Accrington Web

Accrington Web (https://www.accringtonweb.com/forum/index.php)
-   General Chat (https://www.accringtonweb.com/forum/f69/)
-   -   Back Stabbing The Armed Forces. (https://www.accringtonweb.com/forum/f69/back-stabbing-the-armed-forces-27549.html)

jambutty 10-01-2007 11:52
Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
It was recently reported that the MOD has spent over TWO BILLION POUNDS for new MOD offices. To add insult to injury the procurement office has approved the spend, as cost effective.

Of course in the meantime flesh and blood in the shape of our armed forces have to fight without adequate equipment. Helicopters are being cannibalised for parts to keep others in the air. Troops are going out on highly dangerous patrols in Land Rovers because there are not enough armoured cars. Guns that jam. Ammunition that is defective. Indeed it has been reported that our brave soldiers have had to BORROW ammunition from the Americans. A number of our troops have been killed because there was insufficient body armour for every man/woman. Even food and water has been in short supply.

Back home the troops barracks and married quarters are not much more than hovels.

To cap it all the MOD is considering mothballing half the fleet in a cost cutting exercise. I understand that the naval dockyard is under threat too. But the MOD officials and senior ranks have to have plush new offices where they can sit and plan who to send to their death next.

It is no wonder that more people are leaving the armed forces than are joining.

SPUGGIE J 10-01-2007 12:01
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Typical! Some desk jocky aint happy with his lot so goes crying to the govenment who in a warped wisdom deside he is a very important person. Sorry but he should have to work in a potacabin as the money is needed by frontline troops who are getting shot at running the gauntlet of bombs etc and the worst the Deskjoc is a heavy worded memo. The priorities are so fkd up its beyond belief. Its time the troops, Airforce and the Navy got the credit and equipment to keep up the men and women as the best in the world.

garinda 10-01-2007 12:44
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
The new chairs for each of the thousands of civil servants at the MOD, to sit on the arses, cost over £1,300. Which is more than the cost of a bullet proof vest, which are still not standard kit in Iraq.

Ridiculous.

jedimaster 10-01-2007 14:33
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
all i can say is god help us if there is ever an invasion

it'll be back to pitchforks and broom handles for us!!!!

Ianto.W. 11-01-2007 00:17
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jedimaster (Post 364905)
all i can say is god help us if there is ever an invasion

it'll be back to pitchforks and broom handles for us!!!!
My Brother in Law informed me from Afganistan, that they would be glad of owt like that.

WillowTheWhisp 11-01-2007 07:19
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by garinda (Post 364792)
The new chairs for each of the thousands of civil servants at the MOD, to sit on the arses, cost over £1,300. Which is more than the cost of a bullet proof vest, which are still not standard kit in Iraq.

Ridiculous.
The front line troops should come first. The very least they should expect is proper equipment and not to have to make do and mend whilst the MOD sits in the lap of luxury.

Never mind, they might have new barracks to come back home to with some nice new fluffy rugs. Personally I'd rather have the bullet proof vest and a gun that actually works.

bullseyebarb 17-01-2007 19:52
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
[quote=jambutty;364769]
Of course in the meantime flesh and blood in the shape of our armed forces have to fight without adequate equipment. Helicopters are being cannibalised for parts to keep others in the air. Troops are going out on highly dangerous patrols in Land Rovers because there are not enough armoured cars. Guns that jam. Ammunition that is defective. Indeed it has been reported that our brave soldiers have had to BORROW ammunition from the Americans. A number of our troops have been killed because there was insufficient body armour for every man/woman. Even food and water has been in short supply.quote]


Most recently, four British Royal Marines were strapped to the underside of an Apache attack helicopter when embarking upon a rescue mission. VERY dangerous.....and highlighting the shortage of light tactical helicopters. Indeed, much equipment is being "borrowed" from U.S. forces.

I've been wondering.....is this a prelude to subsuming the great British military into a larger EU force? If that happens, you guys won't have the flexibility to choose what is necessary to defend and what isn't.

Billcat 17-01-2007 20:21
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bullseyebarb (Post 369907)

Most recently, four British Royal Marines were strapped to the underside of an Apache attack helicopter when embarking upon a rescue mission. VERY dangerous.....and highlighting the shortage of light tactical helicopters.

