lol they don't exactly live off others... but i would agree with you in my own way,people on the dole realy need to bother to earn a living and stop being jippo... also to stop smaller crimes like house theft, mugging e.c.t they need to make harsher punishments.... tresspassing and civial matter are a bit ifffy too...
Excuse me?!? You're talking about bank robbers, people who find loop holes, and drug barrons who "are pretty cool". Ever consider that someone has to pay up for the money that bank robbers steal? It's not the "the bank", like an anonymous edifice, that pays up; "the bank" is just a building. It is the investors in the bank or insurance companies who do. Some of those people invested their life savings. If the bank cannot absorb the losses, it collapses, taking the livelihoods of thousands of people with it. And then I'm not even talking about the bank personnel and customers who were traumatised by having a gun shoved in their faces. People who find "loop holes" are usually lawyers who get their client off charges that they know full well they are guilty of. So that this guy can rob again, that guy can get behind the wheel of his car drunk to kill someone again, that other guy can rape again... Drug barons build their throne upon the lives and suffering of thousands of farmers that they exploit, the mules that get caught smuggling their goods, the dealers that tote their wares and kill competitors, and the addicts that kill themselves getting hooked on it. They are indirectly responsible for every drug and gang war that goes on, every heroine prostitute on every street corner, every toodler that overdosed on a parent's drugs, every teenager that killed themselves in their bedroom. Most car break-ins, petty burglaries and bungled muggings are a result of drug-related crime. You want to respect that? Be my guest. Glamourise crime. Glamourise violence and exploitation. Glamourise deceit and dishonesty. See if those people respect you in return.
Q: Why does someone who fought in a war 60 years ago differ to someone who served in a war 3 years ago? Whilst in Iraq I served with true heroes, and a few of them lost their lives. I had the honour to serve with them and with 2 of them I was there at the end, but I honoured them by bringing them back to barracks. I honoured them by being the one who told their family as thats what they wanted me to do. I honoured them by telling their families they died great men, and I honoured them by doing my damn best to keep them alive, but it just wasnt to be. I personally don't see a difference between soldiers 60 years ago and soldiers now.
I don't think other people do. But the Second World War happened some time ago, before most people on this forum were born. So it is easier to romanticise that period and get all sentimental about it. It is also clearly regarded as a war in which there were some evil oppressors out to take over the world, and a group of free democratic nations fighting against this. Because it is such a long time ago, people get a bit hazy on the technical details such as the "free world" selling out Sudetenland (then belonging to Czechoslovakia) to appease Hitler, most governments (inc. the British Goverment) quite liking the man before he invaded Poland, Stalin carving up Europe in a deal with Hitler before Hitler switchbacked on him and invaded Russia, the US not really getting involved until Japan pwned them in Pearl Harbour. And then there are the Jews... many of them did, in fact, escape persecution but were neatly sent back to Germany by the many "free democracies" they fled to, such as Holland and Switzerland. Russia simply deported them to Siberia. Other allied countries knew of their extermination, but chose not to get involved. Interestingly, some of the countries that did try to protect the Jews were Portugal (neutral), Spain (friendly with Germany) and Italy (initially allied with Germany). A war of good vs. evil indeed... I could go on a bit, making the arena look decidedly gray rather than black-and-white. Allthough I give you this: Hitler and Hirohito were evil sods who clearly started the fight. Now the war in Iraq is much more recent. As such people remember well all the controversy around it, and feel more... ambivalent about this war. Saddam was an evil sod, but he was not trying to take over the world. And wasn't he an ally first? So it is harder to think of the soldiers as unconditional heros, even though, of course, they are no less or more heroic than those who fought in WWII, or Vietnam (another "ambivalent" war...). What people forget is that the war in Iraq (or Vietnam, for that matter) is no more messy, conflicted, political, double-dealing and double-standardised than WWII. We just forgot our history, that's all.
