Trial By Press...Again
Well timex you are in fact wrong. Most aircrew were given at least a few opportunities to go out on patrol in South Armagh. Trust me this is NOT a pleasant experience but nowhere near like being shot at, petrol bombed etc. Even although NIBAT1 was a nasty place its not as bad as Iraq. Believe me, even now i wouldnt want to go on patrol in NI, never mind Iraq.
As I said "walk a mile in their shoes"
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: wherever I lay my headset
Posts: 538
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TM said (someway back)...
and advoactes treating people in a way they "understand". Two points:
If you really believe "they ain't worth tuppence" then by acting in a similar manner are you not devaluing yourself?
If our troops can remain calm they retain control, it seems such attacks are designed to provoke a reaction... if our troops do react then they've lost. End of...
What next, shades of the Indian Mutiny, and rioting crowds being machine gunned... I thought we'd moved on a bit over the last 100-150yrs and learned a few lessons, maybe not as many as I thought?
We're talking about people that throw bricks, fire bombs, deliver suicide bombs, and saw-off people's heads. They ain't worth tuppence
If you really believe "they ain't worth tuppence" then by acting in a similar manner are you not devaluing yourself?
If our troops can remain calm they retain control, it seems such attacks are designed to provoke a reaction... if our troops do react then they've lost. End of...
What next, shades of the Indian Mutiny, and rioting crowds being machine gunned... I thought we'd moved on a bit over the last 100-150yrs and learned a few lessons, maybe not as many as I thought?
Timex:
Your "Walk a mile" rationalisation is spurious. It's a pragmatic justification for having 'our boys' act like their boys 'cos we're the good guys.
I refuse to walk a mile in the shoes of :
Ossy Bin Liner
Gerry Adams
Hammas
July 7th 'heroes'.
What they do is cowardly and wrong.
What the Basra boys did is too.
As an aside thousands and thousands more Iraqi innnocents have had to scrape up and bury their own than in the NI parallel you propose.
CG
I am aware of many crewmen who went out of BBK and XMG on patrol- it was reasonably common. I didn't.
Your "Walk a mile" rationalisation is spurious. It's a pragmatic justification for having 'our boys' act like their boys 'cos we're the good guys.
I refuse to walk a mile in the shoes of :
Ossy Bin Liner
Gerry Adams
Hammas
July 7th 'heroes'.
What they do is cowardly and wrong.
What the Basra boys did is too.
As an aside thousands and thousands more Iraqi innnocents have had to scrape up and bury their own than in the NI parallel you propose.
CG
I am aware of many crewmen who went out of BBK and XMG on patrol- it was reasonably common. I didn't.
Your "Walk a mile" rationalisation is spurious. It's a pragmatic justification for having 'our boys' act like their boys 'cos we're the good guys.
As an aside thousands and thousands more Iraqi innnocents have had to scrape up and bury their own than in the NI parallel you propose.
I am aware of many crewmen who went out of BBK and XMG on patrol- it was reasonably common. I didn't.
Last edited by timex; 19th Feb 2006 at 11:48.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pierre, I understand your point but I just don't agree with it.
To get wrapped-up in worries about whether we take the moral high ground, or if we provoke reaction, or if we do this or do that, is pointless. In the final analysis, these people deal in muders, missile throwing and heaven-knows what else, all in the name of some rubbish that is spouted from a book. They're entirely welcome to do that in their own country, but to worry about how we deal with them is to credit them with more value than they're worth. If our troops are being hit by bricks then grab 'em and beat 'em, by all means. It's the only kind of rough justice that thugs understand.
The way I see it is this; our troops, airmen and sailors are commtted to our armed forces, who are, in turn, committed to the defence of this country. Exactly what they're doing in Iraq or anywhere else is questionable. Their presence isn't going to stop so much as one placard being displayed in England, never mind a terrorist attack, so they're patently being used merely for the agendas of our polticians, who certainly never asked us if we wanted to send troops out there in the first place. So why on earth should they sit on their hands and get injured or killed, just to bolster Tony Blair's image? What must the poor parents of the killed soldeirs feel like? Your son's just been killed for, er... the defence of the United Kingdom? Bullsh*t, he's been killed because Tony Blair wanted to go on a crusade.
