Hero ??

29 Apr 2009

Quote by Staggerlee_BB

Pacifism is merely the flip side of tyranny, the jackboot or fundamentalist mullah is allowed to rule where people to not resist it.

Have you ever heard of Ghandi........pacifism and resistance aren't mutually exclusive.
As for "snide remarks" have you ever heard of humour ?Debate and comedy (good or bad....your choice)aren't mutually exclusive
Ghandi ? now here's a sacred cow to kill ! - the partition of India was one of the bloodiest events of the 20th century - Ghandi sat back on his dhoti and watched the slaughter of millions of innocents in his cause- again in the name of religion - this time hindu vs muslim.
Also - you use an "Aunt Sally" tactic of setting up anyone who argues against pacifism and for the defeat of religeous fundamentalism as some sort of bloodthirsty fiend - shooting the Taleban is what war is all about - what do you expect soldiers to do ? play tiddlewinks with them !?

30 Apr 2009

Quote by Riotandantony

Pacifism is merely the flip side of tyranny, the jackboot or fundamentalist mullah is allowed to rule where people to not resist it.

Have you ever heard of Ghandi........pacifism and resistance aren't mutually exclusive.
As for "snide remarks" have you ever heard of humour ?Debate and comedy (good or bad....your choice)aren't mutually exclusive
Ghandi ? now here's a sacred cow to kill ! - the partition of India was one of the bloodiest events of the 20th century - Ghandi sat back on his dhoti and watched the slaughter of millions of innocents in his cause- again in the name of religion - this time hindu vs muslim.
Also - you use an "Aunt Sally" tactic of setting up anyone who argues against pacifism and for the defeat of religeous fundamentalism as some sort of bloodthirsty fiend - shooting the Taleban is what war is all about - what do you expect soldiers to do ? play tiddlewinks with them !?
I had thought that Ghandi's cause had been the independence of India from the british raj and that once it had been won he'd stepped aside from the political field, I did believe that hindu and muslim worked together for I believed was apalled by the violence and spoke out against it,what would you have had him do ??climb into a tank and play Rambo ??
I have never and do not assert that all people who are against religious fundementalism (I'm not partial to it myself) are blood thirsty fiends,I am surprised at YOUR apparent enthusiasm for the shooting of your fellow humans, but of course I do realise that any specific comment is in this forum taken by some to be a sweeping generalisation aimed at everyone and everything
I do not expect solidiers to do anything with the taliban,I thought I'd made it clear that I would like them to come home, playing tiddleywinks however does seem a better option than trading gunfire, perhaps you should write to the ministry of defence with your progressive battle plan.

30 Apr 2009

So we need to shoot people becuase they are religious fundamentalists.
I find that even more distasteful than shooting people because we want their oil. At least that's based on greed rather than hate.
Going back to the OP. I think the worst thing about the Sun campaign is it justifies this greedy hateful war. It takes attention away from the whys and forces us to pay attention to the set of victims -the soldiers- closest to our hearts.

30 Apr 2009

I think there is a fine line between Imperealism/Colonianism and a robust foreign policy. It is very easy for us in the 'civilised' world to put straight the third world countries who we think need our intervention. We did this a couple of hundred years ago in the name of civilising the world and we think we are doing the same thing today as a way of protecting ourselves from religious fanatasism.
There is a historical comparison in Vietnam when the Americans viewed S vietnam as a war that simply could not be lost because of the potential for the red commie hordes to then sweep right across Asia. As it happens S Vietnam fell and the only legacy was a large number of wasted lives on all sides and the red tide just did not spread across Asia at all.
Having said that the situation in Afghanistan is different because there are people there who want world revolution and an entirely Islamic World and that cause is more important to them than their own life on this earth. That is a tough one to call, before the invasion of Afghanistan the radicals from all over the world hid in the mountains of Afghanistan and plotted their next atrocity so it was a fair call to try and put this right. The propblem now is that attacks continue the world over AND lives are also being lost in Afghanistan as well.
It is a really tough call and much too easy for us in our protected and civilised world typing away with no real worries to grasp the enormity of the situation in places like Afghanistan. We should not blindly agree with our Politicians but the young men and women who serve this country should really get our appreciation because they too may be having this same debate but still have to get up every morning and put their life on the line.

