing and maiming them. The testimony of Vietnam [http://www.combatreform.org/guerrillabn.htm] and Rhodesian Light Infantry Combat veterans [http://www.combatreform.org/RLIfireforce.htm] are presented in this video; further "validating" our points. T.J. Mullin in Special Operations: Weapons & Tactics writes in Chapter 5: Analyzing your enemy, page 41: "...the distinctive 30-round magazine of the AK series of rifles frequently allowed US Soldiers to spot the NVA/VC although he was otherwise not visible. Rifles like the AK (much less things like the M16A2) are quite distinctive in appearance and can be spotted by their regular appearance. As the Australians long ago showed with their factory-camouflaged, painted Owen SMG, a weapon to be used for fighting and not parade-ground work should be pattern-painted to break up the outline. I see no painted rifles AKMs in the videos from overseas." Did you get that memo military bureaucrat? This problem can be solved by spray painting magazines: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcNzuWIJaX0 and McNett Camou-Form tape covering non-metallic parts: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCV29wVpNv0 YOU HAVE NO EXCUSE. Get off your ass and do it--or don't even pretend you are a professional. http://www.combatreform.org/camie.htm ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2yAhhU_8KA

One of the great mysteries of WW2 is what happened to all of the positive (+) reform efforts between the wars by General J.F.C. Fuller, Captain Liddell-Hart and General Hobart? http://www.geocities.com/armorhistory/sld04.htm American military reformer, Brigadier S.L.A. Marshall (SLAM) in his masterpiece, "The Soldier's Load & the Mobility of the Nation" describes how Liddell-Hart ran "Sherman marches" with British troops loaded with under 30 pounds of gear achieving "high levels" of mobility in the 1930s as this video shows. (One of SLAM's flaws is he didn't DEFINE WITH A MPH NUMBER what "good mobility" is) http://www.combatreform.com/combatlight.htm British reformers were all WW1 veterans who surely knew about the German bicycle-troop success in taking the Mt. St. Pere bridge over the Marne river in 1914 in coup de main, and Vorbeck's bike victories in East Africa as well as Hutier knocking the Russians out of the war in the east with bicycle cavalry. http://www.combatreform.com/atb.htm On D-Day, British bike-mobile infantry freed by Hobart's "Funnies" engineer tanks swarmed 7-10 miles inland while foot-slogging Americans were still stuck on beaches. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSm5nBZ4X0A So where was the bicycle coup de main force to take Arnhem bridge in late 1944? The Germans swarmed on bikes and repulsed mobility expert Frost's men from the north side of the bridge. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o44BvtQxOV4 We are going to venture that SLAM was wrong about the foot-infantry infatuated British NOT solving their individual load/mobility problems. Their M1937 pattern web gear with suspenders and two large pouches to hold magazines for Sten SMGs or Bren LMGs was far superior to American canvass web gear based on hanging things loosely by wires; though the 8-round M1 Garand semi-automatic rifle clip mini-pouches was clever and minimalist. This video shows British infantry supported by Bren gun carrier open-topped tracked APCs carrying their extra supplies of food, water and ammo, too. No, the conclusion one has to draw in light of the CHINDITS in CBI http://www.geocities.com/airbornemuseum/nlmb.htm as well as European operations is that the British Army DID have their Soldiers highly mobile and well-camouflaged on foot. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xi3pc0aA-oc The problem was this in itself is not a panacea;--SLAM is wrong, sometimes THERE IS NO EASY WAY TO CIRCLE AROUND AN ENEMY if a part of the force is pinned down. Sometimes you have to BLAST YOUR WAY THROUGH; and the Germans in the 1930s realized this and created the turretless STUG assault gun LIGHT TANKS to insure infantry could blast their way through. The British lost efficiency by insisting on turrets and had excellent Churchill medium infantry fire support tanks but NO LIGHT TANK STUG equivalents to keep lighter 3D maneuvering by-parachutes-and-gliders forces moving in the face of enemy fire. Why they simply didn't put a 75mm pack howitzer on some Bren gun carriers which would have saved the day on the road to Arnhem so Frost would have been reinforced and held is still a huge mystery. http://www.geocities.com/armorhistory The sad conclusion is that EGOS were to blame; the walking infantry doesn't want to admit it needs the help, insisting it can SLAM-infiltrate with foot fire & maneuver through any opposition and those that want to operate "tanks" want to have 360 degree swiveling turrets so they can shoot faster with less effort--even though it damns them to a huge silhouette and less armor protection and armament. It seems only the Germans were able to make the necessary hard choices based on a correct understanding of planet of earth and human war realities to get maximum efficiencies at every level. To have LIGHT TANKS that can operate in CLOSED terrain for example, you can ill afford a turret as we see the American Locust/British Tetrarch light tanks had--which damned them to weak 37mm cannon armaments. The Germans re-armed their excellent Czech 38T light tanks' 37mm cannon turrets with large 75mm guns throughout WW2. Nevertheless, egomaniac General Browning refused to glider-land available 6th Airborne Locust/Tetrarch light tanks to Arnhem in the same infantrymania that failed to put guns on Bren gun APCs--that were all over the place giving infantry a lift and carrying its supplies. The answer to being pinned down by German fires was right there in front of them! ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxbAUtfhySk