Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there! Sign in to have your say on this topicNew here? Join for free to post

Socialists Question Time AKA 'Ask a Socialist'

This thread is sponsored by:
Announcements Posted on
    • 16 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Skipper)
    No I wouldn't. I would not criticise for fighting there but this does not mean I would condone the abuse of Iraqi POW's. The two situations are very different- One situation where the soldier is doing his duty, the other where he is guilty of severe misconduct.
    What if the orders said to abuse POW's? The same situation, orders against conscience.

    In my view fighting for a war that you don't believe in makes you nothing short of a murderer.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ukebert)
    What if the orders said to abuse POW's? The same situation, orders against conscience.

    In my view fighting for a war that you don't believe in makes you nothing short of a murderer.
    You would never receive such orders and the situation is totally different anyway. As a soldier, fighting wars is your duty, abusing POW's is not. It is the politicians who deserve the criticism, not the British armed forces.
    • Thread Starter
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Skipper)
    You would never receive such orders and the situation is totally different anyway. As a soldier, fighting wars is your duty, abusing POW's is not. It is the politicians who deserve the criticism, not the British armed forces.
    It is also, incidentally, your duty to refuse to obey orders that are illegal. Just to point out.

    You're right - the politicians deserve more criticism, but that doesn't mean the soldiers are saints.

    Nor, which is the original point you raised, does it mean that the flag is somehow sacrosanct.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alasdair_R)
    It is also, incidentally, your duty to refuse to obey orders that are illegal. Just to point out.

    You're right - the politicians deserve more criticism, but that doesn't mean the soldiers are saints.

    Nor, which is the original point you raised, does it mean that the flag is somehow sacrosanct.
    I'm not trying to defend those who abuse POW's but I cannot agree that soldiers doing their duty should receive criticism from people who have never been in the military and never risked their life. Furthermore, surely your protest is against the government and the Labour Party, who took us to war rather than the country and the armed forces. I therefore find it difficult and hypocritical that some of you can be so vehemently opposed to the war but still vote Labour in the next election.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Alasdair, UKe: forget it. He can't rise above the cliche.
    • 16 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Skipper)
    I'm not trying to defend those who abuse POW's but I cannot agree that soldiers doing their duty should receive criticism from people who have never been in the military and never risked their life. Furthermore, surely your protest is against the government and the Labour Party, who took us to war rather than the country and the armed forces. I therefore find it difficult and hypocritical that some of you can be so vehemently opposed to the war but still vote Labour in the next election.
    (Original post by Skipper)
    You would never receive such orders and the situation is totally different anyway. As a soldier, fighting wars is your duty, abusing POW's is not. It is the politicians who deserve the criticism, not the British armed forces.
    I think the word duty is overused. Let's call it 'job' OK? Now am I justified in criticising someone for "just doing their job" if I disagree with the job itself? In my view yes. Am I justified in villifying them? No. Am I justified in criticising someone doing a job that I do not think is right and neither do they? Most certainly. I do not have to be a rocket scientist to criticise the rocket scientists that worked for the Nazi's, neither do I have to be a soldier to criticise the armed forces.

    And I won't be voting labour in the next election for the record.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Humble Mosquito)
    Alasdair, UKe: forget it. He can't rise above the cliche.
    It's because I'm a bastard or an idiot. One of the two
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ukebert)
    I think the word duty is overused. Let's call it 'job' OK? Now am I justified in criticising someone for "just doing their job" if I disagree with the job itself? In my view yes. Am I justified in villifying them? No. Am I justified in criticising someone doing a job that I do not think is right and neither do they? Most certainly. I do not have to be a rocket scientist to criticise the rocket scientists that worked for the Nazi's, neither do I have to be a soldier to criticise the armed forces.

    And I won't be voting labour in the next election for the record.
    It's more than a job though, isn't it? The life they lead is not comparable to the lives we lead and that's why I don't think we're in a position to judge.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ukebert)
    I think the word duty is overused. Let's call it 'job' OK? Now am I justified in criticising someone for "just doing their job" if I disagree with the job itself? In my view yes. Am I justified in villifying them? No. Am I justified in criticising someone doing a job that I do not think is right and neither do they? Most certainly. I do not have to be a rocket scientist to criticise the rocket scientists that worked for the Nazi's, neither do I have to be a soldier to criticise the armed forces.

