what no annual poppy bunfight thread?
- Thread starter Pingu
- Start date
Sasaferrato
Super Refuser!
I take your point on that, and if the 'hysteria' regarding wearing a poppy or being seen as disrespectful grows any more, I may well stop wearing one myself.
It is right, I feel, to mark the sacrifice of those who died in WWII, but those who died subsequently did not die 'saving the nation', they died in bitter little spats frrom Korea via Kenya and the Falklands, to Iraq and Afghanistan.
It may be argued that Gulf I, was necessary, to get Hussein out of Kuwait, and stop him from moving against Saudi.
That was something in the national interest, because not only plutocrats need oil, we all do, at present at least.
My own little wars were in NI and the Falklands. NI, we had got in so deep that keeping fighting seemed to be the only thing to do.
The Falklands? Well, if Galtieri had attacked a PM sooner, or a PM later, he would probably have held on to the islands. He picked the wrong PM. I did not speak to a single soldier at the time who felt that the Falklands shouldn't have been retaken. Now? Don't know. I lost five friends as a result of the Falklands, three on the Galahad, two to suicide associated with poorly treated/untreated PTSD. Personally, and I know this won't go down terribly well here; even with hindsight, I'd do it again. It was what we trained for, it was our purpose.
It was also a magnificent logistics exercise and showed Britain at its best. When the Galahad went down, 80% of our Field Hospital kit went down with it. Stuff we had to get from the manufacturers to replace it, was arriving at Southampton without any paperwork, or signature required. After I came back, I transferred from nursing to pharmacy. I was at DMED Ludgershall (the medical equipment central stores) nearly two years after the conflict, and we were still trying to get the paperwork straight and everyone paid. When we finally called it quits, it became obvious that some companies had not submitted invoices at all.
Sasaferrato
Super Refuser!
I think Corbyn is a decent man, a genuine man. If he just changed a few things, and moderated others a bit, he could win.
Mr.Bishie
pickled egg
redsquirrel
This Machine Kills Progressives
And what about the millions of innocent civilians in those countries murdered by a retaliatory strike I guess they deserve death too. Absolutely disgusting, but then it fits in with your vile defence of the attacks on the Gaza flotilla for example.
Last edited:
Doctor Carrot
Marxist Henchman
No I'm not saying you're saying that I'm saying it's the general feeling every remembrance day and it seems to get worse every year.
weltweit
Well-Known Member
I didn't see anything disrespectful in his placing of his wreath.
He seemed at least as respectful as Cameron.
Did I miss something?
I haven't watched it but perhaps Corbyn wasn't only trying to seem respectful and horror of horrors was actually being respectful thinking of the significance of the event and the lives lost rather than solely about putting in his best performance. He could also of been nervous a lot people laying the wreaths this morning seemed so and they only had a couple dozen people watching. Even relatively well drilled people who I'm pretty sure I've seen lay wreaths in previous years (instructors in one of the kiddies paramilitary organisations) seemed to my eye to fuck up a bit. Corbyn probably walked up and down his office a couple of times like Nicola Murray in The Thick of It.
purenarcotic
Conveniently Pocket Sized
War, which saw my grandfather watch cannibalism and have no shoes in a concentration camp in Siberia because he dared to be born a Polish Jew, which saw him fight at monte casino after his release and watch his best friend get blown to bits, which resulted in him never being able to show love to his children, suffering from terrible nightmares and needing support from Combat Stress until he died. Yeah, this definitely seems like somethings that we should be glorifying and the most important thing to do is have a go at people for wearing a poppy or not and moaning about the extent to which someone bows their heads. Jesus Christ.
Saw that early. A bit opportunitistic and disrespectful I feel.
brogdale
Coming to terms with late onset Anarchism
Either a planned, deliberate attempt to influence the outcome of LP policy, or a very embarrassing silp of the mask.
Chick Webb
Countryfile and a can
I'll fight ye. Poppies make me sick.
Chick Webb
Countryfile and a can
Again this year!
likesfish
You can't park here sir
The whole point of detterence is if you decide your going to order a mass murder strike on the UK you get exactly the same back regardless of if you love your children or not.
Trident can kill you if your in a bunker or flying command post or brought anti missile defences
Are you serious, stupid or simply insane?
I choose to remember the tragic, manipulated, bullied, threatened, shamed people who were conscripted into fighting - not for freedom or democracy or anything like that - but for the same reasons as always - for the power crazed demands of a ruling class who saw ordinary soldiers as collateral. And no, I will never offer so much as a penny towards a single organisation which perpetuates the tripe peddled by politicians - I do however, wear a green sprig of evergreen holly.
Zabo
Well-Known Member
From so called Cif.
"Remembrance Sunday and the top two articles on the Guardian site are little more than anti-Corbyn shit-throwing. I'm glad I don't pay for this tripe."
brogdale
Coming to terms with late onset Anarchism
Sir Nicolas.
(DM link)
(DM link)
existentialist
Tired and unemotional
This.
I got involved in an opera thing that had been commissioned to mark the start of WW1. I played the part of the "recruiting officer", and had to play a scene in which we'd gone to a village to get people to sign up. The recruiting officer was not a pleasant character - there was lots of moral blackmail, misogyny, and patronising stuff, all aimed at getting young men signed up.