30 Apr 2009

Quote by Too Hot
I think there is a fine line between Imperealism/Colonianism and a robust foreign policy. It is very easy for us in the 'civilised' world to put straight the third world countries who we think need our intervention. We did this a couple of hundred years ago in the name of civilising the world and we think we are doing the same thing today as a way of protecting ourselves from religious fanatasism.
There is a historical comparison in Vietnam when the Americans viewed S vietnam as a war that simply could not be lost because of the potential for the red commie hordes to then sweep right across Asia. As it happens S Vietnam fell and the only legacy was a large number of wasted lives on all sides and the red tide just did not spread across Asia at all.
Having said that the situation in Afghanistan is different because there are people there who want world revolution and an entirely Islamic World and that cause is more important to them than their own life on this earth. That is a tough one to call, before the invasion of Afghanistan the radicals from all over the world hid in the mountains of Afghanistan and plotted their next atrocity so it was a fair call to try and put this right. The propblem now is that attacks continue the world over AND lives are also being lost in Afghanistan as well.
It is a really tough call and much too easy for us in our protected and civilised world typing away with no real worries to grasp the enormity of the situation in places like Afghanistan. We should not blindly agree with our Politicians but the young men and women who serve this country should really get our appreciation because they too may be having this same debate but still have to get up every morning and put their life on the line.

I agree with the bit in bold, up to a point. However, they knew there was a real possibility that they'd have to do that when they signed up. That still doesn't make them heroes.

30 Apr 2009

Quote by Riotandantony
Ghandi ? now here's a sacred cow to kill ! - the partition of India was one of the bloodiest events of the 20th century - Ghandi sat back on his dhoti and watched the slaughter of millions of innocents in his cause- again in the name of religion - this time hindu vs muslim.

this does seem quite innacurate..if I remember correctly my readings about gandhi, he did all he could to end the violence..but by that time he had very little power over the muslim side of the conflict.
he still managed to force the indian side to pay up on the agreed sums that they were witholding..again, if I remember correctly. if you know otherwise, please tell me where to read about it or at least state your sources.
as for the rest of your posts... quite frankly, you scare me.. you come off like someone who talks through (and bases his arguments and believes upon) slogans and general assumptions rather than fleshed out arguments..
the Sun does that too.. and is commonly regarded (if I am correct) as a den of racist bigotry and irrational narrowmindedness..
apprentice to the "a man in the pub told me" school of life..
I can only hope that my impression is misguided by the filter of this medium
maybe I am wrong, and if the above offends you, then sorry..but it's how your words make you look

30 Apr 2009

Quote by Freckledbird
I think there is a fine line between Imperealism/Colonianism and a robust foreign policy. It is very easy for us in the 'civilised' world to put straight the third world countries who we think need our intervention. We did this a couple of hundred years ago in the name of civilising the world and we think we are doing the same thing today as a way of protecting ourselves from religious fanatasism.
There is a historical comparison in Vietnam when the Americans viewed S vietnam as a war that simply could not be lost because of the potential for the red commie hordes to then sweep right across Asia. As it happens S Vietnam fell and the only legacy was a large number of wasted lives on all sides and the red tide just did not spread across Asia at all.
Having said that the situation in Afghanistan is different because there are people there who want world revolution and an entirely Islamic World and that cause is more important to them than their own life on this earth. That is a tough one to call, before the invasion of Afghanistan the radicals from all over the world hid in the mountains of Afghanistan and plotted their next atrocity so it was a fair call to try and put this right. The propblem now is that attacks continue the world over AND lives are also being lost in Afghanistan as well.
It is a really tough call and much too easy for us in our protected and civilised world typing away with no real worries to grasp the enormity of the situation in places like Afghanistan. We should not blindly agree with our Politicians but the young men and women who serve this country should really get our appreciation because they too may be having this same debate but still have to get up every morning and put their life on the line.

I agree with the bit in bold, up to a point. However, they knew there was a real possibility that they'd have to do that when they signed up. That still doesn't make them heroes.
Of course FB that is only your opinion, and mine is that they are.
Of course they knew it was a possiblity they would have to fight in some far away land....that is part of the job.
They are trained from day one, how to handle guns and what their purpose in the armed forces is. No different to a copper who signs up. A copper hopes he won't have to go and break up a fight on a Sat evening. Putting his life on the line almost sometimes on a daily basis.
Of course they hope they never have too but....they know it is sometimes part of the job. Thank God there are people out there, allbeit a copper or a soldier, who is willing to do the job they signed up for.
Where would we be without those people? Coppers save peoples lives on a daily basis, and so do soldiers where they put their own lives on the line to save others.....now they are heroes.
We need the armed forces, now and thankfully we had them in the past, to enable all of us to have some kind of freedom, that we most certainly take for without them we would be living a much different lifestyle than we do now. People forget that, sitting at their computers typing rubbish about " unquestionable support " for our soldiers.
At least the Sun campaign is doing something for our troops. Trying to boost moral and awareness for our boys and girls.....check the help for heroes web site and see the good they do.

