Socialists are actually a great example of givers - giving support to the poor. Soldiers are takers - they take other people's lives in exchange for money.

I'll address the rest later.

Originally Posted by DougieG

Socialists are actually a great example of givers - giving support to the poor. Soldiers are takers - they take other people's lives in exchange for money.

I'll address the rest later.

Having not been in the military I don't think you understand. Military people don't usually join for the money.

I think I posted the reference on another thread but here in the States the people that join are usually better educated and come from more affluent homes than those selfish pricks that don't serve. Probably the same demographics apply in your country.

Some of the people that do join for a career will usually wind up in the non combat arms.

There is not an officer in the military that couldn't make more money on the outside than they could inside.

Most of the lower enlisted ranks live near the poverty level and could make more money elsewhere.

Your premise is just simply wrong.

People join the military to serve their country and do their duty. Some join for the adventure of it. Very few join to kill but you wouldn't know that if you never served, would you? By the way your country would have folded a long time ago if everybody had the same sense of duty as you.

I really like Heinlein’s premise that only veterans have the intelligence and sense of duty to be a citizen. He got it right.

If you are going to take my advice and read Heinlein I would also suggest you read "The Moon is Harsh Mistress". It is where the phrase "there ain't no such thing as a free lunch" came from. It is a book about economics just like Starship Trooper is a book about duty.

An unnecessarily directly insulting post, flash. I refuse to answer any more of your posts until you apologise for your personal attacks.

Heinlen was a nutjob as is flash (not an insult check his own status he knows it)

nuff said innit. anyone in my view who picks up a gun and then goes overseas to fight (not to defend but to attack) other nations is a criminal and no better than a common murderer in fact maybe worse coz the wimps hide behind the excuse of ''Following orders' - this is my definition of a coward. Someone who kills other people and then hides behind the excuse of 'just following orders'.

Why does it not surprise me that flash wants to build a society on the premise of moral cowardice

Originally Posted by Marxist Nutter

Heinlen was a nutjob as is flash (not an insult check his own status he knows it)

nuff said innit. anyone in my view who picks up a gun and then goes overseas to fight (not to defend but to attack) other nations is a criminal and no better than a common murderer in fact maybe worse coz the wimps hide behind the excuse of ''Following orders' - this is my definition of a coward. Someone who kills other people and then hides behind the excuse of 'just following orders'.

Why does it not surprise me that flash wants to build a society on the premise of moral cowardice

So when your country sent troops to defend the invasion of Poland at the outbreak of WWII then they were criminals? Germany had not attacked the UK at that time.

How about when they declared war on Germany because Germany invaded Belgium in WWI? Germany had not attacked the UK at that time.

How about when they sent troops to Serbia in the 1990s to kill Christians to protect Muslims? I never remember the Christians attacking the UK, do you?

Seems like according to your definition you belong to criminal country.

Heinlein was probably the greatest SF writer of all times. He used SF to discuss politics and philosophy. He was very good at it. I have never heard anybody call him a nutjob but you.

I have little respect for the cowards that chose to sit at home and eat their potato chips and play their video games while the real men and women in their country are doing their duty in harm's way.

I have less respect for the people that demean the men and women in the service of their country. It takes a real lowlife to go that route. I don't know if it is insecurity or envy or just plain hatefulness for something they don't understand.

Maybe that is just an American thing but I don't think so.

Maybe one of these days I will figure it out.

Originally Posted by DougieG

An unnecessarily directly insulting post, flash. I refuse to answer any more of your posts until you apologise for your personal attacks.

Don't take my views on serving in the military personally. I think the Bush's twins were selfish pricks for not serving in the military during a time of war and I voted for Bush twice.

Originally Posted by flash

Don't take my views on serving in the military personally. I think the Bush's twins were selfish pricks for not serving in the military during a time of war and I voted for Bush twice.

Irregardless, you referred to me directly. Your view that everyone who doesn't serve in the army is a selfish coward is condescending, idiotic and disgusting.

Originally Posted by DougieG

Irregardless, you referred to me directly. Your view that everyone who doesn't serve in the army is a selfish coward is condescending, idiotic and disgusting.

Trust me kid. If you don't know what is wrong with not serving your country in the military at a time when the troops are in Harm's Way then there is nothing I can say that will impart moral clarity to you.

There are some things that simply cannot be taught on an Internet Discussion forum.

A sense of duty is one of them.

If you think that duty has to involve killing, then either your parents or your teachers must have been regrettably bloodthirsty psychopaths.

Originally Posted by DougieG

If you think that duty has to involve killing, then either your parents or your teachers must have been regrettably bloodthirsty psychopaths.

Good thing my Dad and Uncle were involved in killing or else you would probably be speaking German now.

You post shows a great moral weakness. Not uncommon for Left Wingers.

Originally Posted by Marxist Nutter

Why does it not surprise me that flash wants to build a society on the premise of moral cowardice

This coming from someone who so eloquently describes his willingness to employ the beta chimp strategy of offering his anus up to the aggressor. Way to go.

Originally Posted by flash

Good thing my Dad and Uncle were involved in killing or else you would probably be speaking German now.

You post shows a great moral weakness. Not uncommon for Left Wingers.

I think you'll find that FDR was responsible for that cock-up. And anyway, America's entry into the war was purely for political reasons. We didn't need your egotistic generals chasing objectives for glory no matter what the cost (Rome springs to mind). You really only needed to contain Psycho Stalin.

And you are being very patronising flash. Fighting for a flag in another's country is not in any way justified on determining cowardice.

People don't want to die or be shot at. Those that do should be respected but not worshipped quite the way you Americans do it. Glorifying what is essentially political murder seems a bit rash.

Peace is what we want, but not what the US want. There are so many soldiers in the US Army that it would be "inconvenient" during peace time to have such a large force. Not to mention it would cost a fortune to pay their salaries during peacetime when there are no spoils of war to divide.

Originally Posted by flash

Good thing my Dad and Uncle were involved in killing or else you would probably be speaking German now.

You post shows a great moral weakness. Not uncommon for Left Wingers.

I was quite clearly talking about modern wars. Vietnam and Iraq had absolutely no value in defending my country. Were the equivalent of WW2 to come about, well then you would have a point.

I have far more respect for the scientist who researches cures for cancer than for the slapheaded warmonger whose business is to kill for oil.

Originally Posted by DougieG

I have far more respect for the scientist who researches cures for cancer than for the slapheaded warmonger whose business is to kill for oil.

Haha, but where are most medicines derived from... hydrocarbons. The point is null in this context as surely the insurance of a steady influx of oil to develop medicines to cure cancer.

