Cops investigate Ibrox soldiers

[Blue Moon 1,362]

That kinda depends on how you define 'supporting' your country.

Some people think that spending billions of pounds we don't have in order to fight a pointless war we don't understand and which we can't win whilst wasting thousands of lives doing so is actually damaging to our country.

 

I'd also be keen to know who it is that's denying you your right to an opinion. Let me know and i'll have a word with them.

 

Arrogant!!!!

[The Real PapaBear 0]

Arrogant!!!!

 

really? In what way?

[simplythebest 0]

I don't think you would be banned, you know. Many people would probably put their names to the 'agree' box under such a post for the majority opinion in the country is plainly to back the services.

 

What I don't think I could agree to is the leap you make from people having some issues over the armed forces = trying to diminish them. It's that kind of 'all or nothing' argument that doesn't make sense to me: 'either you fully back me or you're a treacherous swine, and quite possibly

 

Thing is most people's issues with the armed forces seems to be over the politics of the wars and it's a fact that the politicians and not them make those type of decisions. Yes I know you made the point that no-one is forced to join the army but we need an army, i'm sure even the most anti-war type person must accept that. So once someone is joined up i'd imagine it's very very difficult for them to suddenly start picking and choosing what orders they obey and don't based on some uncertainty over the rights and wrongs of war.

 

Can't claim to know much about the class structure but I don't think admiration of the troops is in any way influenced by that sort of thing. As for the Sun, I don't like them either but these guys deserve hero worship imo, if the Sun join in so be it.

 

It's the same with white poppy stuff (i know about this because I have an older half sibling who really is ultra leftist), why can the admiration of bravery and service and tributes to those that die not be made totally separate from the politics of war? I just can't understand it.

 

You maybe aren't trying to diminish them Andy but i'm sure you'd accept a few other posts in this thread have at least appeared that way. You can have a problem with rogue soldiers sure and you do get them, you get rogue everything though. Beyond that I cannot understand how anyone couldn't at least respect and admire what these guys do.

[The Real PapaBear 0]

I'm getting kind of fed up with this, because I don't think you have any intention of discussing the subject seriously. You have shown that you have an annoying trait of dropping a statement designed to illicit a reaction from someone and when they raise a point you deflect from having to answer your original statement.

 

You are confused between making a point in a reasoned argument, all of which I address, and making statement a priori, based on no more than your personal prejudice and unfounded opinion. I'm certainly not going to address each of those.

 

Now I was thinking along the lines of what we have in society at the moment whereby we pick a day, and for instance, call it "secretaries day" and we recognize their contributions. I would have thought that the point was pretty obvious and that the point you had to answer to was why you denigrated the status of the contributions given by the armed forces by writing this sentence : "All of these jobs are far more valuable to society than that of a soldier and far more deserving of recognition."

 

In what way is that statement denigrating the armed services? The work of a cancer nurse, something that the vast majority of us will have some experience of unfortunately, is far, far more valuable to society than that of a squaddie. Not all jobs are of equal value - which is presumably why you chose the ludicrous example of "secretaries day".

 

Can you not see how disturbing such a statement is to many people?

 

You clearly can't see how your beatification of the military is disturbing to others.

 

Maybe it might just be policy if you checked with the professions you purport to support to see if they would want such a celebration as you propose.

 

And what was the celebration I proposed, exactly?

 

If you are prepared to answer directly why you feel the troops, in your opinion, are not worthy of such acclimation then please lay it out. If you are not, don't bother answering. Thank you.

 

And so we come full circle and you've had your fingers in your ears all the way round. I have told you that imho there are other professions far more worthy of celebrating than soldiers, professions which are of greater value and contribute far more to society. You, otoh, have not made any case as to why the armed forces are deserving of their own day other than to claim that somehow they allow all the other professions to go about their business. Yet, when pressed for any evidence of this, you could give none.

 

The only reason, as far as i can see, that we celebrate our own special little AFD is to wind up Timothy. And that really is denigrating and demeaning to the armed forces.

[The Real PapaBear 0]

Beyond that I cannot understand how anyone couldn't at least respect and admire what these guys do.

 

There is a world of difference between respecting what these guys do and believing that they are somehow more deserving than many other professions and that we should hold military parades at Ibrox.

