Morals

[leefer]

I think it's unfair, even if you sign up for something, that if you get injured in the line of duty you don't get the support and rehabilitation with it. As others have said that's what the government should be doing.

If I got injured at work my employers would have insurance to cover it. You can't really do that with the forces.

For me it's not about what a brave job our troops do, it's giving them the support they deserve if wounded etc.

That said, people are entitled to refuse to donate to something they don't believe in and shouldn't be hounded for it. Loads of people slag off Comic Relief (as an example). I really don't give much to charities which don't strike a personal chord with me.

Ditto.

[Spy]

I don't agree with the war and for me it logically follows that I'm not going to give money to people injured in a war when I don't think they should have been there in the first place.

There's something that doesn't quite make sense to my reasoning in saying you can support the troops even if you don't support the war because at the end of the day they're the ones actually at the sharp end fighting that war.

[Fred Elliot]

I don't agree with the war and for me it logically follows that I'm not going to give money to people injured in a war when I don't think they should have been there in the first place.

so are you saying that we need no defence for this country ?

Or are you saying that you just dont want us to go and defend other peoples countries ?

I am sorry for quoting your post Spy, as the question is not just directed at you and bears no malice at your original post

[glos_robin]

Christ I've opened up a right can of worms here.

[Fred Elliot]

Christ I've opened up a right can of worms here.

Its cool mate


I hate war, but understand the need for a defence, plus I also see the bigger picture with regards to NATO etc

[glos_robin]

NATO

All the houses round me have been bought by members of NATO now that there based here in Gloucester

[Fred Elliot]

All the houses round me have been bought by members of NATO now that there based here in Gloucester

its going to get worse as well mate

[Spy]

The Second World War was easily justifiable.

The Iraq war was based on lie and opposed by a massive proportion of the public. Saddam was not threatening our country. That's all been covered loads of times in the media, enquiries etc.

The Afghanistan war is just not winnable imo.

Both of these wars can actually fuel islamic extremism.

These are the reasons that spring to mind first of all.

If another country was actually going to invade us then that would clearly be a very different matter to going halfway around the world to change a regime/drop bombs etc.

e.g.You can't seriously say the Iraq war is a war of defense imo.

[glos_robin]

its going to get worse as well mate

Probs, maybe they can shoot at the flood water if it ever comes back again

[Fred Elliot]

Probs, maybe they can shoot at the flood water if it ever comes back again

yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeehaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa


Good ole boys

[Fred Elliot]

The Iraq war was based on lie and opposed by a massive proportion of the public.

Which one ?

  *Devils Advocate*  If China got pissed off with us and wanted a tear up (for what ever reason), would you like us to take our chances standing alone, or would you want the help of NATO ? *Devils Advocate*

[Spy]

The main lie that springs to mind is the claim Iraq had WMDs.

I really don't think Saddam/Iraq did want a "tear up" with either the USA or the UK. Not in terms of launching a strike against us. Even if they had wanted to do that I don't think they had the means.

The U.S administration wanted to attack Iraq and a lot of the U.S people, having been whipped into a state of paranoia were keen on this idea. In peoples minds the invasion of Iraq was linked to 9/11. Some sort of extended 9/11 revenge as the next stage in the "war on terror". This was absolute bollocks and Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11 at all.

Not sure why you keep going on about NATO. NATO wasn't central to my argument. Are you talking about the illegal/legal war issue there?

Here's a question for you: do you think the invasion of Iraq and the continuing war there was justifiable or a defensive war?

[Fred Elliot]

Here's a question for you: do you think the invasion of Iraq and the continuing war there was justifiable or a defensive war?

Completely unjustifiable, the US hid behind 9/11 as a vehicle, totally agree with you there.

Pisses me off that Bush's cock was so far down Blairs throat, he was incapable of saying no.

Both Iraq wars were "convenient" for the US to go all Buffalo Bill on people, for economic or other reasons.

[sonicyouth]

Moved to general discussion as it's not really got anything to do with football anymore.

Military is a necessary evil so long as the instability of other nations threatens the rest of the world but equally have no right to invade other nations to rectify that instability - when has it ever worked? And that's disregarding the real reasons for the recent conflicts.

[Fred Elliot]

Military is a necessary evil so long as the instability of other nations threatens the rest of the world but equally have no right to invade other nations to rectify that instability - when has it ever worked? And that's disregarding the real reasons for the recent conflicts.

Sorry Sonic.

and how come you are always better at putting things

Thats kinda what a was trying to get to