Recruitment for British army soars in Republic of Ireland

Timberrrrrrrr · 17-01-2017 11:53PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Like a Coke ad preys on aspirations? They sell a dream life.

Please show me one of these ads that "sell the dream life".

Fratton Fred · 17-01-2017 11:54PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Here Fred, did you miss it? There was no IRA of any merit when they arrived.

Hmm, questionable. Very questionable.

Jawgap · 17-01-2017 11:55PM

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Please show me one of these ads that "sell the dream life".

I think a more incisive mind would've used Apple as the example, Coke, like Pepsi, is just sugar water

FrancieBrady · 18-01-2017 12:00AM

Jawgap wrote: »

Soldiering is not all about combat......I think the ratio of support to combat troops (T3R) is about 3:1 - in other words most personnel aren't on the pointy end of the stick.

It's quite possible to join and not go into a line formation......or even join and go into the line as something like a combat medic to look after casualties.

I know that. But you are in an army, you are part of what they do.
I have already asked the question, what are you doing supplying support to a foreign army?
Personally I don't think you can wash your hands so blithely.

FrancieBrady · 18-01-2017 12:04AM

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Please show me one of these ads that "sell the dream life".

Ah here :rolleyes: If you don't get the parallel to aspirational advertising, I can't really help you.

maryishere · 18-01-2017 12:10AM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I know that. But you are in an army, you are part of what they do.

And what do they do? Last year no UK army/ service personell died on active service. If they do anything, they save lives as they act as a deterrent, or they act in a peace keeping role, or in case of major natural disasters / emergencies.

Parachutes wrote: »

I don't see anyone ever complaining about Commonwealth citizens joining and while we're not in the Commonwealth, we are certainly closer to the UK culturally, economically and geographically than the majority of those nations so why shouldn't Irishmen and woman who want a career in soldiering join up if they can't get into the PDF?

Correct. FrancieBrady saw nothing wrong with the PIRA murdering people , yet he condemns Irish people furthering their careers abroad. Says it all.

Jawgap · 18-01-2017 12:10AM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I know that. But you are in an army, you are part of what they do.
I have already asked the question, what are you doing supplying support to a foreign army?
Personally I don't think you can wash your hands so blithely.

Well I've one relative currently, one retired, two (now deceased) who served as senior non-comms, one (now deceased) who was a warrant officer.......all the way back to one great grandfather who was wounded in WWI. And another (Aldo deceased) who served in the Merchant Navy on the Arctic Convoys during WWII.

As I said the relative currently serving reckons he's had (and continues to have) opportunities he'd have never got if he'd stayed kicking about in Dublin. He's done everything from free-fall parachuting to gaining a mountain leader's qualification to learning to ski.

And apparently in the next few months he's off to train as a medic (having matured over the last few years).

FrancieBrady · 18-01-2017 12:13AM

Jawgap wrote: »

Well I've one relative currently, one retired, two (now deceased) who served as senior non-comms, one (now deceased) who was a warrant officer.......all the way back to one great grandfather who was wounded in WWI. And another (Aldo deceased) who served in the Merchant Navy on the Arctic Convoys during WWII.

As I said the relative currently serving reckons he's had (and continues to have) opportunities he'd have never got if he'd stayed kicking about in Dublin. He's done everything from free-fall parachuting to gaining a mountain leader's qualification to learning to ski.

And apparently in the next few months he's off to train as a medic (having matured over the last few years).

Lucky boys.

Since WW2 8000 BA personnel have died in combat and countless injured/maimed. Not to mention the number they killed and maimed in return.

All somebody's loved relatives.

Fratton Fred · 18-01-2017 12:13AM

Jawgap wrote: »

He's done everything from free-fall parachuting to gaining a mountain leader's qualification to learning to ski.

The Royal Marine mountain leaders course?

Jawgap · 18-01-2017 12:15AM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Lucky boys.

Since WW2 8000 BA personnel have died in combat and countless injured/maimed. Not to mention the number they killed and maimed in return.

All somebody's loved relatives.

......and how many have gone through the books over the same period?

You're a great man for throwing up figures without context......

Jawgap · 18-01-2017 12:20AM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

The Royal Marine mountain leaders course?

I think it was a civilian run one that they were given the opportunity to go on - they spent time in Brecon, Snowdonia and the Lakes......in January last year!!

FrancieBrady · 18-01-2017 12:23AM

Jawgap wrote: »

......and how many have gone through the books over the same period?

