No Money to Train British Soldiers — Millions for Yemenis and Third World Farmers Watch

Voluntas Mos Victum
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#121
Report Thread starter 9 years ago
#121
(Original post by Kolya)
The Queen is the Supreme Governor of the Church of England;. she is "the highest power under God in this kingdom". Therefore to wilfully act in a way contradictory to the Bible is to insult Her Majesty. Call me old-fashioned, but I think patriots shouldn't be in the business of insulting the Queen.
Well, the Bible is contradictory in many ways itself, and is open to much interpretation, as I'm sure you are aware.

To suggest that to oppose foreign aid is to go against the Queen is nothing short of ridiculous.
0
reply
Prince Rhyus
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#122
Report 9 years ago
#122
Have a look at the diagram at http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datab...nts-money-cuts

There are lots of other areas the Government spends money on. It's not a simple case of "if we spend money on A, we don't spend money on B"

It's much more complicated than that. Complain about cuts in TA funding by all means, but to try and equate those cuts to money being diverted to other areas is being over-simplistic to an extreme.
0
reply
Jim-ie
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#123
Report 9 years ago
#123
(Original post by theBOON)
:lol: funny enough to think I thought by English people I was covering all the people on the British Isles but now that I think of it I needed to use British instead isn't it? I got confused which one to use :lol:
Yeah, my new housemate from pakistan called me English one day because NI is part of the UK.

Called him Indian and he wasnt too happy, he sees my point
0
reply
CharlieBee_90
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#124
Report 9 years ago
#124
1. Withdraw our troops from Afghanistan
2. Continue to spend money on international aid
3. ??????
4. Profit!
0
reply
StraightDrive
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#125
Report 9 years ago
#125
(Original post by Kolya)
I'm not saying that's wrong. What is disgusting is claiming to be a patriot and then attacking Christianity and the Queen. Worse than being a patriot, or not being a patriot, is being a hypocrite. I'm not bothered if people aren't patriots; I am bothered if people are hypocrites.
Whatever. Like I said, it's a disgrace that you think Christianity is somehow inextricably tied up with being a patriot. One need not subscribe to that view at all.

And just for the record, I piss on the Queen and all that the royal family stands for too.
0
reply
Renner
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#126
Report 9 years ago
#126
(Original post by bigmo7)
That was going to be only point I was going to make on this thread. A life is a life...
So if there was a 50/50 chance between you loved ones and a group of strangers half way around the world being killed you wouldn’t interfere because A life is a life....

(Original post by StraightDrive)
Whatever. Like I said, it's a disgrace that you think Christianity is somehow inextricably tied up with being a patriot. One need not subscribe to that view at all.

And just for the record, I piss on the Queen and all that the royal family stands for too.
To be a member of the Church of England and to be anti-establishment is somewhat contradictory.

And why, because its cool:rolleyes:
0
reply
StraightDrive
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#127
Report 9 years ago
#127
(Original post by Renner)
To be a member of the Church of England and to be anti-establishment is somewhat contradictory.
What on earth are you on about? Since when am I a member of the Church of England?

(Original post by Renner)
And why, because its cool:rolleyes:
Because they are a waste of resources. Charles is a case in point. They are also entirely backward and irrelevant. Just my view, I don't expect others to share it.
0
reply
The Referee
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#128
Report 9 years ago
#128
(Original post by The_Octopus)

Not forgetting that the soldiers in the British army signed up to fight in a war to protect people like those Yemeni refugees. If they didn't think risking their lives to save others was a worthwhile enterprise then they should/would not have joined the army in the first place.
The signed up to serve Queen and country...not go into combat ill-prepared and under trained. When the TA deploys they serve along side their regular army counterparts, fulfilling the same duties. They have the right to expect the country they serve to train and kit them out properly.
0
reply
StraightDrive
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#129
Report 9 years ago
#129
(Original post by Prince Rhyus)
Have a look at the diagram at http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datab...nts-money-cuts

There are lots of other areas the Government spends money on. It's not a simple case of "if we spend money on A, we don't spend money on B"

It's much more complicated than that. Complain about cuts in TA funding by all means, but to try and equate those cuts to money being diverted to other areas is being over-simplistic to an extreme.
Exactly.
0
reply
Renner
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#130
Report 9 years ago
#130
(Original post by StraightDrive)
What on earth are you on about? Since when am I a member of the Church of England?
I didn’t say you were, it was more of a general point as the majority of Christians are CofE and quite patriotic.

Because they are a waste of resources. Charles is a case in point. They are also entirely backward and irrelevant. Just my view, I don't expect others to share it.
The financial argument is complete bumf, utters balls, factually incorrect. And they are not backwards or irrelevant.
0
reply
StraightDrive
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#131
Report 9 years ago
#131
(Original post by Renner)
I didn’t say you were, it was more of a general point as the majority of Christians are CofE and quite patriotic.
Don't care. I'm not.
My point was that you don't have to be a Christian to be a patriot.