I read that story, Bulleyebarb, and I believe that you miseed the bullseye this time! In fact, I've now read several account and not one of them indicates that these soldiers felt that they were undersupplied.

There were three Apache helicopters. The real problem here is that the Apache is only a two-seater, one of which is occupied by the pilot. As more soldiers needed to go along, the Apache was not an appropriate choice for the rescue mission. But, when time is of the essence, as in this rescue mission, good soldiers improvise with what they have at hand. Virtually no army ever has every conceivable weapon instantly available. Frankly, give the stubby wings, I don't think that strapping more than two soldiers to the AH-64 helicopter would be practical/

Here's the link: http://news.bostonherald.com/interna...ticleid=177642

bullseyebarb 17-01-2007 21:15
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Perhaps. However, according to U.K. military spokesman Lt.Col. Rory Bruce, it is believed to be the first time British forces ever tried this type of rescue mission. They were incredibly brave, considering that the mobility of this type of helicopter would have been heavily restricted and extremely vulnerable throughout the operation. Any loss would have been a propaganda coup for the enemy. I have been following closely all stories of shortages and substandard equipment. Land vehicles have been a topic of much discussion also. Obviously, this is not an isolated incident.

Billcat 17-01-2007 21:20
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bullseyebarb (Post 369984)
Perhaps. However, according to U.K. military spokesman Lt.Col. Rory Bruce, it is believed to be the first time British forces ever tried this type of rescue mission. They were incredibly brave....
That statement I certainly agree with. It also was a fine display of the sort of military improvisation that can often make a huge difference between success and death.

Ianto.W. 18-01-2007 12:49
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Quote:
bullseyebarb, I have been following closely all stories of shortages and substandard equipment. Land vehicles have been a topic of much discussion also. Obviously, this is not an isolated incident.
This is not the first conflict where the equiptment was not up to the job, as we are all aware sand and dust is the enemy of any motor vehicles, helicopters etc. To bring to mind a certain USA ill fated rescue attemt of hostages, suffered the same fate because the helicopters were not equipped to deal with the conditions. Also shortages are not just in equiptment, but skilled engineers to repair what the army already have, shortages come in many disguises.

shakermaker 18-01-2007 13:17
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Just bring them all home.
Sending these lads out there is just sending them out to die for no cause.

Saddam has been caught. It's just a civil war out there now. Why are British and American soldiers even there??

Billcat 18-01-2007 13:51
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by shakermaker (Post 370216)
Just bring them all home.
Sending these lads out there is just sending them out to die for no cause.

Saddam has been caught. It's just a civil war out there now. Why are British and American soldiers even there??
Apparently, some of our leaders didn't learn much from the experience in Vietnam - or from how Eastern Europe moved to democracy.

Our kids will be paying for this folly for many decades to come.

Ianto.W. 18-01-2007 23:02
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by shakermaker (Post 370216)
Just bring them all home.
Sending these lads out there is just sending them out to die for no cause.

Saddam has been caught. It's just a civil war out there now. Why are British and American soldiers even there??
Oil shakermaker if they had no oil, we would be trying to sell them cement they have enough sand of their own, and maybe de-salination plants, on second thoughts we would probably be giving them aid, as without oil they would have no money to buy owt.

bullseyebarb 20-01-2007 20:10
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Billcat (Post 370225)
Apparently, some of our leaders didn't learn much from the experience in Vietnam - or from how Eastern Europe moved to democracy.

Our kids will be paying for this folly for many decades to come.

No, they didn't. Viet Nam was not lost on the ground but in Washington. And many of the same rancid politicians are still up there and ready to repeat the '70's. Millions of people were slaughtered in Southeast Asia as a result of what they did then. Only difference is that the North Vietnamese had no interest in attacking America.

You are right......our kids will be paying for this - if we repeat the same mistakes we made back then.

bullseyebarb 20-01-2007 20:14
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ianto.W. (Post 370677)
Oil shakermaker if they had no oil, we would be trying to sell them cement they have enough sand of their own, and maybe de-salination plants, on second thoughts we would probably be giving them aid, as without oil they would have no money to buy owt.

If they had no oil, they wouldn't be able to fund terrorism. Hence, I doubt we'd give a damn.

steeljack 20-01-2007 20:27
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bullseyebarb (Post 371588)
No, they didn't. Viet Nam was not lost on the ground but in Washington. And many of the same rancid politicians are still up there and ready to repeat the '70's. Millions of people were slaughtered in Southeast Asia as a result of what they did then. Only difference is that the North Vietnamese had no interest in attacking America.

You are right......our kids will be paying for this - if we repeat the same mistakes we made back then.
Barb, Dont you mean some of the rancid politicians who never saw/avoided Vietnam are repeating the same folly

bullseyebarb 20-01-2007 20:35
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by steeljack (Post 371596)
Barb, Dont you mean some of the rancid politicians who never saw/avoided Vietnam are repeating the same folly

I mean what I say. Far too many of these politicians stand for absolutely nothing beyond their own re-election. Who was up on The Hill then and who is still there now? Shall we go back and take a vote count? This is not a partisan issue. It's a matter of will.

steeljack 20-01-2007 20:39
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
off the top of my head , the Senior Senator from the state of Massachusetts springs to mind .......

bullseyebarb 20-01-2007 20:46
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Ah, Senator Bartender, (as my in-laws from MA refer to him.) Personally, I prefer The Swimmer. As good a reason as any for term limits.

Ianto.W. 21-01-2007 11:43
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bullseyebarb (Post 371592)
If they had no oil, they wouldn't be able to fund terrorism. Hence, I doubt we'd give a damn.
I already said that barb:confused:
Quote:
Ianto.W.on second thoughts we would probably be giving them aid, as without oil they would have no money to buy owt.

Billcat 21-01-2007 13:40
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bullseyebarb (Post 371588)
No, they didn't. Viet Nam was not lost on the ground but in Washington. And many of the same rancid politicians are still up there and ready to repeat the '70's. Millions of people were slaughtered in Southeast Asia as a result of what they did then. Only difference is that the North Vietnamese had no interest in attacking America.

You are right......our kids will be paying for this - if we repeat the same mistakes we made back then.
Millions of people? Oh DO tell! In Vietnam? What "histories" are you reading?

The Vietnamese people certainly did win their independence on the ground, through the tactics of guerilla warfare. The Vietnamese people, as a group, didn't want the French there, nor did they want us there. While they may not have been able to beat these far risher and more powerful countries, they didn't have to. They just wanted their freedom, the right to decide for themselves what was best for Vietnam. They hung on and outlasted us, much as the Americans did versus the British during the Revolutionary War.

Nobody ever had a workable solution for winning in a country where the inhabitants simply did not want a foreign army on their soil - so long as those inhabitants managed to keep some military force in the field! That's why guerilla warfare works - be it in Vietnam or Iraq.

As an American, I don't want other countries interfering in my life; if I were an Iraqi, I would feel the same way. That's the biggest lesson we failed to learn in Vietnam.

bullseyebarb 21-01-2007 19:03
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Billcat (Post 371889)
Millions of people? Oh DO tell! In Vietnam? What "histories" are you reading?

The Vietnamese people certainly did win their independence on the ground, through the tactics of guerilla warfare. The Vietnamese people, as a group, didn't want the French there, nor did they want us there. While they may not have been able to beat these far risher and more powerful countries, they didn't have to. They just wanted their freedom, the right to decide for themselves what was best for Vietnam. They hung on and outlasted us, much as the Americans did versus the British during the Revolutionary War.

Nobody ever had a workable solution for winning in a country where the inhabitants simply did not want a foreign army on their soil - so long as those inhabitants managed to keep some military force in the field! That's why guerilla warfare works - be it in Vietnam or Iraq.

As an American, I don't want other countries interfering in my life; if I were an Iraqi, I would feel the same way. That's the biggest lesson we failed to learn in Vietnam.
You don't pay attention! I said millions died in SOUTHEAST ASIA. Laos, Viet Nam......and, apparently, you haven't heard of the Killing Fields of Cambodia. The aim over there was to stop the spread of Communism. South Viet Nam wanted to be free. Just as the majority of Iraqis wish to be free. Military action is only one part of the overall picture, which also includes diplomacy and economics.