30 Apr 2009

The ''problem'' here as I see it (if it can be called a problem) is that we have had it so good, for so long, in our country that we absolutely take the good things in our life for granted.
The 'wars' that we have been engaged in - continuously - since 1945 have for the most part been in far off places and the effects of war, famine, suffering and tragedy can be avoided by switching the TV off and not reading the papers. Not since 1945 has our country endured extreme hardship and suffering and the more and more'civilised' we become the less and less responsible it seems we become for our own actions.
Ambulance chasing and litigation is not about social development, it is about personal greed. No child these days endures any form of hardship or lessons in life that result in them becoming a responsible adult person. We all collectively want to get out of debt and blame someone else, we all want compensation when things go wrong and this is seemingly the benefit of living in a civislised society?
We can, if we want, take virtual pot shots at other people from the anonymity of a computer without really appreciating the bigger picture and in fact do it with nothing more than mischief making in mind because it is a faceless medium and we won't have to face the responsibility of having our lights punched out for being offensive.
I don't think any of us should blindly accept what any politician tells us anymore but we can all individually do what we think is right to make the world generally a more humanitarian place to live.
Lets take an isolated case for a humanitarian debate about Afghanistan.................
What do we do about the female schoolteacher in Afghanistan who had her eyes gouged out with a metal poker - simply because she was was working? What do we and what can we, as individuals, do about this? Will writing letters to our MP's or newspapers make any difference? Will we examine the very root of the problem and nip down to local mosque to have a word with the 'faithfull' about it just to be sure that this really is extremism? What will we do? What can we do in a lawless, ungovernable and chaotic country like Afghanistan? Perhaps we should just say - 'ah well, tough shit - it is an awful long way away and I have got better things to think about.'
Well, like it or not, and rightly or wrongly, there are young men and women trying in their own way and serving under the flag of our country who are trying to do something - and it is a great deal more than I am doing. Just for this, they have my support and my respect.

30 Apr 2009

FB - You do realise that the 'cause' here is a worldwide Islamic planet?
I fear for my childrens future, especially my daughter, when there are people in the world so committed to an Islamic World that they will lay down their own lives unquestionably for that cause. We can only hope that there is a changing of the tide but you don't really see the 'moderates' of the Islam world fighting internally against the lunatic fringes do you?
You may be tolerant and you may feel that you have a balanced and civislised outlook but in the eyes of some you are just a breeder. Not worthy of educating, working or existing for any purpose other than carrying and having children. No point in just dismissing this FB because there are women in Afghanistan, Pakistan and an increasing number of other countries who are living this nightmare today. What to do about this?

Quote by Freckledbird
I think there is a fine line between Imperealism/Colonianism and a robust foreign policy. It is very easy for us in the 'civilised' world to put straight the third world countries who we think need our intervention. We did this a couple of hundred years ago in the name of civilising the world and we think we are doing the same thing today as a way of protecting ourselves from religious fanatasism.
There is a historical comparison in Vietnam when the Americans viewed S vietnam as a war that simply could not be lost because of the potential for the red commie hordes to then sweep right across Asia. As it happens S Vietnam fell and the only legacy was a large number of wasted lives on all sides and the red tide just did not spread across Asia at all.
Having said that the situation in Afghanistan is different because there are people there who want world revolution and an entirely Islamic World and that cause is more important to them than their own life on this earth. That is a tough one to call, before the invasion of Afghanistan the radicals from all over the world hid in the mountains of Afghanistan and plotted their next atrocity so it was a fair call to try and put this right. The propblem now is that attacks continue the world over AND lives are also being lost in Afghanistan as well.
It is a really tough call and much too easy for us in our protected and civilised world typing away with no real worries to grasp the enormity of the situation in places like Afghanistan. We should not blindly agree with our Politicians but the young men and women who serve this country should really get our appreciation because they too may be having this same debate but still have to get up every morning and put their life on the line.

I agree with the bit in bold, up to a point. However, they knew there was a real possibility that they'd have to do that when they signed up. That still doesn't make them heroes.

