This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Why I disagree with Help for Heroes

Scroll to see replies

Basically, I just wanted to see if my opinion is, in fact, completely ludicrous, or if it bares credence. By nature, I am far-left in ideology, however my peers find my discussion of this topic "disgusting".

So, why do I disagree with this appeal? Foremost, I believe that anyone who joins this war condones it. Secondly, if one man is to kill another, regardless of circumstance, I see him only as a murderer. Finally, the State sends these people to war, the State should ensure they are comfortable in return for their compliance and effort.

Discuss.

Scumbag much?

Reply 41

Drewski

Original post by Glenbot3000

I can understand he believes he is fighting for my freedom and I respect this fact, however I can't respect someone who fights in an illegitimate war.

Imagine being the poor Afghani public, having to endure an unjust occupation.

The Afghanistan conflict is many things, but none of them are illegal. The Iraq conflict was of questionable legitimacy [which we know since it happened - the Gov's lawyers said beforehand that it was legal, so that's what the Armed Services went in on, hindsight is a wonderful thing, but doesn't change the past], but the Afghan conflict has long been based on legitimate actions sanctioned by international bodies.

That it's been done badly and mismanaged is a very different thing altogether.

Reply 42

MissMoanie

Well it's not his fault the Government sent him there is it? So how can you have no respect for him? It is the Government you should lack respect for, not my boyfriend.

Poor Afghan's? Many of them are glad we are there and are greatful for our help and there is much evidence to support this. It is only the Taliban that are resisting the Coalition Forces now. My boyfriend is already planning on taking sweets out there for the Afghan children and has asked me to send him some whilst he is there so that he doesn't run out.

He doesn't have to agree with the War. I think this makes him all the braver that he is fighting for something he doesn't believe in the protect the people of the United Kingdom.

Reply 43

Glenbot3000

Original post by Drewski

There are AIDS charities designed to help drug users and former prostitutes who make themselves ill in even less morally dubious ways - should we disapprove of their [the charity's] work too?

Fair point. My argument would be that warfare is more destructive than any AIDS epidemic or drug abuse. The term "poverty trap" also comes to mind. People often get into such situations through a cyclic culture, whereas people actively join the armed forces.

Original post by Drewski

And the fact also remains that H4H is a charity set up to help these people when they can no longer help themselves. Yes, the Government who sent them should also be the Government who supports them afterwards - but they don't. Why shouldn't a voluntary organistion take up the slack if they want to?

My point, moreover, is that money should be spent more on pressuring government into handing over more money to injured soldiers. This would have much more beneficial long-term solutions.

Reply 44

thisisnew

Original post by Glenbot3000

if one man is to kill another, regardless of circumstance, I see him only as a murderer

So let's say I save your future son/daughter from a vile pedophile but just happen to kill the attacker in the process you'd see me as a murderer?

As a developed and powerful nation do you not feel like you should help smaller and poorer countries who are being oppressed by brutal dictators and regimes or would you rather cover your ears and be like "lalalla not my problem"?

Reply 45

Drewski

Original post by Glenbot3000

My point, moreover, is that money should be spent more on pressuring government into handing over more money to injured soldiers. This would have much more beneficial long-term solutions.

Agreed. But that doesn't help Private Bloggs who gets his legs blown off by an IED and who now needs help to carry on with the rest of his life. He needs support now. Plus, the Armed Forces are realistic, they know the money pot isn't bottomless, they do what they can, but they can't do everything they want to, especially in the current climate.

Reply 46

TimmonaPortella

Original post by Glenbot3000

Yes, the omnipotent, omniscient State should chew our food for us, and wipe our arses, too. (It's a war, if you didn't ****ing notice.)

Soldiers do not choose their fight. The people of the country do, albeit by proxy. You cannot hold them responsible for the wars they fight; they are doing the nation's bidding, nothing more.

Reply 47

Glenbot3000

Original post by thisisnew

Firstly, yes I would. That person would obviously have deep-set psychological issues which are not resolved through death, surprisingly.

And our first retort should be diplomacy. This was not exhausted. Instead we waded in with barbaric warfare, with barbaric consequences.

