For Les
04 April 2008, 09:46 PM
#1
BANNED
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,675
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For Les
Watch. I believe you. But war in any form is wrong. War is wrong and your excuse is wrong and always will be.
Redacted (2007)
Yes I was quite prepared to go and bomb a military target if I was sent off on such a mission and the reason for that would have been that part of Nato, which of course included this country had been attacked by the Eastern Bloc with nuclear weapons. The fact the the other side knew that I and my compatriots were ready to respond should they be so silly to start it off was a very big part in persuading them that it would be very stupid to attempt it. It seems that we got it right because it never happened I am very glad to say. I am not in the slightest bit ashamed that I was prepared to do my duty as was required of me for the sake of this country.
Last edited by _RIP_; 04 April 2008 at 09:52 PM.
04 April 2008, 10:02 PM
#2
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Pot Belly HQ
Posts: 16,694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I fail to see what Les, or any RAF serviceman, being willing to make the ultimate sacrifice has to do with US troops raping a young girl.
A mission is a mission.
I doubt very much that any troops have ever been tasked with raping the enemy on anyone's orders.
And do you expect any RAF aircraft to land in enemy territory just for a bit of rape and pillaging? They aren't Vikings.
Yes, war might be wrong. But is defending your country wrong? If the UK was attacked or invaded and the enemies troups invaded, and using the film you posted as an example, raped our people, or closer to home your mother/sister/wife/girlfriend then how would you feel? Would you sign up to defend your country? Remember back to WW1 when we used to kill our own for cowardice.
A mission is a mission.
I doubt very much that any troops have ever been tasked with raping the enemy on anyone's orders.
And do you expect any RAF aircraft to land in enemy territory just for a bit of rape and pillaging? They aren't Vikings.
Yes, war might be wrong. But is defending your country wrong? If the UK was attacked or invaded and the enemies troups invaded, and using the film you posted as an example, raped our people, or closer to home your mother/sister/wife/girlfriend then how would you feel? Would you sign up to defend your country? Remember back to WW1 when we used to kill our own for cowardice.
04 April 2008, 10:20 PM
#3
BANNED
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,675
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You've missed the point. We as human beings are simply war mongers. It's noting to do with sacrifice. This facet of our nature does no good and never will do. The film in particular that I highlighted reflects this, nothing more nothing less.
The rape is systematic of man though, and of our many wars, and what war solves or does not solve is laid bare for all to see.
We, as a species, are our own worse enemy, always have been always will be, end of. I have a hatred of all man made destruction and death. It's surely something we can avoid. Why does it happen? Well, imo those in the military are the wrong people to be in charge of the military. Lets face it, if you want to kill people than perhaps you're not the right person to have your finger on the button.
Can we not see what has went before and then learn from our mistakes?
The rape is systematic of man though, and of our many wars, and what war solves or does not solve is laid bare for all to see.
We, as a species, are our own worse enemy, always have been always will be, end of. I have a hatred of all man made destruction and death. It's surely something we can avoid. Why does it happen? Well, imo those in the military are the wrong people to be in charge of the military. Lets face it, if you want to kill people than perhaps you're not the right person to have your finger on the button.
Can we not see what has went before and then learn from our mistakes?
04 April 2008, 10:25 PM
#4
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Pot Belly HQ
Posts: 16,694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To be honest, it's the Government who are in charge of the military. And we vote for them.
Is what you are suggesting is that we get rid of the Government?
Is what you are suggesting is that we get rid of the Government?
04 April 2008, 10:32 PM
#6
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You've missed the point. We as human beings are simply war mongers. It's noting to do with sacrifice. This facet of our nature does no good and never will do. The film in particular that I highlighted reflects this, nothing more nothing less.
The rape is systematic of man though, and of our many wars, and what war solves or does not solve is laid bare for all to see.
We, as a species, are our own worse enemy, always have been always will be, end of. I have a hatred of all man made destruction and death. It's surely something we can avoid. Why does it happen? Well, imo those in the military are the wrong people to be in charge of the military. Lets face it, if you want to kill people than perhaps you're not the right person to have your finger on the button.
Can we not see what has went before and then learn from our mistakes?
The rape is systematic of man though, and of our many wars, and what war solves or does not solve is laid bare for all to see.
