Recruitment for British army soars in Republic of Ireland

maryishere · 13-01-2017 10:45AM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Most if not all acts of violence in Britain in the last 50 yrs have been carried out by people with British citizenship who would qualify to the highest (foreigners debarred) echelons of the RAF.

I would say many of the acts of terrorism carried out in the UK in the past 50 years were carried out by people who had not British passports. Some were carried out by people who lived outside the UK jurisdiction.

As an aside, 38.5% of Catholics in N. Ireland choose to have a UK passport. 40.5% of Catholics in N. Ireland choose to have an Irish passport.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_Northern_Ireland

I know someone from the Republic who wanted to be a pilot in the RAF so he simply went to university in N.I., worked for a year or 2 and before he knew it, the 5 years were up.

FrancieBrady · 13-01-2017 10:49AM

maryishere wrote: »

I would say many of the acts of terrorism carried out in the UK in the past 50 years were carried out by people who had not British passports. Some were carried out by people who lived outside the UK jurisdiction.

The point is they could easily sidestep the BA system of discrimination and get to fly planes. And I did say 'most acts'...
Should a woman tolerate discrimination just because she is a 'woman' in this day and age?

maryishere · 13-01-2017 11:04AM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The point is they could easily sidestep the BA system of discrimination and get to fly planes.

No, most people who carried out acts of violence in the UK in the past 50 years could not have flown planes, and no, the RAF selection process for pilots is not meant as discrimination but instead serves to find those people best suited to serving as pilots, who are not "foreign mercenaries" as you put it.

maryishere · 13-01-2017 11:09AM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Should a woman tolerate discrimination just because she is a 'woman' in this day and age?

No and I would imagine there are equal opportunities in this day and age. Most armies in the world though comprise mostly men though, I would imagine. Even in our Irish army, they currently have a gender imbalance of roughly 94% – 6% with males dominating. No women whatsoever hold rank higher than that of lieutenant colonel in the Irish defence forces. The British army has a female major general. ( Brig Susan Ridge, who is Director General Army Legal Services in charge of a team of 130 lawyers.)

FrancieBrady · 13-01-2017 11:20AM

maryishere wrote: »

No, most people who carried out acts of violence in the UK in the past 50 years could not have flown planes, and no, the RAF selection process for pilots is not meant as discrimination but instead serves to find those people best suited to serving as pilots, who are not "foreign mercenaries" as you put it.

Why not?

FrancieBrady · 13-01-2017 11:23AM

maryishere wrote: »

No and I would imagine there are equal opportunities in this day and age. Most armies in the world though comprise mostly men though, I would imagine. Even in our Irish army, they currently have a gender imbalance of roughly 94% – 6% with males dominating. No women whatsoever hold rank higher than that of lieutenant colonel in the Irish defence forces. The British army has a female major general. ( Brig Susan Ridge, who is Director General Army Legal Services in charge of a team of 130 lawyers.)

Why should a foreign member of the British army tolerate arbitrary ceilings then?
Arbitrary in the sense that the biggest threat to Britain, so far, comes from people who were 'citizens' of Britain.

Fratton Fred · 13-01-2017 12:25PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Why should a foreign member of the British army tolerate arbitrary ceilings then?
Arbitrary in the sense that the biggest threat to Britain, so far, comes from people who were 'citizens' of Britain.

like these

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_O%27Connell_(Irish_republican)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liam_Quinn

Irish citizens have been the biggest threat to British civilians over the last fifty years.

Fratton Fred · 13-01-2017 12:26PM

BalcombeSt4 wrote: »

Or the people who carried out
Benny's Bar bombing
Ramble Inn
McGurks
Dublin 1972
Dublin 1973
Dublin & Monaghan
Dublin Airport Bombing
Rose & Crown Bar
Kellys Bar
Miami Showband
Reavey & O'Dowd killings
Hillcrest Bar
Chlorane Bar
Belfast & Coleraine attacks
Stepp Inn
Miltown Cemetary
Avenue Bar
Sean Grahams Bookmakers
James Murray's Bookmakers
Greysteel
Loughingisland
Quinn Brothers firebombing
Paddy Wilson & Irene Andrews
Not to mention the Butchers or Glennane.

"One man, allegedly Stephen McKeag, opened fire on the customers with a Vz58 assault rifle and another volunteer, reportedly C Company's second-in-command, threw a Soviet-made fragmentation grenade, shouting "Youse deserve it, youse Fenian bastards" as he did so"

And that's only Loyalists not the massacres carried out by the British Army themselves (I mentioned the Falls Curfew) or acts of collusion

Most of these events recevied half the media coverage Republican outrages did, thats mabye why your so mixed up & the propaganda has you by the noes.