Originally Posted by Syphro

And you are being very patronising flash. Fighting for a flag in another's country is not in any way justified on determining cowardice.

I disagree. In my life I have come to the realization that those that don't serve usually have some kind of yellow streak down their back. They are usually lacking in morals and sense of duty. It is a character deficiency. It can be manifested in many ways but the root cause is usually putting ones selfish needs ahead of others.

The finest people in America serve. The assholes don't. I don't know for sure but I suspect that is also true in your country.

A little while ago I got a call from my son in the Army. He went to his NCO Board today as he has been put up for promotion to Sergeant. He only plans to stay in for one enlistment and then get out. He is not doing it for the money or for anything other than a sense of duty to his country. To me that makes him morally superior to his buddies back home that never served. He has bought his own ticket to live in America. His buddies back home had their ticket paid for by somebody else.

People don't want to die or be shot at. Those that do should be respected but not worshipped quite the way you Americans do it. Glorifying what is essentially political murder seems a bit rash.

I make no apologies for respecting those brave troops that defend my country. It is appalling and quite disgusting to see you Europeans make despairing remarks about the military. For instance, to hear someone call them political murderers is very disgusting. I know there are people here in the States that don’t like the military but even those people wouldn't say anything despairing.

Peace is what we want, but not what the US want. There are so many soldiers in the US Army that it would be "inconvenient" during peace time to have such a large force. Not to mention it would cost a fortune to pay their salaries during peacetime when there are no spoils of war to divide

I don't think you know much about America to make that comment.

America has a long tradition of having a strong military.

If it was up to me I would withdraw troops from around the world but I would still keep the military strong.

Originally Posted by flash

I disagree. In my life I have come to the realization that those that don't serve usually have some kind of yellow streak down their back. They are usually lacking in morals and sense of duty. It is a character deficiency. It can be manifested in many ways but the root cause is usually putting ones selfish needs ahead of others.

Generally, I tend to agree with you on most issues, but I'll have to disagree on this one. When I came out of high school, the first Gulf War was just ending and there were no immediate threats on the horizon, so I went to college instead. By the time I graduated from college, Slick Willie had slashed the military budget to the bone, so they weren't in desperate need of personnel. That didn't stop me from trying though. I spoke to the Army who gave me some song and dance about how I'd have to enlist and go in as an E-3, then they'd "try to find me an OCS spot if one came open." You and I both know what would have happened in that case (at least in 1997). I would have been a Private First Class with a Bachelor's Degree taking **** from a 2nd Lieutenant of the same age and education. Once again, since there were no immediate threats, I chose to go into my chosen profession of law enforcement. Since then I have accumulated 12 years of honorable service including work as both a patrolman and an undercover detective. I have both written and served my own high-risk search warrants, kicking the doors of some of the worst thugs and meth-monkeys you can possibly imagine without knowing what was on the other side of the door. Thankfully, I was able to make it through without serious injury or having to shoot anyone. I have placed myself in more peril than probably 80% of our armed services. I don't mean to diminish their service and sacrifices in any way because I am eternally grateful for their service; however, I have to disagree with your assumption that failure to serve in the military automatically makes one a coward. Also, if it was about the money, I've been duped!

Also, consider what would happen if every man and woman of enlistment age tried to enlist. The military could never take them all. The funds just aren't available.

Originally Posted by Tantal

Generally, I tend to agree with you on most issues, but I'll have to disagree on this one. When I came out of high school, the first Gulf War was just ending and there were no immediate threats on the horizon, so I went to college instead. By the time I graduated from college, Slick Willie had slashed the military budget to the bone, so they weren't in desperate need of personnel. That didn't stop me from trying though. I spoke to the Army who gave me some song and dance about how I'd have to enlist and go in as an E-3, then they'd "try to find me an OCS spot if one came open." You and I both know what would have happened in that case (at least in 1997). I would have been a Private First Class with a Bachelor's Degree taking **** from a 2nd Lieutenant of the same age and education. Once again, since there were no immediate threats, I chose to go into my chosen profession of law enforcement. Since then I have accumulated 12 years of honorable service including work as both a patrolman and an undercover detective. I have both written and served my own high-risk search warrants, kicking the doors of some of the worst thugs and meth-monkeys you can possibly imagine without knowing what was on the other side of the door. Thankfully, I was able to make it through without serious injury or having to shoot anyone. I have placed myself in more peril than probably 80% of our armed services. I don't mean to diminish their service and sacrifices in any way because I am eternally grateful for their service; however, I have to disagree with your assumption that failure to serve in the military automatically makes one a coward. Also, if it was about the money, I've been duped!

There wasn't much of a need after the first Gulf War.

You are right about Slick Willie and the military during that time. He destroyed the patriotism that drove men into the military and he did everything he could to gut the military. Obongo is essentially doing the same thing nowadays only worse.

My comments were more directed towards a war time situation. Especially post 911. I suspect by the time 911 came you were too old and had an established family.

I understand the military is not for everybody. It sounds like from your comments that you had an inclination to join but there was no great need and it just wasn't the right thing for you to do at the time.

You decision to not join was not based upon the unwillingness to sacrifice. The need for the sacrifice was simply not there in those days and I understand.

My older son essentially made the same decision when he graduated from High School in 1996. Clinton was gutting the military in those days and recruitment was down. He finished college about the time of 911 and when he tried to join then he was rejected due to a medical problem.

My statement on this thread was directed towards the anti military comments that were made and the idea that those that serve may have the best set of values to run this country as articulated in Heinlein’s book Starship Trooper.

It is an interesting topic to explore.

Also, consider what would happen if every man and woman of enlistment age tried to enlist. The military could never take them all. The funds just aren't available

You are right about that. Not everybody can be in the military. The moral thing to examine is are you willing to do your duty? Most Americans will step up to the plate. You certainly did an evaluation at the time. Sometimes there is a big need and sometimes there is a small need.

There was a big need when I joined the Army in 1966 because of the Cold War and Vietnam. By 1978 after Carter did everything he could to gut the military there was hardly a need. While I went in 1966 I may not have gone in 1978. However, I would have missed a great experience and probably would have regretted it the rest of my life.

Originally Posted by DougieG

Socialists are actually a great example of givers - giving support to the poor. Soldiers are takers - they take other people's lives in exchange for money.

I'll address the rest later.

You do not have the slightest idea of what a soldier does.I spent 16 years in the Army as an infantryman.My rank upon leaving was a Corporal(i was lokking at SGT and had passed the PSBC prior to my last deployment.

