Recruitment for British army soars in Republic of Ireland

Jawgap · 19-01-2017 10:18PM

smurgen wrote: »

The British were key players in it sure.as lapdogs for the U.S i believe they're obliged to take part in whatever the latests attrocity is.

Yeah, they were (as were the Poles, Aussies and PUK).....but it doesn't change the fact that they had nothing to do with the conception, promulgation and prosecution of "shock and awe" which was a wholly American idea, not, as you wrongly suggested, anything to do with the Brits.

19-01-2017 10:18PM

maryishere wrote: »

If every nation was cowardly enough to attempt to stay out of the war, Hitler would have had a field day. As it was, he invaded some neutral countries and deported some of their citizens to extermination camps etc.

Who dismissed every imperial aggression? We were talking about WW2, and responding to Nazism / fighting the Axis forces was not " imperial aggression".

Ah mary we know the game you are playing. You don't consider Nazi occupation & exploitation of eastern Europe as a form of colonialism because you've refused to offer a judgment on the practice as a whole so far in this thread since the British are indelibly linked with the practice.

maryishere · 19-01-2017 10:19PM

smurgen wrote: »

Wait i thought you didn't like talking about old wars?

No problem talking about old wars but you just want to cherry pick the worst British action and bash them with that, instead of looking at everything in context.

smurgen wrote: »

Ah sure while we're at that period in time...how about the British bombing on Dresden that killed 25k civilians?

Actually it was not just British: it was 722 heavy bombers of the British Royal Air Force (RAF) and 527 of the United States Army Air Forces (USAAF). I guess they justified it as the Nazis had bombed cities like Coventry first, and years before hand. A post war report defended the operation "as the justified bombing of a strategic target, which they claimed was a major rail transport and communication centre, housing 110 factories and 50,000 workers in support of the German war effort.". Perhaps it shorted the war a bit. It certainly demoralised Germany at the time, and many of their troops. Still very sad.

Now please answer the following...given DeValera killed some IRA men in jail in his time - do you think if Thatcher in the eighies had killed some IRA men in jail - or had been as brutal on IRA prisoners as DeValera had been - would have IRA activity have reduced like it did in WW2?

Fratton Fred · 19-01-2017 10:19PM

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

The British, as regards foreign policy, have proved themselves utterly amoral when it comes to furthering their interests.

Amoral?

Who the **** has morals when it comes to their national interests?

smurgen · 19-01-2017 10:22PM

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Saddam was a brutal dictator and let's not forget that Britain helped the fucker build up his chemical weapons capability.

The British, as regards foreign policy, have proved themselves utterly amoral when it comes to furthering their interests.

Funny how they're not helping little old Yemen against Saudi Arabia?!funny how all their arms deals with Saudi is still going ahead despite war crimes? http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/bae-systems-saudi-arabia-arms-deal-yemen-war-crimes-a7348156.html

maryishere · 19-01-2017 10:24PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Ah mary we know the game you are playing. You don't consider Nazi occupation & exploitation of eastern Europe as a form of colonialism because you've refused to offer a judgment on the practice as a whole so far in this thread since the British are indelibly linked with the practice.

Here is a list , a long list of German colonies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_former_German_colonies
Which countries on the list are you referring to?

FrancieBrady · 19-01-2017 10:25PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Amoral?

Who the **** has morals when it comes to their national interests?

I just watched a glowing uncritical review of Obama there, who ordered the dropping of over 26,000 bombs this year alone. He won the Nobel Peace prize, Winston must have been one bad bastard, because he couldn't win it.

Jawgap · 19-01-2017 10:26PM

smurgen wrote: »

Funny how they're not helping little old Yemen against Saudi Arabia?!funny how all their arms deals with Saudi is still going ahead despite war crimes? http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/bae-systems-saudi-arabia-arms-deal-yemen-war-crimes-a7348156.html

Yeah, there's no oil there that's why they're not helping and that's why they're content to keep selling arms to the Saudis -

what? You thought you'd stumbled on the equivalent of the Third Secret of Fatima?

I'm guessing as soon as we wean ourselves off our hydrocarbon addiction the "west" will be a lot less interested in that part of the world.

Fratton Fred · 19-01-2017 10:27PM

smurgen wrote: »

Why would you put yourself in the position that a politician will essentially be able to decide your fate?

So no one should join an army, ever?

smurgen · 19-01-2017 10:29PM

Jawgap wrote: »

Yeah, there's no oil there that's why they're not helping and that's why they're content to keep selling arms to the Saudis -

what? You thought you'd stumbled on the equivalent of the Third Secret of Fatima?

