Talk:Finnish Coastal Jaegers

The name of the article

Really though, skip the 'commando' part. It's Coastal Jaegers/Jägers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.80.159.9 (talk) 23:32, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

I agree. Furthermore, the whole article is written in an almost elitist manner not quite appropriate for an encyclopedia.--Kaspersu | talk to me 19:09, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your opinions, guys.

The "commando" word is an international way of describing this type of marine infantry troops. Jaegers/Jägers is a scandinavian/germanic expression and means nothing to people outside Scandinavia. Hence, in the interest of making the article more accesible to non-scandinavian readers I chose to use the "commando" word. Furthermore, the article itself makes this point.

I don't think the article is elitistic. If anything, it is factual and descriptive which is what encyclopedias are all about. Although, I may stretch as far as to agreeing that some parts off the text are slightly subjective. I chose to write the article in this way in order to make it more interesting and at no point have I sacrificed any factual content.

Also, I chose to concentrate on training methods and selection as these are non-controversial topics. It would have been inappropriate (and criminal) to, for example, list equipment details or other non-public information.

/The Author —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.188.217.129 (talk) 19:13, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

It's true that the term "jäger" does not tell much to the international audience but it does not tell much even in countries where it is used. Sometimes, and especially in the past jäger ("jääkäri") really meant kind of an elite light infantry in Finland (i.e. something like commandos). However, since then that word has been attributed to many different kinds of infantry units, usually because of the history of that unit.

Consider Kaartin jääkärirykmentti (Guard jäger regiment) in Helsinki. Conscripts serving there have been dubbed jägers because the roots of the unit lie in some jäger batallions of the early 20th century, in a sense that these batallions were formed of finns who had been in Germany to receive military training. The regiment itself, however, does not train any "special forces" or "commandos", only regular infantry, although somewhat specializing in urban warfare. We have also mechanized jägers ("panssarijääkärit") who just happen to be normal mechanized infantry fighting alongside with some heavier vehicles. In the past these units were also the first to receive armored personnel carriers while other infantry used trucks for transportation. That doesn't make them "commandos" either, does it?

So even rannikkojääkärit are just regular infantry, although under the navy and specializing in landings and coastal combat. They should be compared to the likes of Russian naval infantry, United States marine corps or royal marines of the United Kingdom, none of which are in themselves commandos but do contain some such subunits. Also note that the Coastal jägers are already mentioned in the article about marines. I think they should be dubbed accordingly, i.e. "coastal jägers" but the introduction could explain their modus operandi and possibly refer to the article about military marines in general. 62.78.227.13 (talk) 01:59, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

I agree. In particular, this is true at the moment. During the time of the Rannikkojääkärikoulu of Upinniemi, the coastal jaegers were a true elite formation. They were all volunteers, and every man was trained as a squad leader. As far as I understand, the idea was that in a war, they would have lead normal infantry-trained rank and file. Since the coastal jaegers were transferred to the Nylands Brigad, they have become a rather normal light infantry unit. If we happened to find "coastal jaeger" as distasteful, we should use the title "Finnish naval infantry". --MPorciusCato (talk) 18:31, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

You are implying that the "commando" word is an international way of describing this type of marine infantry troops. No. Marine is an international way of describing this type of marine infantry troops. This is a direct quote from Wikipedia: "Commando is a military unit or a soldier of an elite light infantry or special operations forces often specializing in amphibious landings, parachuting or rappelling". Although the article mentions the capability to assault conventional military targets (every soldier in FDF is trained to assault conventional targets) the Finnish coastal jaegers are not elite light infantry or special forces. Considering their training they are blunt shock troops operating in coastal enviroment just like marines. Commandos are much more surgical instrument and comparable to army's rangers. Commandos carry their own equipment whereas coastal jaegers rely on transports to deliver their heavy weaponry. Coastal jaegers are more comparable to army's mechanized infantry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.137.245.117 (talk) 21:52, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks again for the opinions chaps. Nice to see a few people engaged in the discussion and sorry for taking so long to reply (don't really check the page too often).

To begin with, the article refers to a subsection of troops at KJK. It also makes it clear that the company trains soldiers for other, less intensive, tasks. The article also states several times that the troops are infantry (albeit elite), not special forces so I think many of your comments are redundant. The training undergone by the troops I am refering to is more intense than that of normal infantry and those selcted are almost exclusivly volunteers. Hence, they are elite infantry. Furthermore, the article draws a very clear and crucial dividing line between the troops trained for 6 and 12 months (ie privates vs NCOs & Officers) which must be taken into account. It even explicitly states that privates are only trained for basic marine warfare.

As mentioned above the article already addresses many of the issues raised in this discussion. This implies that some of the commentators have not actually read the article or have not understood it. For example, the article stated that the training is amongst the most intense given to any Finnish INFANTRY. Someone had added "except divers and paratroopers" to this. Divers and paratroopers are not infantry hence the comment was completely redundant and I have hence deleted it.