[barca72 440]

Originally Posted by barca72

I'm getting kind of fed up with this, because I don't think you have any intention of discussing the subject seriously. You have shown that you have an annoying trait of dropping a statement designed to illicit a reaction from someone and when they raise a point you deflect from having to answer your original statement.

You are confused between making a point in a reasoned argument, all of which I address, and making statement a priori, based on no more than your personal prejudice and unfounded opinion. I'm certainly not going to address each of those.

 

Deflection again.

 

 

Originally Posted by barca72

Now I was thinking along the lines of what we have in society at the moment whereby we pick a day, and for instance, call it "secretaries day" and we recognize their contributions. I would have thought that the point was pretty obvious and that the point you had to answer to was why you denigrated the status of the contributions given by the armed forces by writing this sentence : "All of these jobs are far more valuable to society than that of a soldier and far more deserving of recognition."

In what way is that statement denigrating the armed services? The work of a cancer nurse, something that the vast majority of us will have some experience of unfortunately, is far, far more valuable to society than that of a squaddie. Not all jobs are of equal value - which is presumably why you chose the ludicrous example of "secretaries day".

 

To say that a person is less valued in society and is less deserving of recognition in society, is puzzling to you as to why it is denigrating to that person? Really? To compare and base a person's worth to society based on the job they do is a bit ridiculous, but I'll let you argue with yourself on that one. As ludicrous as it may seem, there are many businesses that exist day to day based on the work of the "secretary".

 

Originally Posted by barca72

Can you not see how disturbing such a statement is to many people?

You clearly can't see how your beatification of the military is disturbing to others.

 

You have not answered the question but instead have deflected to another subjective statement.

 

 

Originally Posted by barca72

Maybe it might just be policy if you checked with the professions you purport to support to see if they would want such a celebration as you propose.

And what was the celebration I proposed, exactly?

 

"alternatively, we could drop this display of militaristic jingoism entirely and replace it with something worthwhile. Why not have a particular day set aside ever season where we celebrate one particular branch of public sector workers - not just soldiers. We could have nurses one year, carers who work in old people's homes the next year, firemen the year after that. All of these jobs are far more valuable to society than that of a soldier and far more deserving of recognition."

 

This was your suggestion from your initial post. You tell me exactly what form your celebration would take. Assuming of course that you have determined that each of the professions named would welcome your particular form of celebration day.

 

 

Originally Posted by barca72

If you are prepared to answer directly why you feel the troops, in your opinion, are not worthy of such acclimation then please lay it out. If you are not, don't bother answering. Thank you.

And so we come full circle and you've had your fingers in your ears all the way round. I have told you that imho there are other professions far more worthy of celebrating than soldiers, professions which are of greater value and contribute far more to society. You, otoh, have not made any case as to why the armed forces are deserving of their own day other than to claim that somehow they allow all the other professions to go about their business. Yet, when pressed for any evidence of this, you could give none.

 

The only reason, as far as i can see, that we celebrate our own special little AFD is to wind up Timothy. And that really is denigrating and demeaning to the armed forces.

 

You have stated that in your opinion there are other professions far more worthy of celebrating and of greater value to society than the humble soldier. You have not explained why you think this is. You seem oblivious to the fact that other people would not and do not agree with you. I have told you that I believe we have the societies we have because a strong and well equipped, and well trained military afford us the freedom to shape our societies to our own taste. This includes giving you the right to hold opinions which appear to be contrary to the majority. You accuse me of not providing evidence to back this up. As previously stated, ask the people of Ulster if the military did a worthwhile job in protecting them against the IRA. Ask the people of the Falklands if they are glad Thatcher sent in the military. There are many other instances where the military has stood strong. You are good on Google, look them up. As good a job as the nurses, firemen and other professions do, I doubt it would do us any good to ask them to man the front lines in a time of conflict. Before you spout any Utopian pish about there not being a need for wars, tell that to the other guys. You know the ones who fly airplanes into buildings, who blow up train stations in London, the ones who drive trucks into airport terminals in Glasgow. I'm pretty sure that I have made a case for the need for the military. No beatification necessary, just the basics.