In that 16 years of service I never once Killed a single person, i served in NI keeping the peace between two sets of A-Holes who wanted to kill eachother because of two lines in a prayer, my job was trying to ensure that the normal people could live a normal life free from the violence of the A-Holes.I served in Bosnia, again stopping different A holes from screwing up the lives of the normal folk, Kosovo the same, Afghanistan the same.In The first Gulf war my job was caring for Kurdish children who had been orphaned by the actions of Iraqi forces, entertaining them, feeding, changing etc.I delivered food aid to the starving in many lands, helped in rescues after natural disasters, evacuated people from areas at risk from natural disasters and Man made disasters.

Do you ever stop to consider those actions, the army is a device to SAVE lives not take lives.

At times killing a few bad guys will save the lives of hundreds or thousands of innocents, i guess you dont think of that one either, Killing a suicide bomber before he initiates his device for example would save many lives whilst taking one, you are very narrow minded in your views when it comes to the troops.

Originally Posted by pauli007001

You do not have the slightest idea of what a soldier does.I spent 16 years in the Army as an infantryman.My rank upon leaving was a Corporal(i was lokking at SGT and had passed the PSBC prior to my last deployment.

In that 16 years of service I never once Killed a single person, i served in NI keeping the peace between two sets of A-Holes who wanted to kill eachother because of two lines in a prayer, my job was trying to ensure that the normal people could live a normal life free from the violence of the A-Holes.I served in Bosnia, again stopping different A holes from screwing up the lives of the normal folk, Kosovo the same, Afghanistan the same.In The first Gulf war my job was caring for Kurdish children who had been orphaned by the actions of Iraqi forces, entertaining them, feeding, changing etc.I delivered food aid to the starving in many lands, helped in rescues after natural disasters, evacuated people from areas at risk from natural disasters and Man made disasters.

Do you ever stop to consider those actions, the army is a device to SAVE lives not take lives.

At times killing a few bad guys will save the lives of hundreds or thousands of innocents, i guess you dont think of that one either, Killing a suicide bomber before he initiates his device for example would save many lives whilst taking one, you are very narrow minded in your views when it comes to the troops.

Well tens of thousands of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan have been shot by Western forces. If that's not paid killing, I'm not sure what is.

Originally Posted by DougieG

Well tens of thousands of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan have been shot by Western forces. If that's not paid killing, I'm not sure what is.

By western forces??????
Are you really so stupid that you believe that EVERY civvy killed in Afghanistan or Iraq are killed by US or British troops???????????
Most are killed by ****ing al ****ing quaida or other such groups.The US and UK forces do not target civvies.But all deaths must be by British troops, cos it dosnt say specifically in the BBC reports how where when and why each person was killed or by whom, from that BALENCED omission, you assume based on your prejudices.


The vast majority of people killed by US or UK troops were civvies who illegally took up arms(based on the rules of armed conflict), under the rules of armed conflict they may be shot out of hand, they are not civvies as they have taken up arms, but they are not legal combattents because they do not represent a national government nor do they have a recognised chain of command.Civillian insurgents are not protected as a civvillian carrying on with their life would be, they may legally be shot out of hand without any trial.The US and UK treats them as PWs at point of capture.They are in fact exceeding the protection allowed to armed combattents who do not meet the criterea to be considered legally soldiers.

You are guilty of twisting facts AGAIN to support a position that is completely flawed.

Do you personally know one single serving soldier with combat experience?

NO you do not, you do not know what you are talking about and you are posting some of the most offensive and incorrect assumptions i have ever read, do go and check your facts, you know that i will.I will aquire if you wish the info of as many civvies killed in both Iraq and Afghanistan and find for you exactly how many innocents have been killed deliberatly by the US or UK troops.


OOOOhhhhhhhh look i got it, Number of innocent civvies killed by US or UK troops in deliberate targeting incidents.



ABSOLUTELY NONE, ZIP ZERO NADA NONE!!!!!

Save your false assumptions, you hate soldiers because they have honour and courage, 2 things that you lack.Like i said without soldiers MILLIONS of people would have died.I can say that in my 16 years i was responsible(along with my collegues)for saving the lives of at least half a million Bosnians, up to a million Kosovars, another Million rawandans,then not forgetting how many hundreds of thousands of sudanese, sierra leonis etc etc etc.

Guess you would prefer to see em all dead.Perhaps that might have something to do with your Islamophobic and racist beliefs, you hate to admit that it is good to save the lives of Islamic or black people, OK in that case go join the BNP!!!

Talk about NARROW MINDED!!!!!

Originally Posted by DougieG

Well tens of thousands of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan have been shot by Western forces. If that's not paid killing, I'm not sure what is.

So the British bomber crews that killed hundreds of thousands of German children and non combatants were, in your estimation, nothing more than "paid killers"? After all they did get a salary for serving in the RAF and dropping bombs on the civilians.

Is that your conviction or were these brave RAF bomber crews the exception to your convictions?

If that is your conviction, which they must be, then you are absolutely the first person I have ever heard in my life to say that. You are truly unique.

By the way can you tell me how many "thousands" of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan have been "shot" by Western forces? I would really like to hear how they were shot. Did an American soldier get these poor unfortunate civilians in the sights of his ACOG and then pull the trigger as he was laughing maniacally? Did he then go back to the FOB, have a beer and then bragged to his buddies how he wasted another raghead? I would like to hear some details seeing that you know all this stuff.

I have seen some figures by some hateful Left Wing groups that have "estimated" hundreds of thousands of poor Iraqi and Afghanistan non combatants being slaughtered by the evil Americans and their lackeys the British. However, upon any kind of scrutiny these figures are easily debunked.

You lack of respect for the military is very appalling. To me it shows a significant lack of moral clarity. I am very curious. Did you develop that mindset on your own or did your parents teach you?

Edited

Look kid I feel sorry for you so I decided to help you out.

Here is a video of those evil American soldiers mowing down the civilians. In this video if you look closely you can see the women and children being slaughtered. Also, to further reinforce your statement about the soldiers being paid killers you can see them high fiving each other after every each raghead child bites the dust. You hear one of them bragging about the new Corvette he is going to buy with all the money he is making on the killing.

http://www.apacheclips.com/media/966...n_Afghanistan/

Originally Posted by flash

So the British bomber crews that killed hundreds of thousands of German children and non combatants were, in your estimation, nothing more than "paid killers"? After all they did get a salary for serving in the RAF and dropping bombs on the civilians.

Is that your conviction or were these brave RAF bomber crews the exception to your convictions?

If that is your conviction, which they must be, then you are absolutely the first person I have ever heard in my life to say that. You are truly unique.

I think those bombers would have been held accountable if they had lost WWII or done such a bombing in the present day. Today, soldiers have to be accountable to be trusted by the government and the general public.

