pslewis

They BOTH know they may kill some people if they carry out their chosen actions!!

The suicide bomber 'may' get through and kill

The speeding driver 'may' just misjudge a bend and kill

They BOTH make an informed decision!

Pete

Jerome

Give me strength. Do you understand the words 'intend' and 'intent'?

Put it this way. A speeder, if caught, gets 3 points and a fine. What do you imagine a potential suicide bomber would get if they were caught before they could carry out the act? Do you still think they are comparable offences. The law and the courts don't. Or is this another one of your usual attempts to get a rise out of SNetters?

gsm1

No, you go and help the Iraqis, thats what you went for wasn't it? How fast the phoney facade drops. You're the one who has created that mess for them, you sort it. And as for commenting on something I don't know about, that's really rich coming from you.
I don't get my information from liars, unlike you. Found any WMD yet?

I'm not surprised you are so defensive about psychopaths in the British army considering you're one of them. I remember very well your comment about how Iraqis who had their relatives killed/abused by British soldiers should shut up or face more of the same.

The story of the British soldier was as told on the BBC, I made no other comment on it apart from the fact I have little faith in the MoD to actually investigate anything properly.

Jerome

How did any British servicemen or women create the current mess in Iraq exactly? I think you'll find that was politicians. I think you'll also find that British troops are doing a very good job out there. Why do you think that we are suffering far less attacks than the US troops?

As for psychopaths in the British Army, to whom or what are you referring?

Mitchy260

I wonder who commands more respect.....

The 18 yr old boy soldier patrolling iraq on £13k a year

OR

The balding overweight fat office worker earning £50k a year.

They're doing a fantastic job and as soon as a thread like this appears its the usual suspects which run it down.

Our soldiers have more respect in 1 finger than you'll ever have in your entire worthless lives.

gsm1

Yes, it was the politicians who created this mess, the Brit army just have to carry out their job. My issue is with Taff and his gung-ho crap and how he's always telling everyone else to go and help the Iraqis if they didn't like it.

Jerome, I'm sure you know full well of the stuff that happens. Many soldiers may lose it sometimes just through the nature of the job but some just have a sick fascination with violence.

As for the British troops doing well, yes they are because they're not as trigger happy as the Americans but also because they are in the South with the Shias where there is less conflict. The Americans do have it much harder near Baghdad.

Btw. What is your opinion on the deaths at Deepcut? What do you think of the culture within the armed services and the MoD handling of discipline within it?

Jerome

As I haven't seen the posts from Taff that you're talking about, I'll refrain from commenting on that and let him respond for himself.

Agreed, the Shia areas were always going to be more accepting of the 'liberation' because they were extremely badly treated by Saddam. I witnessed appalling conditions there. Quite literally tear inducingly bad, when I first crossed the border. A sight that will live with me forever. However, if we'd used the same tactics as the US, we would have had a much much harder time down there.

I also agree that there are some bad apples in the Army, but there are in every part of society. Civilians are equally capable of despicable acts (the dog burnt alive recently for example), however any bad apples in the Army in Iraq will have increased oppurtunity to behave badly. I guarantee that I would have turned in anyone I had found contravening the Geneva convention, as would the vast majority of troops. Grassing on your own doesn't even come into it. The Geneva Convention is the standard that the British Army prides itself on conforming to, it is the very essence of a soldier to uphold it with pride.

As for Deepcut, I am sure there is something being covered up here. Not necessarily anything too sinister, but we aren't being told the whole story. Bullying does go on in the Army. Personally, as long as it isn't too severe, I think it isn't always a bad thing. If you can't handle someone shouting at you, maybe even pushing you around a little bit, maybe the Army wasn't the right career choice. An enemy soldier certainly won't be concerned about your feelings. However, there are some that may step over the mark of what is reasonable, and that may have been an issue at Deepcut. I really should'nt speculate any further, but it does seem unusual to have so many apparent suicides at one training centre.

TonyBurns

iTrader: (3)

I would believe them, ok they can sometimes be incorrect, and the fact is that information can go out of date very quickly (1hr) BUT, if it wasnt for these people, the terror campaign that the likes of the IRA did in mainland Britain would have been much worse, or the fact that you wouldnt hear (and dont hear) alot of information that is still classified, about terrorists and terrorist organisations carrying out operations much closer to home.
Dont think that because you dont hear about it, it doesnt happen on your doorstep, the media is a powerful friend and enemy at the same time, and you seem to take in what they want you to hear, there is a much bigger scale of operations going on behind the scenes that people take for granted.

Tony

TonyBurns

iTrader: (3)

The Armed forces have 2 laws, Military law and Civil law, your quite lucky, you just get Civil law, a person convicted under Military law can also then be tried under Civil law for an offence, where as you would only face one..... nice eh!

