1 CANPARA badge aged

[cw2311]

But the seller GUARANTEED it to be ‘original WW2’ from his 30 year collection!!!....therefore it must be the real deal!!

[Seathanaich]

Originally Posted by Infanteer

As mentioned, the slider is wrong and at the risk of sounding like a broken record, these badges are made in the form of the officer's badge which is different from the EM badge so it's wrong in pretty much every sense. Aged or not, these badges should not fool anyone as there is more then enough examples of original badges on the internet and in books.

What does "EM" mean? Electro-magnetic? Or are you trying to say "OR's", or "NCMs"?

[Infanteer]

Enlisted Men (Man).... synonymous with OR and NCM.... so I wrote precisely what I meant to write.

[Seathanaich]

Originally Posted by Infanteer

Enlisted Men (Man).... synonymous with OR and NCM.... so I wrote precisely what I meant to write.

That's an Americanism that I have never heard used in the Canadian military in 24 years. OR is the term previously used in the Canadian military, and NCM is the term primarily used in the Canadian military since unification.

[Infanteer]

Originally Posted by Seathanaich

That's an Americanism that I have never heard used in the Canadian military in 24 years. OR is the term previously used in the Canadian military, and NCM is the term primarily used in the Canadian military since unification.

So.... it's a term that is understood by most which is the point of communication. I understand your point and in some situations I agree that accuracy in terminology/nomenclature can prevent confusion but IMO reviving this old thread to make a point about semantics really doesn't add anything useful to the topic.

And in my 22 years in the Canadian military I have heard it. It may not have been in an official capacity but again, we all understood what was meant.

[Seathanaich]

Originally Posted by Infanteer

So.... it's a term that is understood by most which is the point of communication. I understand your point and in some situations I agree that accuracy in terminology/nomenclature can prevent confusion but IMO reviving this old thread to make a point about semantics really doesn't add anything useful to the topic. And in my 22 years in the Canadian military I have heard it. It may not have been in an official capacity but again, we all understood what was meant.

The point of raising this isn't "semantics", the point was to correct incorrect usage (people always cry "semantics" when someone corrects their usage). I would do the same if someone was repeatedly writing "Pvt" instead of "Pte", or calling the Canadian Army the "Royal Canadian Army". Correct terminology should not only be something any regular here should want to employ, it's also important if this is to be considered a source of expert opinion and advice.

Your 22 years in must have ended before my 24 years in began, because I have never seen that abbreviation nor ever heard it used outside of American war movies.

[Bill A]

Drifting off the topic of the thread. Lets keep the focus on the badges, please.

[Infanteer]

Originally Posted by Bill A

Drifting off the topic of the thread. Lets keep the focus on the badges, please.

No problem.... that's what I was thinking too.