Support our troops

[Guest mcwarre]

Our guys n girls are out there dying because they follow orders (forget the legality/morality of them) from Bliar. What is the general feeling? I am absolutely fed up of them dying and paying the price of political incompetence/indecision.

Most people don't realise that we (I am RAF) have no choice. We may not agree with Bliar or any politician but we have no choice (the moral argument is to leave but what happens to our families???)

Please support them.

"Ours not to reason why Ours but to do and die" Alfred Lord Tennyson

[Guest Paul (MVP)]

Interesting and controversial thread Mick.

When you say there is no choice, that's not entirely true, there is a choice (as with anything), it's just there are bills to pay, and that's the way you (and fellow service members) know how to do it.

Is it worth dying for tho? :rolleyes: I know I wouldn't put myself in that situation...

P

[Guest goochy1]

To be honest i don't agree with why they are there in the first place

[Guest The Doctor]

Interesting and controversial thread Mick.

When you say there is no choice, that's not entirely true, there is a choice (as with anything), it's just there are bills to pay, and that's the way you (and fellow service members) know how to do it.

Is it worth dying for tho? :rolleyes: I know I wouldn't put myself in that situation...

P

Tbh you don't really have a choice, your duty to Great britain supscedes the duty to yourself and your team, as a member of the armed services your prorities are:

1. Follow the orders in your chain of command

and second to that

2. The saftey of your fellow servicemen and women under your command.

It's not your job to consider the moral implications of an order, your job is to follow it and achieve priority one, sometimes at the expense of priority two.

It IS acceptable to spend the lives of men and women under your command, however it is NOT acceptable to waste those lives.

So far iraq has been an overall a waste of good men and women :(

Phil

Edited October 7, 2006 by The Doctor

[Guest mcwarre]

When you say there is no choice, that's not entirely true, there is a choice

Sorry but the choices are limited to:

a. Serving the remainder of your contract then leaving (as nearly 90% of my specialisation do) - I have 3 years to go then that is exactly what I am going to do.

b. Trying to leave early (they do not have to let you go and they are making it extremely difficult for you to leave as there are manning issues). This also means that you lose the majority of your benefits (unless you have served over 16 or 22 years). Remember I cannot just walk away from my job - I would be deemed absent without leave. I don't have the same rights as you do.

c. Refusing to go to Iraq on moral grounds. Flight Lieutenant Kendall-Smith recently did this (albeit he had gone several times before) and was jailed for about three years. What has been kept quiet is that the Government has changed the law such that refusal to go on operations carries a life sentence!!!

Not much of a choice really is it??? (I knew this when I joined so I am not moaning just presenting the facts)

[Guest drblow]

Interesting ... and definately controversial!! Its been a good weekend for controversy so far! :rolleyes:

I'm not entirely sure about this one ... on one hand I believe that war in itself is abhorrent and should be forever erradicated from the world (if only we could talk to each other) ... on the other hand I am realistic enough to know that is not going to happen. On one hand I believe that any of the casualties from any nation currently in Iraq are wasted lives because the political basis for that "war" is complete and utter lies ... on the other hand I don't want to hold that against individual soldiers, many of whom I'm sure also feel that their presence there is not justified in the way that we understand "war" should be justified.

Most people agree that WWII was a justified war - Hitler aggressively took over and occupied most of Europe, and carried out extensive attacks and campaigns against Britian itself. When a nation is under attack then it retaliates ... fairly straighforward. But the Iraq war has not materialised in the same way. We all know the WMD stuff, and it would definately seem from my experience that people's opinions are fairly well swayed to the side of "it was all a big lie from George & Tony". It will never cease to amaze me the fact that Bush continues to this day to talk about the terrorist threat that came from Iraq under Saddam Hussein, when reports have already been highlighted showing that any links between Iraq & Alquaida are tenuous to say the least. But the problem is that people just suck it in. Not only that but plenty will then tell other people the 'facts' about Iraq that they just read in the Daily Scum.

I know it's all I ever say, but to me the Iraq war is proof beyond any doubt that the world we live in today is a media driven puppet show. The news channels, papers etc feed the public bull**it reports about terrorism ... the US government uses that as justifictaion for a campaign against a country that has no connection to the supposed terrorist attack ... unprecedentedly huge demonstrations are carried out in many countries including the US & Britain against the war plans ... and the war goes ahead anyway.

Almost immediately there is a cry from the media about "support our troops", beacuse "well, they are over there now & they need to know they have the backing of the public". Its a difficult situation. I am sure that the troops do want the support of the people, it must be difficult enough to enter combat with a strong political belief in what you are doing, but I cannot imagine how that would be if you doubted your own purpose.

Its a bit like Nazi Germany though ... do we attribute blame to the individual soldiers who carried out atrocities across Europe? They will say they were following orders, sometimes on pain of death if they refused. I guess every individual person would need to ask themselves "would I die for a cause I did not believe in?" or maybe even more importantly "would I kill for a cause I did not believe in?" And the public ultimately shoudl be asking "would we send our sons & daughters to kill or die for a cause we do not not believe in?"

The problem is though ... even after all the demonstrations, after all the conversations people have about this terrible unjustified war ... Blair still gets re-elected, the war still goes on ...

I guess though ultimately I would have to say 'No' to the poll question. Not that I want to hold it against individual troops, but in order to express my overall feeling about the war itself. And in the hope that all troops would be removed from Iraq as soon as possible.

[Guest chucky.egg]

I absolutely 100% support the troops. No question at all.

I don't support the government in their choice of where to send the troops, or the reasons behind it, but these service men and women are putting their lives on the line (and all too often losing them) taking on a fight that "our country" believes needs fighting.

You can't put war to a vote - "should we bomb these people for doing XYZ?" - but you can vote for the people who start the wars.

We need to choose better governments, but I think we also need to stamp down hard on the people (not generally countries, but radical individuals) that threaten our fellow country men and women.

[Guest drblow]

We need to choose better governments, but I think we also need to stamp down hard on the people (not generally countries, but radical individuals) that threaten our fellow country men and women.

See what I mean?? :rolleyes:

What threat? What individuals?? You mean the ones that are currently a threat (that is AFTER their country is invaded)? Was there a 'threat' to our fellow country men before the invasion began? From Iraq?? The government doesn't even justify the war on that basis ... they choose to state that the invasion was meant to "stamp dpwn hard" on the threat to the people of Iraq from Saddam Hussein. Our fellow country men & women are only now being threatened because the government sent them in there ... this is not a response to a valid threat to our national security. In fact, as stated many times the war in Iraq has increased the risk to British people.

Don't believe them. You are NOT being threatened ... they WANT you to feel that way ...

I mean, you English folks lived in fear of Irish people during the 70's and early 80's ... there was a definate terrorist threat then, and nobody invaded Ireland ...

[Guest mcwarre]

and nobody invaded Ireland ...

Only because the situation was, arguably, caused by the English invading Ireland in the first place!!! :rolleyes: :(

[Guest drblow]

Very, very true!! :rolleyes: The history of Ireland's struggle for freedom goes back over 1000 years.

So, surely the same rationale can be applied to the current situation in Iraq? The problems have been caused by the invasion ... not remedied by it.