Bansenshukai

Sounds like Arauca and Saravena... am I right? Boy, I've been neck-deep in them woods. PS - Thanks alot, ryyannon! I'm glad to know at least something on this board. Typically, I'm just sitting here and learning from you guys.

I totally agree. The name "mercenary" lends so much more in the way of pre-conceived notions, however. I personally know quite a few members of such organizations and I believe that they fill a gap that neither military nor law enforcement can adequately fill in the service of private corporations operating in an "in extremis" environment. While many people believe that these private security contractors are all former special operations personnel, this is not always the case. Of course, there are some firms that hire almost exclusively from that lot of personnel. The vast majority, however, maintain not-too-stringent requirements with a "have-gun-will-travel" methodology for hiring. As a result, you can have a security detail composed of a few former special operations personnel, a couple of retired police officers and some guys with only corporate security experience. Also, it is important to understand that "special operations" is a relative term that is directly proportional to the military capability of that former soldier's country of origin. For instance, I have known "special operators" from foreign countries that would not stand-up against a vehicle maintenance platoon from the 101st Airborne Division. A large number of these private security companies don't always hire former US/BR/AUS special operations personnel. In many countries, "special operations units" can be much more heavy-handed and crude than any light infantry organization in the conventional forces of the afore-mentioned countries. For them, clearing a room might involve tossing-in a fragmentation grenade and spraying with an automatic weapon. Therefore, they might not be the subtle, precise, "smooth" operators we might expect. You get some of these guys in a firefight, in an urban environment, with civilians around and you might have a very [censored]-off populace after the subsequent funerals are finished. And, it's not that this would not happen with military units. The difference is that military units usually prepare for secondary and tertiary effects when they conduct an operation - this is a normal part of operational planning. It's hard, however, to plan for contingencies when organizations outside of the military unit's sphere of direct influence conduct their own "operations" within the military's area of operations. For the military commander these private security companies can become a headache as they certainly have the ability to "shape" the operational environment while not being directly accountable to the commander of the area of operations they work in. So, while both parties try to coordinate for the betterment of all involved, sometimes the "contract" takes priority over the military objective and the private security employees execute was is most profitable for their employer and not necessarily the military commander. Also, security considerations might preclude the military contingent from sharing the most critical aspects of a campaign plan, or strategy, for the same reason an FBI agent might not inform a private security guard how he's conducting a major investigation. It's an uneasy partnership. But, I'm of the belief that these private entities do - in the end - allow the military to free itself from a great deal of ancillary tasks in order to concentrate on the more critical operational and tactical situation at hand. In the end, this type of employment is not for everyone. In many cases the money is quite significant for the short period of time one is exposed per each contract (weeks, or months). But, a great majority of these companies do not have much in the way of benefits (medical, dental, etc.) and cannot guarantee continued employment. The industry itself - especially for the really expensive (read "specially skilled") personnel - hinges on "word-of-mouth" and reputation. After a few contracts, a person begins to network and, if seen as a reliable and professional team member, begins to work more often. Also, one will not always risk his life for what most of us might consider "a worthy cause". I believe that the ill-fated Blackwater security contractors killed in Fallujah died protecting kitchen supplies. So, in the end, one must have his personal affairs in order and understand the true cause for which one is "fighting" - namely, one's own financial future and, ultimately, one's life. "De Oppresso Liber!"

I acquired a vintage (1940 - 1950's) Omega. It is a hand wound watch. Well, I banged it too harshly against the side of my closet by accident and the minute hand fell off. Now, I have the tools to put it back in place, but I'm not sure how to remove the back. The back has no markings except a small inscription that says "18 KT" inside of a engraved box. So, I tried to turn it to remove it, but have gotten no effect. Do I pry it open? How do these things open? I don't want to try the wrong thing and break it. Thanks in advanced.

Ok. I believe I might shed some light into some of this. I recently received the OEM (straight from Omega) bezel for the replica to the 2209.50.00 Planet Ocean (Orange Bezel, Steel Bracelet). R11co is exactly right on in the previous quote. From what my trusty caliper can tell me, the genuine bezel is exactly one millimeter smaller than the replica (4th Gen PO) that I have. The OEM hands (minute, second and hour) seem smaller than the replica's as well. I was wondering if the 4th Gen PO was a replica of the 42mm or the 45mm Seamaster PO genuine because maybe its a matter of just returning this one and ordering the larger one. Any thoughts?