The truth is a pint of British blood is worth more than a pint of Irish blood.

did they kill a childrens tv presenter as well?

****ing hypocrite.:rolleyes:

FrancieBrady · 13-01-2017 12:31PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

like these

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_O%27Connell_(Irish_republican)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liam_Quinn

Irish citizens have been the biggest threat to British civilians over the last fifty years.

Spectacular miss of the point there Fred.

Fratton Fred · 13-01-2017 12:40PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Spectacular miss of the point there Fred.

not really, you're just talking utter ****e as usual.

The military has very strict residency restrictions on people who are given access to sensitive roles. big ****ing deal.

I heard the head of MI5 and MI6 are both British citizens as well, quick, call the PC police.

FrancieBrady · 13-01-2017 12:45PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

not really, you're just talking utter ****e as usual.

The military has very strict residency restrictions on people who are given access to sensitive roles. big ****ing deal.

I heard the head of MI5 and MI6 are both British citizens as well, quick, call the PC police.

I am amazed that somebody deemed fit to die on a battlefield is deemed not loyal or honourable (that is what is really being said here after all) enough to attain certain roles and astounded anyone can swallow that hard to join.

Jawgap · 13-01-2017 12:53PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I am amazed that somebody deemed fit to die on a battlefield is deemed not loyal or honourable (that is what is really being said here after all) enough to attain certain roles and astounded anyone can swallow that hard to join.

Not for the first time have you missed the point.....

....the idea is not to die on the battlefield.....it's to make the other poor dumb sonofabitch die on the battlefield

FrancieBrady · 13-01-2017 12:55PM

Jawgap wrote: »

Not for the first time have you missed the point.....

....the idea is not to die on the battlefield.....it's to make the other poor dumb sonofabitch die on the battlefield

A quick google will tell you that this 'idea' has failed almost 8000 times since WW2

Jawgap · 13-01-2017 12:58PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

A quick google will tell you that this 'idea' has failed almost 8000 times since WW2

Indeed, but the underlying principle is sound at the level of the combat soldier.

Plus, body counts, as the Americans found out in Vietnam, are an inefficient metric of success on the battlefield.

Fratton Fred · 13-01-2017 01:02PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I am amazed that somebody deemed fit to die on a battlefield is deemed not loyal or honourable (that is what is really being said here after all) enough to attain certain roles and astounded anyone can swallow hard enough to swallow that and join.

Do you think every soldier in every army has access to the same level of information and intelligence?

hell, do you think every Garda in the country is given the same level of intelligence?

FrancieBrady · 13-01-2017 01:02PM

Jawgap wrote: »

Indeed, but the underlying principle is sound at the level of the combat soldier.

Plus, body counts, as the Americans found out in Vietnam, are an inefficient metric of success on the battlefield.

I wasn't talking about perceptions of success.
I was expressing my amazement that anyone could serve in an organisation that ultimately expects you to die, if necessary, but doesn't think you are loyal or trustworthy enough to do other things. And that anyone would join such an organisation.

*Google has failed me on this, does anyone know how many Muslims are pilots in the RAF?

FrancieBrady · 13-01-2017 01:03PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Do you think every soldier in every army has access to the same level of information and intelligence?

hell, do you think every Garda in the country is given the same level of intelligence?

I am not aware of any bar on progressing in the Garda based on nationality. Is there one?

* by the way, there is no point in the 'look over there' approach fred. I think is wrong in any organisation/army anywhere.

Jawgap · 13-01-2017 01:11PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I wasn't talking about perceptions of success.
I was expressing my amazement that anyone could serve in an organisation that ultimately expects you to die, if necessary, but doesn't think you are loyal or trustworthy enough to do other things. And that anyone would join such an organisation.

*Google has failed me on this, does anyone know how many Muslims are pilots in the RAF?

Yeah, but its young people and they all think they're immortal.

There's any amount of studies showing how young people don't have a grasp on their mortality.....in fact there's almost as much material discussing the the psychological states combat personnel evolve through from 'rookie' ("it will never happen to me") to fatalist ("it's going to happen to me") to veteran ("it could happen to me if I take shortcuts and ignore my training").