You're a great man for throwing up figures without context......

You are doing a Coke/Apple ad and presenting your experience as the only one.
The reality is different for many.

maryishere · 18-01-2017 12:32AM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Lucky boys.

Since WW2 8000 BA personnel have died in combat and countless injured/maimed.

All countries have fatalities in their armies. Look at our Irish army. Even look at the Gardai. As someone else pointed out, at least 23 serving Gardaí have been murdered by individuals or groups associated with the IRA/dissident republican paramilitary and terrorist groups, this being the most common cause of death apart from accidents.

Jawgap · 18-01-2017 12:32AM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You are doing a Coke/Apple ad and presenting your experience as the only one.
The reality is different for many.

You threw up casualty figures without context.......

8000 is a lot if only 10000 went through the ranks in the period under consideration......it's less significant if 1,000,000 went through.

Put it this way, three times as many people died on Irish roads since 1959 (when records began) than died in combat while serving in the BA since WWII (according to your stats).......now do you see why context is important?

And in the year the BA had zero combat casualties, there were 139 deaths on the roads here.

wotzgoingon · 18-01-2017 12:35AM

Any Irish person serving or thinking about serving in the scumbag army across the pond is not right in the fúcking head.

Unless of course they are thinking of taking it down from the inside........

FrancieBrady · 18-01-2017 12:36AM

Jawgap wrote: »

You threw up casualty figures without context.......

8000 is a lot if only 10000 went through the ranks in the period under consideration......it's less significant if 1,000,000 went through.

Put it this way, three times as many people died on Irish roads since 1959 (when records began) than died in combat while serving in the BA since WWII (according to your stats).......now do you see why context is important?

And in the year the BA had zero combat casualties, there were 139 deaths on the roads here.

I didn't put them up out of context, I presented them in answer to your post that was making a point about getting through army life unscathed.

The rest of your point is about nothing to do with mine.

Jawgap · 18-01-2017 12:39AM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

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

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I didn't put them up out of context, I presented them in answer to your post that was making a point about getting through army life unscathed.

The rest of your point is about nothing to do with mine.

Of course you put them up without context because you never mentioned the size of the 'population' your sample was drawn from!!

This is what happens when you let Shinnernomics into your life - ideas about statistical significance get quickly abandoned

smurgen · 18-01-2017 12:42AM

maryishere wrote: »

You think there was an honour in IRA terrorists dying "for their country"

So allied soldiers who risked their lives,( and some who paid the ultimate price so their mates - and you - could live) to liberate Europe from the Nazis was tragically pointless, according to you.

The British were no better than the Nazi's just about hid their hatred a bit better.If I was English in particular i'd be ****ing mortified at the history of my country.I cannot believe that conquering a country is seen as something to be proud off.no matter how many years in the past.

FrancieBrady · 18-01-2017 12:45AM

Jawgap wrote: »

Of course you put them up without context because you never mentioned the size of the 'population' your sample was drawn from!!

This is what happens when you let Shinnernomics into your life - ideas about statistical significance get quickly abandoned

Eh neither did you and neither did you present the other side of the experience, the one that started this particular bit of the conversation. Dying.

Context indeed.

* and the 'shinner' attempt to troll again. Well done, we know what point we are at when that gets fired in to the debate.

maryishere · 18-01-2017 12:46AM

smurgen wrote: »

I cannot believe that conquering a country is seen as something to be proud off.no matter how many years in the past.

You are aware that all European countries eg Spain Italy France Germany had colonies throughout the world? And if Britain did not defend itself it would have been invaded by France or Spain or Germany?

maryishere · 18-01-2017 12:50AM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Dying.

Are you against people joining the Gardai because 23 serving Gardaí have been murdered by individuals or groups associated with the IRA/dissident republican paramilitary and terrorist groups?

I know you condoned the PIRA murdering northern police / RUC, I wonder what is your attitude towards the murder of our Gardai ?

18-01-2017 12:52AM

maryishere wrote: »

You are aware that all European countries eg Spain Italy France Germany had colonies throughout the world? And if Britain did not defend itself it would have been invaded by France or Spain or Germany?

So are you against the practice or what? Your answer isn't clear.

smurgen · 18-01-2017 01:01AM

maryishere wrote: »

You are aware that all European countries eg Spain Italy France Germany had colonies throughout the world? And if Britain did not defend itself it would have been invaded by France or Spain or Germany?

