Cops investigate Ibrox soldiers

[BrahimHemdani 1]

End of story hopefully; but a lesson learned perhaps.

[barca72 440]

Ah yes. Of course. Without these fine soldiers running off to invade Iraq, Afghanistan or god knows where else the cancer nurses and geriatric carers wouldn't be able to do their jobs.

How silly of me to overlook such an obvious truism. Condescending in the extreme.

 

But humour me; Can you tell me which military operation, campaign or war we have been involved since 1945 in has resulted in nurses having more freedom to carry out their work?

Patronizing, but I'll have a go.

 

I can't tell you how many military actions that have resulted in giving Britons greater freedom since 1945, and you can't either. The Armed Forces are involved in many operations that go unreported. However, the first ones that come to mind are Ulster, The Falklands, many in Africa and the Middle East. I will not be drawn into an unnecessary argument of why the troops were there, nor why Britain has Armed Forces. I have seen other posts you have made on many other threads and I suspect you are an intelligent person so please don't insult my intelligence either by trying to give point-scoring answers.

I have no doubt that you enjoy the freedom of a society that allows you to voice an opinion on any subject you wish, indeed even to criticise the government, the police, the armed forces or any other institution that you may have a grievance with. No doubt you will concede that Britain can afford you these freedoms only because of these institutions being strong and efficient.

I worked several times in both the north and south towers of the World Trade Centre, the last job was in July 2001. I was back in Canada when the 9/11 bombings took place. I have thought often about how lucky I was that I had finished my contract when I did. I was, like many Canadian and American citizens, hugely stunned and emotionally affected by the horror of those events. In fact I was scared. It took some time to create and bring up to speed the Homeland Security organization. In the interim period I was grateful to see the armed forces at airports and railway stations. It gave myself and many millions of people, among these no doubt there were many cancer nurses and geriatric carers, great comfort and a reduced stress level. At least it was an effort to combat the terrorists.

I never did believe the "smoking gun" theories, but we are where we are. I take great umbrage at your sneering and disrespectful remark "these fine soldiers running off to invade ...". Of course any member of the Armed Forces can refuse to carry out an order if they so choose, but again this may be because they live in a free society which their forefathers have earned for them. These troops are stationed where they are because their government chooses to put them there. There is no argument that you can give that changes that fact. I would suggest that this is because of a pro-active policy on the part of the Western governments. Deal with the terrorist threat locally before it can be exported to our shores. According to the greatly reduced acts of terror being perpetrated on Western countries, I for one am grateful for that policy.

These young people on the front lines abroad face real bullets, real IED's, real mortars etc. I don't think I could do that on a daily basis so I am real glad that they can do it for me. Maybe when some of them are injured and are taken to a field hospital, they are treated by a nurse who has had previous experience as a cancer nurse.

I wonder if you have ever had the urge when you see a member of the armed forces in the street to walk over and shake their hand and thank them for their service? You could of course do the same to a cancer nurse or a geriatric carer.

 

B.H. in post #42 you stated, " I'm not sure that politics and football mix all that well. ". I don't know why you think that Rangers hosting an Armed Forces Day is a purely political act. Rangers extend an invitation to the Armed Forces Command who in turn request personnel to put their name forward for possible selection. The troops are there because they want to be there and the fans are obviously happy to laud these personnel for their contributions to the services. Many football clubs in Britain do the exact same. This is not a formal occasion where the troops are marching on the street but rather an informal gathering where a great many fans are gathered and can show their appreciation to the troops. I think Rangers are providing a welcome opportunity for the fans and the troops.

In post #51 you state,

" As I suggested earlier, if we do continue with the Day, then I feel it should be a much more formal affair and I do not think that the soldiers should be allowed to break ranks and run about the pitch waving scarves and banners of any description."

On this one I am conflicted between the off-duty troops being allowed to enjoy an informal moment with the fans and the fact that the uniform still has to be respected. A compromise might be that they march onto the pitch, then form a circle(s) around the edge of the pitch, and in the stand easy position enjoy the fans accolades.

[andy steel 0]

I'm not sure it can be called ultra leftist to have some issues with the army.

 

I am a bit uneasy with the media worship of the armed forces these last years, because I think what lies behind it is the need to recruit troops rather than any actual feelings of pride. Whether you think The Sun runs campaigns about Our Boys because they believe it or because they are a scummy money making business happy to use the blood of others to get rich is up to you. I have my doubts.

 

I'm also uneasy with the class structure of the British services. In the 21st century it is asking a bit much to believe that the best candidates for the officer ranks still come from the upper classes. What chance a Colin Powell in our services? Not very much, I'd reckon.

 

And you have to say, anyone who has joined up in the last 20 years would have to have lived in a cave not to know that they would be involved in some questionable campaigns once they did. Since the 1991 Gulf War to the present western armies have been going through a period we won't look back on with much pride in future; I would go further and argue that the actions of the western nations have more or less guaranteed terrorism on the streets of the west for the next generation (at least). Befehl ist befehl? I'm not certain how much an individual can turn round and say 'blame the government, not the soldier' in this day and age. It's not a conscript army after all.

 

And finally the hysterical reaction to any criticism of the armed forces gets on my tits a bit too.

 

But when all's said and done, any excuse for a proper pipe band on the pitch is worth it imo.

[simplythebest 0]

I'll get banned if I express my true feelings on people trying to diminish our armed forces.

 

I will say if Rangers bow the mock offended over this it's one of the few things that would make me consider walking away from the club.