Ianto.W. 21-01-2007 19:26
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
The lessons all autocratic nations fail to heed is, YOU CANNOT DEFEAT THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE.

Billcat 22-01-2007 11:41
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bullseyebarb (Post 372067)
You don't pay attention! I said millions died in SOUTHEAST ASIA. Laos, Viet Nam......and, apparently, you haven't heard of the Killing Fields of Cambodia. The aim over there was to stop the spread of Communism. South Viet Nam wanted to be free. Just as the majority of Iraqis wish to be free. Military action is only one part of the overall picture, which also includes diplomacy and economics.
I "don't pay attention?" Utter nonsense, courtesy of bullseyebarb! I deliberately ignored your silly claim, just to see where you would go. Ignoring nonsensical, hyperbole-inflated claims is a common debating technique, as it allows - indeed, encourages - the person making those specious claims the opportunity to fully claim an indefensible position.

bullseyebarb, you are the very first person I have encountered who has arrived at the rather unique conclusion that the United States' decision to leave Vietnam somehow caused the Pol Pot regime outrages. If you want to provide some proof of this rather outrageous claim, go for it. While you are at it, why not blame the USA for Idi Amin, the Armenian genocide, and every other outrage committed in the 20th century?

South Vietnam wanted to be free? Correction - ALL of Vietnam wanted to be free. Free of the French, free of the Americans who came in after the French, free to be Vietnam. South Vietnam was an artificial concept, which existed only because of the French, the USA, a ton of money, and some very corrupt Vietnamese leaders who ran incompetent, unsustainable regimes for a short time. Ngo Dinh Diem refused the scheduled 1956 countrywide election to democratically choose a leader for all of Vietnam. Later, he was ousted, killed in a CIA-backed coup, and replaced with Nguyen Thieu. So much for US attempts to create democracy in Vietnam!

Essentially, all we managed to do in Vietnam was to spend billions, kill many thousands and prolong the Vietnamese war for independence - and to harm the name of the USA in a large part of the world! As in Iraq, we were the foreign invaders.

Ianto.W. 22-01-2007 12:08
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Quote:
Billcat, ALL of Vietnam wanted to be free. Free of the French, free of the Americans who came in after the French.
Who were both sent packing via the WILL OF THE PEOPLE. No as you rightly say Billcat you can not blame the USA for all the worlds ill's, as some amongst us would have us believe.

bullseyebarb 22-01-2007 20:45
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
1.5 million killed by Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge alone. At least 1 million South Vietnamese sent to "re-education camps" after the fall of Saigon, where there were starved and tortured horribly. Many more fled the country. They died at sea or were murdered by Thai pirates. I don't think we'll ever have a full count of all who died in the region as a whole. Two million plus is a conservative estimate. Millions more with ruined lives. Do you really think the South Vietnamese were better off under Communist rule? Would the South Koreans have been likewise better off under a united Communist regime? Selective moral outrage is for those who haven't had to live under such circumstances.

Ianto.W. 22-01-2007 21:45
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
The aircraft that delivered the Napalm and associated equiptment to Vietnam, also brought the occupied bodybags out of Vietnam, if nothing else good came out of the end of the 'war' this has ceased.

steeljack 22-01-2007 21:51
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
seems odd that the Vietnamese and Cambodians had a problem with the US but have no problems with being the number one and two destinations for European and Australian child molesters, suppose it takes all sorts :eek:

mr flibble 22-01-2007 22:02
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
I cant believe i am seeing posts saying 'why are we still out there' and 'bring them all home'.

that has to be the single worst thing that we could do.

i am sick to death of people complaining about our soldiers and airmen dieing while we are at war. what the hell do you join the armed forces for? oh yes thats right most people join because its an easy option with good pay, low living costs.

im ex royal air force and my partner is a helicopter pilot in the RAF as well, and although i would not like to have her die she joined up knowing full well she might have to fight and die for her country or as it might be somebody elses.