I'm guessing as soon as we wean ourselves off our hydrocarbon addiction the "west" will be a lot less interested in that part of the world.

Oh don't be under any illusions,i'm well versed in how cyncial all the western military interventions are.you're literally cannon fodder for the politician and business men as soon as you join the war machine which is why you'd be very short sighted to sign up for the British Army.you guys in here talking or skiing trips etc making it sound like the cub scouts.makes me ****ing sick.

Fratton Fred · 19-01-2017 10:30PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I just watched a glowing uncritical review of Obama there, who ordered the dropping of over 26,000 bombs this year alone. He won the Nobel Peace prize, Winston must have been one bad bastard, because he couldn't win it.

Wow, he must have been busy with all those orders. Impressive.

19-01-2017 10:34PM

maryishere wrote: »

Here is a list , a long list of German colonies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_former_German_colonies
Which countries on the list are you referring to?

So 'Lebensraum' has no characteristics of colonialism?

FrancieBrady · 19-01-2017 10:34PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Wow, he must have been busy with all those orders. Impressive.

He was busy being a hypocrite anyhow.

maryishere · 19-01-2017 10:35PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I just watched a glowing uncritical review of Obama there, who ordered the dropping of over 26,000 bombs this year alone.

And yet your fuhrer , Mr. Adams, was upset he was held by security outside the White House and not allowed in?

Fratton Fred · 19-01-2017 10:36PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

He was busy being a hypocrite anyhow.

But he's a lovely guy, that's why we named a petrol station after him.

Jawgap · 19-01-2017 10:37PM

smurgen wrote: »

Oh don't be under any illusions,i'm well versed in how cyncial all the western military interventions are.you're literally cannon fodder for the politician and business men as soon as you join the war machine which is why you'd be very short sighted to sign up for the British Army.you guys in here talking or skiing trips etc making it sound like the cub scouts.makes me ****ing sick.

Well, it's closer to the venture scouts.

I'm guessing people's tunes will rapidly change when next Putin turns off the gas, or the Iranians block the Straits of Hormuz with Chinese Silkworms or Egypt blocks Suez and petrol and diesel double in price.

Doubtless people will be happy enough to see the Americans (or even the Brits) "cynically" stick a carrier group in there to sort matters out.

It seems we're quite happy to enjoy the cheap oil that's come about as a consequence of the Saudis trying to cynically stick it to the Iranians, I wonder if we'd prefer them to be less confrontational if meant more expensive fuel.

smurgen · 19-01-2017 10:37PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

So no one should join an army, ever?

Some militia systems such as the Swiss I would condone.other than that no.

FrancieBrady · 19-01-2017 10:39PM

Fratton Fred wrote: »

But he's a lovely guy, that's why we named a petrol station after him.

You did? Why?

FrancieBrady · 19-01-2017 10:42PM

Jawgap wrote: »

Well, it's closer to the venture scouts.

I'm guessing people's tunes will rapidly change when next Putin turns off the gas, or the Iranians block the Straits of Hormuz with Chinese Silkworms or Egypt blocks Suez and petrol and diesel double in price.

Doubtless people will be happy enough to see the Americans (or even the Brits) "cynically" stick a carrier group in there to sort matters out.

It seems we're quite happy to enjoy the cheap oil that's come about as a consequence of the Saudis trying to cynically stick it to the Iranians, I wonder if we'd prefer them to be less confrontational if meant more expensive fuel.

Ah the old, we are responsible for the mess the warmongers and greed merchants made of the world stick. Who knew that old chestnut would be thrown on the fire.

maryishere · 19-01-2017 10:43PM

smurgen wrote: »

Some militia systems such as the Swiss I would condone.other than that no.

And given Nazi Germany invaded neutral countries, and deported their citizens etc, who do you think should fight such regimes as the Nazis?

Or in more recent times, Kuwait was invaded by Iraq (1990). Kuwait had the 4th biggest army in the world at the time : Kuwaits military might was more comparable to that of Switzerland.

You have not answered the following: ..given DeValera killed some IRA men in jail in his time - do you think if Thatcher in the eighies had killed some IRA men in jail - or had been as brutal on IRA prisoners as DeValera had been - would have IRA activity have reduced like it did in WW2?

19-01-2017 10:46PM

maryishere wrote: »

And given Nazi Germany invaded neutral countries, and deported their citizens etc, who do you think should fight such regimes as the Nazis?

Would you include the USSR as one of the 'good guys' mary?

Jawgap · 19-01-2017 10:49PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Ah the old, we are responsible for the mess the warmongers and greed merchants made of the world stick. Who knew that old chestnut would be thrown on the fire.