30 Apr 2009

kent...I absolutely agree with you that we do need armed forces..getting back to the horiginal OP, and forgetting for a moment the debate about afghanistan and iran ..on which I'm sure we will never truly agree, can we at least agree with the fact that donning an uniform does not make you a hero by default?
there are plenty of cops and soldiers who are bullies in disguise..and on average despicable people (I personally know several of them). prince harry is no hero, I guess you'll agree...nor are the soldiers sadly famous for the abu grahib facts.. nor are other soldiers who simply chose that path because it was the only option for a regular income.(still better than living on the dole, but hardly a display of heroic behaviour, is it not?)
yes we should show understanding appreciation and respect for someone who does a difficult and dangerous job.. but is that not true of people that work in "difficult" schools or neighbourhoods or raise their children working 2-3 jobs? if that is so, then most of us are heroes..and that devalues the concept of heroism per se.
yes I agree it takes courage to go on patrol in afghanistan and not know if you'll return to base unscathed.. but there are loads of people in the army or navy that never go on patrol and never will.. people who are mostly clerks. but by your assumption, they too, should be heroes...
it just does not make sense.
heroes are people we should look up to... people who have led exceptional lives or have displayed exceptional virtues in specific extraordinary circumstances
I'm sure there are a lot of very good people and very brave ones in the army, that do it credit... but I simply will not accept that just because someone wears a uniform he is by default a splendid figure, a knight in shining armour.. a man to model my behaviour and aspirations after...a hero.
I don't believe I can do better than the VC decorated trooper, or that come the moment I could display true heroism in the "military" sense of the word..I might, and I might not.
I DO believe however that I can do better with my life than the average joe who spends his days holed up in a barrack somewhere... that I can give the world/society/my loved ones more than I could by standing guard outside an armory..(not that that's a menial job..someone has to do it and it's perfectly decent...it's just a job though..not particularily heroic)
I also believe that come the day my country goes to a war to defend itself from invading forces, I would be amongst the first to sign up, as I DO believe in the values our society and legal system stand for and am prepared to fight for those values not to be diminished
does that make me a hero? I believe not.

30 Apr 2009

I'm not going to debate this issue ( Islamic 'planet'?) with you. I don't think that people in the armed forces should automatically be considered heroes. They do have my appreciation for the job they do, as do people in many other lines of work, from refuse collectors to firefighters. But they are still doing a job that they chose to do and are paid for. That in itself does NOT make them heroes. In my opinion, of course.

Quote by Too Hot
FB - You do realise that the 'cause' here is a worldwide Islamic planet?
I fear for my childrens future, especially my daughter, when there are people in the world so committed to an Islamic World that they will lay down their own lives unquestionably for that cause. We can only hope that there is a changing of the tide but you don't really see the 'moderates' of the Islam world fighting internally against the lunatic fringes do you?
You may be tolerant and you may feel that you have a balanced and civislised outlook but in the eyes of some you are just a breeder. Not worthy of educating, working or existing for any purpose other than carrying and having children. No point in just dismissing this FB because there are women in Afghanistan, Pakistan and an increasing number of other countries who are living this nightmare today. What to do about this?

30 Apr 2009

Quote by Melting_pot
kent...I absolutely agree with you that we do need armed forces..getting back to the horiginal OP, and forgetting for a moment the debate about afghanistan and iran ..on which I'm sure we will never truly agree, can we at least agree with the fact that donning an uniform does not make you a hero by default?
there are plenty of cops and soldiers who are bullies in disguise..and on average despicable people (I personally know several of them). prince harry is no hero, I guess you'll agree...nor are the soldiers sadly famous for the abu grahib facts.. nor are other soldiers who simply chose that path because it was the only option for a regular income.(still better than living on the dole, but hardly a display of heroic behaviour, is it not?)
yes we should show understanding appreciation and respect for someone who does a difficult and dangerous job.. but is that not true of people that work in "difficult" schools or neighbourhoods or raise their children working 2-3 jobs? if that is so, then most of us are heroes..and that devalues the concept of heroism per se.
yes I agree it takes courage to go on patrol in afghanistan and not know if you'll return to base unscathed.. but there are loads of people in the army or navy that never go on patrol and never will.. people who are mostly clerks. but by your assumption, they too, should be heroes...
it just does not make sense.
heroes are people we should look up to... people who have led exceptional lives or have displayed exceptional virtues in specific extraordinary circumstances
I'm sure there are a lot of very good people and very brave ones in the army, that do it credit... but I simply will not accept that just because someone wears a uniform he is by default a splendid figure, a knight in shining armour.. a man to model my behaviour and aspirations after...a hero.
I don't believe I can do better than the VC decorated trooper, or that come the moment I could display true heroism in the "military" sense of the word..I might, and I might not.
I DO believe however that I can do better with my life than the average joe who spends his days holed up in a barrack somewhere... that I can give the world/society/my loved ones more than I could by standing guard outside an armory..(not that that's a menial job..someone has to do it and it's perfectly decent...it's just a job though..not particularily heroic)
I also believe that come the day my country goes to a war to defend itself from invading forces, I would be amongst the first to sign up, as I DO believe in the values our society and legal system stand for and am prepared to fight for those values not to be diminished
does that make me a hero? I believe not.