No "smoking gun". A group of people can gather enough "facts" either way to make a good case. And, based on the fact that this video will change nothing, it's a good waste of 1 hour and 21 minutes.

Whoever assumes that a TV or theater "anything" (docudrama, based on true events, etc) is supposed to be history is naive and lazy. True documentaries are another matter. And yet, they still will carry over the producer's point-of-view in some respect. Take the very popular movie "Black Hawk Down". It is very much based on true events and very realistic. Yet, they totally omitted key characters and introduced characters that never even existed. I personally have met and have spoken to members of the assault force to include having worked for both special operations unit commanders (later in their careers). One was never portrayed and the other was portrayed with a very negative slant. My point is that I don't think anyone is out there claiming to have known exactly how that operation went down using the movie as a reference. Anyone that does is definitely off his rocker. Therefore, I cannot consider this, or even the film on Flight 93 as a source reference to document history. Honestly, I can't imagine that anyone with any level of education would. In my mind, directors and producers will always insert their own slant. Why are we surprised or find it "shameful"? I love over-dramatized discontent in politics. It's always much more interesting than saying: "I didn't like the film."

I just caught this. My reply: How did you come to that assesment as to what I do and do not "get"? I don't enter into "assessing" you personally as I do not know you and this forum does not present a good enough opportunity for me to get an idea as to what you think, know, do or why. The reasons I don't is that I would do us both a disservice by engaging you on a personal level on something that should remain as intellectual jousting and nothing more. I don't know you and you DON'T know me. Don't assume you do. It is not only rude, but also counter-productive. Have a nice day.

No. Like the way he (Fmr Pres. Clinton) should have ensured UBL was killed when he was not as well protected and was more vulnerable. But, I am not discussing Iraq. I'll address that later, as you seem to want to do a relative comparison of bad leadership between our two Chief Executives. Hint: They both score low. Sorry. It's a good thing you are in the minority then, right? The truth is relative. I fight under the orders of men such as these. I have seen four of my friends die on the orders of the current US President. Do not think for a second that I am naive to what you consider "truth". This "truth" is grey in this case. Former President Clinton's failure and lack of real initiative in this regard has greatly contributed to our involvement in this "Global War on Terrorism" (for lack of a better term). UBL was a critical catalyst for why my hometown does not have two towering buildings in its skyline anymore and why it lost over 2,000 American citizens - that's right, it was also my hometown. Now, I agree 100% with former President Clinton in that there is no real reason why Iraq should have the priority it has over Afghanistan. He is absolutely right, in my opinion. I don't agree with the reasons that we "used" to get into Iraq and I don't agree with us spreading our military resources to engage in that campaign. The results are clearly visible in Afghanistan - where UBL should have been killed by another Chief Executive. I like to remain objective and I believe I'm a great position to do so. After all, I lost neighbors in the WTC attacks and friends in OEF. I will be returning to the region soon enough for another deployment and I might, or might not, come back from it. So, believe me that I do not allow my perspective to be shaped by party lines and hero worship. Fmr President Clinton was perhaps (in my opinion) one of the most intellectually gifted men in the White House in the 20th Century. He was NOT - as some "Kool Aid" drinker Republicans tout - a total failure. The facts support the notion that he failed at getting UBL. UBL and his organization financed and supported the 9-11 attacks. Simple enough? When a leader screws-up, he takes full responsibility. I believe Fmr Pres. Clinton did that in this, and other interviews. I just think the guy is sick of defending this. Fmr. Presidents are all concerned with "legacy". Fmr Pres. Clinton, I believe, is no different. But, he is not the "devil" either. I really wish partisans woke up and tasted a bit of "truth" as you so eloquently put it. I don't get fed the BS you speak of because I execute the National Strategy at the most personal level. When your life hangs on the orders of your President, you don't cling to unrealistic beliefs and hero worship to get you throught your day. When bullets snap past your head, you don't revert to the speech you heard on TV at the National Republican Convention. Finally, relax and enjoy the forum... like I tell my men when we are back in CONUS and get [censored] at administrative BS: "At least we are not getting shot at."

