MilitaryForums.co.uk

Ohh, Stinky I believe I have already addressed you concern in another post.

Yochanan................A soldier does not get to chose where he goes are what he does, he is the governments muscle which THEY use to implement their policies. Rather than having a go at the soldier why vent your spleen at the Government. It does not matter what happens the soldier is always to blame and never the politician. Did I think we should have gone into Iraq, well I must admit i was not keen on the idea of the second invasion, but hopefully some good just might come from it.

yochanan'
In the past near 20 years I have served in every conflict zone that HM Forces have been involved in during that period! Whilst as an individual I may respect whatever views you have upon the current politics of our government (I Don't!) Please do not have the audacity to class yourself as a "fighter" resistance or otherwise. Kindly leave that to those of us who have the dedication and testicular fortitude to enter formal selection, training and service of a regulated armed force!
As a "resistance fighter" statistics tend to indicate that you are aged between 18 -25, are in full time further education, are periodically sexually active with a non disclosed gender and are currently failing to meet the learning objectives in around 55% of the subjects you are supposed to be studying!
If you truly choose to take the path of freedom / resistance fighter or whatever you wish to call yourself please act upon your convictions and take up an active role as I'm sure we'll get to meet at some point!
Best wishes for your short future!
H_N

So am I mistaken in believing that many soldiers have Conscientious Objected to going to war? I am sorry I don’t believe I am “having a go” at soldiers, I apologize if it came across as I was. I just don’t want any more good young men and women to die for what everyone knows is an unjust crusade. Many young men and women in their late teens and early twenties, people my age, people I know and went to school with are dying for nothing.

I would have thought soldiers would be in agreement with what I am saying, my friends in the military are certainly aware of what they are involved in, some have left, some continue to serve. I get horror stories in emails about what these guys and girls are having to witness over there from my friends in the military, it makes me sick.

I couldn’t imagine having to live with the images of war, images of dieing and burning bodies, the smell of the rotting flesh, I have had it explained to me in great detail by friends who have returned, some break down when talking about it, I couldn’t imagine having to live with that for the rest of my life.

Ultimately responsibility lies with the government and ruling elite, but surely some responsibility must lie with those doing the dirty deeds? Obviously it is painful for people to contemplate that they have been involved in war crimes of the highest degree, we were all lead down the garden path by the state, just as the Germans were, but it is only with this realization that you can overcome, come to terms, with what you have done, and then dedicate your life to righting the wrongs you were unwittingly involved in.

I hope my words reach at least one person, please look at what is being done, what you are being asked to be involved in. The magnitude of the crimes you are being asked to commit.

My heart is with you and those who care about you, I hope you do what is right.

Yochanan

There really doesn't seem much point in wasting my time answering your rhetoric! You are now bearing a worrying resemblece to the fanatics who attempt to take my life or that of others on a daily basis..so i'll just treat you as a fanatic and ignore your babbling until which time as you pose a more seious threat at which point I will deal with it within ROE and International Law! Until then you are just another boring and slightly irritating strudent!

That’s rich, someone who has admittedly been involved in every terrorist war Britain has undertaken in the last twenty years is calling me a fanatic. If you have been to Iraq then it is you who should be dealt with under International Law.

But rather than just your generalisations, perhaps you could point out to me where I have been ‘fanatical’.

Dear "yochanan" (not a 4 X 2 are you?):

So, "resistance fighter" are you? What exactly, one wonders, are you fighting to resist other than the urge to touch yourself in front of the mirror?

As a former denizen of these hallowed halls put it (having an uncanny grasp of the vernacualr of the peasantry)...

"Thin out you boring prong".

Failing that, mods please mag to grid this grade-A coprolite nugget as the ozone layer is being depleted at a rapid rate due to his (her/its?) copius gass-passing!

I would die fighting against the Royal Family and for a Republic and a more equal society, just point me to the nearest recruiter.

Two words, f@#k off.

I'm done here.

My brother, among others I love, has come back from Iraq, and the thing which had the biggest impact on him, was being thanked by an Iraqi, for being there.

Should we have left Saddam Hussein to carry on slaughtering his people?
Should we ignore the Sunni and the Shia killing each other?
Maybe it would be easier, but it wouldn't make it right.
Islam is supposed to be a religion of peace, but the Imams twist it into something sickening in their own quest for power and personal glory. And the endemic illiteracy in the country means that people take their word for it, that that is what the Qu'ran says.

