harvey19 Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Does that somehow magically change the fact that they get things done by killing people and threatening to kill people? This is the third time today you've made a strawman with which to attack me, in the interests of a healthy discussion, please try in future to argue against what I've written instead of other things that I haven't said. I was trying to reinforce Newboys point that the army kills in defence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingjimmy Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 I was trying to reinforce Newboys point that the army kills in defence. I'm sure that the army does kill in defense. However that is not what newboy said, he said that the army kills only in defense. A very different claim, a claim that one example from a recent mild conflict right on our doorstep does very little to help prove. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 I'm sure that the army does kill in defense. However that is not what newboy said, he said that the army kills only in defense. A very different claim, a claim that one example from a recent mild conflict right on our doorstep does very little to help prove. The mild conflict resulted in the deaths and maiming of many soldiers and civilians and that is why my point was relevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 I was called up for service in HM Forces at the age of twenty. Did two years and did me a lot of good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newboy2011 Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Thats roughly when i joined 2002 Aye am getting old fast Rusty knees an if by magic my beer belly appears overnite I blame it on the few years i spent in Osnabruck i started in minden, like sheffield but grim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 i started in minden, like sheffield but grim. You should have seen Scheune !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newboy2011 Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 I'm sure that the army does kill in defense. However that is not what newboy said, he said that the army kills only in defense. A very different claim, a claim that one example from a recent mild conflict right on our doorstep does very little to help prove. you on about ireland now? the enemy in that toilet were and are murderers. the issue with soldiers killing over in that foul and vile toilet are a matter of public record. the problem is the enemy were not accountable for its actions.the individual soldiers were. so the enemy still keep wanting the rules changed. an individual soldier is not the army. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newboy2011 Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 I would ask if you were joking again but I know better now. Wow, seriously. Do you read any newspapers? have you ever learned any British history? On current evidence I'm going to have to assume the answer to both questions is 'no'. The education system has truly failed you. history? recent? or past? pre ww2? victorian? what? make a point. you see the army would rather loose a soldier than cause an unjustifiable death. even with the order weapons free, soldiers have rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newboy2011 Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 You should have seen Scheune !! hanover and berlin in 4 years in germany/minden. we were always on 4 hours standby. then warminster dover cyprus. then winchester instructing. back to warminster school of infantry instructing. bulford weeton. and of course operational tours. it was ace. best and worst times. and all that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingjimmy Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 history? recent? or past? pre ww2? victorian? what? make a point. you see the army would rather loose a soldier than cause an unjustifiable death. even with the order weapons free, soldiers have rules. Yet more ridiculous strawman arguments, how surprising. I've said nothing about justifiable or not, and I have not implied that they kill indiscriminately. I'm well aware that the vast majority of our soldiers stick to the rules laid down in various international treaties, and thankful for it. That doesn't change the fact that their job is to kill people and provide a threat of killing people. That is why the army exists. Without that function it would serve very little purpose, and would be useless for defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.