Reply 48

calibrations

A man with a knife is trying to kill your mother. You are 100 metres away with a sniper rifle and a crack shot. Do you take the shot?

Of course you do. Does that really make you a murderer? Surely taking the shot would save an innocent life?

Reply 49

username549578

[QUOTE="Allyx;28628676"]

Original post by Glenbot3000

So, why do I disagree with this appeal? Foremost, I believe that anyone who joins this war condones it. QUOTE]

Utter bull****. Those who join the war who condone it?? Thats very untrue. My best friends boyfriend who died in august out there did NOT agree with the war or condone it at all!!! Same for many other soldiers. But it is a JOB and in a job you do what is required of you, whether it be serving in cyprus, this country, germany or afghan, you obviously know NOTHING about real soldiers.

Why sign up for a job you dont agree with? If nobody signs up, there wouldnt be a job to do. However then conscription would probably be brought back...

Reply 50

MissMoanie

Why don't you just drop it with your stupid comments now OP? You are offensive. And don't tell me about freedom of speech, if you had a decent arguement then I wouldn't mind, but you don't. You are stupid and immature and I hope one day you don't need the help of a soldier...Cos he shouldn't help you. But he still would. Because they are Heroes. Go take your silly remarks elsewhere.

Reply 51

b33tlejuice

Original post by Glenbot3000

My point, moreover, is that money should be spent more on pressuring government into handing over more money to injured soldiers. This would have much more beneficial long-term solutions.

Thats why hundreds of charities exist, because the government doesnt have the money to pay for things like that. All charities can apply for grants etc but in order to sustain themselves they have to rely on fundraising etc... the government simply can not afford to pay for the best of everything they will only recieve a limited amount, so the charities are essentially there to provide services (usually for free or donation based) to either prep up other government services or to offer a service the government doesnt do. If youre going to pick holes in help for heroes why not sit and pick holes in all the charities?

Reply 52

Mighty Moe

Original post by Glenbot3000

But the fundamental still remains that they are supporting people who are illegally invading countries abroad to the general discontent of their country and murdering their civilians.

You're talking crap. The fundamental is that you're a bit of a prick.

Reply 53

Glenbot3000

Original post by TimmonaPortella

Firstly, for all the money ploughed into our armed forces, a few hundred million to sort out home casualties surely wouldn't go amiss in our current state system.

And 1.1 million people marched on the streets of London. If that's what you call a democracy, I shudder at the thought of your opinions on communism or fascism.

Reply 54

usainlightning

Original post by Glenbot3000

You seem to forget that polls show that the majority of Afghanis support the occupation.

Reply 55

thisisnew

Original post by Glenbot3000

How about somebody who wades into a school full of young children with an automatic rifle and starts shooting indiscriminately. Would you take the opportunity to shoot and kill him or would you ask him to see the error of his ways and to seek help?

Diplomacy with the Taliban? Come on... And how was the warfare barbaric? Unfortunately civilians have died but the rules of engagement have since been tightened which makes it even harder for them to pick out insurgents who meld back into the public. You know, the Taliban don't wear bright pink t-shirts and wave flags... They practically use the petrified civilians around them as shields.

Reply 56

harrietta

Xfactor doing that song for Help the Heroes, omg, it was like The Daily Mail on television.

Reply 57

Drewski

Original post by Glenbot3000

It should, but it isn't. Until it is, why shouldn't others make up the difference?

And numbers can say anything. 1 million marched against Iraq, true.

59 million didn't.

Reply 58

TimmonaPortella

Original post by Glenbot3000

Yes, and there's ~45 million registered voters in the country. What's your point? the voice of 1.1 million should override the other 43.9?

Your first point isn't a reason to object to a charity campaign. Perhaps the money should be provided by the MoD; I'm not going to comment on that. The fact that the money isn't, in fact, there, whether or not it should be, is the only relevant issue.

Reply 59

MissMoanie

Original post by Drewski

It should, but it isn't. Until it is, why shouldn't others make up the difference?

And numbers can say anything. 1 million marched against Iraq, true.

59 million didn't.

Precisely. 59 million didn't. OP - be quiet now!