But why is it easier to romantisize WW2? There was still soldiers standing in mud, surrounded by their mates fighting and dying for something which they believe in? Freedom. I didnt go to Iraq to find WMD. I went to liberate the people from an oppresive dictator. I didnt give the chocolate out of my ration pack every day to the kids for political reasons, I did it because it brought a smile to their faces. I didnt watch friends get killed in horrible ways for oil, I did because I beleived I was doing the greater good for the people. I served with great men and women, and those who I shed blood with I will never forget and always honour. I was once told something by our Padre "Soldiers, Sailors & Airmen are diffrent to normal people. These are people who don't like the way the world is and want to make it better. These are the people who are willing to put their lives on the line for something they believe in, and thats what makes them different. Different in that when they need to, they step up to the plate and bat, no matter the personal cost."
"Ally" is a subjective term at best. I'm not a fan of diplomats (hard to believe..just trust me) who act like a certain leader is great when it fits and then absolute evil a few years later. General Patton thought the Soviets were evil fu***** and said it. You have to work with *******s on occasion unfortuneatly. Soldiers who fight valiantly and respectfully for a just cause deserve respect in return. Thanks for your service KelticFox.
The motivations of those who join the army usually are very noble (if sometimes naive). The motivations of those who send that army out to fight their battles usually are not (and often quite cynical). That is the tragedy of war. It is easy to romanticise WWII because people do not remember what it was really like, and those who do (i.e. the soldiers) are mostly dead. So people can project whatever fantasy they want on it, and think it is an exciting time of heroic conflict and bad german accents ("Ve haf vays...") just like in the movies. Of course you, as a soldier, know better the realities of war. On the battlefield itself there are no complex politics, and all battlefields, in the end, are the same. But other people don't see it that way. They see WWII as a romanticised story told in Hollywood movies, and the Gulf War as cold, harsh reality splashed over their widescreen TVs at the nine o'clock news. Remember that people started to lose their romantic notions about war when the Vietnam war was graphically displayed on TV for the first time in history. Now you could see burned children running from their bombed village (and see, incidentally, that the planes were ours). This is nothing new to you, the soldier; you were there. But to ordinary citizens it is.
You mean like Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden? No you don't have to work with them. You can't. Because somewhere along the line there is a price to pay for this alliance, and it is always too big. Don't dance with the Devil if you don't want to get burned...
Yes...by 'work with' I mean like you'd treat a hybrid rabid dog/5 year old. They bite so don't get too close but you can lead them along with something they want. Eventually you'll have to kill it or be prepared to kill it. It will attack you.
People who work from the bottom to the top, from the poorest situation to the richest, but yet still keep their humbleness...
You Sir, are an idiot. How can you not respect someone who puts their life on the line for the good of the nation? I dare you to go on a rememerance parade and tell one of those veterans that you don't respect them for their service to the country.
Harsh words Spiral Architect, everyone is entitled to an opinion after all. While some see soldiers as defenders of say, freedom and their glorious nation, others see soldiers as legitimised murderers who get paid to do a governments dirty work. Lets not forget now, the "good of the nation" and "what the government want" are often called the same thing, but its perfectly within someones rights to say "I don't think the Iraq war was in the UK's or US' best intrests. The "wants of the government" are often seen as the cause for war, not the needs of a nation, because of this percieved illegitimacy of some wars, along with the fact that some people consider soldiers to be no more then hired murderes, many won't respect soldiers.
Agreed. However, I find that people 'romanticize' about a war like that becuase it was a huge war without huge weapons or advanced tanks. 'Back to nature' sort of thing. I still have respect for the serviceman and women of today though.
Whatever the reasons for war you still have to respect the people who are out there risking their own lives, after all they all swore an oath to do so. What kind of society do we live in now where people don't respect our veterans? Edit: On a side note i'm with KelticFox. Just the other day Marks and Spencers refused to send stuff out to our troops because it would make them look as though they supported the war. Just because you don't support the decision for war doesn't mean you can't support the troops out there.
No, you don't. We didn't have a draft, all the people out there chose to be there. You'll find people tend to respect what they consider to be noble causes, if people don't consider a war very noble, soldiers are less likely to get respect and gratitude. Tough maybe, but thats just one more thing you sign up to when you take the kings shilling, or whatever they're calling it these days. Anyway, last post on this subject, mods I'd be happy if you deleted this, as we've really derailed this topic. Perhaps a new topic is required on the subject?
lol you have strong and correct veiws but i respect them in a different way, not effect on society....
