The mother of the soldier who is being allowed to freak out on air.

[danny la rouge]

Should we blame the class system, the politicians or the global economy or a gang of fundamentalists who have created a hellish society in Afghanistan?

Well, we aren't at war with Afghanistan because there used to be a Hellish society there. If that helps you narrow things down any.

 

[Corax]

Where did she say that?

Implied by the hysterical front pages IMO. TBF, that's actually the Sun's fault, not the grieving mother's.

 

[Spion]

I wouldn't campaign to give UK troops more equipment when dozens of Afghans are getting killed for every one of them already. I mean, why should British troops gain greater impunity than they already have in all this? They shouldn't be there. End of story.

 

[Beanburger]

I wouldn't campaign to give UK troops more equipment when dozens of Afghans are getting killed for every one of them already.

This is another good point. Only in this weird modern world would we be complaining about the kind of casualty ratio that we're seeing in Afghanistan. By my rough calculations, we're losing 1 soldier every fortnight. That's an insanely low casualty rate for a war.

 

[Ralph Masters]

The fewer casualties there are, the more time the press has to dig shit, if there were more deaths they'd have more stories and a clearer line. What do New Corporation want? an end to the war, or a new government that let's them rule the roost?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I wouldn't campaign to give UK troops more equipment when dozens of Afghans are getting killed for every one of them already. I mean, why should British troops gain greater impunity than they already have in all this? They shouldn't be there. End of story.

Agreed. I don't support British troops in what they do because I think what they are doing is wrong. That's a position that certain old soldiers on here cannot accept.

 

[ymu]

I wouldn't campaign to give UK troops more equipment when dozens of Afghans are getting killed for every one of them already. I mean, why should British troops gain greater impunity than they already have in all this? They shouldn't be there. End of story.

I don't think they should be there either, but if they are they should have adequate protective equipment. These kids did not make the decision to go there and they do not get to decide when to come home. And scared soldiers don't make civilians any safer anyway, not by a long chalk.

It's not even like this is news. It just happens to be a grieving mother repeating the complaint that's been all over the newspapers for months now, coming from squaddies and generals alike. Soldiers lacking basic body armour, vehicles with inadequate armour, travelling by road due to a lack of helicopters ... it's not right, and I'm not going to start pretending that it is just because The Sun happens to be involved. If the government wants this war they can pay for it with politically inconvenient taxes. If they choose to pay for it in soldiers' lives instead, then that needs to be made even more politically inconvenient. IMO, obv.

 

[smokedout]

Yes. She has to face the fact that her son is dead because HE decided to go to war.

no, he decided to join the army, i dont imagine he had much say over the war in afghanistan

 

[Beanburger]

no, he decided to join the army, i dont imagine he had much say over the war in afghanistan

Yeah, I mean an army going to war. Bet he never expected that!

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I don't think they should be there either, but if they are they should have adequate protective equipment. These kids did not make the decision to go there and they do not get to decide when to come home. And scared soldiers don't make civilians any safer anyway, not by a long chalk.

It is precisely because of their technological superiority that the armies of the likes of the UK and US can continue in constant war somewhere in the world against much less well-armed opponents. If they weren't so well protected, more would die, and this kind of disgusting invasion would not be so easily ordered.

 

[MikeMcc]

Used? - it's not like Gordo wasn't using the idea of handwriting letters as a cynical spinmeistered attempt to make it appear as though he actually has a personality.

Whatever PR genius came up with that concept? - it was guaranteed to fail - at the point where the flow of bodies overtook his availability to scrawl notes (using a thick felt tipped pen so he didn't have to put much on each small piece of Basildon Bond).

She's got every right to be aggrieved, especially when he deigned to phone up and pour out a load of platitudes - although the word "sorry" was used throughout the call, it was apparently always in the context of "I'm sorry that you felt that this was inappropriate" (e.g. not an apology) as opposed to "I'm sorry that my desire to appear like a Statesman isn't backed up by any understanding of funding the armed forces properly so I' was culpable in the death of your son and I'm deeply sorry" (an apology).

As much as I'd love to slag off Gordon Brown, it seems every PM has produced hand written letters of condolance. I'm pretty sure he didn't set out to be an insensitive arse. The problem was that it wasn't checked before it went out.

The Scum are pretty cynically using this poor lady.

 

[smokedout]

Yeah, I mean an army going to war. Bet he never expected that!

perhaps he trusted the government not to send him into a pointless, unwinnable shambles

 

[danny la rouge]

Yeah, I mean an army going to war. Bet he never expected that!

The armed forces recruit kids from schools. They organise "fun days" at my daughters school for S1s. That's 11 and 12-year-olds. Learning how fun being in the forces is. That is seems like a good option to some kids in some areas is hardy surprising.

Try to focus on those actually responsible, not this 20-year-old and his mother.

 

[Beanburger]

perhaps he trusted the government not to send him into a pointless, unwinnable shambles

Well that's not very bright. I guess we could blame the government for that as well though - he'd never have joined up if history was taught properly in schools.

 

[smokedout]

Well that's not very bright. I guess we could blame the government for that as well though - he'd never have joined up if history was taught properly in schools.

your a bit of a prick arent you

 

[Beanburger]

The armed forces recruit kids from schools. They organise "fun days" at my daughters school for S1s. That's 11 and 12-year-olds. Learning how fun being in the forces is. That is seems like a good option to some kids in some areas is hardy surprising.