We have a position of responsibility in this world, and we save a hell of a lot more lives than we take. We do not run around other countries randomly shooting down innocent civilians - ROE prevents that. (I can't speak for the Americans there)
There are always going to be casualties, but we do everything in our power to make sure there are as few as possible.
Nearly all of the civilians taken onto our hospital ships so far have been injured in RTAs with other civilians, not at our hands.

Yochanan..............Every one in the Forces is a volunteer and they should know exactly what they might be called to do and the risk involved. Seeing Men Women & Children that have been tortured to death during ethnic cleaning is one of the thing you have to face and deal with, and fighting to protect them is a part of your task, are you saying that that they should not get involved. To some one that has never served or done this work has know idea of what troops do, and just chant the popular mantra of troops out and baby killers.

SO19 wrote:

I would die fighting against the Royal Family and for a Republic and a more equal society, just point me to the nearest recruiter.

Two words, f@#k off.

I'm done here.

What he said.

Some of the stuff you have said is unbeleivable, now get the f@#k off this forum.

Fellas, fellas, never heard the expression 'give them enough rope...'? And don't tell him to f@#k off, because a) come see the violence inherent in the system! and b) I want to have some fun here.

@yochanan

First off:

yochanan wrote:

sarastro wrote:Go with a wee bit of Socratic debate shall we?

Socratic, Platonic, a bit of Nietzsche, if you wish, but I fear others on these boards may have difficulty with the subject judging from the standard of their posts thus far.

Unfortunately for you, Socratic debate & 'Platonic' debate are the same thing, it was Plato's writing that contained the Socratic Dialogues...and Nietzsche, well, he didn't coin a form of debate. If you think simply naming philosophers denotes intelligent thought, might I suggest a titular stint on The Weakest Link? Also, somewhat rich to accuse others of basing evidence on a 'quick Google search' when you are waving your first from the University of Wikipedia (formerly Internet Polytechnic) around.

Don't try and fake it with me laddie, you'll lose.

I could foresee of situations where war would be justified, but illegally invading and occupying lands on false pretences and then proceeding to slaughter untold numbers of civilians and then polluting a region with DU; that would not be justified.

I'll address justification shortly. First, I want to be clear on this: you can forsee situations where war would be justified, thus you must see justification for maintaining military forces. Correct?

Second:

"But ultimately the British attacked Iraq, not because of WMDs or a supposed threat Iraq posed, but for oil."
"the reasons for the attack and takeover of Iraq? (Oil, Big Business, Regional Hegemony, et cetera)"
"I was of the understanding that if a war is illegal, as the one in Iraq unquestionably is..."
"...now acted to end the illegal occupation..."
"If you have been to Iraq then it is you who should be dealt with under International Law."

Two questions directed at your arguments.

One, sorry Harry, this includes yours as well; you talk about "International Law", and your arguments claim that the invasion of Iraq was illegal. Could you please show me the law they were breaking? Or could you please give me an example of this International Law? Could you please show me the constitution, edict or legal framework which comprises it? Could you show me the universal directive that compels all nations around the globe to adhere to it?

Two, you posit that the US/UK invaded Iraq for oil & big business. If this is true, why did the US/UK enforce and push the UN to institute severe trade sanctions on Iraq for much of the 1990's and up to the invasion in 2003? Saddam was quite willing to sell his oil to anyone, as the 1980's demonstrated. Transnational corporations (TNC's) regularly do business in countries which are strategically neutral, or even strategic enemies of, their UK/US base; for example, Russia, China, even Iran - foreign direct investement in Iran has a large number of British interests. Many blocks to particularly US corporations are from national governments themselves running protectionist policies; ie some aspects of Iranian industry, Venezuala under Chavez.

Furthermore, the US government in particular has a long list of limitations on countries, or national industries, which US TNC's can operate in; Cuba's oil potential is a prime example. US TNC's are the only ones with the interest and technology to do it, indications are that Cuba would welcome this as they desperately need the money, but the US govt. forbids it. If the US is so desperate for oil, why not simply relax trade restrictions? It is vastly cheaper, vastly less controversial, and carries vastly less political risk.

Please demonstrate why the US govt. would have chosen war as a preferable solution?