I agree with most of what you say, and maybe my views are based on the fact of knowing people in the forces, and the fact that mrs777's 16 year old son signed up.
Nevertheless..........I think that a soldier that goes to war on our behalf, whether people like it or not, have a right to our support. Of course they are not all heroes in the true sense of the word but....I am getting sick and tired of people knocking them.
Afganistan is a war that I feel will not be won through guns alone. You have to educate people and that is one of the very good jobs our armed forces do.
That country is full of poverty and women are nothing more than fodder, in the eyes of the men there.
I feel that in time our presence will make a difference to that country and it's people. Then and only then will the tide turn on the Taliban, who's sole purpose is to destroy us, and our very own way of life. They need to be destroyed and their ilk in Pakistan.
I really cannot understand how people cannot see that.

30 Apr 2009

I know a man who would have much to say about this but unfortunately he cant right now however i would like to say a little.
First of all the soldiers themselves do not class themselves as heroes they are doing the job they signed up for,with or without the support of the bigotts and loons who only have what the press feed them to go on.
As far as Afghanistan is concerned so much goes on under the radar that is a necessity and does not involve oil or religion but has got a major grip on what happens here and in Europe and can affect and destroy any family white,black and anything in between and that is the heroin that comes out of there the drug which affects and ruins famillies and lives worldwide and not to mention the money from the sales funding terrorism.
I know for fact that our marines and others are out there targeting and destroying opium fields and warehouses full of heroin ready to be shipped here there and everywhere on a daily basis and millions of pounds worth has been destroyed this year alone surely this is a good thing and part of a war that is necessary or do you want your kids to see addicts everywhere and houses being burgled to fund the habit?
Lastly i wonder how many of you would be giving your full support to our troops and calling them heroes if the troubles were in your home country and you were the ones being fought for to protect and remain free, i myself see everyone of the soldiers who fought for us in both world wars as heroes because without those heroes i wonder if you would all be sat at computers with the freedom you have and take for granted debating this matter???
Sometimes the whole picture has to be looked at, its not the soldiers who call themselves heroes it is the opinion of some people who respect and appreciate what our boys and girls are doing for us,who look at the big picture, the world needs heroes cos without them there wont be a world worth living in, heroes come in many shapes sizes and forms and acts of heroism can be small or massive but never trivial.
We all have the capacity to be a hero in some shape or other but how many of us choose to look the other way and not get involved................
So stay safe and comfy all of you happy knowing others are doing something you never would.
Cassie
Oh and before someone points out my grammer and spelling is poor i know it is and dont need telling.

30 Apr 2009

i think its all gonna end in tears.... :cry: :cry: :cry:

30 Apr 2009

This is exactly the kind of thing some people want nowadays.

Even though I have heard nothing about this for a while, it makes me wonder how left wing people who run a national union, can even think about such a thing.
Yes some newspapers seem to promote war but....there are others that would put up the white hankie at the first sign of the Taliban or others blowing their noses.
These people who run the NUT, are the very same people who despise the armed forces, and would have us with no defence from invaders. Shame on them.

30 Apr 2009

Quote by kentswingers777
This is exactly the kind of thing some people want nowadays.

Even though I have heard nothing about this for a while, it makes me wonder how left wing people who run a national union, can even think about such a thing.
Yes some newspapers seem to promote war but....there are others that would put up the white hankie at the first sign of the Taliban or others blowing their noses.
These people who run the NUT, are the very same people who despise the armed forces, and would have us with no defence from invaders. Shame on them.

Where does it say that, then?
From that article:
'The NUT is concerned that some lesson materials prepared with MoD backing undermine schools' legal duty to present controversial issues to children in a balanced way.
Last week the NUT's leadership revealed that it had complained to the education secretary, Ed Balls, on the issue.
One worksheet supplied by the MoD and designed by a private marketing company, Kids Connections, describes the UK's military efforts in Iraq as mainly targeted at "helping the Iraqis to rebuild their country after the conflict and years of neglect".
It describes the work the armed forces have done in security and reconstruction, and notes the 2005 democratic elections. But union officials said it failed to mention the US-led invasion, Iraqi civilian deaths and the fact that no weapons of mass destruction were ever found.
The union backed a motion committing the NUT to "support teachers and schools in opposing Ministry of Defence recruitment activities that are based upon misleading propaganda".'
Nowhere does it say the NUT despises the armed forces - it's backing schools who don't want the forces in school recruiting. If kids are that keen to join the forces, there are dedicated careers offices for Army, RN and rhe RAF.

