PDA

View Full Version : What do others think?


ArthurR
29th Oct 2013, 20:35
Military charities to get 9.2m - ITV News (http://www.itv.com/news/story/2013-10-29/cameron-backs-bank-fines-going-to-military-charities/)

Whilst I find this good, why should those injured whilst serving in the forces rely on charities.

Cacophonix
29th Oct 2013, 21:23
why should those injured whilst serving in the forces rely on charities.

Put quite simply, they shouldn't have to. This is a part of the traditional historical malaise, the Crown treating those who (and their dependents) have served it with utter indifference, vide. Nelson's wife and prior to that those who served with Drake and were allowed to starve to death on their ships in port...

Caco

Dash8driver1312
29th Oct 2013, 21:34
Nelson's wife or Nelson's mistress?

Cacophonix
29th Oct 2013, 21:41
Nelson's wife or Nelson's mistress?

Both really , Emma, Lady Hamilton (his mistress) was the most impecunious and was pretty close to debtors prison. Frances, his wife, also died in relatively straitened circumstances.

In its cruelty the Crown cared for neither, when both loved and had been loved by him.

Caco

Airborne Aircrew
29th Oct 2013, 21:51
My thought was "Is that all"...

Cacophonix
29th Oct 2013, 22:00
"Is that all"...

You couldn't buy a pot to piss in for that amount, you are right.

Caco

Airborne Aircrew
29th Oct 2013, 22:15
Caco:

Every man and woman that took the shilling deserves better than they get. Whether they went to combat, supported it, never got there, whatever... They volunteered to be the person that may end up standing between the civilians and nasty men because, in the end, technician, pencil pusher or SAS, they are the military and are expected to step to the front. If they ended up damaged by the "experience" they deserve to be looked after...

Cacophonix
29th Oct 2013, 22:19
If they ended up damaged by the "experience" they deserve to be looked after...

I agree with you and the scandal is that the miserable ordure that sent them off to be damaged retire to sinecures with international banks etc. (vide, the war mongering bitch whore from Babylon called Blair)...

Caco

Dak Man
29th Oct 2013, 22:37
Charities should cease to support the military with immediate effect, and by the same token individuals should no support said charities.

Only then will the true picture of how the UK Government and Royal family (for Queen and country) discard their damaged goods be plain for all to see.

They should be shamed into action and not be allowed to use charity as a crutch.

These men and women are fighting for an elite minority that they can never be a part of.

500N
29th Oct 2013, 22:42
Dak

"and Royal family"

What do you mean by that ?

I know people sign on for Queen and country but isn't that more historical than anything else ?

The Gov't runs the country, they should support the returned troops.

And wouldn't you say that William and Harry do a fair bit for the returned soldiers ?

Airborne Aircrew
29th Oct 2013, 22:42
Dak:

I'm not sure you can blame Betty.... In fact, I firmly believe that, given her druthers, she'd take everything the useless polis suck out of the UK and happily hand it over to those who served and need it.

Cacophonix
29th Oct 2013, 22:49
"and Royal family"

Ah hah! A closet royalist... ;)

The current Queen Bess cares no more for the common military man than did the last one..


Caco

500N
29th Oct 2013, 22:50
Caco

Why do you say that ?

I'd say the Queen has a pretty fair idea of what a soldier goes through,
far more than a Pollie.

Cacophonix
29th Oct 2013, 22:57
I'd say the Queen has a pretty fair idea of what a soldier goes through,far more than a Pollie.

How so...? Just because her sons are projected into positions of relative seniority in the military does not give her any more insight into the life of a common soldier than some poor mom in Bristol of Cardiff or Manchester.

How many soldiers return from Afghanistan etc. and walk straight into protected opulence?

Caco

Dak Man
29th Oct 2013, 22:59
Yes perhaps I was a little premature in including the Royals, nonetheless your swearing in oath is to Queen & Country (country being largely synonymous with GovT in this instance) hence both parties need to accept some responsibility. However, via the Queens's speech she could with one fell swoop hijack Cameron (or whoever is PM) and put an end to the abhorrent fact that servicemen have to rely on charitable donations after their service, it's wholly uncivilized IMHO. She's never done so, as Caco says she's likely so far removed from reality that she believes all's well.

500N
29th Oct 2013, 23:08
The Queen might be able to in one speech but she won't for a whole host of reasons. For a start it is not the done thing !

That doesn't mean she wouldn't do it in her monthly private chats with the PM.


Caco

The Queen has been around long enough to know what goes on and far more than she says or lets on. This has come out numerous times.

Cacophonix
29th Oct 2013, 23:09
500N

When I was granted citizenship in the United Kingdom I was asked to swear allegiance to the Queen which I did readily and I would do again because, yes, ultimately the Queen is a symbol of this country which I love, and for all its faults, I respect.

Some of my forebears fought against and some did (nobly and with great honour) for the Queen. I have done neither so some may argue that I should shut up but (heaven forfend) I won't.

The woman should speak up in support of those men and women who have suffered as a result of her government's policies, it is that simple.

If she won't, who will?

Caco

Dak Man
29th Oct 2013, 23:14
N. regardless of what she says to the PM behind closed doors, nowt has changed so she's either not saying these things or she's being ignored. Now as a supposed strong and informed woman the Queen's speech is the perfect vehicle to promote her views, if she is being ignored y the PM. Her silence is therefore deafening.

Anyhoo we digress as this is about charity not Royalty.