    And I won't be voting labour in the next election for the record.
    Its more than just a job old boy, its a career, and a way of life. Many soldiers live, breathe and eat Army (same for the RN and RAF).

    Its like the police in a way, in that they do more than is expected of them, work longer than they get paid for . If the Army, (same as the police) 'worked to rule', the whole thing would crumble overnight.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Skipper)
    It's because I'm a bastard or an idiot. One of the two
    I notice that you skipped my rather lengthy reply in favour of these smaller points.

    But really, you're not making any new argument when you post; you just restate the same unsupported case. The mystical idea that being in the army means someone no longer open to moral criticism is pathetic, and you haven't done anything to actually back it up.

    "The life they lead is not comparable to the lives we lead and that's why I don't think we're in a position to judge."

    Because I've never chosen to go and kill people in Iraq, I can't judge someone who has? That's just... tragically bad.
    • 16 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by duckiciao)
    Its more than just a job old boy, its a career, and a way of life. Many soldiers live, breathe and eat Army (same for the RN and RAF).
    Many people do the same with their own jobs.

    Its like the police in a way, in that they do more than is expected of them, work longer than they get paid for . If the Army, (same as the police) 'worked to rule', the whole thing would crumble overnight.
    I agree that they do a difficult and valuable job, but they are by no means above criticism, and again, others do the same for their jobs. unpaid overtime is not a province of the forces alone.

    (Original post by Skipper)
    It's more than a job though, isn't it? The life they lead is not comparable to the lives we lead and that's why I don't think we're in a position to judge.
    I don't think we are in a position to judge what they do out there in some ways and within reason. However I am in a position to criticise whether they are justified in being out there, and whether each soldier should be out there if they didn't believe that the war itself was justified.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Humble Mosquito)
    I notice that you skipped my rather lengthy reply in favour of these smaller points.

    But really, you're not making any new argument when you post; you just restate the same unsupported case. The mystical idea that being in the army means someone no longer open to moral criticism is pathetic, and you haven't done anything to actually back it up.

    "The life they lead is not comparable to the lives we lead and that's why I don't think we're in a position to judge."

    Because I've never chosen to go and kill people in Iraq, I can't judge someone who has? That's just... tragically bad.
    I was going to reply but I know you'd just reply back:

    I was 12 when the war started
    I still support Labour
    You try to slander me
    I hate the Tories

    So I thought I'd save us both the trouble. How a 17 year old boy with no experience of war or the army thinks he can criticise the men fighting overseas is beyond me. What is even more inexplicable is that you will again vote in Labour (yes I know don't tell me- you are a socialist and Labour are the closest to a left wing government that will get in and you hate the Tories... you've told me several times)

    So before you accuse my arguments of being "tragically bad", I suggest you examine your own motives for voting in a party that took us into a war you are so against.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Skipper)
    I was going to reply but I know you'd just reply back:

    I was 12 when the war started
    I still support Labour
    You try to slander me
    I hate the Tories

    So I thought I'd save us both the trouble. How a 17 year old boy with no experience of war or the army thinks he can criticise the men fighting overseas is beyond me. What is even more inexplicable is that you will again vote in Labour (yes I know don't tell me- you are a socialist and Labour are the closest to a left wing government that will get in and you hate the Tories... you've told me several times)

    So before you accuse my arguments of being "tragically bad", I suggest you examine your own motives for voting in a party that took us into a war you are so against.
    You're a coward in the way you debate.

    Those weren't my points, but 1) You did slander me as I explained, and you have failed to counter; 2) I justified supporting Labour because YOU asked why. 3)I never said I hated the Tories, but you're too retarded to understand the simple fact that I DON'T WANT A TORY GOVERNMENT AND THEY VOTED FOR THE WAR, ANYWAY. 4) I was 12 when the war started, so I didn't protest. You can't argue these things away, but they were a tiny part of all the arguments you couldn't deal with. So, you slander, and fail to respond. I can't stand people who debate like you. I'm rude; you're pathetic.

    Go read my post, go look at the heaps of stuff I said.

    Now, you can have neg.

    And why do I need to reexamine my reasons, when quite clearly you haven't provided a single argument as to why my reasoning doesn't make sense. You just quoted my perfectly logical answer to your question, as if it somehow doesn't count. But you have no REASON why it isn't valid. You've just summarily adn irrationally decided that my reasoning is flawed -- probably on the grounds that you're too thick to think of a counter-argument.