I've served in active duty under administrations run by both parties. I don't trust either. Essentially, I continue to serve for the men to my left and my right - them I trust. However, I will say this; former Pres. Clinton is responsible for not being more aggressive "then" to get after UBL. I would have preferred him "[censored] slap" UBL when he had the chance. The fact is that HIS administration failed; and he openly admits this. The next administration failed too - don't even let me get started there - but, it inherited the Clinton Administration's screw-up; there's no getting around that and anyone with any intellectual honesty knows that. You see, I'm not a Kool-Aid drinker partisan that believes that former Pres. Clinton walked on water, or that the current administration is doing its job in the GWOT. Former Pres. Clinton did not "utterly" destroy anyone in that interview. Quite the opposite, he lost his nerve and allowed his pride to get in front of his usual brilliant intellect. He could have brushed the question aside as he always has and it would have gone unnoticed instead of the "Hey, look at me, I didn't get UBL and I'm [censored] to be called on it." I've seen enough BS in the field to understand that a politician will always be a politician - regardless of what party he adheres to.

So if I take my Corvette to be modified at a customizing shop by some pros, they can get sued by Chevrolet? It's pretty stupid, really. Now, if this guy is selling things forward as bonifide Rolex watches while having something different "under the hood", then he should pay for that.

$1300 USD. Have not decided to buy it yet. Tommorow I'll hit my decision point.

I have the opportunity to purchase the watch on the topic title above. It's part of a limited edition of 500 that were produced. Does anyone have any experience regarding Invicta?

I was looking at Ebay today and noticed all of the "renditions" to Rolex watches. The most guilty party I've seen is Invicta (Submariner, Daytona and Explorer copies). It made me think: Has anyone ever tried to acquire one of these and change parts of it so that it could look like a Rolex (change dial, bracelete, links, crown, etc.)? I would imagine the case would definately be different.

I just ordered a genuine bezel from Ofrei last night (for the 42.5mm model). Plus, I just got a new camera last week (the reason I haven't posted pics in a long time is that the other camera broke). So, I'll let you know what happens and post pics of it.

I've been to all kinds of nasty little places down South - mostly work/play. However, in the middle of the bad stuff in CO, it is a beautiful place. I love the culture, the people and the rich history. And ... Bogota to me is among the top party towns in the world. Here's a pic of "us" enjoying the great outdoors in a river in the south of the country.

Colombia ... I love that place!

Thanks, you rock.

After purchasing a ridiculous amount of reps this year (12 were purchased for my own collection while about 60 others were purchased - through me - for other folks), I am willing to finally get down to modding one of my own watches. I've chosen the 4th Gen Omega SMP I got from Joshua some time back. Next to my Rolex Yachtmaster (rep) and my Rolex Explorer II (gen), it is the most accurate automatic watch I own. [As an aside, the Rolex Yachtmaster rep has been in a winder with my gen Explorer II and has been within one second of the Explorer II for over a week now!] The mods I want to do are replacing of the bezel to a OEM bezel. Replacement of the clasp and replacement of the hour, minute and second hands. So, the question is: What basic tools are required for purchase before I attempt this? Now we are talking about a beginner here, so I'm not interested in the Rolls Royce of the tools. Thanks.

Yep, that's it! Thanks a bunch. That helped a lot. ND

Disclaimer: I used the "search" option first using words such as "winder", "watch winder" and "how to use winder". I came up with nothing I could really use in my case. I appologize for asking this if it has already been posted. I recently received a Steinhausen Dual Watch Winder as a gift. It came brand new in its box except, I didn't find any instructions in there - just the warranty card. Anyway, in the back, it has three sets of buttons. The big one, by itself, has three markings: a "I", a "O" and a "II". So, if you press one side, it's on the "I". If you press the other side, it's on the "II" and if you leave it "neutral", it's on the "O". I'm assuming that this is the "on" and "off" switch and that the "II" symbol has to do with a bi-directional rotation option. Am I right? Anyway, the other two buttons are smaller and sit side-by-side, real close to eachother. They each have the "I" symbol and the "O" symbol. I'm guessing that this has to do with the way the motor of the winder handles rotating one, versus two, watches. So, if I only have one watch in there, I press only one switch to "I" and leave the other on the "O" (for "off"). Again, am I right? The "pillows" that the watches are put on have a metal thing inside them that clicks if you squeeze them. What's that about? It sounds like that "clicker" the US paratroopers used in the Germany invasion of WWII for near recognition in the dark. Anyway, sorry for the question. I couldn't even find an English language official Steinhausen website to answer this question for myself.

