Hatred of the defence forces.

chiefohara05

I'm only RDF, but i came across an obnoxious viewpoint tonight from someone claiming that the Irish military was useless, and that any peacekeeping missions done by the Defence forces were mercenary.

I nearly ended up in a fistfight with this person, but my question is how did such mindless disrespect and contempt creep into the psyche of normal Irish people towards the army.

As far as i am concerned the Defence forces has achieved incredible things internationally for their role in peacekeeping and are recognised for it. Tell anyone from the Lebanon whether the Irish army is useless and im sure they will strongly disagree with you. Ask the same thing of people from Iberia or Kosovo.

Why do some normal Irish people have such contempt towards the military here?

the_syco

chiefohara05 wrote: »

Why do some normal Irish people have such contempt towards the military here?

As they are never in the news over killing people, blowing sh|t up, and screwing up badly, it seems people don't think the Irish Army does anything.

Praetorian Saighdiuir

bore wrote: »

I wouldnt say theres a hatred to the defence forces but they can at least argue the point imo ...
cash escorts , ceremonial/parade duties , enemy party for cadets , doing the work of the county council and weapons displays for students .. you think the public should admire the army for that ?
as for peacekeeping .. i dont know what you think goes on overseas but the fact is any twenty something who goes to the leb or went to kosovo (cant comment on liberia) comes back like an absoloute tank from hitting the gym twice a day , that is just not possible if they were regularly going on patrols , sending out recci teams , living on the ground on ration packs and just generally doing hard soldiering so draw your own conclusions there (anyone who disagrees is a liar)
the irish do have a great rep as peacekeepers but correct me if im wrong highly motivated well trained soldiers make the worst peacekeepers i.e the paras in northern ireland and the us rangers in somalia
just my opinion , dont go all keyboard warrior on me if you dont agree

Ha

Salvation

All Soldiers are Mercenaries the difference between us and the freelancers is that we are regulated and paid for by a government.

The Defence forces is what they are a Defence force but they are the only public service that are 100% accountable and actually do their job.

As for that moron with his opinion, he obviously is an ignorant twat and you would be worse to get in a fight with him and laugh at him as he is braindead and most likely a non functioning member of society that has never lifted a finger.

KickstartHeart

Because everyone in this country has an opinion. Whether they know what they're on about or not. Most Irish people are negative and like to put down everything about Ireland.

Compare; not knowing anything about a subject, with Irish peoples continuous negative attitude, and you get a negative opinion. That's why people put down the Irish Defence Forces so much. Because they haven't a clue what their on about, and they by and large like to put things down anyway.

A post on this thread already highlights my point.

KickstartHeart

bore wrote: »

kickstartheart you in the defence forces ?
i dont have a negative attitude im just a realist

So spell it out for us. What point are you trying to make?

Does the Irish defence forces not warrant respect? Are its soldiers poorly trained? Do people who bash the Defence Forces and say it does nothing have a decent argument?

Fenian Army

Good few people I know are bitter towards the defense forces because they think that they let down the one group of Irish people who have actually needed defending - those in the north

I just say that they can only do what they are ordered to

Praetorian Saighdiuir

bore wrote: »

fair enough so ..
no they dont deserve respect and yes they are poorly trained (myself never even trained in fibua but im **** hot at trench warfare :P lol what does that tell you about the training)

Well well well arent you original.

Maybe_Memories

bore wrote: »

as for peacekeeping .. i dont know what you think goes on overseas but the fact is any twenty something who goes to the leb or went to kosovo (cant comment on liberia) comes back like an absoloute tank from hitting the gym twice a day , that is just not possible if they were regularly going on patrols , sending out recci teams , living on the ground on ration packs and just generally doing hard soldiering so draw your own conclusions there (anyone who disagrees is a liar)

Chad. Rangers (part of PDF so this is a valid point) first in. They went on patrols, did recon, made safe IEDs. Sounds like pretty hard soldering to me. I've heard rumors of lethal force being used by them on that mission as well. As I said, heard rumors. I'm not saying thats fact.

In Liberia they rescued a group of hostages from armed rebels.

East Timor, they were called the most professional special ops team some Aussie government guy had seen.

As for the rest of the PDF, some are working with ISAF in Afghanistan, others are part of the Nordic Battle Group. There are talks of sending the Navy to Somalia.