Armies around the world need to prevent atrocities on their side to have a minimal and clinical invasion if it is unavoidable. Iraq was an example of an invasion that was cocked up and turned friendly insurrectionist forces against the Allied Coalition. Executing Saddam Hussein was the icing on the cake and the power vacuum is why the US forces are still there.

Originally Posted by flash

By the way can you tell me how many "thousands" of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan have been "shot" by Western forces? I would really like to hear how they were shot. Did an American soldier get these poor unfortunate civilians in the sights of his ACOG and then pull the trigger as he was laughing maniacally? Did he then go back to the FOB, have a beer and then bragged to his buddies how he wasted another raghead? I would like to hear some details seeing that you know all this stuff.

American soldiers are very valiant (and reckless like your firemen), but the nationalist and religious breed have an agenda to kill as many potential "bombers" and heathen muslims as they can.

Originally Posted by flash

You lack of respect for the military is very appalling. To me it shows a significant lack of moral clarity. I am very curious. Did you develop that mindset on your own or did your parents teach you?

This is not addressed to me, but I will answer anyway.

Let me just tell you something, if the USA did not have an economic (and therefore moral, somehow) highground then it could be paralleled with Hitler's glorification of the Wehrmacht.

Stalin on the other hand, never trusted the military as they could overthrow his regime. Whereas, many right wing dictators are military based and are relatively secure inside the power structure.

I would only ever fight to protect my family and my country from invaders. That is a duty for every man (and woman if you are a feminist) who lives in that country. I, of course, would rather be a battlefield surgeon in such a situation but I would never support an offensive war to usurp a despot. If the people don't have a will for revolution then a power vacuum and instability will ensue.

Originally Posted by Syphro

Let me just tell you something, if the USA did not have an economic (and therefore moral, somehow) highground then it could be paralleled with Hitler's glorification of the Wehrmacht.

Yea I know. Any country that has pride in its armed forces is nothing more than Nazi meannies.

I would like to hear you back up that economic statement seeing that this war on terror is costing us a ton of money and we are not getting much in return.

At least when we invaded Iraq we should have stole their oil but instead it was the Chinese tht cut the honey deal with the Iraqis for the oil. I have yet to see the first oil tanker show up at the Port of Houston with free Iraqi oil but I am sure you have the pictures and will be glad to show them to me.

Originally Posted by flash

At least when we invaded Iraq we should have stole their oil but instead it was the Chinese tht cut the honey deal with the Iraqis for the oil. I have yet to see the first oil tanker show up at the Port of Houston with free Iraqi oil but I am sure you have the pictures and will be glad to show them to me.

I have no pictures of any oil tankers. I just thought Iraq's assets were given to American corporation and they don't have national interest so I wouldn't be surprised if the Chinese had a better price and the corporations sold it to them.

I think Iraq was unnecessary but Afghanistan was a bomb waiting to go off. The Allied Coalition is doing a brilliant job with only 200 British Casualities. I don't know the number of Americans whose lives have been lost, but the Afghans are indebted to you more than us.

Originally Posted by pauli007001

By western forces??????
Are you really so stupid that you believe that EVERY civvy killed in Afghanistan or Iraq are killed by US or British troops???????????
Most are killed by ****ing al ****ing quaida or other such groups.The US and UK forces do not target civvies.But all deaths must be by British troops, cos it dosnt say specifically in the BBC reports how where when and why each person was killed or by whom, from that BALENCED omission, you assume based on your prejudices.

Well, around 100,000 civilians have been killed to date in Iraq alone, let alone Afghanistan: Iraq Body Count You're seriously naieve to think that terrorists could inflict that number of casualties.

Originally Posted by pauli007001

The vast majority of people killed by US or UK troops were civvies who illegally took up arms(based on the rules of armed conflict), under the rules of armed conflict they may be shot out of hand, they are not civvies as they have taken up arms, but they are not legal combattents because they do not represent a national government nor do they have a recognised chain of command.

Yes, that accounts for some. But 'civilian' casualties do not count people who are fighting back. Maybe some of them were 'off-duty' terrorists but if they are firing at soldiers when killed then their deaths are not listed as civilian.

Originally Posted by pauli007001

Civillian insurgents are not protected as a civvillian carrying on with their life would be, they may legally be shot out of hand without any trial.The US and UK treats them as PWs at point of capture.They are in fact exceeding the protection allowed to armed combattents who do not meet the criterea to be considered legally soldiers.

Then they're not going to feature in the death lists, are they Pauli? If only some of them are killed then of my 100,000 deaths that I've quoted, very few are going to be insurgents.

Originally Posted by pauli007001

You are guilty of twisting facts AGAIN to support a position that is completely flawed.

No comment. You say this about anything that contradicts your view.

Originally Posted by pauli007001

Do you personally know one single serving soldier with combat experience?

Yes, about three or four. I've had to break up fights in pubs involving several squaddies too. There's certain 'no-go' areas in Windsor, where the soldiers hang out, and once they've had a couple of drinks they'll just assault anything that moves. I've had a friend go home in an ambulance after two squaddies jumped him in an alley with a knife. The old soldiers who I know are invariably rude and unpopular.

Originally Posted by pauli007001

NO you do not, you do not know what you are talking about and you are posting some of the most offensive and incorrect assumptions i have ever read, do go and check your facts, you know that i will.I will aquire if you wish the info of as many civvies killed in both Iraq and Afghanistan and find for you exactly how many innocents have been killed deliberatly by the US or UK troops.

Did I say deliberately? You're spreading malicious lies about me Pauli.

Originally Posted by pauli007001

OOOOhhhhhhhh look i got it, Number of innocent civvies killed by US or UK troops in deliberate targeting incidents.

What's with the deliberate again? As far as I'm concerned, shelling a city where a few terrorists are living and killing the civilian inhabitants too is unacceptable. Remember the images of Baghdad burning? How many civilians do you think died in that?

Originally Posted by pauli007001

Save your false assumptions, you hate soldiers because they have honour and courage, 2 things that you lack.

Jumping people in alleys with knives isn't very honorable or courageous. Nor is shelling a town full of innocents and one or two terrorists.

Originally Posted by pauli007001

Like i said without soldiers MILLIONS of people would have died.I can say that in my 16 years i was responsible(along with my collegues)for saving the lives of at least half a million Bosnians, up to a million Kosovars, another Million rawandans,then not forgetting how many hundreds of thousands of sudanese, sierra leonis etc etc etc.