I agree there's reasons why kids are dumb enough to see the army as a good career choice. But even allowing for porpaganda and poor education, it's not rocket science to work out that if you join the army, you stand a greatly increased risk of being blown up or shot.

Try to focus on those actually responsible, not this 20-year-old and his mother.

I'm sorry, I don't see it in such simplistic terms. I don't agree with the army's involvement in Afghanistan, but nor do I blame the army and the government if volunteer soldiers get killed. It's war. People die. If you join the army, you should kinda expect that. And for a war, the casualty rate is ridiculously low. It's hardly Vietnam. Tragic though every death is, and much as I feel compassion for anyone affected by a death, there's really not much to complain about.

 

[Beanburger]

your a bit of a prick arent you

Can't beat a good rational discussion.

 

[Spion]

I don't think they should be there either, but if they are they should have adequate protective equipment. These kids did not make the decision to go there and they do not get to decide when to come home.

Sure, but they need to start making some decisions. There needs to be union organisation in the forces, refusing to follow orders, refusing to fight.

Young men in the armies of developed countries have done this before. And they can do it again. But these days the idea needs to become popularised, diseminated before w/c lads can even start to take some control over what they are doing out there.

 

[danny la rouge]

I'm sorry, I don't see it in such simplistic terms. I don't agree with the army's involvement in Afghanistan, but nor do I blame the army and the government if volunteer soldiers get killed. It's war. People die. If you join the army, you should kinda expect that. And for a war, the casualty rate is ridiculously low. It's hardly Vietnam. Tragic though every death is, and much as I feel compassion for anyone affected by a death, there's really not much to complain about.

I don't think it's simplistic to follow the chain of responsibility to where it originates. Squaddies don't declare wars, politicians do. The people on this thread calling this grieving mother and her dead son "pricks" have picked the wrong targets. They are like the person who looks at the finger pointing at the moon, instead of looking at the moon.

 

[kabbes]

You used a Bruce Lee quote in an argument! You win!

 

[Spion]

You used a Bruce Lee quote in an argument! You win!

Yeah, right. Where's Bruce now then?

 

[Beanburger]

I don't think it's simplistic to follow the chain of responsibility to where it originates.

It is if you ignore everything else along the way. Sure, politicians chose to involve us in Afghanistan. But I know that armies get sent to war, which is why I never chose to join the army.

Squaddies don't declare wars, politicians do

And that doesn't strike you as simplistic? Yeah, I agree that the government need to shoulder their share of the responsibility, but they are not to blame for volunteer soldiers getting killed.

There people on this thread calling this grieving mother and her dead son "pricks" have picked the wrong targets

I haven't called 'em names. I don't agree with the mother's view, but I understand why she holds it and respect her right to express it.

 

[The Black Hand]

I don't think it's simplistic to follow the chain of responsibility to where it originates. Squaddies don't declare wars, politicians do. The people on this thread calling this grieving mother and her dead son "pricks" have picked the wrong targets. They are like the person who looks at the finger pointing at the moon, instead of looking at the moon.

Yes, but the right wing press are using this to bash Brown and get Cameron in.

 

[Spion]

Squaddies don't declare wars, politicians do.

People who say they're on the side of the w/c should recognise that it's squaddies that have done and can stop wars.

In times like these we need some good resources on soldiers organising/mutinying

 

[smokedout]

Can't beat a good rational discussion.

no you can't

if you know anyone capable of having one why not tell them about this thread

 

[DownwardDog]

Maybe Gordon Brown should have used a standard, impersonal formula letter. Or just not bother saying he's saddened by the woman's tragedy, she is obviously someone who can't accept people might be genuine. Is she genuine about the reasons for being so upset, or is she trying to distract herself from the reality of her loss?

Or maybe he should have thought, "Hang on, I can hardly see, I certainly can't spell and I'm fucked up on anti depression medication I better get somebody more normal to have a look at this letter before we see if the posties are on strike and send the cunt out."

It just shows a catastrophic lack of self awareness.

 

[Ralph Masters]

Although we expect our politicians to be accountable we can't expect them to reveal the aims of the War, secrecy and misinformation must play a role in their campaign. Brown has his hands tied when it comes to making decisive. statements about strategy, maybe the loss of life is worth it when all factors facing the west are taken into consideration, I seem to remember the US were very concerned when the Russians invaded Afghanistan, since then a very worrying sequence of events has unravelled.

 

[Beanburger]

no you can't

if you know anyone capable of having one why not tell them about this thread

Let me know when you want to discuss the issue like a grown-up, eh?

 

[untethered]

I don't think they should be there either, but if they are they should have adequate protective equipment. These kids did not make the decision to go there and they do not get to decide when to come home. And scared soldiers don't make civilians any safer anyway, not by a long chalk.

What constitutes "adequate" protective equipment is a judgement that must be made in the light of numerous commitments and constraints.

Soldiers volunteer to join the forces as they are, not as some might like them to be. I respect their courage and expect them (and their families, if necessary) to stand by the realistic commitments that they have made. This isn't a fantasy war, it's a real one.

 

[danny la rouge]

And that doesn't strike you as simplistic? Yeah, I agree that the government need to shoulder their share of the responsibility, but they are not to blame for volunteer soldiers getting killed.

No, it doesn't strike me as simplistic. The government is to blame for soldiers being killed, for all who are killed in the wars it orders. And I think to ignore the very real fact of economic conscription is to miss a huge part of the story.