How did setting up concentration camps (the first in history) in South Africa help stop Britain from being invaded by a European neighbour?

maryishere · 18-01-2017 01:03AM

Deleted User wrote: »

So are you against the practice or what? Your answer isn't clear.

The practice of what? Colonisation? The ancient Greeks, were at it, and you are bound to have heard of the Roman Empire too? You cannot change the history of the world, how America, Australia etc was settled / colonised. The European countries like Spain, Italy , France etc etc were at it, as was Japan etc. You cannot be for or against what happened in the world over thousands of years.

18-01-2017 01:15AM

maryishere wrote: »

The practice of what? Colonisation? The ancient Greeks, were at it, and you are bound to have heard of the Roman Empire too? You cannot change the history of the world, how America, Australia etc was settled / colonised. The European countries like Spain, Italy , France etc etc were at it, as was Japan etc. You cannot be for or against what happened in the world over thousands of years.

Now I'm confused considering you posted this previously:

So allied soldiers who risked their lives,( and some who paid the ultimate price so their mates - and you - could live) to liberate Europe from the Nazis was tragically pointless, according to you.

'You cannot be for or against' ???????

smurgen · 18-01-2017 01:17AM

maryishere wrote: »

The practice of what? Colonisation? The ancient Greeks, were at it, and you are bound to have heard of the Roman Empire too? You cannot change the history of the world, how America, Australia etc was settled / colonised. The European countries like Spain, Italy , France etc etc were at it, as was Japan etc. You cannot be for or against what happened in the world over thousands of years.

The English celebrate it though while the Germans have learned from past mistakes and look upon history with a non romantic view.

Junkyard Tom · 18-01-2017 01:21AM

Jawgap wrote: »

You're a great man for throwing up figures without context......

Allow me.

Since the so-called 'War on Terror' began, in Afghanistan UK military casualties numbered 15,459 affected. 134,780 soldiers have been deployed to Afghanistan since 2001 so that's greater than 1-in-10 physically affected, some with awful injuries like double/triple amputations, and that's before we even consider the psychological harm caused by conflict.

maryishere · 18-01-2017 01:22AM

smurgen wrote: »

How did setting up concentration camps (the first in history) in South Africa help stop Britain from being invaded by a European neighbour?

Those camps were not the first concentration camps in history. The United States government used them in America before that in 1838, for example.
As you mention the British in S. Africa, at the time ( about 1900 ) they were fighting the Boer people in the Second Boer War in South Africa. At first, the British were not able to beat the Boers. They reacted by putting the Boer fighters' family members into concentration camps. They did this so these family members could not give food or help to the Boer fighters. The Boers were dutch. Other European countries had colonies in Africa eg Italy had Ethiopia, Belgium had Congo, France had parts of N. Africa etc.
Interestingly, Britain was ahead of the curve / ahead of its time in human rights compared to the other countries eg 1807 Abolition of the Slave Trade Act.
1815: British pay Portugal £750,000 to cease their trade north of the Equator
1817: Spain paid £400,000 by British to cease trade to Cuba, Puerto Rico, and Santo Domingo.

maryishere · 18-01-2017 01:29AM

smurgen wrote: »

The English celebrate it though while the Germans have learned from past mistakes and look upon history with a non romantic view.

The British celebrate what? The prisons they had for a brief while while in S. Africa were nothing like the Nazi extermination camps. Even the many tens of thousands of South Africans who fought with the British in WW2 will tell you that.

smurgen · 18-01-2017 01:32AM

maryishere wrote: »

Those camps were not the first concentration camps in history. The United States government used them in America before that in 1838, for example.
As you mention the British in S. Africa, at the time ( about 1900 ) they were fighting the Boer people in the Second Boer War in South Africa. At first, the British were not able to beat the Boers. They reacted by putting the Boer fighters' family members into concentration camps. They did this so these family members could not give food or help to the Boer fighters. The Boers were dutch. Other European countries had colonies in Africa eg Italy had Ethiopia, Belgium had Congo, France had parts of N. Africa etc.
Interestingly, Britain was ahead of the curve / ahead of its time in human rights compared to the other countries eg 1807 Abolition of the Slave Trade Act.
1815: British pay Portugal £750,000 to cease their trade north of the Equator
1817: Spain paid £400,000 by British to cease trade to Cuba, Puerto Rico, and Santo Domingo.

They marched these people for days to the concentration camps.thousands of black south africans died in these camps.it was a land grab operation and men were told to take whatever they wanted

Recruitment for British army soars in Republic of Ireland

Comments