No offence, but a lot of you don't get it. Soldiers sign up to defend freedom, human rights and such things. Soldiers fight and die for such ideals. I have faught for ideals i believe in, I have watched good men die for them. And what do they get? But soldiers do not command the military, politicians do. And unfort Politicians do not have the same noble ideals as soldiers. Politicians are mainly driven by greed and 'favours'. Politics in my opinion are bullsh*t! I was a section medic when we came under attack, and out of the 8 man team, 5 men were injured (including myself - large chunk of Land Rover in my leg, and I still have a 3 inch scar in my shin) and 2 GOOD men died. It was my job to keep them alive and I couldn't. 3 days later I was sent back for PsychEval and I get off the train, and some sh*t headed little chav decided to give me the most sloppiest salute I've ever seen. WITH HIS LEFT HAND! Why? Because he had no respect. He thought it was funny. Why do we reward t*ssers like that, when heroes are not recognised as heroes? We have a healthcare system that cannot afford to provide healthcare. We have a benifits system that does not benifit the citizens who need it the most. We have a employment system that only basically provides a database. We have a criminal system that does not punish criminals. We have a military that is understaffed, underarmed, and a shortage of equipment. We have a intelligence system that does not have the resources to gather intel. We have a tax code that favours the rich more then the poor. Why why why? Because politicians have agenda's, that have nothing to with running the country for the good of the country. Politicians have 'favours' to return to the people who managed to get them into power. In my opinion we ned to get rid of buerocrats and get someone who understands the people becuase he/she is PART of the people. We need to let people who understand and have worked in the system run that part of the system.
OK, perhaps I should repeat myself: You are finding that you put your life on the line to make it a better world, but that this noble intention was abused by politicians, and that the world, for all your efforts and heavy sacrifices, is not much of a better place for it. I'm sorry that you had to find out the hard way. You deserve better --most soldiers do. But war is a messy business. A very messy business. And people find it hard to separate the ignoble intentions of the politicians who instigate war from the noble intentions of the soldiers who fight it, and those noble intentions, in turn, from the very messy things that actually happen during a war. Just being a war veteran is not enough. People will scrutinise your bravery sharply within the context of what the war that you fought was all about, and which side you were on. Otherwise we'd be honouring the German WWII soldiers too... There is a myth that continues to be propagated, that war, somehow, is a noble activity, of men and honour, of an eponymous battle of Good vs Evil. That's all bull. That myth is propagated by politicians and the military to keep recruiting brave and idealistic young people into an activity that normally no sane person would contemplate having any part of. By the time you are on the battlefield, and find out that war, in reality, is not about heroically beating a nefarious evil enemy out to destroy your homestead or about "protecting the free world", but much more about killing strangers, just as young, just as brave/scared, just as idealistic as you (in fact, just like you but just happening to be on the opposite side), about innocent civilians getting caught up in atrocity, about children burnt and mothers raped, about senseless loss of life over a meaningless patch of ground far, far away from your home and everything you joined up to protect, about mere expedient politics, by that time, it is far too late. By that time, you are just hanging on to survive, both physically and psychologically, and you have long lost perspective on how what you are doing is fulfilling the ideals that you envisaged. Some soldiers turn around to accuse their goverment of betrayal. Some others however cannot let go of the myth. The sacrifices and investments they made were too big, the desillusionment is too painful. Instead they proudly display their medals and try not to let on that they still wake up screaming at night... But many people do not buy into the myth. Some because their idealism is tempered with realism (or cynicism), and some --like the chav you met-- because they simply have no ideals whatsoever. But there are many, many people out there who are also courageous, idealistic, self-sacrificing and brave in their own way. Perhaps they chose to join the Fire Service, the NHS, the Police, one of many charities, or perhaps they became teachers, carers, 3rd world development workers. Many people go around every day, trying to make the world a little bit better on a modest salary, long hard hours, and great personal risk and sacrifice. They fight as difficult a battle, and get as little recognition. Spare a thought for them also.
Although I agree with your words keltic fox, I personally wouldn't join the army because I heavily disagree with this countrys stand points. I would join if it was to defend my county, but not to invade another. But also "evil prevails when good men fail to act". Someone needs to do something.