Hyperlithe wrote: Should we have left Saddam Hussein to carry on slaughtering his people?

Excuse me Hyperlithe, you appear to not have a full understanding of the region. I refer you attention to the Halabja Massacre, Saddam Hussein gassed his own people, this resulted in an increase in western support. And let’s not forget where he got that gas from.

Or how about the 500,000 to 1,000,000 who died under Sanctions between 1991 and 2003. Technically maintained by the UN; in reality supported virtually solely by Britain and US. This was responsible for far more people than Saddam ever killed.

Or lets discuss the 655,000 people allegedly killed in Iraq as a direct result of Britain and American aggression.

The historical facts are as follows, Saddam was put in and supported by the US and Britain, Saddam Gassed his own people, again with support from the US and Britain. Saddam only became a problem when he threatened Western Hegemony in the region. Up until that point ‘we’ were happy to support him with technology and arms.

It cannot be disputed that Britain and the US have been directly responsible for far more death and destruction that Saddam ever was. Saddam never used to DU, the US and Britain have polluted the whole region with the stuff. Just look at the pictures of the deformed babies who are victims of the toxic waste, which is a war crime to use by the way, as it is an indiscriminate weapon. It’s not just Iraqis who are getting poisoned by this stuff, look at the numbers ill, dead and dying from the assault of 1991.

If you want to kill and die in some desert for a cause you don’t fully understand, so be it. Just don’t expect any sympathy when an Iraqi actually stands up for themselves.

Hyperlithe wrote: Should we ignore the Sunni and the Shia killing each other?

We should perhaps stop carrying out ‘special operations’ i.e. blowing up schools and Mosques and them blaming it on one group to get them fighting each other. Divide and rule, anyone who’s heard of the FRU and their involvement in NI will be aware of what I am talking about.

Hyperlithe wrote: My brother, among others I love, has come back from Iraq, and the thing which had the biggest impact on him, was being thanked by an Iraqi, for being there.

One Iraqi thanked him, shame he inst fluent in Arabic maybe he would have heard the 1000s marching in to street telling him to go home, or maybe he would have heard the countless others telling him to go home.

Hyperlithe wrote: We have a position of responsibility in this world, and we save a hell of a lot more lives than we take

That is not true at all, something I would expect from someone who gets their ‘news’ from Mr Murdoch. Britain has been directly responsible for the Killing of 4.03-5.7 million people since the end of World War II, and has been indirectly responsible for the deaths of 8.65-13.47 million people since the Sixties.

Britain has continued to support dictators and tyrants the world over, in fact, contrary to the what you may read in The Sun, rather than a defender of freedom and democracy, Britain has continually stifled democratic movements the world over, from Iran to Indonesia. I am happy to cite any figures or facts you may take issue with.

Hyperlithe wrote: There are always going to be casualties, but we do everything in our power to make sure there are as few as possible.

Ohh that is really rich, you break into someone’s house with a mechanized force of thousands and all the latest killing machines, a trained contingent of Pavlovian killers, but you didn’t mean to kill anyone.

Please, look at what you are doing, who you are doing it for, you are killing innocents, no matter how innocent you believe your actions to be, you must agree that you are not as innocent as the children who have had their lives taken away, or the unborn babies who risk being deformed by the Depleted Uranium munitions you are polluting the country with. Please I beg all sentient human beings, stop what you are doing; one less soldier in Iraq is one less baby’s blood on your hands. I know this will reach someone, juts sop it now, stop the killings, they are groups that can help you, PM me if you need any advice on objecting to this terrorist war.

My heart is with you all, even those who want to rip it out, my thoughts of with you the most.

Yocahanan x

Well, that's nice mate, but instead of the usual rhetoric and increasingly dodgy grasp of facts, how about you address the hard questions eh?

Like the ones I posted above, which you just ignored.

Also: Since you have a sensible disregard for biased sources of evidence (ie Mr Murdoch), you will clearly be happy to start providing unbiased, empirical sources for the various facts you are claiming? Let's start with those numbers of people killed directly/indirectly by the UK, or the factual basis for your claim that coalition soldiers are bombing civilians to forment sectarian war.

Oh, and mind explaining how causing that sectarian war & reducing security in Iraq aids the profits of oil companies & big business who we invaded for in the first place?