It doesn't mean it's not true.

Our economy runs on hydrocarbons - we've built a society that is based on burning things. And we're happy to insulate ourselves from the consequences of that.

In the Irish case, we'll sell our beef to anyone who'll take it, no questions asked about where the money comes to pay for it and who it will be used to feed......

.....and even the Shinners fall over themselves to get an hour with Obama....who I have a lot of time for, but who presided over a massive expansion of the drone strike programme and whose administration prosecuted more whistleblowers than the last three combined!

So, yeah, I know how culpable I am in the order of things and I'm honest enough to admit it.

maryishere · 19-01-2017 10:52PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Would you include the USSR as one of the 'good guys' mary?

When? It was correct to help them defeat Nazi Germany in WW2 (Arctic convoys etc ) after Germany invaded them, but overall, I would not be a fan of the USSR.

Junkyard Tom · 19-01-2017 10:54PM

Jawgap wrote: »

I'm guessing people's tunes will rapidly change when next Putin turns off the gas, or the Iranians block the Straits of Hormuz with Chinese Silkworms or Egypt blocks Suez and petrol and diesel double in price.

It would not be in Russia's interests to 'turn off the gas'.

It would not be in Iran's interests to block the Straits of Hormuz.

The Egyptians blocked the Suez Canal as retaliation for the invasion of Sinai by Israel, France and Britain. The Americans told them to get the fuck out and they did as they were told.

It seems we're quite happy to enjoy the cheap oil that's come about as a consequence of the Saudis trying to cynically stick it to the Iranians

The former does not follow, or precede, the latter.

FrancieBrady · 19-01-2017 10:56PM

Jawgap wrote: »

It doesn't mean it's not true.

Our economy runs on hydrocarbons - we've built a society that is based on burning things. And we're happy to insulate ourselves from the consequences of that.

In the Irish case, we'll sell our beef to anyone who'll take it, no questions asked about where the money comes to pay for it and who it will be used to feed......

.....and even the Shinners fall over themselves to get an hour with Obama....who I have a lot of time for, but who presided over a massive expansion of the drone strike programme and whose administration prosecuted more whistleblowers than the last three combined!

So, yeah, I know how culpable I am in the order of things and I'm honest enough to admit it.

I also know what you know. But how often is the alternate voice listened to?
The one that had the solutions here on this island? 40 yrs of death and carnage to get ALL the people around a table as equals?
How often is the alternate voice listened to as boys get their 'jollies' with 'toys' and their new found 'mates'?
Very rarely.

Jawgap · 19-01-2017 10:59PM

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

It would not be in Russia's interests to 'turn off the gas'.

It would not be in Iran's interests to block the Straits of Hormuz.

The Egyptians blocked the Suez Canal as retaliation for the invasion of Sinai by Israel, France and Britain. The Americans told them to get the fuck out and they did as they were told.

The former does not follow, or precede, the latter.

Depends on the timing - given the fact they've done it before, no reason to think they won't do it again......

.......and do you really think a theocracy like Iran engages in a rational analysis of what it's national interest is?

Or for those who need things explained in simple terms, do you think the sect running the country, that conceived the notion of religion-driven suicide attack nearly a thousand years ago won't act in a way that damages their country, if it means damaging an enemy?

Timberrrrrrrr · 19-01-2017 10:59PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Would you include the USSR as one of the 'good guys' mary?

There hasn't been a USSR since 1991

19-01-2017 10:59PM

maryishere wrote: »

When? It was correct to help them defeat Nazi Germany in WW2 (Arctic convoys etc ) after Germany invaded them, but overall, I would not be a fan of the USSR.

Since the large majority of the Wehrmacht was engaged and defeated on the Eastern Front it was the USSR that helped the west defeat the Nazis not the other way round.....

Fratton Fred · 19-01-2017 11:00PM

smurgen wrote: »

Some militia systems such as the Swiss I would condone.other than that no.

Nice, in an ideal world.

What do you propose the world does when the next Bosnia or Rwanda kicks off? The world just shrugs it's shoulders and decides it has nothing to do with us?

FrancieBrady · 19-01-2017 11:01PM

Jawgap wrote: »

Depends on the timing - given the fact they've done it before, no reason to think they won't do it again......

.......and do you really think a theocracy like Iran engages in a rational analysis of what it's national interest is?

Or for those who need things explained in simple terms, do you think the sect running the country, that conceived the notion of religion-driven suicide attack nearly a thousand years ago won't act in a way that damages their country, if it means damaging an enemy?

Arrogance or what?
Rational analysis? Have you heard of Brexit?

Recruitment for British army soars in Republic of Ireland

Comments