The story is often told of the inexperienced US troops used on D-Day and when one group was receiving a briefing that amounted to "we expect 90% casualties in the first wave" everyone was looking at everyone else thinking "poor b@satards" because it never entered their heads they wouldn't be the 10% (one in each squad effectively) who would be uninsured at the end of the day.

Timberrrrrrrr · 13-01-2017 01:13PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I wasn't talking about perceptions of success.
I was expressing my amazement that anyone could serve in an organisation that ultimately expects you to die, if necessary, but doesn't think you are loyal or trustworthy enough to do other things. And that anyone would join such an organisation.

*Google has failed me on this, does anyone know how many Muslims are pilots in the RAF?

Probably the same amount that play football in the premier league, not really relevant is it?

FrancieBrady · 13-01-2017 01:16PM

Jawgap wrote: »

Yeah, but its young people and they all think they're immortal.

There's any amount of studies showing how young people don't have a grasp on their mortality.....in fact there's almost as much material discussing the the psychological states combat personnel evolve through from 'rookie' ("it will never happen to me") to fatalist ("it's going to happen to me") to veteran ("it could happen to me if I take shortcuts and ignore my training").

The story is often told of the inexperienced US troops used on D-Day and when one group was receiving a briefing that amounted to "we expect 90% casualties in the first wave" everyone was looking at everyone else thinking "poor b@satards" because it never entered their heads they wouldn't be the 10% (one in each squad effectively) who would be uninsured at the end of the day.

Are you saying it is alright because they are young and innocent?

FrancieBrady · 13-01-2017 01:19PM

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Probably the same amount that play football in the premier league, not really relevant is it?

480 muslims are in the army in general, it is a sizeable number. Can't find out how many are pilots though.

Timberrrrrrrr · 13-01-2017 01:20PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

480 muslims are in the army in general, it is a sizeable number. Can't find out how many are pilots though.

What if there are no Muslim pilots in the RAF? What are you trying to prove?

Jawgap · 13-01-2017 01:22PM

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Probably the same amount that play football in the premier league, not really relevant is it?

I think the point he misses, again, is that it is not only irrelevant it's also silly.

And if anyone wants to know about Muslims bombing Daesh they need look no further than some of the Islamic countries and the work being done by their air forces.

One of the UAE F-16 drivers over Syria a couple of years ago was a Major in their Air Force.

FrancieBrady · 13-01-2017 01:23PM

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

What if there are no Muslim pilots in the RAF? What are you trying to prove?

Look, if you don't know, that is fine. I am interested in knowing.

ohnonotgmail · 13-01-2017 01:24PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Look, if you don't know, that is fine. I am interested in knowing.

so you can use it to have another dig at the british?

Jawgap · 13-01-2017 01:25PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Are you saying it is alright because they are young and innocent?

No, I'm saying if you put a bunch of 20 year olds in a room and tell them most of them will be killed, they'll all assume they'll be the ones to survive.

It's why young people, and young men in particular, do reckless things like speed, engage in extreme sports and jump out of perfectly good aircraft to fight on the ground.

Timberrrrrrrr · 13-01-2017 01:27PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Look, if you don't know, that is fine. I am interested in knowing.

How many Mormons are there? How many Hinduism or Sikh's?

How many are captains in the Royal navy?

Honestly I'm trying to understand where you are going with this line of questioning.

Timberrrrrrrr · 13-01-2017 01:28PM

Jawgap wrote: »

No, I'm saying if you put a bunch of 20 year olds in a room and tell them most of them will be killed, they'll all assume they'll be the ones to survive.

It's why young people, and young men in particular, do reckless things like speed, engage in extreme sports and jump out of perfectly good aircraft to fight on the ground.

I think FB was born as a 45 yr old middle aged man so ever experienced the feeling of immortality:pac:

FrancieBrady · 13-01-2017 01:32PM

Jawgap wrote: »

No, I'm saying if you put a bunch of 20 year olds in a room and tell them most of them will be killed, they'll all assume they'll be the ones to survive.

It's why young people, and young men in particular, do reckless things like speed, engage in extreme sports and jump out of perfectly good aircraft to fight on the ground.

That has nothing to do with it, frankly.

Fratton Fred · 13-01-2017 01:33PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I am not aware of any bar on progressing in the Garda based on nationality. Is there one?

* by the way, there is no point in the 'look over there' approach fred. I think is wrong in any organisation/army anywhere.

it isn't look over there, it is cop the **** on.

nationality/citizenship is a factor in a number of jobs, not just military. it's like asking why someone would move the US when they have no chance of being president.

Recruitment for British army soars in Republic of Ireland

Comments