Well you weren't personally responsible for that were you? I'm sure that without you personally the army would still have done the same thing. I'm not saying we need no army, I just think we need to be more honest about what it is. Most of these men aren't 'heroes'. They're just blokes doing a job. Working on an oil rig has a similar chance of death, but you wouldn't call them 'heroes' would you? Someone who lays their life down to save ten of their squad mates, they are a hero. Someone who was the school bully and joined the army because he wanted to 'blow up pakis' (I've got several people in mind who I know have said this or things like it) after getting no GCSE's because he was too busy beating up small children and is then subsequently hit by a car bomb and dies. That is NOT a hero.

Originally Posted by pauli007001

Guess you would prefer to see em all dead.Perhaps that might have something to do with your Islamophobic and racist beliefs, you hate to admit that it is good to save the lives of Islamic or black people, OK in that case go join the BNP!!!

Thanks for that Pauli.

Originally Posted by pauli007001

Talk about NARROW MINDED!!!!!

Yes, let's please. This is the man who can't accept any criticism whatsoever for a branch of the government.

Originally Posted by flash

So the British bomber crews that killed hundreds of thousands of German children and non combatants were, in your estimation, nothing more than "paid killers"? After all they did get a salary for serving in the RAF and dropping bombs on the civilians.

Yes, that's right. Well done. Though they were just following orders and I don't blame them personally as such. Low civilian deaths is acceptable, if you are bombing railways or factories. The enormous bombing of cities indiscriminately is not OK. Look at Dresden as a good example. The fault lies with Churchill and the army general staff.

Originally Posted by flash

Is that your conviction or were these brave RAF bomber crews the exception to your convictions?

Sorry not to give the answer you were expecting.

Originally Posted by flash

If that is your conviction, which they must be, then you are absolutely the first person I have ever heard in my life to say that. You are truly unique.

Well by your own admission you don't like left wingers very much. So the people you associate probably support the untold massacre of innocents.

Originally Posted by flash

By the way can you tell me how many "thousands" of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan have been "shot" by Western forces? I would really like to hear how they were shot. Did an American soldier get these poor unfortunate civilians in the sights of his ACOG and then pull the trigger as he was laughing maniacally? Did he then go back to the FOB, have a beer and then bragged to his buddies how he wasted another raghead? I would like to hear some details seeing that you know all this stuff.

Well, actually that's not far out. I think most civilian deaths occur 'accidentally', like chucking a grenade into a building or aiming a mortar at a village. Not always, though. You hear the squaddies in bars around hear boasting about how many Iraqi civvies they have shot. 'They're all paki's' is what I frequently hear.

Originally Posted by flash

I have seen some figures by some hateful Left Wing groups that have "estimated" hundreds of thousands of poor Iraqi and Afghanistan non combatants being slaughtered by the evil Americans and their lackeys the British. However, upon any kind of scrutiny these figures are easily debunked.

It's actually funny how much you think your country are ALWAYS the good guys. There's so many shades of grey, you know. Iraq Body Count shows that yes, many civilians are killed by terrorists, but many are also killed by soldiers.

Originally Posted by flash

Your lack of respect for the military is very appalling. To me it shows a significant lack of moral clarity. I am very curious. Did you develop that mindset on your own or did your parents teach you?

Developed in contact with soldiers and a realisation that most of them are just violent, rude and arrogant (you certainly have two out of three). Your willingness to support the deaths of innocents shows just how far your far right patriotic nationalism goes. Let's think of all the times that the military have gained political power, shall we? Oooh, Pinochet. There's Hitler, where the entire country was militarised. You have Napoleon, who went pillaging and raping his way across the whole of Europe. The only time in history where most soldiers have been normal people is in WW1 and WW2 simply because of conscription and the fact that the army became a real necessity to survival. Before and since, private soldiers have mostly been the bottom of society, either too uneducated or too unsavoury to do anything else.

[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by Syphro

I have no pictures of any oil tankers. I just thought Iraq's assets were given to American corporation and they don't have national interest so I wouldn't be surprised if the Chinese had a better price and the corporations sold it to them.

What Iraqi assets were given to American corporations?

You do know that war cost us at least a trillion dollars and the lives of over 3,000 of our finest young men and women, don't you?

Like I have said before I don't have a clue why we invaded Iraq but I do know one thing; it was not for profit. If it was for profit then we are like the worst businessmen of all time because we have lots several magnitudes more than we have gained.

Originally Posted by DougieG

Developed in contact with soldiers and a realisation that most of them are just violent, rude and arrogant (you certainly have two out of three). Your willingness to support the deaths of innocents shows just how far your far right patriotic nationalism goes. Let's think of all the times that the military have gained political power, shall we? Oooh, Pinochet. There's Hitler, where the entire country was militarised. You have Napoleon, who went pillaging and raping his way across the whole of Europe. The only time in history where most soldiers have been normal people is in WW1 and WW2 simply because of conscription and the fact that the army became a real necessity to survival. Before and since, private soldiers have mostly been the bottom of society, either too uneducated or too unsavoury to do anything else.

I don't know about soldiers in the UK. However, I have several times posted the link to the study that indicated military people in the US are more educated and come from wealthier families than those dullards that don't serve.

I would really be surprised to discover that the demographics are much different in the UK.

Could you provide a little more information on why you don't consider the brave men and women that serve in the UK's armed forces to be "normal"?

I served briefly with a detachment UK troops back in the summer of 1967 in Germany before being deployed to Vietnam. I found them to be very intelligent and professional. They did the same job as me and were very competent. They loved their country and were standing at the Fulda Gap to oppose the massed invasion army of the Soviet Union. I think they would have been a little disappointed to learn that their fellow countrymen like you felt they were the scourge of British society.

While you are backing up your rhetoric could you also show me where I indicated a willingness to support the deaths of innocents?

I think I have said specifically that I have no idea why we invaded Iraq, sent troops to Somalia or to Bosnia. I have also said repeatedly that if it was up to me we would withdraw troops from most places in the world.

In that non intervention light I also have questioned why Americans sent troops to Europe in WWI and also in WWII seeing that the people that attacked us were Japanese.

Please provide specifics on how I support the killing of innocents.

Those who serve UK forces are no more or less "dullards" than those who dont. Most are just as normal if a little more special as the next person.My son applied to join when he was 15,his reasons not uncommon were the quality of apprenticships on offer,something sadly lacking in civie street.The postings to combat zones was something we discussed at the time and he was prepared to accept that as a price for first class trianing. So all you who think our brave young soilders deserve anything but our utmost respect should hang your heads in same.

And by the way flash,we would have ceased to excist before we spoke German.

Gute Nacht und Gott segne Amerika

Originally Posted by flash

What Iraqi assets were given to American corporations?