As for the deaths at Deepcut, yes there is something wrong there, but its been investigated by both miliary and civil police, now if your saying that the death of 4 soldiers in basic training is suspicious (possably down to abuse/bullying) try closer to home, look at the ammount of schoolkids that are bullied and commit suicide or are killed by classmates, even workers in offices that are bullied, just because something is high profile with a very small loss of life, (media again btw) then look at a much greater loss that you dont hear about (office bullying/suicide) you take one as suspicious and one for granted?
I had a mate who blew his head off with a 7.62mm SLR whilst on guard duty, due to a woman he was going to marry, sh@gging around, so yet another thing i can say hits close to home over what alot of people dont understand.

Tony

khany

People to really understand what is happening in the world we have to look at history and how tings have paved out since....Bush & Blair are just pawns in this whole thing and the only people loosing are ourselfs......the people of Britain, America and Iraq...! Educating people is the only way out of this mess...........

I think you will find many more Jewish terrorists around the world than you will Arab terrorists. And there are quite a few American terrorists around the world also.

We don't have the right to colonize other countries anymore than the Israeli's/Zionists have the right to take land away from Palestinian's and Arab's.

It depends on who you are as to who the terrorists are. George Washington was considered a terrorist in England.

Because the Zionist media pours out lies and our Zionist controlled government says to invade another country and kill people there , morally we don't have that right.

I think the future will show just as the past did with the Lusitainia and Pearl Harbor that own governments were involved in setting it up , so that we would join in the wars to kill the Zionists enemies.

Leslie

After the length of time I was in the Service Moose, I would be very silly not to realise that the politicians control the troops as you say. Does not make any difference to how I feel about the piece of paper that you mention. I am also on record on this forum as saying that I think war is obscene and should be avoided at all costs. Does not make me a pacifist, I was always ready to fight for my own country.

I also said that wars were almost all initiated by greedy and selfish leaders who are after as much power or as many acquisitions as they can get. This is true of the present conflict. There is almost always something to be gained somewhere in the background. In the cases of the earlier Gulf war and also the Falklands, one country had attacked another and that was a good reason for sending in the troops. In this present case we were led up the garden path by the leaders deliberately to justify their illegal adventure.

There was also a pretty good reason for defending the Falklands apart from the fact it was a British protectorate, and that was that there are valuable minerals in the area which will one day be worth exploiting. This was apparent to both sides in the dispute.
Of course Mrs Thatcher saw it as an opportunity for her own status and that will have had a great deal to do with her decision. As I said, there is always an underlying reason somewhere.

Had we been attacked by the Eastern Bloc which was the big threat some years ago, then I would have had no compunction in defending this country by carrying a very powerful weapon in that direction even though we would not have survived. That was the basic reason that that war never got started. The world was actually a safer place than it is now because the Services were ready to counter attack instantly and the enemy knew it very well.

One thing I am not Moose is naive. I have had plenty of time to think about it all and a lot of experience in seeing how political leaders behave. If I appear cynical, I believe I have good reason to be so and do not apologise for it.

UB, see you in the Tower when they catch up with us.

Les

popeye

Clear off you raving loon.

khany

What part is loony?

popeye

What does this mean?

khany

Try reading "Zionist Connection II" by Alfred Lilienthal a Jewish historian or "The Controversy of Zion" by Douglas Reed an English war correspondent.

That will enlighten you.

TonyBurns

iTrader: (3)

Im not going to get into the Israel debate that you seem to want to start, so ill just give you a little insite into whos fault it was..... Both the Arab states and Israel.
The UN gave the Jews some nice land so that they could live in (and yet again under UN control, us brits lost troops there in quite large quantities )
Now, when the State of Israel was declared, the neighbouring Arab states got abit upset and started a little war, land lost by these states is now land owned by Israel, so the words, "self inflicted" come into it.

Tony

popeye

Let's assume I can't be arsed. Could you condense them to about a paragraph and type it here please? Thanks.

||VaNDaL||

just caught up on this thread since last posting.....


I can say I have a great deal of respect for jerome and leslie, but I still feel that Tony; you need to realise that the whole point of the armed forces and even government in this country is to protect the population of this country - that role clearly includes personal freedoms and safety.....

your views reflect more a 1930s view and I feel you would be better off wearing a brown shirt, perhaps out burning books somewhere.

The phrase "if you knew what i knew is so tony blair"..... you aint he are you????

Patt@firstime

Just moving off the point just slightly, what did K Bigley do for a living? What was he doing in Iraq making so much money as some of you have mentioned?

Matt

khany

Tony it is a bit more complicated than that....i'm not trying to get into a Arab Israel debate but am trying to stress the point that this war in Iraq...or the war on 'terror' is exactly not that....it is an overall agenda for the Zionists who are pulling all the strings.

The Zionists prevented nations from absorbing the "Russian Jews" (from Poland) and refused to accept Uganda over Israel.

As is plainly shown in the history of Israel, the Israeli's slaughter innocent people , meaning people who posed no threat to them at all other than living in their own country which the Zionists wanted , but the worlds ( zionist controlled ) papers say that the Israeli's "retaliated" against "terrorism" over and over.


I am not inforcing my opinions on anyone, its my personal view just adding a different view to this thread.