    You remind me of a certain TSR Labour member, who I clashed with: either you don't understand how reasoned argumentss work or you're incapable of participating.
    • Thread Starter
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Skipper)
    I'm not trying to defend those who abuse POW's but I cannot agree that soldiers doing their duty should receive criticism from people who have never been in the military and never risked their life. Furthermore, surely your protest is against the government and the Labour Party, who took us to war rather than the country and the armed forces. I therefore find it difficult and hypocritical that some of you can be so vehemently opposed to the war but still vote Labour in the next election.
    I didn't vote Labour. I voted Lib Dem. Which I very nearly lived to regret, as my seat is a real marginal with only 200 votes separating the winning Labour MP from the Tory candidate. In the current system, you're all too often forced to opt for the least bad candidate.

    So, living in a marginal constituency and being against the war, who do you suggest I should vote for?
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Humble Mosquito)
    You're a coward in the way you debate.

    Those weren't my points, but 1) You did slander me as I explained, and you have failed to counter; 2) I justified supporting Labour because YOU asked why. 3)I never said I hated the Tories, but you're too retarded to understand the simple fact that I DON'T WANT A TORY GOVERNMENT AND THEY VOTED FOR THE WAR, ANYWAY. 4) I was 12 when the war started, so I didn't protest. You can't argue these things away, but they were a tiny part of all the arguments you couldn't deal with. So, you slander, and fail to respond. I can't stand people who debate like you. I'm rude; you're pathetic.

    Go read my post, go look at the heaps of stuff I said.

    Now, you can have neg.

    And why do I need to reexamine my reasons, when quite clearly you haven't provided a single argument as to why my reasoning doesn't make sense. You just quoted my perfectly logical answer to your question, as if it somehow doesn't count. But you have no REASON why it isn't valid. You've just summarily decided that my reasoning is flawed on the ground that you're too thick to think of a counter-argument.
    Superb post. A splendid display of maturity. Nice to see you don't mind compromising on your principle of being opposed to neg rep in D&D to give me some. This post is the best display of, in your own words, me being a bastard, and you being an idiot.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Skipper)
    Superb post. A splendid display of maturity. Nice to see you don't mind compromising on your principle of being opposed to neg rep in D&D to give me some. This post is the best display of, in your own words, me being a bastard, and you being an idiot.
    Once again, no response to the meat of the post -- just your usual nonsense.

    Yeah, but the thing is: you're not debating. So the rule is sort of null and void at that point. Still, I dunno. Twenty minutes until I can rep, and by that time, I'm hoping to have consigned you to the back of my memory as Another Brainless, Accidental Troll. I really don't understand why you hit such a nerve. It wasn't because you were at all close to the truth or effective -- you weren't. I think it was when you turned one of my arguments upside down, spat on it, displayed it for the world to see as if you were actually literate enough to be there... and then failed to even retract.

    I really thought it was the other way round, actually, since you're posting on a debating forum prior to acquiring the most basic skills of argument; and I'm giving you grief about it. But... well, think what you want.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I don't know what you want me to say. I have nothing to apologise for. I have nothing to retract. If anything, the insults you have thrown at me should warrant an apology but I doubt it'll be offered.

    Your argument has offered nothing new in subsequent posts and anything I post, you just come back to to the army not being above criticism and saying I have not backed up my arguments. I have but your obviously limited mental capacity means it's difficult for you too accept a view that differs from your own. Gid help us if you do go into politics, but then again, I'm sure you'd be a perfect Labour candidate.

    All the same, I'll look forward to trading abuse with you again some time
    • Thread Starter
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    You've forgotten to tell us who we SHOULD have voted for, skippy...
    • Thread Starter
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    And incidentally, I find it interesting that somebody banging on about insulting the Army should have a VC as his avatar. Disrespectful and trivial, wouldn't you say?
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Surely, seen as it was a Labour government that took us to war, you would either be voting Lib Dem (as you did) or Tory. I find it suprising you ask me seen as my views are held in such contempt.

    With regards to your second point, I need further elaboration, if you would be so kind, to be able to answer.

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: November 16, 2014
New on TSR

GCSE mocks revision

Talk study tips this weekend

Article updates
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.