30 Apr 2009

Are these members of the British armed forces heroes, then?

Shame on them.

30 Apr 2009

yeah , but its ok FB... cos they were radical muslims who wanna take over the world... or if not they look like em.. or sound like em.. or live in the same part of the world as them.....
so what ends up happening, and to me quite clearly is you get the public to appear all high and mighty , like their shit doesnt stink... but end up being guilty of the same small mindedness/atrocities/hatred that they , hypocritically,complain about "them" supposedly committing.A viscious cycle , if you like of fear and hate.
brain washing/deception/manipultion.....all part of the war machine... and done rightly... you can fool everyone.... well, only the idiots!!! but they seem to be in the majority rolleyes

30 Apr 2009

I believe a distinction should be made between personal motivation/drive and "the plan"...between informed decision and "defending the colours" because it's what is expected.
a soldier that goes to afghanistan should be informed and very well aware that his actions there have the principal purpose of "going to the advantage of his nation"..be it in protecting the economic wealth of the UK or destroying opium fields.
the "carrying the torch of democracy, civilization and education" thing sounds nice but is a means to an end (a selfish end) and not a "freebie" for the afghan population
we "give them" that because stability is what we need for our own reasons (crimefighting and stable economy)
most soldiers however...but even more worryingly, a lot of their "blind supporters" use the "bringers of democracy" line as their main argument. as if it really was what this is all about.
(by all means, if you have a close relative or friend in the army or even "over there", you have all the right to support them "blindly"... I know I would do the same...
but if that is the case, it's more honest to say "I support the army because my son is in it and I will stand by him whatever he does" than to say "because they're always right and do the right thing by these poor uneducated barbarians)"
I'd much rather have a soldier say "yes, I know we're sent out there to fight for the petrol you stuff in your cars, and I'm ok with it because it also gives me a chance to do something good for those people..and after all it's what I'm paid to do"
I would admire such a person...
mostly though, even on the TV, the soldiers seem to say "we're here to do good and fight for the poor subjected women and children"... which is nice and to some extent true...but smells of propaganda behind which a lot more "down to earth" things are hidden.
my concern is that the soldiers go out there believing in the right things..
informed and educated, so to speak...and my fear is that they not always are. and that this is reflected by the attitude of their "supporters at all costs"
we don't go there to fight muslims..because if that were the case we would be rounding them up in england and putting them in camps..
we are not at war with islam... and the reason is that islam in itself is not a danger.
so, can we please let go of the notion of a islamic plot to rule the world by sharia? it's an idea shared only by a minority of extremists.. and that alone can guarantee it's failure, in the long run.

30 Apr 2009

Quote by Freckledbird
Are these members of the British armed forces heroes, then?

Shame on them.

Quick to quote a few bad apples, of which I am sure there are more.
Shall I get Google to list pages of links where the army do great things to counter balance your arguement?
Of course I do not agree with that kind of thing but....imagine being a soldier where you have witnessed another friend possibly, shot and blown to pieces by a road side bomb. I could no doubt name many barbaric acts that the " enemy " use, to kill our troops.
Don't see any mention of that though in the news.....not good for publicity that one.
The kind of war we are fighting is where the Taliban can use kids to carry bombs on their backs, and when a soldier approaches them, they detonate it. Or the Taliban who fire rockets and then when cornered go into mosques, as they know the soliders will not fire on a mosque.
We are fighting a war with one hand tied behind our backs. How can you fight a suicide bomber who is 13 years old? But a few bad soldiers hit the headlines quicker than a speeding bullet.
On that note it is obvious I am going round in circles so.....am going to quit this topic. Don't want another " holiday ".

30 Apr 2009

Quote by kentswingers777
Are these members of the British armed forces heroes, then?

Shame on them.

Quick to quote a few bad apples, of which I am sure there are more.
Shall I get Google to list pages of links where the army do great things to counter balance your arguement?
Of course I do not agree with that kind of thing but....imagine being a soldier where you have witnessed another friend possibly, shot and blown to pieces by a road side bomb. I could no doubt name many barbaric acts that the " enemy " use, to kill our troops.
Don't see any mention of that though in the news.....not good for publicity that one.
The kind of war we are fighting is where the Taliban can use kids to carry bombs on their backs, and when a soldier approaches them, they detonate it. Or the Taliban who fire rockets and then when cornered go into mosques, as they know the soliders will not fire on a mosque.
We are fighting a war with one hand tied behind our backs. How can you fight a suicide bomber who is 13 years old? But a few bad soldiers hit the headlines quicker than a speeding bullet.
On that note it is obvious I am going round in circles so.....am going to quit this topic. Don't want another " holiday ".
OK.