The reasons we are in iraq and other countrys dont matter now because the fact is we are there.

we destoyed iraq on our way in and it would be totally and unquestionably wrong for us to now just leave. it is our responcibility to stay untill the people of iraq have a some what stable situation in which they can govern there own country freely and police in a just a honest way.

Yes i admit our troops are not getting the things they need to fight and work properly and that is an issue, but our armed forces didnt get the things they needed in WW2 or WW1 and we did bloody well with out them.

I am very proud to say we have what in my opinion is the best army, air force and navy in the world and the most experianced.

and as for them using oil to fund terrorism...are you insane? iraq didnt and has never funded terrorism and certainly had NO connections with al-quiada or osama bin ladin. why? because saddam and most of iraq hate there guts because they follow a different stream of religion.

as for the incident with the apache helicopter incident, the wings are designed to be able to carry one troop on each side with a special attachment for use in an emergancy, what should they have done? use the apache and save time to save a fellow soldier or wait for a merlin and waste time?

Neil 22-01-2007 22:10
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
WOW 2nd post in 2 years Mr F but a damn good one at that.
I hope she returns to you soon, safe and well.

Billcat 23-01-2007 00:41
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bullseyebarb (Post 372701)
1.5 million killed by Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge alone.
Again, this had nothing to do with our leaving Vietnam.


Quote:
Originally Posted by bullseyebarb (Post 372701)
Do you really think the South Vietnamese were better off under Communist rule?
The Vietnamese were and are better off without the French and the Americans trying to dictate their future.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bullseyebarb (Post 372701)
Would the South Koreans have been likewise better off under a united Communist regime?
Getting desperate and trying to change the subject? The South Koreans had just gained independence from Japan and wanted our help to stay that way. Looks like you are trying to compare apples and oranges!

garinda 23-01-2007 17:33
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr flibble (Post 372770)
I cant believe i am seeing posts saying 'why are we still out there' and 'bring them all home'.

that has to be the single worst thing that we could do.

i am sick to death of people complaining about our soldiers and airmen dieing while we are at war. what the hell do you join the armed forces for? oh yes thats right most people join because its an easy option with good pay, low living costs.

im ex royal air force and my partner is a helicopter pilot in the RAF as well, and although i would not like to have her die she joined up knowing full well she might have to fight and die for her country or as it might be somebody elses.

The reasons we are in iraq and other countrys dont matter now because the fact is we are there.

we destoyed iraq on our way in and it would be totally and unquestionably wrong for us to now just leave. it is our responcibility to stay untill the people of iraq have a some what stable situation in which they can govern there own country freely and police in a just a honest way.

Yes i admit our troops are not getting the things they need to fight and work properly and that is an issue, but our armed forces didnt get the things they needed in WW2 or WW1 and we did bloody well with out them.

I am very proud to say we have what in my opinion is the best army, air force and navy in the world and the most experianced.

and as for them using oil to fund terrorism...are you insane? iraq didnt and has never funded terrorism and certainly had NO connections with al-quiada or osama bin ladin. why? because saddam and most of iraq hate there guts because they follow a different stream of religion.

as for the incident with the apache helicopter incident, the wings are designed to be able to carry one troop on each side with a special attachment for use in an emergancy, what should they have done? use the apache and save time to save a fellow soldier or wait for a merlin and waste time?

Your profiles states you are only twenty two. How long did you serve Queen and country for, in the RAF?

You may be content for our service men and women, including your partner, to be cannon fodder, but in a democracy we have every right to discuss why this war, supposedly to rid a country of an evil dictator happened, and why just as evil ones are allowed to flourish, some of whom we have close trade and diplomatic ties with.

garinda 23-01-2007 17:38
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Very confusing.:confused:

Mr Flibble, you last posted two years ago, when I presume you were twenty.