As far as our AFD is concerned, the forces were invited to Ibrox and they accepted, willingly. Do you think that the Armed Forces Command would allow that to happen if they thought the forces were being denigrated or demeaned? I would suggest that only someone with your mindset would classify AFD as a windup for Timothy rather than a chance for a large gathering of the populace to willingly show their appreciation to the humble squaddies. Timothy can have his own AFD if he so desires, more power to him.

However, if you still feel offended by this celebration at half-time at Ibrox, may I suggest that you retire to the pie and bovril stand for the duration.

[andy steel 0]

Thing is most people's issues with the armed forces seems to be over the politics of the wars and it's a fact that the politicians and not them make those type of decisions. Yes I know you made the point that no-one is forced to join the army but we need an army, i'm sure even the most anti-war type person must accept that. So once someone is joined up i'd imagine it's very very difficult for them to suddenly start picking and choosing what orders they obey and don't based on some uncertainty over the rights and wrongs of war.

 

Can't claim to know much about the class structure but I don't think admiration of the troops is in any way influenced by that sort of thing. As for the Sun, I don't like them either but these guys deserve hero worship imo, if the Sun join in so be it.

 

It's the same with white poppy stuff (i know about this because I have an older half sibling who really is ultra leftist), why can the admiration of bravery and service and tributes to those that die not be made totally separate from the politics of war? I just can't understand it.

 

You maybe aren't trying to diminish them Andy but i'm sure you'd accept a few other posts in this thread have at least appeared that way. You can have a problem with rogue soldiers sure and you do get them, you get rogue everything though. Beyond that I cannot understand how anyone couldn't at least respect and admire what these guys do.

 

Interesting points & well worth discussing. As you say, once you sign your papers you are in and that's that, there's no way anyone can expect individual soldiers to pick & choose their battles. Maybe it would be better if they could! It's just that the equation which runs 'I have joined up, therefore I no longer bear any responsibility for these actions (wars)' doesn't sit right. I agree that's how it is, and that we must have armies, but it's not the 15th century...having said that, a job is a job, you can't eat principles and an empty belly is a surefire motivator.

 

As to class I too am not up to date but I do know that as recently as the last 5 years the highest a state educated soldier could hope to get is iirc staff sgt; maybe that's changed. To judge from the guys we see on the box, it hasn't & again, an army which recruits grunts from the poorest and least advantaged then sets them to fight under an officer class which looks suspiciously like the one Henry IV would have recognised leaves me itchy.

 

White poppies do seem to me to a slight cop out, but in all honesty its a tiny minority who wear them and they don't bother me especially...at least they are showing some respect.

 

The last point you make is the most interesting one to me, because I think it shows a certain knee-jerk reaction to any perceived criticism of the services. Anything less than complete adulation is immediately looked on with grave suspicion, and I don't think that's healthy. Look at this example from this thread, where Barca72 tells TRPB:

 

You seem oblivious to the fact that other people would not and do not agree with you.

 

This is undeniably true. It is not, however, a reason why someone else should be silent. There has to be room for people to mistrust official bodies, whether they be the BBC or the Army, without cries of 'burn the witch' going up. And not even to mistrust them, but even to hold other groups up to comparison, is even being seen as belittling in the context of this thread.

 

I dunno, maybe to sum up it could be respect yes, admire, well sometimes, but immunity from criticism? Not for me.

[The Real PapaBear 0]

Originally Posted by barca72

I'm getting kind of fed up with this, .

.. the duration.

 

tell you what mate; you do me the common courtesyy of formatting your post properly and I'll respond to it.

[BrahimHemdani 1]

Don't agree with the inference that we shouldn't have these sort if celebrations because some may misunderstand the reasoning for hosting such an offence.

 

A Freudian slip perhaps?

[BrahimHemdani 1]

No, it came about because Rangers fans were singing about Terrorist Organisations and dead republican 'martyrs' and the soldiers joined in and starting singing the songs too.

 

If the soldiers started singing Blue Sea of Ibrox, then there would no issue regarding soldiers and 'sectarian' singing.

 

As for the reference to Celtic, I believe the phrase is 'fk them'.

 

I have zero interest in them, their results, their fans or their causes. We can't justify our fans misdemeanours or short comings by saying 'wit aboot thaym'.

 

100% spot on, sir.