We advocated the bombing or Iraq because we were told that they posessed weapons of mass destruction which (theoretically) could threaten the UK. Well fine - bomb Saddam Hussein's government out of existence but then just get the hell out of there - what happens to Iraq after that, frankly, just isn't our problem, and it still isn't. We should try taking care of our own country instead of wasting money and lives trying to bring civilisation to nations that traditionally behave like animals.
As I've said before, the future of any of these countries isn't worth the life of even one British soldier.
To get wrapped-up in worries about whether we take the moral high ground, or if we provoke reaction, or if we do this or do that, is pointless. In the final analysis, these people deal in muders, missile throwing and heaven-knows what else, all in the name of some rubbish that is spouted from a book. They're entirely welcome to do that in their own country, but to worry about how we deal with them is to credit them with more value than they're worth. If our troops are being hit by bricks then grab 'em and beat 'em, by all means. It's the only kind of rough justice that thugs understand.
The way I see it is this; our troops, airmen and sailors are commtted to our armed forces, who are, in turn, committed to the defence of this country. Exactly what they're doing in Iraq or anywhere else is questionable. Their presence isn't going to stop so much as one placard being displayed in England, never mind a terrorist attack, so they're patently being used merely for the agendas of our polticians, who certainly never asked us if we wanted to send troops out there in the first place. So why on earth should they sit on their hands and get injured or killed, just to bolster Tony Blair's image? What must the poor parents of the killed soldeirs feel like? Your son's just been killed for, er... the defence of the United Kingdom? Bullsh*t, he's been killed because Tony Blair wanted to go on a crusade.
We advocated the bombing or Iraq because we were told that they posessed weapons of mass destruction which (theoretically) could threaten the UK. Well fine - bomb Saddam Hussein's government out of existence but then just get the hell out of there - what happens to Iraq after that, frankly, just isn't our problem, and it still isn't. We should try taking care of our own country instead of wasting money and lives trying to bring civilisation to nations that traditionally behave like animals.
As I've said before, the future of any of these countries isn't worth the life of even one British soldier.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: In the dark
Posts: 391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Of course only the good guys have to play be the rules.
And only the military have to be honest and truthfull in press reports/statements.
Yet, for example, the press happily forget that Saddam Hussein deliberately hid/placed things like military HQs, AAA, SAMs etc in highly populate areas when they talk about collateral damage. Any civillian death or injury is purely the UK/US military's fault.
Or when they talk about all the military equipment we sold Iraq, like Migs, Mirages, SA7, Scuds and AK47s. They forget the British didn't even make them. Now if they mentioned the Hawker Hunters we sold them, fair enough, guilty as charged M'Lord.
And only the military have to be honest and truthfull in press reports/statements.
Yet, for example, the press happily forget that Saddam Hussein deliberately hid/placed things like military HQs, AAA, SAMs etc in highly populate areas when they talk about collateral damage. Any civillian death or injury is purely the UK/US military's fault.
Or when they talk about all the military equipment we sold Iraq, like Migs, Mirages, SA7, Scuds and AK47s. They forget the British didn't even make them. Now if they mentioned the Hawker Hunters we sold them, fair enough, guilty as charged M'Lord.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: at the end of the bar
Posts: 484
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This would not be such big news if it wasn't for the actions of the Americans in Abu Ghraib and Gitmo - the more feverish elements in the press have been digging for a 'British Abu Grhaib' for a long time.
It's interesting to note that
a) the NOTW said it has had this video for 'sometime' and (b) they paid their source for it. The latter IMO simply encourages others.
It's interesting to note that
a) the NOTW said it has had this video for 'sometime' and (b) they paid their source for it. The latter IMO simply encourages others.
Hts Good is correct in what he says about RAF SH crews going on patrol. I did 2, one in ETB and the other around Aldergrove with the RAF Regt.
Sorry to say it but once again people with NO real knowledge of a Soldiers job and the stresses involved are passing judgement.