When the Queen was here last year the Air Corp had to intercept a bogey entering restricted air space.


Don't even get me started on what happened in the Congo.


Sounds like the PDF is certainly doing something.

KickstartHeart

I'm beginning to think that mr. Bore may be in the RDF, and thinks his training mirrors that of the Army.

xflyer

Whatever happened to Mr Bore's comments? It's odd to read them second hand.

To answer the original question. I think it's partly down to the history when quite frankly the army was badly trained, poorly equipped and apparently did nothing before the deployment to the Congo changed things. This poor view of the army has been handed down over the generations. The fact that things have changed considerably hasn't entered the collective consciousness.

Then there's the reality that the army has never seen war and given our so called neutrality probably never will. An army that never has to face war can be seen as a bit of sinecure. The sad truth is for the army to gain any respect in the general public's eyes. They have to go to war, suffer casualties and distinguish themselves in battle. Peacekeeping for all it's worthiness doesn't quite capture the imagination.

Meanwhile the news is full of images of other soldiers fighting in Afghanistan or Iraq or wherever the latest war pops up. But the general public's only sight of the Irish army is seeing them carry out the highly dangerous job of standing outside a bank.:(

I don't see how that perception can be changed though. In spite of the good they do. It'll never be appreciated.

cyrusdvirus

expanding on Xflyers point, when incidents like Jadotville, which was as good a feat of soldiering you'll find, get covered up it doesn't help.

BostonB

Salvation wrote: »

...The Defence forces is what they are a Defence force but they are the only public service that are 100% accountable and actually do their job....

I guess slagging off the rest of the public service, fireman, police, doctors nurses, etc isn't doing you any favours.

Jogathon

I think that the defence forces do a great job. I'm not connected to them in any way, but I do live near the south coast where we see the benefit of our Naval Service.

Salvation

BostonB wrote: »

I guess slagging off the rest of the public service, fireman, police, doctors nurses, etc isn't doing you any favours.

At least they get overtime, people seem to over look the military when the public service are in the lime light.

We cant strike and we actually do our job as we are under 2 laws not one military and civil.

I would respect the Firemen as they do an excellent job and one of the best, as for the rest, I will say nothing as my comments might offend the less productive parts of the public service

BostonB

Well you slagged them all off, be they children's doctors or someone dealing with dole payments, or working out your tax. Lots of jobs that people aren't interesting in doing, or able but keep society working.

A lot of the criticism of the defence force is around value for money. I mean why do the banks not cover the full cost of using the Army for security? Why does the tax payer need to pay that. What value do the PC9's give us over another CASA or two. Things like that.

Morpheus

My gripe is looking at all of the cuts that front line services undergo be they gardai, fire service, paramedic, doctors etc - and i mean coalface roles - and then looking at how innefficient their senior staff can be (not 100% of them but I personally believe the majority of senior staff in these depts are not doing their job).

From firsthand experience of this level of management especially in the healthcare area I know that there are stupid needless levels of hierarchies and micromanagement of staff, duplication of roles, PLUS absolutely horrendous levels of waste of resources both personnel and material supplies.

The dept of defence have made an art of removing this kind of wasteage and I believe that w/o the prospect of facing unions that the same process applied to the defence forces back in 1999-2000, that being the PWC white paper on defence, if this were done (for example) to the HSE AND followed through by implementation of all of the recommendations would result in a leaner more efficient less top heavy dept with benefit to all citizens.

The downfall here was that some of these reccomendations made by PWC were cherry picked at a political level by spineless politicians and probably as a result of parish pump politics and sadly at a time when we had surplus cash and some were never implemented or were half heartedly employed, still the defence forces today is a leaner greener more robust and flexible machine than it was in the 90s.

Just my own opinion.

tac foley

Anybody, and I mean ANYBODY, who signs on the dotted line to become a member of their country's Armed Forces - call them what you will - has effectively signed over not just a few years of their life, but what could, in certain circumstances, be the entire rest of their lives.

You are signing up to offering your life for your country - a risk that goes along with the wearing of the rather odd clothes that you are made to wear to distinguish you [the defender] from the civilian [the defended].

Respect is due and required.