'hello everybody, im the content manager and co-founder of risingbridge.co.uk, first off sorry for the lack of content but it was only setup while i was recovering from a nite out down accy, there will be more stuff on there soon so keep checkin it, peace yall'[quote]

Just how long did you serve in the RAF, and if it is so wonderful why did you leave, after what appears to be such a short time?

mr flibble 23-01-2007 18:22
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
i unfortunetly had to leave for medical reasons when i was in a bad car accident on the M6 that subsequently resulted in damage to both my knee's.

i was only in the RAF for a short time as an engineering officer working under CIS-ENG.

what this has to do with anything ive said however is beyond me.

garinda 23-01-2007 19:02
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr flibble (Post 373323)
i unfortunetly had to leave for medical reasons when i was in a bad car accident on the M6 that subsequently resulted in damage to both my knee's.

i was only in the RAF for a short time as an engineering officer working under CIS-ENG.

what this has to do with anything ive said however is beyond me.
You were lucky then. More lucky than the thousands of young men and women who have been killed in this war so far.

By the way, it was you that brought up your service history to illustrate your argument.

mr flibble 23-01-2007 19:17
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
i did mention i was in the raf, i just dont see how long i was in or why i left is important.


anyway what is it tennyson said

'Not tho' the soldier knew
Someone had blunder'd:
Their's not to make reply,
Their's not to reason why,
Their's but to do and die'

steeljack 23-01-2007 20:03
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr flibble (Post 372770)
i am sick to death of people complaining about our soldiers and airmen dieing while we are at war.
Pardon me , but I thought the Military in the UK was under the control of the Ministry of Defense, (doh. to defend the Country from outside aggression,) I dont think I remember reading any news reports about the Iraqi fleet being spotted off the Cornish coast or any blitzkriegs by the Iraqi airforce on British cities ,to the best of my knowledge the War Office has been closed down since the 1950s when the Govt. at the time decided that a bankrupt Britain was no longer a World Power and the days of Empire were over .
This is the first time the British Govt. has declared war on a country since 1939 (history lesson .....we declared war on Germany , not them on us) In other conflicts since then Britain has used its armed forces as a reaction to acts of aggresion (apart from the Suez fiasco) . or as peacekeeping forces under NATO command .
In my view the military currently being used in Iraq are being used as nothing more than mercenaries for the oil companies and the state of Israel ,
The use military forces in Afghanistan is a different story , they were sent in originally to get Bin Laden the guy behind the Sept 11 attacks but are now bogged down suporting a corrupt regime .

Now, I am going to get myself in trouble .........all this trouble in the Mid-East since Gulf war 1 / Sept 11 / present Iraqi war , I lay at the feet of Ronald Reagan and his messiah complex of ridding the world of comunism, If he had just left the Russians alone when they invaded Afghanistan and allowed them to push a bit further south into Baluchistan/Pakistan and allow them to get a warm water port there would be none of the problems we have today.

sorry for the ramble ;)

garinda 23-01-2007 22:42
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr flibble (Post 373386)
i did mention i was in the raf, i just dont see how long i was in or why i left is important.


anyway what is it tennyson said

'Not tho' the soldier knew
Someone had blunder'd:
Their's not to make reply,
Their's not to reason why,
Their's but to do and die'
I'm sorry if what I said seemed harsh, partly I agree with you. We don't have conscription in this country, and our armed services are paid to do a job. To obey orders unquestiongly. I know I couldn't do it. Especially if it was something I didn't believe was right. However I do support the very great service they provide for us.

Your comment about our troops not having the right equipment, and comparing it to the last two World Wars, suprises me. Surely if we send troops to war zones, the least they can expect is the right kit, and equipment such as body armour, which could lessen their chances of coming back in a box, or spending the rest of their lives permanently disabled.

garinda 23-01-2007 22:48
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Interesting to note that since the West over threw the Taliban in Afghanistan, the production of heroin as soared there, something the Taliban used to crack down on, and it seems that the NHS might consider buying the surplus smack to turn into Diamorphine to treat drug addicts in the UK.

Funny old world.

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sto...005961,00.html

jambutty 24-01-2007 12:36
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr flibble (Post 373386)
i did mention i was in the raf, i just dont see how long i was in or why i left is important.


anyway what is it tennyson said

'Not tho' the soldier knew
Someone had blunder'd:
Their's not to make reply,
Their's not to reason why,
Their's but to do and die'
Tennyson was talking about an era when the soldier was considered as canon fodder for the generals to gain their war medals. The days when the generals sat behind the front line, well out of harms way, pushing bits of timber around a map committing their troops to slaughter whilst shedding crocodile tears for their loss are quite rightly long gone.