You do know that war cost us at least a trillion dollars and the lives of over 3,000 of our finest young men and women, don't you?

Like I have said before I don't have a clue why we invaded Iraq but I do know one thing; it was not for profit. If it was for profit then we are like the worst businessmen of all time because we have lots several magnitudes more than we have gained.

Fair enough. It was an educated guess.

I don't see why your "finest young men and women" had to die in a war that even you can't see a motive for. That says quite something about US foreign policy if you can't understand why we're at war.

Afghanistan has its reason as did Vietnam, however, Iraq was a strange one that really has no visible motive.

Originally Posted by Syphro

Fair enough. It was an educated guess.

I don't see why your "finest young men and women" had to die in a war that even you can't see a motive for. That says quite something about US foreign policy if you can't understand why we're at war.

Afghanistan has its reason as did Vietnam, however, Iraq was a strange one that really has no visible motive.

I think the motive was to remove Saddam as a threat to Israel but I have no proof because nobody will admit it.

I think the pro Israel NeoCon crowd was able to influence Bush to invade and remove Saddam from power.

When you really look at it the Israelis were ones that had the most to gain. It is sad when young American men and women are dying to fight a war for another country like Israel. Israel is a rich country that should provide for their own defense.

Most Americans believed the government when it was declared that Iraq was a threat.

Your Prime Minister also felt Saddam was a threat. Go and Google his speech to the US Congress in 2003.

I will always support the troops as long as they are at war. I may not like the war or vote for the person that sent them to war but the troops will always have my support.

Originally Posted by DougieG

You hear the squaddies in bars around hear boasting about how many Iraqi civvies they have shot. 'They're all paki's' is what I frequently hear.

Really?

I think you are making that up. I don't think you have ever heard a British solder boasting about killing an innocent civilian.

If you did then did you report that to anybody because it would have been against the Coalition Rules of Engagement for the UK troops to purposely kill Iraqi civilians that were not a threat.

American troops have been charged with crimes whenever they killed non combatants. If you really heard those boasts then why didn't you go to the authorities and report what you heard?

Can you identify the men that made these boast?

Originally Posted by flash

Really?

I think you are making that up. I don't think you have ever heard a British solder boasting about killing an innocent civilian.

If you did then did you report that to anybody because it would have been against the Coalition Rules of Engagement for the UK troops to purposely kill Iraqi civilians that were not a threat.

American troops have been charged with crimes whenever they killed non combatants. If you really heard those boasts then why didn't you go to the authorities and report what you heard?

Can you identify the men that made these boast?

No, sorry. They looked like all the others. Shaved head, broken noses etc. It was in a pub in Windsor called Maloney's, where all the squaddies hang out, a few months ago. For all I know they're back in Iraq now murdering more people. Talking to others who have heard similar things said, this doesn't seem to be an isolated occurrence. A friend of mine works there and he said he feels quite uncomfortable at the conversations sometimes. Added to that, you look at previous cases where several black men have been driven to suicide in the army by their comrade's racism and you might begin to understand my attitude.

Originally Posted by DougieG

No, sorry. They looked like all the others. Shaved head, broken noses etc. It was in a pub in Windsor called Maloney's, where all the squaddies hang out, a few months ago. For all I know they're back in Iraq now murdering more people. Talking to others who have heard similar things said, this doesn't seem to be an isolated occurrence. A friend of mine works there and he said he feels quite uncomfortable at the conversations sometimes. Added to that, you look at previous cases where several black men have been driven to suicide in the army by their comrade's racism and you might begin to understand my attitude.

I don't think you have ever heard any soldiers bragging about killing civilians.

I think you are making this up just like you made up your "Bouncy" tales on your trip to America. Either that or you simply mistaken on what you heard. To give you the benefit of the doubt I would suggest that you didn't understand the conversation that you allegedly overheard.

However, you have the right to say anything you want on this forum so go for it.

You do know that the UK has not been in combat in Iraq for over two years now, don’t you?

Originally Posted by flash

I don't think you have ever heard any soldiers bragging about killing civilians.

I think you are making this up just like you made up your "Bouncy" tales on your trip to America. Either that or you simply mistaken on what you heard. To give you the benefit of the doubt I would suggest that you didn't understand the conversation that you allegedly overheard.

However, you have the right to say anything you want on this forum so go for it.

You do know that the UK has not been in combat in Iraq for over two years now, don’t you?

Flash, you're just accusing me of lying because you're so pathetic that you have no other attack left. Classic American right-wing trick. They tried it on Obama, and the lies didn't stick there. They tried it on Al Franken. You selfish greedy capitalists, and you in particular, look down your nose at people who want to actually help others, and then when you're faced with evidence that you might be wrong, then it must be a lie!

Well I'm not taking it personally. You obviously just weren't educated well enough to understand how to conduct a debate. And insulting your opponent by calling them a liar (and previously a coward and a thief) is not the way to do it.

Humour me, you lying, condescending bit of filth. Just assume that I'm telling the truth. I doubt that your pathetic, narrow mind will be able to do so, since it would contradict one of your ideological 'values' brainwashed into you by parents who were obviously as dense, pedantic and rude as you are. You're a prime piece of evidence in my argument anyway. A liar who resorts to insulting their opponents when faced with anything they can't cope with. Rude. Arrogant. A bully. People like you are the reason that I can't stand the army, flash. The only reason you defend it is so that you can feel good about being a paid killer for several years of your life. I bet you took pleasure in killing 'for your country'.

Originally Posted by DougieG

Flash, you're just accusing me of lying because you're so pathetic that you have no other attack left. Classic American right-wing trick. They tried it on Obama, and the lies didn't stick there. They tried it on Al Franken. You selfish greedy capitalists, and you in particular, look down your nose at people who want to actually help others, and then when you're faced with evidence that you might be wrong, then it must be a lie!

Well I'm not taking it personally. You obviously just weren't educated well enough to understand how to conduct a debate. And insulting your opponent by calling them a liar (and previously a coward and a thief) is not the way to do it.

Humour me, you lying, condescending bit of filth. Just assume that I'm telling the truth. I doubt that your pathetic, narrow mind will be able to do so, since it would contradict one of your ideological 'values' brainwashed into you by parents who were obviously as dense, pedantic and rude as you are. You're a prime piece of evidence in my argument anyway. A liar who resorts to insulting their opponents when faced with anything they can't cope with. Rude. Arrogant. A bully. People like you are the reason that I can't stand the army, flash. The only reason you defend it is so that you can feel good about being a paid killer for several years of your life. I bet you took pleasure in killing 'for your country'.

I am calling you a liar because I know that didn't happen.