G*d Bless ALL our Armed Forces, who might be put in harm's way so that the rest of you can sleep easy in your beds at night, your children grow up in peace, and that you speak and hear the language of your choice whenever you want to.

tac

thoker

Army deafness hearings, what a shower?:rolleyes:

FoxT

chiefohara05 wrote: »

I'm only RDF, but i came across an obnoxious viewpoint tonight from someone claiming that the Irish military was useless, and that any peacekeeping missions done by the Defence forces were mercenary.

I nearly ended up in a fistfight with this person, but my question is how did such mindless disrespect and contempt creep into the psyche of normal Irish people towards the army.

As far as i am concerned the Defence forces has achieved incredible things internationally for their role in peacekeeping and are recognised for it. Tell anyone from the Lebanon whether the Irish army is useless and im sure they will strongly disagree with you. Ask the same thing of people from Iberia or Kosovo.

Why do some normal Irish people have such contempt towards the military here?

OP, I know nothing about the defence forces, but my impression as a layman, is that they do seem to punch well above their weight on UN missions, and they have also been of great service during flooding here in Ireland over recent years.

The air corps seem to maintain a good SAR service, the navy strikes me as being underequipped for the large patrol area they have?

It is true that the army deafness claims looked somewhat ridiculous - but again I speak as a layman here. It is a pity that the issue was not managed better for the sake of all involved.

I also wonder about how well equipped the army is? I must confess, if I had decided on a military career then purely for career reasons the UK DF would offer better experience/promotion prospects?

I am posting here, not so much to share my opinion, more to find out more about it. Thanks.

-FoxT

BostonB

tac foley wrote: »

...You are signing up to offering your life for your country - a risk that goes along with the wearing of the rather odd clothes that you are made to wear to distinguish you [the defender] from the civilian [the defended].

Respect is due and required....

Everything is relative.
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/farming-officially-the-deadliest-job-2977668.html

Poccington

Ah, the Deafness Claims carry on raises it's head yet again...

The claims all stemmed from DoD trying to do things on the cheap and refusing to issue troops hearing protection as they weren't bothered to splash the cash and buy it. Cue lads who spent years using small arms, on mortar lines etc. on a frequent basis suddenly realising that "Hang on a minute, my ears don't work anymore". We're not talking about being in a contact Overseas and not having hearing protection on. We're talking about lads carrying out training and still not being given adequate protection.

The DoD and in turn the DF, tried the cheap option and in doing so, sacrificed troops health for no good reason. Not only that but there was lads turning up, with their own personally purchased hearing protection, being threatened with being disciplined for using non issued kit.

Did some people chance their arm? Of course they did.

However, the fault of the claims lies solely at the feet of the DoD and it's retarded logic and penny pinching.

BostonB

I'd say most people criticism is for the management of the DF .

Poccington

BostonB wrote: »

Everything is relative.
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/farming-officially-the-deadliest-job-2977668.html

I fail to see how it's relevant to what Tac was saying?

He was making the point that someone, upon joining their countries military, is effectively signing over their life to the service of their country, something which could result in their death.

He's not saying "Being a soldier is super dangerous all the time".

Poccington

BostonB wrote: »

I'd say most people criticism is for the management of the DF .

IMO, I'd say most people haven't the slightest breeze about management in the DF.

BostonB

Poccington wrote: »

IMO, I'd say most people haven't the slightest breeze about management in the DF.

Management of not in.

Poccington

BostonB wrote: »

Management of not in.

Even then, I'd still say most people have no real idea.

Purely because in Ireland, there's quite a lack of interest from people when it comes to the DF.

laoch na mona

I've never came across that attitude a few of my friends are trying to join the army and no one has giving then **** about it
personally i think we should invest in the military as native military industry could create jobs

BostonB

Poccington wrote: »

Even then, I'd still say most people have no real idea.

Purely because in Ireland, there's quite a lack of interest from people when it comes to the DF.

I hate to say it, but I find that when people bring up the DF, in relation to some issue, its generally the butt of jokes, or criticism of its role and costs. Most people don't understand why it isn't utilised for more things they would find directly useful. Its only people with some interest in military matters or connection with the DF that would know something of the roles the DF actually does.

Poccington

BostonB wrote: »

I hate to say it, but I find that when people bring up the DF, in relation to some issue, its generally the butt of jokes, or criticism of its role and costs. Most people don't understand why it isn't utilised for more things they would find directly useful. Its only people with some interest in military matters or connection with the DF that would know something of the roles the DF actually does.