We, as a species, are our own worse enemy, always have been always will be, end of. I have a hatred of all man made destruction and death. It's surely something we can avoid. Why does it happen? Well, imo those in the military are the wrong people to be in charge of the military. Lets face it, if you want to kill people than perhaps you're not the right person to have your finger on the button.
Can we not see what has went before and then learn from our mistakes?
I've read some pap on here but this takes the biscuit
Trending Topics
04 April 2008, 10:35 PM
#8
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Pot Belly HQ
Posts: 16,694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Prior to the outbreak of World War II, concerns about British forces being understrength led in 1936 to the creation of the post of Minister for Coordination of Defence by Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin. The post was abolished by Baldwin's successor Neville Chamberlain in April 1940.
On his appointment as Prime Minister in May 1940, Winston Churchill created for himself the new post of Minister of Defence. The post was created in response to previous criticism that there had been no clear single minister in charge of the prosecution of the war. In 1946, the post became the only cabinet level post representing the military, with the three service ministers - the Secretary of State for War, the First Lord of the Admiralty, and the Secretary of State for Air, now formally subordinated to the Minister of Defence.
In 1964, the creation of a single merged Ministry of Defence and the abolition of the separate service ministries in the UK led to the creation of the new post of Secretary of State for Defence, more popularly known as Defence Secretary.
Secretaries of State for Defence
Name Entered office Left office Political party
Peter Thorneycroft 1 April 1964 16 October 1964 Conservative
Denis Healey 16 October 1964 19 June 1970 Labour
Peter Carrington, Lord Carrington 20 June 1970 8 January 1974 Conservative
Ian Gilmour 8 January 1974 4 March 1974 Conservative
Roy Mason 5 March 1974 10 September 1976 Labour
Frederick Mulley September 10, 1976 May 4, 1979 Labour
Francis Pym 5 May 1979 5 January 1981 Conservative
John Nott 5 January 1981 6 January 1983 Conservative
Michael Heseltine 6 January 1983 7 January 1986 Conservative
George Younger 9 January 1986 24 July 1989 Conservative
Tom King 24 July 1989 10 April 1992 Conservative
Malcolm Rifkind 10 April 1992 5 July 1995 Conservative
Michael Portillo 5 July 1995 2 May 1997 Conservative
George Robertson 3 May 1997 11 October 1999 Labour
Geoff Hoon 11 October 1999 6 May 2005 Labour
John Reid May 6, 2005 May 5, 2006 Labour
I've not noticed a single military officer in that list, just politicians....
On his appointment as Prime Minister in May 1940, Winston Churchill created for himself the new post of Minister of Defence. The post was created in response to previous criticism that there had been no clear single minister in charge of the prosecution of the war. In 1946, the post became the only cabinet level post representing the military, with the three service ministers - the Secretary of State for War, the First Lord of the Admiralty, and the Secretary of State for Air, now formally subordinated to the Minister of Defence.
In 1964, the creation of a single merged Ministry of Defence and the abolition of the separate service ministries in the UK led to the creation of the new post of Secretary of State for Defence, more popularly known as Defence Secretary.
Secretaries of State for Defence
Name Entered office Left office Political party
Peter Thorneycroft 1 April 1964 16 October 1964 Conservative
Denis Healey 16 October 1964 19 June 1970 Labour
Peter Carrington, Lord Carrington 20 June 1970 8 January 1974 Conservative
Ian Gilmour 8 January 1974 4 March 1974 Conservative
Roy Mason 5 March 1974 10 September 1976 Labour
Frederick Mulley September 10, 1976 May 4, 1979 Labour
Francis Pym 5 May 1979 5 January 1981 Conservative
John Nott 5 January 1981 6 January 1983 Conservative
Michael Heseltine 6 January 1983 7 January 1986 Conservative
George Younger 9 January 1986 24 July 1989 Conservative
Tom King 24 July 1989 10 April 1992 Conservative
Malcolm Rifkind 10 April 1992 5 July 1995 Conservative
Michael Portillo 5 July 1995 2 May 1997 Conservative
George Robertson 3 May 1997 11 October 1999 Labour
Geoff Hoon 11 October 1999 6 May 2005 Labour
John Reid May 6, 2005 May 5, 2006 Labour
I've not noticed a single military officer in that list, just politicians....
04 April 2008, 10:51 PM
#12
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Pot Belly HQ
Posts: 16,694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Google? Not used it. Just common sense and Wiki to back it up.
Just look at it, politicians decided to appoint a minister to decide what the military do. We, the people, vote in the Government. the Government (allegedly) act on the wishes of the people.