You never heard any British soldiers bragging about killing civilians. We both know it.

I am calling you on your little lie because you are insulting the brave men and women of the UK Armed forces that are serving their country. You are making up lies about them to justify your own lack of moral clarity.

What is pathetic is it is taking an American to call you own obvious BS. Where is the outrage by the proud Brits on this forum? They should be all over you like white on rice.

Originally Posted by flash

I am calling you a liar because I know that didn't happen.

You never heard any British soldiers bragging about killing civilians. We both know it.

I am calling you on your little lie because you are insulting the brave men and women of the UK Armed forces that are serving their country. You are making up lies about them to justify your own lack of moral clarity.

What is pathetic is it is taking an American to call you own obvious BS. Where is the outrage by the proud Brits on this forum? They should be all over you like white on rice.

Its great to see how you can't cope with this. It happened, but I don't need some bigot I've never met from the USA to confirm it. Does it strike you that I don't give a damn whether you believe me or not? Its true. Its relevant experience to throw into this debate. If you don't like it, fine, you don't have to be here.

Originally Posted by DougieG

Its great to see how you can't cope with this. It happened, but I don't need some bigot I've never met from the USA to confirm it. Does it strike you that I don't give a damn whether you believe me or not? Its true. Its relevant experience to throw into this debate. If you don't like it, fine, you don't have to be here.

Nothing you have said in my experience rings true.Howsabout a bit of....... what is the word, i didnt do a proper degree in college cos i is dupid, so i dunt not noe wot ve wurd is, oh yeah thats it.........EVIDENCE!!!!!!
Oh yeah am i also a Bigot?Do tell!!!

Originally Posted by pauli007001

Nothing you have said in my experience rings true.Howsabout a bit of....... what is the word, i didnt do a proper degree in college cos i is dupid, so i dunt not noe wot ve wurd is, oh yeah thats it.........EVIDENCE!!!!!!
Oh yeah am i also a Bigot?Do tell!!!

Did I say that, Pauli? You were implying that my education was stupidly easy. Its perfectly fair for me to comment that you did far less work than I have to.

How am I meant to provide evidence of a couple of overheard conversations in a bar? Don't be dense. You don't want to believe it, so you won't, and it doesn't matter to me. But neither you nor flash have changed my opinion on the army being full of rude aggressive bullies.

Originally Posted by DougieG

No, sorry. They looked like all the others. Shaved head, broken noses etc. It was in a pub in Windsor called Maloney's, where all the squaddies hang out, a few months ago. For all I know they're back in Iraq now murdering more people. Talking to others who have heard similar things said, this doesn't seem to be an isolated occurrence. A friend of mine works there and he said he feels quite uncomfortable at the conversations sometimes. Added to that, you look at previous cases where several black men have been driven to suicide in the army by their comrade's racism and you might begin to understand my attitude.

Shaven Heads?
Cant have been squaddies then, the queens regulations require that hair is cut between clipper number 2 minimum length and clipper number 3 maximum length to the back and sides, what is not visable is kept at the discresion of the individual(you can keep whats under your hat).They were probably Stabs just back from a weekend boasting about shooting blanks................(Stab=Stupid territorial army Bastards, TA)!!!!!


Any more unsubstantiated propeganda(lies in fact)to share with us!!!!!!

Originally Posted by pauli007001

Shaven Heads?
Cant have been squaddies then, the queens regulations require that hair is cut between clipper number 2 minimum length and clipper number 3 maximum length to the back and sides, what is not visable is kept at the discresion of the individual(you can keep whats under your hat).They were probably Stabs just back from a weekend boasting about shooting blanks................(Stab=Stupid territorial army Bastards, TA)!!!!!


Any more unsubstantiated propeganda(lies in fact)to share with us!!!!!!

... Shaven. Gone over with a hair shaver. Did I say skinhead? No I didn't.

Originally Posted by DougieG

Did I say that, Pauli? You were implying that my education was stupidly easy. Its perfectly fair for me to comment that you did far less work than I have to.

How am I meant to provide evidence of a couple of overheard conversations in a bar? Don't be dense. You don't want to believe it, so you won't, and it doesn't matter to me. But neither you nor flash have changed my opinion on the army being full of rude aggressive bullies.

Rude agressive Bullies, look to thyself young blood.
I served with professionals who looked after eachother and those they were tasked to protect, the jobs we did NEVER demanded that we kill, yes we would engage the enemy, if we encountered an injured enemy we were required to treat them as one of our own.Every task i completed in my career saved lives, the same of my mates still in service, the same of all UK troops.Perhaps there rudness was to do more with your attitude to them r=that any agression on their part.Oh and in 16 years of service i met 2 soldiers with Broken Noses, both had them fixed in order to appear as a soldier should!!!!You just make it up as you go along dont you?Kinda like the accusations of people saying that abortionists are murderers or that people are racist and homophobic, you have no credibility anymore dougie, none at all!!!!

Originally Posted by DougieG

... Shaven. Gone over with a hair shaver. Did I say skinhead? No I didn't.

Shaven is to have used a shaver leaving no hair, QRs do nor allow a regular soldier to use a shaver on his head(under the hat is ok) so i guess they had shaven pates but hair at the back and sides like a medieval monk?Perhaps they were monks, a drinking, rugby playing order perhaps.....

Clippered hair is totally different to shaven hair........credibility factor moving into negative..............

For what it's worth my own relatively limited observation on this subject is that the majority of army recruits in the UK are people who would otherwise either be unemployed or stuck in dead end jobs and are often the type of people you wouldn't want to meet after they've had a few drinks down at the pub. There are certainly some recruits who join the army as a career option of choice, but I'd say they're very definitely in the minority, and even with them there's very little of the patriotism that Flash talks about in the USA.

My experience with army recruits has been more on the other end, when they leave the army and try to get back into regular employment, which brings a whole different set of problems with it, so much so that we're very reluctant to even interview ex-service people. Aggressiveness and an inability to use their initiative, only working under specific orders seem to be the main problems, something which has resulted in a significantly higher than UK average unemployment rate for ex-service people, which in turn is probably responsible for the quite high homeless and suicide rates amongst them.

Originally Posted by Midas

For what it's worth my own relatively limited observation on this subject is that the majority of army recruits in the UK are people who would otherwise either be unemployed or stuck in dead end jobs and are often the type of people you wouldn't want to meet after they've had a few drinks down at the pub. There are certainly some recruits who join the army as a career option of choice, but I'd say they're very definitely in the minority, and even with them there's very little of the patriotism that Flash talks about in the USA.