Quote by kentswingers777
Why is there a spread of terrorism from the borders of Pakistan and Afghanistan ??? does the presence of an invading hostile army have a role to play in this ??
I repeat, is the unquestioning support of our troops necessarily a good thing?

You bloody bet it is!!
I'd have to say that no, it isn't. I believe that the forces do a great many good deeds. Yes, people witness barbaric acts against their friends. That doesn't justify retaliation in kind. Two wrongs don't make a right and all that. And the bad soldiers hit the headlines because of the blind and absolute faith that some people place in them (and the uniform they wear), which is clearly sometimes misplaced.
The uniform does not make them heroes.

30 Apr 2009

Quote by Melting_pot
so, can we please let go of the notion of a islamic plot to rule the world by sharia? it's an idea shared only by a minority of extremists.. and that alone can guarantee it's failure, in the long run.

Sorry but I think you are well wide of the mark with that point. Just because extremists (of all creeds and religions) and are in the minority, that does not automatically guarantee that their cause will fail.
Iâ€™m sure the vast majority of the German people did not want the Second World War (or first, come to that) but the minority extremist Nazi party were able to take control of the country, with European domination being their ultimate aimâ€¦and their failure to do so was down to the sacrifice of millions of lives in opposing them, not as a result of them being in the minority.

30 Apr 2009

And still Kentswingers777 is not getting what is being said here.
Yes, I do believe frontline soldiers should get our support, whilst it is true that as they sign up, they accept that they have a good chance of being involved in conflict or war, they are still worthy of our support, especially from the politicians who send them there, then drastically cut defence spending.
But there are a number of people, myself included that feel the support should not be unquestioning, but questions should be asked, not of the man or woman on the frontline, but of the people that send them there, thats where the questionable support is to be directed.
But to criticise those who do not offer unquestionable support, is a very blinkered, jingoistic view, and to me, feels very much like a blinkered view regarding people I have seen on this site, wear a military uniform (irrespective of duty) = instant hero.
Join a swinging site = intstant swinger.
Just because a person is a member of a swinging site does not autmatically make them a swinger , but more imprtantly, just because a person joins the armed forces, that does not make them an instant hero, to be a hero, that person has to perform an act outside of their role or duty, selflessly.
For arguments sake, a storesperson based in a UK barracks loads up pallets to be delivered to RAF Brize Norton, to then be airlifted into theatre, because that storesperson is a member of the armed forces, then you are saying we should instantly consider that person a hero, and anyone who says otherwise is considered treasonous.
Not disputing the sentiment Kentswingers777, but it should be tempered with a little perspective.

30 Apr 2009

Quote by Max777

so, can we please let go of the notion of a islamic plot to rule the world by sharia? it's an idea shared only by a minority of extremists.. and that alone can guarantee it's failure, in the long run.

Sorry but I think you are well wide of the mark with that point. Just because extremists (of all creeds and religions) and are in the minority, that does not automatically guarantee that their cause will fail.
Iâ€™m sure the vast majority of the German people did not want the Second World War (or first, come to that) but the minority extremist Nazi party were able to take control of the country, with European domination being their ultimate aimâ€¦and their failure to do so was down to the sacrifice of millions of lives in opposing them, not as a result of them being in the minority.
Extremists of any type only prosper if the circumstances are right for their view to grow...The nazis came to power in Germany in no small part because of the punative reparations forced on them after the first world war..a seemingly unstoppable downward spiral in the wiemar economy led to mass disillusionment with mainstream politics and opened a door through which Hitler passed, a stable secure Germany would never have elected Hitler and for many years he was seen as little but a sideshow....circumstance is everything....extremism thrives in poverty...elevate the poor to a stable secure position and it withers and dies.

30 Apr 2009

Quote by kentswingers777
This is exactly the kind of thing some people want nowadays.

Even though I have heard nothing about this for a while, it makes me wonder how left wing people who run a national union, can even think about such a thing.
Yes some newspapers seem to promote war but....there are others that would put up the white hankie at the first sign of the Taliban or others blowing their noses.
These people who run the NUT, are the very same people who despise the armed forces, and would have us with no defence from invaders. Shame on them.