I felt uncomfortable, because it seemed to me inconceivable that anyone would have been quite so blatantly manipulative about getting people to sign up to fight, so I did some research. And what I learned was that, far from being a caricature of the situation, it was, if anything, a toned down version of what went on. Huge amounts of emotional blackmail were applied, both by the military themselves, but by society at large. People bought into this, to the extent that apparently fit young men who hadn't signed up (this was prior to conscription, which didn't happen until 1916) were often given a hard time in the street.
The "Pal's battalions", similarly, weren't as simple as they're now presented - people were put under considerable pressure to join up with their workmates, neighbours, or friends. We might see the idea of a bunch of mates going off to fight together as noble and laudable, and it was certainly presented that way, but a lot of people joined up because they didn't feel that not joining up was an option.
Furthermore, the stories we hear of young people so fired up with patriotic fervour that they signed up with false ages also tell quite a few tales - a lot of that went on with a nod and a wink from the authorities, who were knowingly signing up 14 year olds to go and fight in the horror of the trenches. Any sense of moral rectitude had taken second place behind the goal of getting as many people onto the battlefield by whatever means possible, whether they were old enough or genuinely willing to volunteer - so long as they gave the impression of volunteering, that was good enough.
And that's before we get into economic conscription, or the rights and wrongs of statutory conscription.
taffboy gwyrdd
Embrace the confusion!
More from FB
See him at the Cenotaph tho? What a disaster. Dunno why, just someone said, on the BBC I think.
He should be a war criminal who helped ISIS get off the ground like Blair, or cut benefits to former soldiers like cameron, that's proper respect.
Peace? - I mean FFS.
And as for stopping around to talk to veterans - It's the fucking end.
All respect for veterans has gone once you start talking to such cannon fodder serfs as if they are somehow worthy of time and attention.
I want to wretch. It's a disaster, and I hope someone says so in The Guardian.
Lets hope he isn't around this time next year, dragging down the tone by giving a shit.
likesfish
You can't park here sir
That's the rational behind trident its accuracy the multiple decoys mirv etc etc. It was designed to defeat the extensive abm defences around moscow and kill any hardened bunkers the politbureau might try to hide in.
the french system is less accurate but its not designed for pinpoint accuracy its designed to kill as many russians as possible the french don't believe you can win a nuclear war but if their going to hell your coming too.
pointing nuclear weapons at each other is possibly insane but apparently not starting a world war is really hard
.doubt ww3 wouldn't have happened with out them
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
So what? Not abasing himself is NOT indicative of his level of respect. Neither is the abasement of the other party leaders indicative of their level of respect.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Even if Corbyn had bowed to the arbitrary standards set by the gutter press, they'd have insisted that he anoint the feet of the dead too.
Artaxerxes
Look out, he's got a gnu!
Worse than fucking Hitler.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
He's making a rational point about the nature of deterrence and the utility (as a weapon of mass destruction) of Trident.
Turning his point into a sweepstake on whether he's "serious, stupid or simply insane" shows that you were unable or unwilling to grasp that rational point.
Idris2002
Christmas Eve, you know?
Yeah, you see, the French system sounds like a genuine deterrent. The MIRV, designed to evade ABM defences and kill Brezhnev sounds more like something an aggressive imperialist power would design in the belief that it could actually emerge the winner.That's the rational behind trident its accuracy the multiple decoys mirv etc etc. It was designed to defeat the extensive abm defences around moscow and kill any hardened bunkers the politbureau might try to hide in.
the french system is less accurate but its not designed for pinpoint accuracy its designed to kill as many russians as possible the french don't believe you can win a nuclear war but if their going to hell your coming too.
pointing nuclear weapons at each other is possibly insane but apparently not starting a world war is really hard
doubt ww3 wouldn't have happened with out them
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
One of my paternal great-grandfathers was one of 6 children - he had 3 brothers and 2 sisters. He signed up in 1903 (after getting fed-up with the South Yorkshire coal mines), did his 9 years service, and was nearing the end of his reserve service when he was re-mobilised about a fortnight before the start of the war. He died in April 1915. His "sacrifice" was, according to one of my great-aunts/his sisters, used to emotionally-blackmail his three brothers into enlisting. By the end of the war, my great-great-grandmother had one son left - all because a recruiting sergeant and a bunch of local veterans who'd never served anywhere more taxing than Ireland, thought it was their "duty" to cajole and badger local young men into becoming fodder for the grinder - a policy that was, of course, sanctioned and even encouraged by those on different - "higher" - strata of the class spectrum.
kebabking
Not a Girly Swot, but I like them....
partly true, also partly not true - one of the problems with the French system is that it would require the person launching it to close their mind to what i about to happen. given that deterence is not about what you will or will not do, but about what the other guy thinks you will, might, or will not do, there is a greater degree of opportunity for the other guy to believe - erroneously or not - that the French president will infact not order a launch because he cannot face the consequences of doing so. this makes a nuclear attack more likely, not less likely.
the UK system however removes - to some degree - that weight from the person ordering its launch, and therefore ensures that the other guy can be less sure about whether a UK would, or would not, launch. if you are less sure than you would like that your enemy will in fact not use his very large, very sharp stick it return for you using yours, you will be more hesitant about using yours.
the more likely an absolute and complete conflagration, the less likely anyone is to tread, however carefully, the steps that might bring it about.
Similar threads
- Poll