I have to admitt that I don't know the context in which troops are refered to as "Coastal Jeagers" in the wider article on the Finnish Defence Force but I am uncertain as to whether it refers to the same troops as in this article. Although I don't care too much whether the troops are primarily refered to as jaegers or commandos (I quite like the compromise with the "commando" word in the brackets) I still maintain that the scandinavian view of a "Commando" soldier diverges widely from, for example, the British. As scandinavia is a tiny part of the world I hence chose the use of the more international expression for an article written in English.

As far as other jaeger troops go in Finland I am not really in a position to comment appart from agreeing that the name is used inconsistently. However, this fact doesn't actually say anything about the troops referred to in the article.

Finally, I'd like to add that the structure of how troops are trained at this company seems to undergo fairly regular change, so it is not impossible that some of the information I have provided is out of date. If this is the case please feel free to make this known. /The Author — Preceding unsigned comment added by Set04 (talk • contribs) 12:09, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Its completely irrelevant what anyone else in other countries call their amphibious units. Finland doesnt have any commandos. Being pre-selected doesnt make them any more special unit. You even talk about "elite marine infantry", there arent any other units that train amphibious infantry. Training part of the text is utter hearsay. Full pack is definitely not 60kg, not even with the ballistic plates. Regular full pack is some 30kg, ballistic plates add some 7kg. With food and cooking equipment it gets maybe to some 42kg tops. I know this as ive myself were in FRDF, though it was in Säkylä. Pretty much only credible info in this article is the "Task" and "The Green beret" parts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.142.198.87 (talk) 12:41, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

How come you talk in the beret march that it is about 120km long, when in the finnish version of the article there is mention that it is 70km long. How come in the english version it is 50km longer`? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.221.22.10 (talk) 23:09, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Should also ice hockey be translated to football to make the sport more accesible to areas outside Scandinavia? I mean come on, ice hockey is basically a scandinavian thing and others may find the term difficult to comprehend. IMO the word "jaeger" is much more distinctive and reflects better the Finnish culture. For example, British army has Gurkhas. Why not call them just rangers if it makes the term much more comprehendible? Of course the definition of a coastal jaeger should be pointed out in the article as Finnish derivative of the original term but coastal jaegers in their current form can hardly be called elite (especially after watching the documentary TV-series "Drakan"). But if the jaegers must be stripped from their original name then they should be called marines instead of commandos. The term marine defines (according to Wikipedia) their role more clearly as specialists in conventional amphibious warfare and coastal jaegers lack the skills mentioned in the Wikipedia commando article. And what about coastal infantry (Rannikkojalkaväki) currently trained in Upinniemi? Their training is based on coastal jaeger program with focus on reconnaissance. Should they be called commandos as well or do you grant the title exclusively to coastal jaegers? Despite the fact that some coastal infantry units have been trained over the years in team-sized operations, basic counter-terrorism, deep battlespace reconnaissance and other skills related to special forces? And what about naval scouts and other coastal units? I'm sorry but your terminology lacks consistency. The term "commando" combined with the green beret distorts the real nature of the coastal jaegers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.240.70.114 (talk) 18:39, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

You are implying that the "commando" word is an international way of describing this type of marine infantry troops. No. Marine is an international way of describing this type of marine infantry troops. This is a direct quote from Wikipedia: "Commando is a military unit or a soldier of an elite light infantry or special operations forces often specializing in amphibious landings, parachuting or rappelling". Although the article mentions the capability to assault conventional military targets (every soldier in FDF is trained to assault conventional targets) the Finnish coastal jaegers are not elite light infantry or special forces. Considering their training they are blunt shock troops operating in coastal enviroment just like marines. Commandos are much more surgical instrument and comparable to army's rangers. Commandos carry their own equipment whereas coastal jaegers rely on transports to deliver their heavy weaponry. Coastal jaegers are more comparable to army's mechanized infantry. This entire article gives me the feeling that the author was a coastal jaeger himself with a little too much "branch pride". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.137.245.117 (talk) 21:52, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Quite so (see my first comment above). The article is in need of an overhaul and has been for a long time. Moreover, please adhere to guidelines on this talk page as well (at least sign your comments). Kasper^Su _Talk 20:46, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Added tags. Kasper^Su _Talk 20:57, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

--

This battle - in my opinion - is fought against somebody who has probably served in the unit and has a bit too much pride in his/her unit than he/she should. Calling a regular light infantry unit that trains for 6 months (and the normal 12 for the NCO's, even though article tries to make it somehow superhuman feat) a commando unit is absolutely ridiculous and silly. The best example of how this conflicts with the reality is the Kaartin jääkärirykmentti (Guard Jäger/Jaeger Regiment). This place trains regular light infantry units referred to as kaupunkijääkäri (as obvious by the 1st and 2nd kaupunkijääkärikomppania), which can be translated to "Urban/City Jäger/Jaeger" that serve for 6 months AND on top of that a Military Police Company (2nd Kaupunkijääkärikomppani serves half a year as military police besides the actual military police company) that serve for 9 months and get extensive extra training on top of the regular 6 month service of the regular light infantry. However, these units serving for 9 months are NOT referred to as special forces (erikoisjoukot) but rather as erikoiskoulutettu jalkaväki (specially trained infantry or specialised infantry) stating their position as something more than just regular infantry but not special forces. Furthermore, there are is the Engineer Regiment (or Pioneers to some english speakers) that trains Engineers that all receive 12 month NCO training and are not referred to as Engineer Commandos, but rather as Combat engineers or plain engineers. Even on top of that the mechanized infantry is referred to as Panssarijääkäri (Armoured/Armour Jägers) and they - similarly - receive 6 month training for infantry and 12 months for NCO's and reserve officers, nothing special or commando about them either.