What I think actually happened is that he almost had her convinced - or not at all - and she told him about the 100 posts thing so that he would shut up. He offered it up, you guys complied and she ultimately didn't (as was not going to anyway). So, now that he got everyone interested in his post and didn't deliver, he doesn't have the courage to post again, or, most likely, joined under a different name. I'll post my girl's pics when I get a chance. She was a top model down in South America and loves watches.

I have dealt with a very popular dealer and I've had this issue with him at times. For instance, we had some issues with some Asia 7750 chronometers being way off. For our future transactions, I suggested for him to send them to his watch repair guy, have them serviced and then send them to me. I offered, of course, to pay for the additional cost. He said "Sure. Great idea." He never did it. I've had several watches come in with bracelet pins that won't come off for adjustment. Another had one of the hour markers fall off. Another time, when making a 27 watch order, I told him to ensure that I received a certain watch first. There was a reason and I explained it to him. He said "No problem" and sent it last. I've received the wrong watch maybe twice. But, since the watch was nice anyway, I kept it and said nothing. It was the same price so I didn't loose anything. In fact, the only thing I complained to him about is the watch he sent last when I specifically said for him to send it first. Another time, I sent him an e-mail telling him "Hey, buddy, I've made you like $15,000 in sales (at the time - now is more), can you tell me if you can send me a watch that is already modded?" I told him that I would, of course, pay for the extra costs. He said he couldn't do it for a number of reasons. Later, I find that he sends modded watches to other customers and they are only buying a few of his watches at a time. Although, I am not unhappy with him, I think he could do a better job. Right now, in my opinion, he is the best there is. But, that doesn't mean he is the best that there could be. For the most part, he comes through as advertised. But, you would think that one gives special care to those that bring you the most business for a number of reasons which, to a business person, would be obvious. But, I didn't see this too often. I plan to explore with a few other dealers now because of this. I think that maybe, when someone climbs to a level where they gain much popularity and credibility, they can fall prey to becoming lax with their performance or practices. It's tough to stay sharp and hungry when you are regularly being fed. Oh yeah, this guy runs business out of HK too.

While on the topic, I have two gen Omega SMPs (one mid-size and one full size). One of my friends ordered a rep Omega of the same model as my gen Omega SMP large. In comparison, I can say that the quality of rep is terrible as compared to, say, a $225 rep Rolex (as compared to a gen Rolex). However, the Plante Oceans that are out now, are awesome.

Ok, now I feel like the jackass. I'm sorry. I re-read your post. Thanks also, Chronus. You guys rock! On another note, you don't know how pumped the guys get when they go out on a mission knowing that by the time they return (some times, many days), there will be a brand new rep waiting for them. The excitment of not knowing exactly what it'll look like, the fact that it looks so close to the real thing and the challenge of getting your next best rep ... it's all so much fun. And really, it makes our days easier to bear. Honestly, I'm glad I found out about this hobby, found this (and the original site) and have interacted with you gentlemen. It brightens our days. "De Oppresso Liber!"

I would not be to characterize this as any kind of flame. Like I stated previously, my assessment of PT is that he is most likely a really good dealer. I'll restate this to ensure understanding: "My assessment of PT is that he is most likely a really good dealer." Also, I did state that his reasons for using a different shipping method were valid reasons. Also, I stated that I want to do business with him when I get to the US. So, there is no "flame" of the man. Not even a "semi" flame. I will not see a good dealer's reputation marred by even the perception that something unfairly negative has been written about him. I wouldn't do it with Joshua and I certainly would not do it to PT. My statements have been factual and based on the actual events but were never intended to undermind the man himself. He still remains as his reputation has sustained him. PT - I guarantee you that I will purchase from you. If you can find a way to send the stuff to me here, I got a lot of customers interested in two tone watches. I just wanted them to hold off until my own order made it here. I'd rather risk my own money first than their money. But, we're good. Your next, there's no doubt about it. And SeanK, thanks for bringing up the confusion about PT and "Paul". Had you not brought it up, I'd still be all screwed-up. Thanks, buddy. De Oppresso Liber!