Military staff sign up to serve their country, which is ran by the Government, and do not get to choose who they invade, bomb or defend against.
Do you think that a few chaps from the RAF, Navy and Army got together in 1981 and thought "Chaps, why don't we get the Argies to invade the Falklands next year so we have someone to pick a fight with?"
I don't see that as being likely.
Just look at it, politicians decided to appoint a minister to decide what the military do. We, the people, vote in the Government. the Government (allegedly) act on the wishes of the people.
Military staff sign up to serve their country, which is ran by the Government, and do not get to choose who they invade, bomb or defend against.
Do you think that a few chaps from the RAF, Navy and Army got together in 1981 and thought "Chaps, why don't we get the Argies to invade the Falklands next year so we have someone to pick a fight with?"
I don't see that as being likely.
04 April 2008, 10:59 PM
#13
Guest
Posts: n/a
You've missed the point. We as human beings are simply war mongers. It's noting to do with sacrifice. This facet of our nature does no good and never will do. The film in particular that I highlighted reflects this, nothing more nothing less.
The rape is systematic of man though, and of our many wars, and what war solves or does not solve is laid bare for all to see.
We, as a species, are our own worse enemy, always have been always will be, end of. I have a hatred of all man made destruction and death. It's surely something we can avoid. Why does it happen? Well, imo those in the military are the wrong people to be in charge of the military. Lets face it, if you want to kill people than perhaps you're not the right person to have your finger on the button.
Can we not see what has went before and then learn from our mistakes?
The rape is systematic of man though, and of our many wars, and what war solves or does not solve is laid bare for all to see.
We, as a species, are our own worse enemy, always have been always will be, end of. I have a hatred of all man made destruction and death. It's surely something we can avoid. Why does it happen? Well, imo those in the military are the wrong people to be in charge of the military. Lets face it, if you want to kill people than perhaps you're not the right person to have your finger on the button.
Can we not see what has went before and then learn from our mistakes?
It would be good to learn from our *mistakes* but many don't and sh&t happens. Then you need the military and I'm only able to say that today because of the military keeping our freedoms for us. It's the politicians who are dismantling those as we speak .....
Wise up and even if you don't agree with *war* you have to admit that the military ARE needed ...
Dave
04 April 2008, 11:05 PM
#14
BANNED
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,675
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Soz m8, I wasn't being condescending with the Google quote, but fire away. Cheers. 
Jim
Jim
Google? Not used it. Just common sense and Wiki to back it up.
Just look at it, politicians decided to appoint a minister to decide what the military do. We, the people, vote in the Government. the Government (allegedly) act on the wishes of the people.
Military staff sign up to serve their country, which is ran by the Government, and do not get to choose who they invade, bomb or defend against.
Do you think that a few chaps from the RAF, Navy and Army got together in 1981 and thought "Chaps, why don't we get the Argies to invade the Falklands next year so we have someone to pick a fight with?"
I don't see that as being likely.
Just look at it, politicians decided to appoint a minister to decide what the military do. We, the people, vote in the Government. the Government (allegedly) act on the wishes of the people.
Military staff sign up to serve their country, which is ran by the Government, and do not get to choose who they invade, bomb or defend against.
Do you think that a few chaps from the RAF, Navy and Army got together in 1981 and thought "Chaps, why don't we get the Argies to invade the Falklands next year so we have someone to pick a fight with?"
I don't see that as being likely.
04 April 2008, 11:05 PM
#15
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Pot Belly HQ
Posts: 16,694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The other thing to remember is this:
Who are we fighting in Afghanistan? Not the Afghan army.
Who are we fighting in Iraq? Not the Iraqi army.
Who are we fighting to prevent terrorism? I don't think that Al Qeada (or many other terrorist organisations) are a governments/country's army.
Surely these terrorists are worse than the military who are charged with the task of ridding the world of the terrorists?
Who are we fighting in Afghanistan? Not the Afghan army.
Who are we fighting in Iraq? Not the Iraqi army.
Who are we fighting to prevent terrorism? I don't think that Al Qeada (or many other terrorist organisations) are a governments/country's army.
Surely these terrorists are worse than the military who are charged with the task of ridding the world of the terrorists?
04 April 2008, 11:06 PM
#16
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Right, this stops now.
What's this sudden grievence with Les about? Some people have got the hump because he joined in with PS Lewis pixel thread to help him.