Completely agree with you.

doomed

I suspect most of the people who slag off the DF either wouldn't get in themselves or would be F**k all use if they did.

BostonB

Poccington wrote: »

I fail to see how it's relevant to what Tac was saying?

He was making the point that someone, upon joining their countries military, is effectively signing over their life to the service of their country, something which could result in their death.

He's not saying "Being a soldier is super dangerous all the time".

Sorry but I don't get the distinction you're making. Risk, life, death, I don't see how else you could take those terms. Relatively speaking its not that dangerous in relation to other jobs in Ireland, is the point I'm making. Lots of careers require commitments of long terms or contacts, even a lifetime contract, though usually you choose to leave almost all of them.

I'm not rubbishing that is has risk, or that it require serious commitment. But lets rein in the drama. Tac's experience I seem to remember is a little broader than most.

BostonB

doomed wrote: »

I suspect most of the people who slag off the DF either wouldn't get in themselves or would be F**k all use if they did.

I think thats a bit of a cop out. It doesn't hurt to learn from valid criticism.

Wilberto

Firstly, we're a neutral country (obviously), so any wars like Iraq etc. are all out of the question for the Irish Army.

Secondly, The FCA was a joke, seriously! It became known as the "Free Clothing Association" and "Fools Carrying Arms". And even from first hand experience (I was a member for several years), the people who signed up had no more interest of being there. All they wanted was the money from camp. And don't get me started on the joke that those camps were. We all went there for a laugh, nothing more!

But that's why they tried to somewhat overhaul it and change it to the RDF. And, to be fair, it did improve to an extent. The corporal and seargeant's courses became tougher, we actually had meaningful two week camps in the Summer, for example one summer for two weeks we did a mortar course up in Kilkenny. And there were other signs of improvements too. Not sure what it's like now myself because I'm out of it for about 5 years but it seemed to be on the right track when I left.


Oh and another example of how much of a joke the FCA was, even though the age limit was 17, there was a 16 year old Corporal. I knew lieing about your age was a very common occurance, but a 16 year old corporal was just ridiculous.

Another example was during the corporals course when a female private went on sick leave ((I can't remember what it's actually called)) for pretty much the whole two weeks of the course.......and still got her corporal stripes.


To finish though, like I said, that was the FCA. They knew themselves something was rotten with that whole section of the defense forces and they did make a few changes (at least it seemed like that on the ground level), and merged smaller battallions into a larger one etc. and, again it really did seem to be improving when I left.

BostonB

Seems to me there's been a sea of change in the DF over the last decade or so. Its the small things I notice. Like the squads jogging in the park, with packs, in good formation. I doubt I ever saw that a decade ago. There were also on the TV last rebuilding a browning from that crashed spit in the bog. Then test firing it. Good to see.

xflyer

I'm afraid your post summarises many of the problems of public perception of the Defence forces.

Wilberto wrote: »

Firstly, we're a neutral country (obviously), so any wars like Iraq etc. are all out of the question for the Irish Army.

We're not neutral, never were, never will be. That's the fantasy perpetrated for years by various governments over the years. We weren't even neutral in WW2. We are non aligned. Wars like Iraq or wherever are not out of the question. We have troops in Afghanistan right now. This neutrality myth needs to be consigned to history once and for all.

Secondly, The FCA was a joke, seriously! It became known as the "Free Clothing Association" and "Fools Carrying Arms". And even from first hand experience (I was a member for several years), the people who signed up had no more interest of being there. All they wanted was the money from camp. And don't get me started on the joke that those camps were. We all went there for a laugh, nothing more!

It was units like yours that gave the rest of the FCA the bad reputation it had. My experience in our Dublin Battalion was quite different. Sure we had the problem of poor equipment and inadequate training. But everyone involved wanted to be there and we had a good turnout all year round. Camp was taken seriously and we served along the border several years running and were the first FCA unit to get helicopter training and experience. A large number of members later went on to the PDF and other forces having distinguished careers. But we were the exception. Most other units we came across were shambolic in comparison.

As for the Free Clothes Association 'Joke'. It was quite ironic, considering how much money we all spent on our uniforms and equipment to make up for the penny pinching attitude of the government.