Regards

TonyBurns

iTrader: (3)

Van, you know sweet fa when it comes to this subject, and your replies reflect this.
11 years of service for my country in different rolls, you? zero.
All you know is what is given to you by the media, me, first hand experience, that counts for much more than what you read, period.
Do you also realise that at this time, this country is actually at a greater threat of terrorism than that of the IRA bombing campaigne during the 70's?
Do you actually know how far further on terrorist action from some of these extremist groups has gone?
Do you actually know what sort of weapons these people will now use?

You should get out from under your stone and look for a change, instead of emphasising on one point, blair/bush, bring back our boys......
Have you acutally seen what Blair has done for us?
The disarming of certain irish terror organisations? or did you forget about that?
The trouble is, you think we can barter and come to an arrangement with these extremist terrorist organisatons? WRONG, not this time, these are a completely different kettle of fish, where as the irish were fighting for a united ireland, these just want to kill anyone, thats pretty much anyone in the western world, this isnt something you cannot sit back and let happen, so yes, we have to take a harder lined attitude to it, and thank god we dont have someone like you who has to make these desicions as by now id hate to see what would have happened to us

If you want some proof, look at the madrid bombings, indescriminate, then after the spanish pulled out their troops there was yet another potential plot, "after" troops were removed from theatre.
YOU dont have to make the desisions, so its much easier for you to say whats right and whats wrong, and it wouldnt have mattered who was in power, the decision would still be the same as it is now, hold any terrorist suspects without charge.

Tony

TonyBurns

iTrader: (3)

TBH, im not overkeen either side, but there is more to it, considering that by 1945 the germans had murdered 5 - 6 million jews for the hell of it, i think they would be a bit on their back heel, im not saying what they have done is correct, just look at the 1972 olympics for instance, and we know that there has been bad blood between arabs and israel, but this isnt the time to talk about it (or the tread) as the focus is on the death of 3 british soldiers, killed by an extremist terrorist organisation, intent on causing anarchy and removing the restrictions of a dictator so they can have a democratically elected government.

Tony

||VaNDaL||

I feel that whilst it was in theory a brilliant theory for "Israel" to be a Real Country/State - to give someone elses homeland to create that; has to be wrong


And second point on that - have the israelies remembered and learnt nothing from the Jewish plight in the early parts of the 20th century and the acts of genocide committed towards them, that they feel it's ok to do the same to the palestinians.
Dispossessed, deprived of their birthright and denied basic human rights and freedoms, millions of Palestinians daily endure a rare fate. Just the simple act of surviving through the day under occupation requires enormous resilience in the face of a superior war machine, supported by the world's single superpower.

Palestinians have the right to live in freedom, peace and prosperity in their own independent homeland

||VaNDaL||

Oh and tonyB, once again you display the full " I know all, and you know nothing"

it just shows how small and dangerous your thinking is....

you say I know nothing and have no experience, but you havent even read previous posts which give a fair hint that I might well have "previous relevant experience" (as I have)But yes I bow to your "obvious" expertise on these matters and hope you will forgive my relative inexperience and lack of knowl;edge of all things military (total tongue in cheek, on that last bit)

gsm1

Nor do you, Tony. This is all pie in the sky.
There is little that can be done to prevent someone carrying out a terrorist attack and the security measures in the UK are extremely lax anyway.
Tell me, what weapons are 'these people' now using? If you're referring to chemical/biological weapons, only Blair/Bush and the other scaremongers have mentioned them. There is no evidence that Islamic terrorists have any intention to attack the UK or to use these weapons.

||VaNDaL||

thanks gsm1, I missed that bit - greater risk than in the seventies????


how many terrorist attacks have ther been in UK since 9/11 Tony???



But you prove terrorism as a theory works cos it has surely worked on you

bigJoe

How about this then?

I don't think security is lax, it's just that you don't see it all the time during everyday life

gsm1

Vandal, I was wondering whether Tony was The Tony as well. I remember before the Iraq invasion New Labour were telling us Blair knows stuff that us plebs have no idea of..it's all hush hush..we have to trust him, we don't realise the danger.

TonyBurns

iTrader: (3)

Over 10, if you know who the ALF are then you may have an incling.
And the countless ones that have been averted that we wont know about.


Nope, you have proved that you dont see the ammout of terrorist activities as being terrorist activities, just one offs by the looks
You talk about lax security, and no wonder with the lax attitude you take to it

Tony

gsm1

How about what, Big Joe? That report talks of information that has been passed onto a journalist, not the outcome of a trial. The report also says no chemicals or other evidence was found. We had similar raids in the UK (and Spain funnily enough, the other partner in Bush's war) with police claiming the same. What happened to those cases? In Spain they reported on a suspicious white powder being found in one of their raids - this turned out, much later, to be washing powder.

Read it again:

An Islamic terrorist cell was poised to launch biological or chemical attacks in France and POSSIBLY Britain last year.

Some suspects had admitted that Benchellali had stored the toxins in jars of Nivea skin cream and 70cl flasks at his home although no traces had been found so far.

The Telegraph should try and find some documentation in a burning Baghdad building to back it up.