[craig 5,199]

I'll get banned if I express my true feelings on people trying to diminish our armed forces.

 

I will say if Rangers bow the mock offended over this it's one of the few things that would make me consider walking away from the club.

 

I thought you just wanted to concentrate on the football though ?

[amms 0]

I thought you just wanted to concentrate on the football though ?

 

No no Craig, politics are fine as long as STB agrees with them. Anything else simply doesn't show proper support or atmosphere or something, it's hard to keep up.

[The Real PapaBear 0]

Patronizing, but I'll have a go.

 

I can't tell you how many military actions that have resulted in giving Britons greater freedom since 1945, and you can't either. The Armed Forces are involved in many operations that go unreported. However, the first ones that come to mind are Ulster, The Falklands, many in Africa and the Middle East. I will not be drawn into an unnecessary argument of why the troops were there, nor why Britain has Armed Forces. I have seen other posts you have made on many other threads and I suspect you are an intelligent person so please don't insult my intelligence either by trying to give point-scoring answers.

I have no doubt that you enjoy the freedom of a society that allows you to voice an opinion on any subject you wish, indeed even to criticise the government, the police, the armed forces or any other institution that you may have a grievance with. No doubt you will concede that Britain can afford you these freedoms only because of these institutions being strong and efficient.

I worked several times in both the north and south towers of the World Trade Centre, the last job was in July 2001. I was back in Canada when the 9/11 bombings took place. I have thought often about how lucky I was that I had finished my contract when I did. I was, like many Canadian and American citizens, hugely stunned and emotionally affected by the horror of those events. In fact I was scared. It took some time to create and bring up to speed the Homeland Security organization. In the interim period I was grateful to see the armed forces at airports and railway stations. It gave myself and many millions of people, among these no doubt there were many cancer nurses and geriatric carers, great comfort and a reduced stress level. At least it was an effort to combat the terrorists.

I never did believe the "smoking gun" theories, but we are where we are. I take great umbrage at your sneering and disrespectful remark "these fine soldiers running off to invade ...". Of course any member of the Armed Forces can refuse to carry out an order if they so choose, but again this may be because they live in a free society which their forefathers have earned for them. These troops are stationed where they are because their government chooses to put them there. There is no argument that you can give that changes that fact. I would suggest that this is because of a pro-active policy on the part of the Western governments. Deal with the terrorist threat locally before it can be exported to our shores. According to the greatly reduced acts of terror being perpetrated on Western countries, I for one am grateful for that policy.

These young people on the front lines abroad face real bullets, real IED's, real mortars etc. I don't think I could do that on a daily basis so I am real glad that they can do it for me. Maybe when some of them are injured and are taken to a field hospital, they are treated by a nurse who has had previous experience as a cancer nurse.

I wonder if you have ever had the urge when you see a member of the armed forces in the street to walk over and shake their hand and thank them for their service? You could of course do the same to a cancer nurse or a geriatric carer.

 

B.H. in post #42 you stated, " I'm not sure that politics and football mix all that well. ". I don't know why you think that Rangers hosting an Armed Forces Day is a purely political act. Rangers extend an invitation to the Armed Forces Command who in turn request personnel to put their name forward for possible selection. The troops are there because they want to be there and the fans are obviously happy to laud these personnel for their contributions to the services. Many football clubs in Britain do the exact same. This is not a formal occasion where the troops are marching on the street but rather an informal gathering where a great many fans are gathered and can show their appreciation to the troops. I think Rangers are providing a welcome opportunity for the fans and the troops.

In post #51 you state,

" As I suggested earlier, if we do continue with the Day, then I feel it should be a much more formal affair and I do not think that the soldiers should be allowed to break ranks and run about the pitch waving scarves and banners of any description."

On this one I am conflicted between the off-duty troops being allowed to enjoy an informal moment with the fans and the fact that the uniform still has to be respected. A compromise might be that they march onto the pitch, then form a circle(s) around the edge of the pitch, and in the stand easy position enjoy the fans accolades.

 

Ref your post 26, shortly after you had begun the exchange by asking if I was "for real".

I happened upon this article on another site this morning and I thought I would post it for the edification of yourself and the rest of the hoi polloi.

By the way, it's "hoi polloi" not "the hoi polloi" since hoi is already a definite article.

Now, what were you saying about condescension?

 

As to the post above, you've really just made a series of statements, many if not most of them erroneous, without anything to back them up and which, in themselves, don't support or advance an argument.

 

The central point however is that your initial posts were full of assertions as to how our armed forces guarantee our freedoms and yet, when questioned, you admit you are unable to back this up in any way.

 

The remainder of your post about 9/11 and invading countries to prevent terrorism is (and I'm mindful of my resolution to try to be as respectful as I can at all times, here) at the very least the product of an unenquiring mind.

[The Real PapaBear 0]

I'll get banned if I express my true feelings on people trying to diminish our armed forces.

 

I will say if Rangers bow the mock offended over this it's one of the few things that would make me consider walking away from the club.

 

apropos mock offended

[Super_Ally 0]

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 event. Or indeed because media and the Celtic minded insist there were nefarious reasons.

Edited October 18, 2013 by Super_Ally
BrahimFuckingHemdani ;)

[Blue Moon 1,150]

For me it is not about supporting government policy but about supporting the young lads, mainly, who have no hope of any prospects of a decent future at home.

 

It is too easy to confuse jingoism with patriotism. I would have to question the motives of those who live in our country and do not support it, rather than kowtow to their opinions. I believe in freedom of opinion but they would like to deny me the right to mine.