This reminds me of the harsh old British saying "Those who can, do - those who can't, teach" !
Perhaps if leftist teachers want to start examining bias in education they could start looking at what is being taught in "faith schools" such as those run by muslims, and for that matter, christians teaching creationism and other such unscientific twaddle.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
"I never was waiting for the communist call" ; the Sex Pistols ("Holidays In The Sun").

30 Apr 2009

Quote by Riotandantony
This reminds me of the harsh old British saying "Those who can, do - those who can't, teach" !
Perhaps if leftist teachers want to start examining bias in education they could start looking at what is being taught in "faith schools" such as those run by muslims, and for that matter, christians teaching creationism and other such unscientific twaddle.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
"I never was waiting for the communist call" ; the Sex Pistols ("Holidays In The Sun").

'Schools' run by Muslims, are run for Muslims and children who attend are taught by an Imam, in a similar way to how a Sunday school attendee is taught by a priest. They run outside (after or before the usual school day) 'normal' school; if a Muslim child lives in this country, they are still required to attend mainstream, normal state school (or private school if they pay). Other faith schools such as Catholic schools, teach the tenets of their religion. The parents of children who attend such schools, are aware of, and embrace that.
In everyday state schools, children are taught about a wide range of beliefs of different religions and cultures. Creationism is taught as well as evolution. A balanced and unbiased approach.
Hope that helps.

30 Apr 2009

I'm afraid I'm taking the ball home...
Locking this thread - some of the comments being made are inflammatory to say the least.
Nola x

2 May 2009

The thread is being unlocked so a great debate can carry on. So far I have found myself nodding in agreement with all the posters on one point or another. Lets keep the debate on topic and without getting personal.
If it degenerates into name calling then the thread will be locked........and I for one do not want to see it locked.
Dave_Notts

2 May 2009

Quote by Staggerlee_BB

so, can we please let go of the notion of a islamic plot to rule the world by sharia? it's an idea shared only by a minority of extremists.. and that alone can guarantee it's failure, in the long run.

Sorry but I think you are well wide of the mark with that point. Just because extremists (of all creeds and religions) and are in the minority, that does not automatically guarantee that their cause will fail.
Iâ€™m sure the vast majority of the German people did not want the Second World War (or first, come to that) but the minority extremist Nazi party were able to take control of the country, with European domination being their ultimate aimâ€¦and their failure to do so was down to the sacrifice of millions of lives in opposing them, not as a result of them being in the minority.
Extremists of any type only prosper if the circumstances are right for their view to grow...The nazis came to power in Germany in no small part because of the punative reparations forced on them after the first world war..a seemingly unstoppable downward spiral in the wiemar economy led to mass disillusionment with mainstream politics and opened a door through which Hitler passed, a stable secure Germany would never have elected Hitler and for many years he was seen as little but a sideshow....circumstance is everything....extremism thrives in poverty...elevate the poor to a stable secure position and it withers and dies.
I wouldn't disagree with any of that Stagger, all I was trying to say was that I didn't agree with Melting Pot's comment that the cause of Muslim Extremists was guaranteed to fail due to them being in the minority ...as you say, Circumstance is everything!

2 May 2009

Quote by Freckledbird

This reminds me of the harsh old British saying "Those who can, do - those who can't, teach" !
Perhaps if leftist teachers want to start examining bias in education they could start looking at what is being taught in "faith schools" such as those run by muslims, and for that matter, christians teaching creationism and other such unscientific twaddle.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
"I never was waiting for the communist call" ; the Sex Pistols ("Holidays In The Sun").

'Schools' run by Muslims, are run for Muslims and children who attend are taught by an Imam, in a similar way to how a Sunday school attendee is taught by a priest. They run outside (after or before the usual school day) 'normal' school; if a Muslim child lives in this country, they are still required to attend mainstream, normal state school (or private school if they pay). Other faith schools such as Catholic schools, teach the tenets of their religion. The parents of children who attend such schools, are aware of, and embrace that.
In everyday state schools, children are taught about a wide range of beliefs of different religions and cultures. Creationism is taught as well as evolution. A balanced and unbiased approach.
Hope that helps.
No, it does'nt help ! some "faith schools" are funded by the govt (ie, us the taxpayer), whether they are christian evangelist, muslim, sikh, jewish or whatever - children should not be indoctrinated at taxpayers expense.
Also, you describe the teaching of creationism as "balanced", it is'nt balanced, it is unscientific twaddle, for "balance", why not allow hippies to teach that there are pixies in the woods, animal rights cultists to say animals are the same as humans, or muslims to say it is fine for there Prophet Mohammed to marry his wife, Aisha, when she was only six years old and to commence having sex with her when she reached the age of nine ?