Should there now be another think?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/arti cle-1196946/He-led-Lieutenant-Colonel-killed-A fghanistan-highest-ranking-British-casualty-Fa lklands.html

"Be the best at school - then you won't have to join the army!"

I wonder what the family of the late Lieutenant Colonel Rupert Thorneloe, would think of this quote by jake-the-peg?

But I didn't really want to use this question by having a dig at jake, but it infuriates me every time he makes such statements.

No firstly I want to convey my condolences to Rupert's family at their time of great loss, just as I also want to convey my sympathies to Trooper Joshua Hammond's family, Joshua also died in the blast on Wednesday.

What is highlighted from these two sad and unnecessary deaths that our troops are fighting not only with one hand tied behind their backs but also with outdated and inferior equipment. Perhaps now that a most senior officer has been killed riding in one of these vehicles, something may get done. Why with all the use of the technical knowledge and expertise that we possess today, can't a vehicle be equipped with devises that seek out these home made bombs before men and vehicle approach them?

Interesting to note however that now a friend of Prince Charles has been killed, he will be writing personally to the family of his late friend, why didn't he do this for the families of the 170 lives that went before the Lieutenant Colonel, after all wasn't all these also fighting in the name of the Prince's Mother.

Who says there isn't a class structure in this country, even into death?

[anotheoldgit]

That would be of no use NACDGM, they are experts at blowing up their own.

[jake-the-peg]

There is a huge ethical difference between someone who joins an Army to fight in a war that he understands and believes in and someone who joins up because he has no better option.

The first, those who joined up to fight in WWII, those who fought Franco knew what they were fighting for.

The second abdicated their responsibility to make a personal ethical judgement and basically agreed to go off and kill whoever they were told to by some buch of politicians.

And that comes out in the utter hypocracy of those who do not support the war while talking up the "bravery of our boys"

How is it that a soldier can be a Hero in a war he you doesn't believe in?

Because he abdicated the responsibility to decide

He took the Neurenberg defense

"Please Sir I was only following orders"

[Gromit]

Old Jug Ears is a term of affection AOG.

If it is good enough for The Times, it is good enough for me...

"Then Old Jug-Ears parped and the whole thing was called off. "

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/colum nists/guest_contributors/article6514257.ece

By the way, did you notice what I did up there. Because it was someone else's quote, I italicised it and put it in quotation marks.

[rov1200]

I think firstly they should examine the intelligence of the people back home who are putting our troops under threat for no possible benefit whatever for the UK. They have no oil. Why not help Britain's underclass instead?

[jake-the-peg]

You may ask "Given that opinion how could we have an army? We can't simply ask for volunteers the moment there is trouble!"

That is true - but that's not the problem

If the remit of the Armed forces were simply to defend this country there would be no ethical problem. These recruits could join up safe in the knowledge that they would only be called to fight in the preservation of the country

But there's more - there's the support of British interests and those are the weasle words that cause all the trouble

[rov1200]

Your point about devices to detect bombs is a good one and maybe not enough has been done in this direction.

As a suggestion what about those thermal devices that operate from above. To plant a bomb needs a hole to be dug. We can detect recent earth disturbances can't we?

[jake-the-peg]

I agree Rov

The best way we could help them is to have a constitution that only permits the use of our armed forces in defense of the nation.

The we can cancel spending all that money on aircraft carriers

How do you defend your country with an Aircraft carrier thousands of miles away?

And we can spend the money on education.

[paraffin]

God, jake, I've never heard such utter piffle in my natural!

"abdicated their responsibility to make a personal ethical judgement."

What planet are you on? Definitely not mine!

How many soldiers / military personnel have you ever known personally? You shouldn't run out of fingers to answer (of only one hand, too!).

Potential recruits, including the "officer class", don't sit around a roaring log fire in a conspiratorial huddle having cosy little ideological exchanges on the merits and/or ramifications of taking the Queen's shilling.

They join up through a sense of loyalty, pride and duty to their country. It's called patriotism. You should try it sometime, if you can get your head out of your an*l passage long enough to enter the real world.

[NACDGM]

Jake has never been in the real world to him black is good and white is bad

[123everton]

No

[Oneeyedvic]

Actually NCDGM - if you look at the debates that take place on Answerbank you will find that Jake and others who AOG and his ilk will call 'liberal lefties' actually realise that there is a lot of grey - it is the opposite which I find true.

The typical response on this post has been: army = our boys = must be good.

There is never a question on whether or not they are doing the right thing (morally or legally) and if you dare question them you are accused of being unpatriotic.

AOG - it always amazes me at how riled you get at insults - but then you seem to deliberately insult people yourself.

As an example in this post you have accused the Sherman of having imaginary friends and of JNO of having a duplicate account.

Incidentally, I have used several quotations and not agreed with them.

And since you used the quotation in your 'question' can I assume that you agree with it?

[anotheoldgit]

Old Jug Ears is a term of affection AOG

Perhaps not to Prince Charles me thinks, and that is what is important.

How can an outright personal insult be a term of affection?

Maybe we should see a photo of yourself, then we could perhaps make up terms of affection for you.

If it is good enough for The Times, it is good enough for me..

It is all dependent on how high you set your own personal standards Gromit.

[Gromit]

AOG

why didn't he (Prince Charles) do this for the families of the 170 lives that went before the Lieutenant Colonel, after all wasn't all these also fighting in the name of the Prince's Mother.

It is interesting that you question the probity of the Prince and call into question his remorse at other soldiers dying. That is a lot more disrespectful than referring to him asOld Jug Ears.

The use of the term Old Jug Ears for Charles is fairly widespread in the media, I didn't have to look too far for other examples.

Guardian:
Not according to the Prince of Wales, it's not. For today old jug-ears showed blatant disrespect for Britain's finest old fella...

The Independent:
John Bruton telling Prince Charles at a banquet in Dublin Castle that the visit of Old Jug Ears...

The Times
Plus the issue is not about Old Jug Ears having his say...

New Statesman
Dear old jug-ears. He does b*gger up, but I adore the fool, whatever

FYI

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-3 16572/Prince-Charles-urged-pin-ears.html

[Gromit]

Nearly forgot the Daily Mail

Charles is merely being affectionate, and has probably been called Jug Ears in his time.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1120 722/LIZ-JONES-I-8217-ve-lived-white-man-racism -DNA.html

[sherminator]

Im also the sherman! You really do astound me aog
firstly you think my mate is imaginary bt then still wont insult him because he is an imaginary marine????? that is priceless, absolutely hilarious.

Second you come on here acting all high and mighty but must have a very short memory!
you dont agree with throwing playground insults around?......
One of your posts earlier this year was along the lines of "should i be allowed to say that shawn wright phillips looks like a monkey because he actually does" are you really really serious or are you as I have suspected all along an almost professional troll on this site?