This is the 21st century and people who VOLUNTEER to serve in the armed forces deserve the very best equipment that the country can provide regardless of cost. And that statement comes from someone, me, who served for 13 years in the Royal Navy. Our troops have been let down by a government that prefers to spend billions on plush new offices, subsidies to private companies and foreign aid to despots who just keep the money for themselves.

We, with the Americans, invaded Iraq on an outright lie and since then both governments have quietly ignored that FACT and tried to justify the invasion by its effect.

Having said that we should stay to finish the job but give the troops the tools to do so.

bullseyebarb 24-01-2007 17:33
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Billcat (Post 372880)
Again, this had nothing to do with our leaving Vietnam.




The Vietnamese were and are better off without the French and the Americans trying to dictate their future.



Getting desperate and trying to change the subject? The South Koreans had just gained independence from Japan and wanted our help to stay that way. Looks like you are trying to compare apples and oranges!

Perfectly fine for Communists, Fascists and Islamic rads, et al to spread their poison throughout the world....but heaven forbid that Western democracies should resist this or attempt to help others do the same. Oh, OK then.

Billcat 24-01-2007 17:55
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bullseyebarb (Post 373915)
Perfectly fine for Communists, Fascists and Islamic rads, et al to spread their poison throughout the world....but heaven forbid that Western democracies should resist this or attempt to help others do the same. Oh, OK then.
If there were any consistency to the USA sticking to its principles and only supporting democracies, or even leaders edging towards democracies, I might well agree with you. However, we have not done so. We have very generously supported all sorts of criminal and corrupt dictatorships, sometimes even against those within their country who were seeking democracy. Noriega, the Shah of Iran, the Saudi royals, Pinochet, Vietnam's Diem and Thieu, Saddam Hussein, and the ugly list goes on and on. We've not fooled much of anyone, save for those who uncritically believe only what they are asked to. That's why most of the country and most of the world believes that the USA is currently headed in the wrong direction.

As a patriotic American, I beleive that we should always practice what we preach. In the long term, it would help to spread our values to other countries, it would restore much of the trust our government has lost at home, and it would help to restore the world's good opinion of the USA.

Billcat 24-01-2007 18:00
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr flibble (Post 373386)
anyway what is it tennyson said

'Not tho' the soldier knew
Someone had blunder'd:
Their's not to make reply,
Their's not to reason why,
Their's but to do and die'
Fine. Soldiers should obey any legal order. I don't think anyone was saying differently, which makes me wonder why Tennyson might be pertinent to the discussion.

For us non-soldiers, we are not obliged to follow those orders. We should always evaluate where our govenrment is leading us, and speak out as we see fit. Speaking out and participating in public discussion of the issues of the day is an important part of being a member of a democracy. It's patriotic!

Billcat 24-01-2007 18:09
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr flibble (Post 372770)
i am sick to death of people complaining about our soldiers and airmen dieing while we are at war. what the hell do you join the armed forces for?
I've had many friends who have been in the service. Not a one of them joined to die. They joined to make a living and defend the USA. While they practice the arts of war, the ultimate goal is to be so repected as warriors by potential foes that they would never have to go to war.

Soldiers and sailors, when it actually comes to war, are in business to make the other guys die, while not dying themselves. A paraphrase from the movie Patton: "the object is not to die for one's country, it's to make the other poor son of a bitch die for his. "

bullseyebarb 24-01-2007 19:45
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Billcat (Post 373938)
If there were any consistency to the USA sticking to its principles and only supporting democracies, or even leaders edging towards democracies, I might well agree with you. However, we have not done so. We have very generously supported all sorts of criminal and corrupt dictatorships, sometimes even against those within their country who were seeking democracy. Noriega, the Shah of Iran, the Saudi royals, Pinochet, Vietnam's Diem and Thieu, Saddam Hussein, and the ugly list goes on and on. We've not fooled much of anyone, save for those who uncritically believe only what they are asked to. That's why most of the country and most of the world believes that the USA is currently headed in the wrong direction.