Nothing about Coastal Jägers or their NCO's amphibious school is any different to any other regular Finnsh military conscript service in general, their training is no harder than the others nor is it special to validate the title "commando". They are specialised in the same sense that Mechanized infantry is specialised in mechanized operations, Guard Jäger Batallion is specialised in urban combat and Engineer Regiment specialised in Engineering/Combat engineering, but this in it self doesn't justify the title of Commando which traditionally refers to special forces or professional military units of smaller scale. As mentioned in the beginning, I believe this is merely harrasment - if not bullying - by somebody who perhaps has served in the unit or is affiliated with it in an attempt to glorify his/her personal service history or personal needs. I obviously do not know, but tat is the feeling I get of this argument and naming trend of the article.

Finnish military consistently refers to Jääkäri as a Jaeger in their websites as proven by sources in the end of this rant, including their official website referring to Coastal infantry as Coastal Jaegers. This should be the end of this ridiculous argument over calling them this or that.

On the side note of having the term Jäger or Jaeger replaced with something more comprehensible to english readers outside Central Europe or the scope of military knowledge, the article should be called "Finnish Coastal Light Infantry" or "Finnish Coastal Amphibious Infantry" or "Finnish Coastal Infantry" or "Finnish Coastal Marine Infantry" or "Finnish Marine Infantry" or something along the line, but since the prelevant english term in all military terminology concerning finnish light infantry these days is Jäger/Jaeger, I don't see any point in that.

Here are the references as follows:

• Nyland Brigade: Coastal Troops - A link pointing to the website of the unit (Nyland Brigade) training these conscripts refers to them as Coastal jaegers, cited directly from the page: "The Nyland Brigade trains among others coastal jaegers, mortar men, engineers, military police, drone operators, drivers and boat navigators. Furthermore, training is given for many special tasks, such as fire control, signal and target acquisition, medical care and maintenance tasks."

• Guard Jaeger Regiment: Organisation - This site refers to the Kaartin Jääkärirykmentti as "Guard Jaeger Regiment" and points out the fact that the Jääkärirykmentis are referred to as "Jaeger Regiment", not Commando Regiment

• Häme Armour Battalion - This site refers to the Panssarijääkärikomppania as Armour Jaeger Company, again, not as Armour Commando Company.

I hope this is sufficient in order to move this article under the name it should have rather than have it under some silly Commando term. --221.191.243.111 (talk) 19:39, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

The References Section

The singular current statement of the References section, that the Finnish Defence Forces home pages (puolustusvoimat.fi, to which the alias mil.fi points) are a source for every ostensibly attributable "fact" of the article (in its current form), is, quite simply, not true. Rather, it would seem not a single piece of information in the article may be attributed to the FDF home pages. Hence, I will be removing the section. Kasper^Su _Talk 00:13, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

The reference does not exist anymore since the website has been updated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.244.20.50 (talk) 00:48, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Here is something that maybe could be used for the beret march part. Even though the march is known to vary from time to time. http://www.puolustusvoimat.fi/portal/puolustusvoimat.fi/!ut/p/c5/04_SB8K8xLLM9MSSzPy8xBz9CP0os3h3IzMLDy8DQ0t3Qz8LA0__kAAj9yA3A4swU6B8JJK8v7evE1DexyDM3CfA0NnCiBLdBobE6DYzdvV29XM3MXQPcDYx8Ax2CbUMCTU3dg81o8Bu_yBzArrDQSGF3-f45EF-A8njcz0e_WD3geQNcABHA30_j_zcVP2C3NDQ0AiDTM8sE0UAPN3fbA!!/dl3/d3/L0lDU0NTQ1FvS1VRIS9JSFNBQ0lLRURNeW01dXBnLzRDMWI4SWtmb2lUSUJLUVEvN19HMjY4SEowMTlHMU44MElPVFAyR1JGME9NNy9XQ01fQ09OVEVYVC8lMHN1K3B1b2x1c3R1c3ZvaW1hdC5maSUwcHVvbHVzdHVzdm9pbWF0LmZpJTBydW90dXZha2ktbGVodGklMHBpa2F1dXRpc2V0JTB2aWhyZWFuK2JhcmV0aW4rbWV0c2FzdHlz/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.244.20.50 (talk) 00:56, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Small changes subsection

Added semi-official motto. As far as I know, this motto is not fully official, not on General Headquarters level, but it is written on the wall above the company wachman. At-every-company. As well on the wall of the mess hall... ...and it's quite oftenly cited in speeches by senior officers. 188.238.158.164 (talk) 16:00, 23 April 2014 (UTC)