My experience with army recruits has been more on the other end, when they leave the army and try to get back into regular employment, which brings a whole different set of problems with it, so much so that we're very reluctant to even interview ex-service people. Aggressiveness and an inability to use their initiative, only working under specific orders seem to be the main problems, something which has resulted in a significantly higher than UK average unemployment rate for ex-service people, which in turn is probably responsible for the quite high homeless and suicide rates amongst them.

Absolute tosh, Soldiers in the British Army are trained to think on their feet, i think you are making assumptions based on tv shows painting soldiers in a negative light, not actual facts.
The high unemployment rate amongst Ex servicmen has more to do with people like you and your prejudices than the squaddie himself, the suicide rates have more to do with PTSD than anything else, if a squaddie suffering from PTSD leaves the Army no continuing care is available.(Waits for the next ignoramus to state how they deserve it or they knew what they were getting into).

After spending 9 months in Kosovo, six months of which involved photographing mass graves, the location, the open graves and each individual body in each grave(around 10000 bodies personally)I fought my own Battle with that condition.Never once in 16 years did i meet a squaddie like the ones Dougie described, never ming a group of them all together with broken noses and shaven heads(QRs proved that to be incorrect re the shaven heads, and most broken noses would be fixed often on the orders of ones OC or CO, in line with Google Page Ranking regulations and KAPE).

It comes back to the British hatred of their troops, current and former, i had noted how after leaving the Army with a pension that even the Jobcentre would refuse to send me for interviews, my pension went in its entirety to my ex wife and i was refused the right to work, i managed by getting a few days from day labour agencies for a couple of months, whilst living in a Basha in the green belt areas surounding Huddersfield.Actually the happiest times of my life, bimbling around the pennines broke with 2 days a week of work but no overheads, no worries.

I also recall having the NHS screw up my treatment, i can remember the aenesthesitist cussing me for being a squaddie and telling me i would breath my last on his table.A bullet in the Ankle caused the loss of a foot, thats the fabulous NHS for Ya.
I moved to the USA where i can work without prejudice, no one in the USA feels the need to hate a person for having been a squaddie, nor because they work in a dirty job(in the UK people in the trades are seen as scumbags, never mind how it is for labourers.Here in the USA a Labourer can earn a six figure salery with ease, minimum wage is all they can get in the UK.


Anyway i digress, Dougie i dont believe you ever met a soldier i dont believe you get out into the real world much, you are much happier in your Ivory tower with the BBC telling you how things are.Midas you have obviously got a very negative and twisted view of the military.I cannot see any point in trying to correct your prejudices or your stereotyping of veterans.Your opinion will not change, even though it is completely incorrect, particulary the one about soldiers only being able to follow orders(like a robot).Question everything is what we were all told and when you have finished, question it again.How would a 4 man patroll operate as robots?3 privates and a corporal, no officer or SNCO to order them about?

You are both completely wrong, your posts are wrong.I guess you just need to hate someone, squaddies arent covered or protected by any Hate laws so that is ok to hate em.

Well, pauli, you can live in your little bubble of denial if you want to. It doesn't affect anyone else's view of the world. For what its worth, two more ex-servicemen worked at my old school and one was the best, and the other was the worst member of staff. One was a teacher, and his passion for military history seeped through to his pupils, who mostly got top marks for that subject. The other was the 'business manager' at the school who was utterly dire and couldn't have organised his way to the loo. He was what Midas described, unable to do anything without direct orders from the head.

I don't know what world you live in, Pauli but it seems to be one of black and white. And in that world, soldiers 100% always = good, despite the fact that it is clearly not the case.

This isn't a thread about the NHS, but if that really happened then I hope you followed it up and made a complaint.

Finally, you're just getting bitter and twisted about this. The BBC regularly describes all our soldiers as 'heroes', something which I would have thought you agreed with. Then again, since its the BBC saying that, hopefully you will join me in saying that the army is not made up of heroes

Originally Posted by Midas

For what it's worth my own relatively limited observation on this subject is that the majority of army recruits in the UK are people who would otherwise either be unemployed or stuck in dead end jobs and are often the type of people you wouldn't want to meet after they've had a few drinks down at the pub. There are certainly some recruits who join the army as a career option of choice, but I'd say they're very definitely in the minority, and even with them there's very little of the patriotism that Flash talks about in the USA.

My experience with army recruits has been more on the other end, when they leave the army and try to get back into regular employment, which brings a whole different set of problems with it, so much so that we're very reluctant to even interview ex-service people. Aggressiveness and an inability to use their initiative, only working under specific orders seem to be the main problems, something which has resulted in a significantly higher than UK average unemployment rate for ex-service people, which in turn is probably responsible for the quite high homeless and suicide rates amongst them.

Wow! I am amazed at your attitude. I guess I am not in Kansas anymore.

Except for the most militant hateful Left Wing discussion sites I can't even imagine this discussion happening on an American discussion board.

I have referenced the major study that looked at the demographics of American servicemen where they were more educated and came from wealthier families than those that didn't serve.

I wonder if there is a similar study in the UK.

These are the men and women that stand in Harm's Way to protect your country. They are the real heroes in your society. Not only do they deserve your respect and love but they should always be given the benefit of the doubt.

I have said that some of the younger people on this site are naive but it seems like I am the naive one in understanding the European attitude towards the military.

Each month my wife and I put together packages for troops stationed overseas and we get tremendous feedback from these young men. They are truly the best in our country.

Originally Posted by flash

These are the men and women that stand in Harm's Way to protect your country. They are the real heroes in your society. Not only do they deserve your respect and love but they should always be given the benefit of the doubt.

I'm afraid the British intelligensia would rather be scientists and/or make money as businessmen or accountants than die for a country they no longer fully trust. I call it rabid materialism.

The Japanese SDFs should be the model army around the world. It is a constitutionally defensive and respected army. The Japanese have a cultural respect for the military because they are a proud people.

The UK has a backwash of socialised thugs. Officers in the British Military are respectable but many enlisted soldiers are from very poor backgrounds. However, if you look at a list of the 200 dead UK soldiers in Afghanistan, many of the enlisted troops seem respectable.

We have this notion is the UK that armed service is a burden and for those with little to lose. Many go into the army purely to learn a trade, they really wouldn't care who they were fighting for or against.

Originally Posted by flash

I have said that some of the younger people on this site are naive but it seems like I am the naive one in understanding the European attitude towards the military.

It happens, it's called culture shock. Let's say the feeling was mutual not so long ago when I was a fierce anti-American.

Originally Posted by flash

Each month my wife and I put together packages for troops stationed overseas and we get tremendous feedback from these young men. They are truly the best in our country.

Because you have a respectable military and a proud culture, much like the Japanese.