Oh and another example of how much of a joke the FCA was, even though the age limit was 17, there was a 16 year old Corporal. I knew lieing about your age was a very common occurance, but a 16 year old corporal was just ridiculous.

Again it would never happen in my unit but we did have a 14 year old recruit and the vast majority joined when they were 16. This got Ireland mentioned by Amnesty in terms of using child soldiers. But as another example of how the FCA wasn't taken seriously as a military unit. A lawyer friend who is an expert in the field dismissed it as an 'over the top reaction'. 'It was' she said 'only the FCA'. A sort of glorified boy scout troop.

With that kind of legacy it's no wonder there is a general lack of regard for the Defence Forces.

KickstartHeart

A life in the Defence Forces may hold low amounts of risk. But the risk amounts on operations. Given the amount of our soldiers that were killed oversea's from IED's, mines, gun fire, and in some cases general combat, its fair to say that going on operations with the Defence Forces is definitely more risky than other jobs.

Obviously other jobs will have more risk attached than a life time in the Army. Pretty much most armies are not risky. They just get risky when operations arise. If you exclude the missions that soldiers take part in, from any army, the job isn't too risky. (within reason. some armies in the world exist in war zones, rather than getting sent to them like the PDF or the British Army or other ones closes to us).

BostonB

The point still stands that other professions are more dangerous in relative terms per the numbers involved. If you consider how often you stand beside lethal spinning machinery, or working from heights or electricity on a daily basis.

I'm not dismissing the magnitude of what the DF can be asked to do. Not everyone can do a different profession, be it, work at height, or put themselves in harms way, or walk into a fire etc.

Morpheus

Good thing we dont train regularly with live munitions, explosives, grenades, rockets, artillery, heavy machinery, around and in vehicles, aircraft, boats, ships, both in and under water, inside aircraft, parachuting, in heavy machinery shops, welding, cutting, cranes, LFTT, on ranges, in and around areas containing unexploded ordnance, living outdoors for days on end, etc ..... get the picture? The DF isnt about strolling unarmed around a barracks all day. All the safety in the world doesnt stop someone clearing a weapon incorrectly due to tiredness and missing your foot by inches with a live round, being shot in the arm on a range practice, or sadly like the young soldier from cork being buried today who was killed during LFTT in the UK last week.

Kat1170

BostonB wrote: »

The point still stands that other professions are more dangerous in relative terms per the numbers involved. If you consider how often you stand beside lethal spinning machinery, or working from heights or electricity on a daily basis.

I'm not dismissing the magnitude of what the DF can be asked to do. Not everyone can do a different profession, be it, work at height, or put themselves in harms way, or walk into a fire etc.

You mean as opposed to the fitters, riggers, electricians, and firemen in the DF ???? :cool:

Your ignorance of what the DF actually do on a day to day basis is clear. :rolleyes:

BostonB

Kat1170 wrote: »

You mean as opposed to the fitters, riggers, electricians, and firemen in the DF ???? :cool:

Your ignorance of what the DF actually do on a day to day basis is clear. :rolleyes:

So your saying the stats are wrong. Can you offer some links to better stats then?

BostonB

That wasn't the Irish DF though. The point still stands regarding the number of relative deaths and accidents in Ireland.

Morpheus

the most dangerous job in ireland was supposedly in the construction industry or farming in a recent survey no?

so the DF are safer? of course they are. This isnt due to us all carrying water pistols and throwing halloween bangers at each other... rather do you think that this could be something to do with the vast quantity of H&S thrown at you from the moment you join as a recruit.

The DF is a safer place to work due to the effort they have put in to MAKE, what is by its nature a deadly working environment, an inherently safe one, purely because of the level of training and care and protection its employees are given and surrounded by.

NOT because the consequences of your actions around the military working environment are less dangerous, but because due to your training, it is MORE safe.

Some of the other industries in Ireland with bad track records in deaths in the workplace, could do with an equal amount of regulation in regard to H&S.

Nobody here is saying the being in the DF means you have THEE most dangerous job in the country, rather they are saying that due to our training in health and safety, its much harder to accidentally walk into a spinning rotor or drop the grenade on the range after you've pulled the pin and not have your training kick in and save your life. But it remains a potentially deadly working environment there are almost 15000 members in the DF (including reserves), that alone makes it one of the larger industries in the country yet there are not many potentially lethal injuries and this is due to ... you guessed it, training and H&S.