Otherwise, for what we know, he flew in the RAF to defend this country.
Bit of respect lads?
What's this sudden grievence with Les about? Some people have got the hump because he joined in with PS Lewis pixel thread to help him.
Otherwise, for what we know, he flew in the RAF to defend this country.
Bit of respect lads?
04 April 2008, 11:12 PM
#18
BANNED
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,675
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that one has been put to bed recently m8. Well it has been here for me. But I still say, even though my old man was in the RAF, we just shouldn't say 'hey, forces, fire them in and thats OK'. Unless you want to tell me why military intervention beats diplomacy. Please tell me why our forces are needed, and then when, why, how? I'm certainly at a loss.
Jim
Jim
04 April 2008, 11:14 PM
#19
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Possibly for the first time I'm in total agreement with Martin2005 .....
It would be good to learn from our *mistakes* but many don't and sh&t happens. Then you need the military and I'm only able to say that today because of the military keeping our freedoms for us. It's the politicians who are dismantling those as we speak .....
Wise up and even if you don't agree with *war* you have to admit that the military ARE needed ...
Dave
It would be good to learn from our *mistakes* but many don't and sh&t happens. Then you need the military and I'm only able to say that today because of the military keeping our freedoms for us. It's the politicians who are dismantling those as we speak .....
Wise up and even if you don't agree with *war* you have to admit that the military ARE needed ...
Dave
04 April 2008, 11:17 PM
#20
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Pot Belly HQ
Posts: 16,694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
04 April 2008, 11:19 PM
#21
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Pot Belly HQ
Posts: 16,694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
04 April 2008, 11:20 PM
#22
BANNED
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,675
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Even though I was a complete **** in putting across my point for ww2, I never doubted this fact for one minute in reply. What I did and still doubt was the reason and final end result for all conflicts in many SN replies. Were the previous wars futile, poss not, are they now, well we can still debate, soon.
Soz Les, but I just don't like guns and bombs being the way we deal with things. Perhaps had you been higher up then you'd have had more say.
Jim
Soz Les, but I just don't like guns and bombs being the way we deal with things. Perhaps had you been higher up then you'd have had more say.
Jim
Last edited by _RIP_; 04 April 2008 at 11:29 PM.
04 April 2008, 11:33 PM
#23
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
04 April 2008, 11:43 PM
#24
SN Fairy Godmother
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Far Far Away
Posts: 35,246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What in Gods name is this load of old bollox. Les is a fine, upstanding member of the Scoobynet community. War is rank but until the world changes it will continue to happen. He defended us and I for one am extremely proud of that fact.
I, am not going to post anymore in this thread as I think it stinks
I, am not going to post anymore in this thread as I think it stinks
04 April 2008, 11:52 PM
#26
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: It's like finding a cocktail sausage, when what you really wanted was a rather large saveloy.
Posts: 20,535
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What in Gods name is this load of old bollox. Les is a fine, upstanding member of the Scoobynet community. War is rank but until the world changes it will continue to happen. He defended us and I for one am extremely proud of that fact.
I, am not going to post anymore in this thread as I think it stinks
I, am not going to post anymore in this thread as I think it stinks
I've just read this thread, and amazed that this has been pointed at Les.
You've summed it up v. nicely, L. War is going to happen, until the worlds inhabitants change. It's not nice, but I for one, am glad and proud to acknowledge the service and support of our armed forces, and the men & women who have served and those who are still serving today, and who risk their own lives and safety for our country, and those who live in it.
Without them look at what we might have been
From what I know of Les, he is an articulate, helpful and supportive member of this BBS; he speaks a lot more sense than some, and long may it continue
04 April 2008, 11:54 PM
#28
BANNED
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,675
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmm, yes 84, perhaps it's my fault, soz. But, I never really meant to come across as hitting on Les alone, although it does look like this :/ But, I still don't think I'm that far of the mark. It's just that no one wants to discuss killing other human beings in order to create some sort of peace.
Everyone seems to want to justify killing just one way or another. So, I'm Sorry, I cant be part of this crap. Feel free to justify it because you like someone in particular. But I'm out of here death wise.
JIm
Everyone seems to want to justify killing just one way or another. So, I'm Sorry, I cant be part of this crap. Feel free to justify it because you like someone in particular. But I'm out of here death wise.
JIm
04 April 2008, 11:58 PM
#30
BANNED
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,675
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