As a patriotic American, I beleive that we should always practice what we preach. In the long term, it would help to spread our values to other countries, it would restore much of the trust our government has lost at home, and it would help to restore the world's good opinion of the USA.
I agree entirely. I have never liked the policy of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend." Always comes back to bite. However, in reality needs must when the devil drives. It's also fair to say that the facts gets skewed many a time. Just one example would be the widespread belief that the U.S. sold weapons to Saddam during the Iran/Iraq war. We didn't - although we did provide some satellite intelligence. The U.S. did tilt diplomatically toward Saddam during those eight years, because he was fighting against the regime of the Ayatollah Khomeini and our government believed Saddam to be the lesser of two evils. We didn't support Bin Laden either when he was in Afghanistan fighting the Soviets in the 1980's, although a lot of people think we did.

steeljack 24-01-2007 20:11
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bullseyebarb (Post 374051)
I agree entirely. I have never liked the policy of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend." Always comes back to bite. However, in reality needs must when the devil drives. It's also fair to say that the facts gets skewed many a time. Just one example would be the widespread belief that the U.S. sold weapons to Saddam during the Iran/Iraq war. We didn't - although we did provide some satellite intelligence. The U.S. did tilt diplomatically toward Saddam during those eight years, because he was fighting against the regime of the Ayatollah Khomeini and our government believed Saddam to be the lesser of two evils. We didn't support Bin Laden either when he was in Afghanistan fighting the Soviets in the 1980's, although a lot of people think we did.
At times , reading some of these posts is akin to reading Alice in Wonderland

Billcat 24-01-2007 20:39
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bullseyebarb (Post 374051)
The U.S. did tilt diplomatically toward Saddam during those eight years, because he was fighting against the regime of the Ayatollah Khomeini and our government believed Saddam to be the lesser of two evils. We didn't support Bin Laden either when he was in Afghanistan fighting the Soviets in the 1980's, although a lot of people think we did.
We certanly did support many of the folks who later became the Taliban regime. And if we did not overtly supply Hussein, we did covertly - and turned a nice, blind eye to his use of chemical weapons. Seems the name is familiar, too - Rumsfeld! http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...nguage=printer

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._su..._Iran-Iraq_war

In any case, I've seen too many of our leaders either distorting the truth or just plain lying over the years to accept what I am told when the politicians are trying to sell me some idea.

bullseyebarb 27-01-2007 18:39
Re: Back Stabbing The Armed Forces.
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Billcat (Post 374076)
We certanly did support many of the folks who later became the Taliban regime. And if we did not overtly supply Hussein, we did covertly - and turned a nice, blind eye to his use of chemical weapons. Seems the name is familiar, too - Rumsfeld! http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...nguage=printer

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._su..._Iran-Iraq_war

In any case, I've seen too many of our leaders either distorting the truth or just plain lying over the years to accept what I am told when the politicians are trying to sell me some idea.
You are ignoring the role of Saudi Arabia and Pakistan here. In Afghanistan the U.S. role was to provide logistics and technological support as well as money. Our only interest there was to drive out the Soviets. We funneled money to the Mujahadeen via the Pakistanis so as to give ourselves "plausible deniability" with the USSR. The Saudis collaborated with Pakistan's intelligence service, ISI, to really run the war on the front lines. It was the Pakistani army, in particular the ISI, that picked the political winners and losers in the jihad. They favored radical Islamist factions because it suited the goal of the Pakistan army to pacify Afghanistan. The U.S. acquiesced with all of this because our government really didn't care about local politics in the region, only booting out the Soviets. The Saudi government lavishly funded Saudis who were fighting in Afghanistan. Bin Laden had no contact with America - nor does he appear to have needed funding from anyone due to his own considerable resources. The former foreign correspondent and editor at the Washinton Post, Steve Coll, covers this war in his book "Ghost Wars."

And I agree. Turning a blind eye to things others are doing is not good policy. Unfortunately, this is the way of the world.....and successive administrations. I wish we could put an end to it. I don't trust government either. Ditto large segments of the media establishment.


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:02.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1
© 2003-2013 AccringtonWeb.com