As regards it not being the Irish DF, we do the same training and run the SAME risk. he was unlucky even though he too was properly trained and surrounded by an environment made as safe as possible for what he was doing. All it takes is one person to slip and fall in mud etc, mid shot with safety off and someone gets hurt. Anyway, this thread now has f**k all to do with hatred of the DF.

tac foley

BostonB wrote: »

The point still stands that other professions are more dangerous in relative terms per the numbers involved. If you consider how often you stand beside lethal spinning machinery, or working from heights or electricity on a daily basis.

Sir - you seem to have overlooked the point that the 'lethal spinning machinery, heights and electricity' are not actively doing their utmost best to kill you.

For those who choose to wear uniform, that simple fact persuades other people that they are live targets to be engaged and 'neutralised'.

tac

BostonB

tac foley wrote: »

Sir - you seem to have overlooked the point that the 'lethal spinning machinery, heights and electricity' are not actively doing their utmost best to kill you....

I suggest you don't test that theory when working with them. Gravity in particular doesn't generally miss.

tac foley

BostonB wrote: »

I suggest you don't test that theory when working with them. Gravity in particular doesn't generally miss.

Sir - again, you miss the point. These phenomena are not sentient, but either forces of nature or the products of human generation. But they do not actively or intentionally try and kill you because you are 'their enemy'.

Unless, of course, you believe that these forces of nature have a life and will of their own...

tac

BostonB

Morphéus wrote: »

....Anyway, this thread now has f**k all to do with hatred of the DF.

I don't see how you can deny that peoples perception (hatred) is coloured by their opinion or indeed experience of the relative risks of different professions.

BostonB

tac foley wrote: »

Sir - again, you miss the point. These phenomena are not sentient, but either forces of nature or the products of human generation. But they do not actively or intentionally try and kill you because you are 'their enemy'.

Unless, of course, you believe that these forces of nature have a life and will of their own...

tac

The stats would suggest that the lack of sentience doesn't make them less dangerous.

twinytwo

BostonB wrote: »

I guess slagging off the rest of the public service, fireman, police, doctors nurses, etc isn't doing you any favours.

whatever about everyone one else... its impossible to hate a guy who will walk into a burning building to pull your ass out.... that said i wonder is it as bad here as it is in england.

I remember watching a show on ITV or one of the like a few months back, where a women fell down an old mining shaft in wales and the health and saftey guys prevented the firemen from lifting her out with one of their harnessess as it wasnt "safe" and in breach of regulations.

They were told they would have to wait for specalist equipment to be flown in that would take 4 hours. They even tried to get the medic that was with her out of the hole... he told them what to do with themselves.

The equipment took so long the women died of a heart attack.

There was also a case of a policeman being brought up on report for breaching health and saftey regulation by going into a icy river to pull a man out.....

Whats next???... soldiers arnt allowed to go to war any more?

KickstartHeart

Is there a point to your argument Boston?

In the UK the figures of farm deaths a year aren't far off the deaths of soldiers per year...and they're fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan in the worst war since the Korean War.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-11682742

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AonYZs4MzlZbcGhOdG0zTG1EWkVPanRFU1JZNW8wZHc#gid=0

http://www.hse.gov.uk/press/2010/hse-fatals0910ag.htm

Please stop going on about this. Your'e clogging up the threads that we use to discuss these topics.

I promise you, a tour in Chad is definitely a lot more risky than farming. There are many many variables and different things to take into consideration if you want to compare the danger levels of service in the Defence Forces to other jobs. Simply looking at yearly numbers of accidents and fatalities does not look deeply enough at the issue.

Other than that farming is the most dangerous job in Ireland, have you anything better to add to this thread that is asking why people dislike or don't appreciate what their country's military do?

groundshaker

KickstartHeart wrote: »

Is there a point to your argument Boston?

In the UK the figures of farm deaths a year aren't far off the deaths of soldiers per year...and they're fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan in the worst war since the Korean War.


What ya have to remember there though is the amount of people farming is massive compared to britains troop numbers in afganistan, and even greater still if ya take into account those who are on the front line...