(Original post by Renner)
The financial argument is complete bumf, utters balls, factually incorrect. And they are not backwards or irrelevant.
Unless you can show me they use no resources whatsoever, you shall remain a *******. Because my view was that they provide no economic benefits whatsoever, much like people on benefits.
0
reply
Renner
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#132
Report 9 years ago
#132
(Original post by StraightDrive)
Don't care. I'm not.
My point was that you don't have to be a Christian to be a patriot.
And my point was that most Christians are

Unless you can show me they use no resources whatsoever, you shall remain a *******. Because my view was that they provide no economic benefits whatsoever, much like people on benefits.
The Queen is not paid a salary, she does not gain any money from the government. The only money there is for official duties which would be paid to a president anyway on top of a salary. If you want to know economic benefits check out the crown estate, the mahosive tax they pay for and Prince Andrew as Special Representative for International Trade and Investment. So the Queen and Philip work without a wage, the rest are all wealthy people who make huge economic contributions to the state just like any other business person.
0
reply
StraightDrive
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#133
Report 9 years ago
#133
(Original post by Renner)
And my point was that most Christians are
Once again, entirely irrelevant. Defining patriotism by religion is disgusting.

(Original post by Renner)
The Queen is not paid a salary, she does not gain any money from the government. The only money there is for official duties which would be paid to a president anyway on top of a salary. If you want to know economic benefits check out the crown estate, the mahosive tax they pay for and Prince Andrew as Special Representative for International Trade and Investment. So the Queen and Philip work without a wage, the rest are all wealthy people who make huge economic contributions to the state just like any other business person.
Last I checked, any other wealthy business person doesn't get taxpayer funding for transport and security (the latter is never disclosed. hmm, convenient). If they're so productive for the economy, they shouldn't need taxpayer subsidies right?

The last figure I saw was somewhere around £40m of taxpayer money. If you can show me they induce more than that in economic benefits, great, if not, don't care. My best estimate is that they don't.

As for replacing them, I thought we had a prime minister?
0
reply
Smiz
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#134
Report 9 years ago
#134
How DARE we use our money to help those less fortunate than ourselves. Not.
0
reply
Renner
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#135
Report 9 years ago
#135
(Original post by StraightDrive)
Once again, entirely irrelevant. Defining patriotism by religion is disgusting.
Not really


Last I checked, any other wealthy business person doesn't get taxpayer funding for transport and security (the latter is never disclosed. hmm, convenient). If they're so productive for the economy, they shouldn't need taxpayer subsidies right?

The last figure I saw was somewhere around £40m of taxpayer money. If you can show me they induce more than that in economic benefits, great, if not, don't care. My best estimate is that they don't.

As for replacing them, I thought we had a prime minister?
The Crown Estate is one of the largest property owners in the United Kingdom with a portfolio worth over £7.33 billion, with urban properties valued at £5.38 billion, and rural holdings valued at £903 million; and an annual profit of £211 million. This pays for this supposed £150 million (40 mill + security) and some more. Prince Charles pays more in tax than his government expensive. If you’re going to go down the economic route a Royal Family trumps the alternatives every day of the week.

Those expenses would be paid to any head of state, and yes we should have one as Head of Government (PM) and Head of State (HM) are two different things. And with a president you only have one guy; with the Royals you get a whole family available to perform duties around the country.
0
reply
The_Octopus
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#136
Report 9 years ago
#136
(Original post by The Referee)
The signed up to serve Queen and country...not go into combat ill-prepared and under trained. When the TA deploys they serve along side their regular army counterparts, fulfilling the same duties. They have the right to expect the country they serve to train and kit them out properly.
Yes, obviously they do. I have not claimed that troops should go into battle without the appropriate training and equipment. But I also think that Yemeni refugees shouldn't starve to death. We don't have to choose between them in reality. The OP is just implying that the reason there is no money for the TA is that money is given to those in poverty instead and it was that fallacy, as well as the implication that this means money should not be given to those in poverty since it should be given to the TA instead.
0
reply
~The Mixed Race Girl~
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#137
Report 9 years ago
#137
money should be spent more on the british army than anyone else! after them poor farmers but i dont see the need to help yemeni soldiers
0
reply
Redemption
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#138
Report 9 years ago
#138
(Original post by Gremlins)
why is hte life of a British soldier worth any more or less than a Yemeni refugee?
The value of human life is relative. The value of a human life that is spending their days trying to protect you is higher to you than the value of a sponging refugee.

Don't agree? Which life has a higher value to you, your mother or a member of your seminar group? What about between your seminar group and someone living in nigeria? What about between someone risking their life to protect you and someone who has absolutely no positive effect upon you or the rest of the world, and is merely a waste of resources?
0
reply
TheLandOfNorwegia
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#139
Report 9 years ago
#139
(Original post by Redemption)
The value of human life is relative. The value of a human life that is spending their days trying to protect you is higher to you than the value of a sponging refugee.

Don't agree? Which life has a higher value to you, your mother or a member of your seminar group? What about between your seminar group and someone living in nigeria? What about between someone risking their life to protect you and someone who has absolutely no positive effect upon you or the rest of the world, and is merely a waste of resources?
When you value resources over human life you have lost your humanity.
0
reply
UGeNe
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#140
Report 9 years ago
#140
Train to murder v. buy Food
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Are you chained to your phone?

Yes (105)
19.48%
Yes, but I'm trying to cut back (222)
41.19%
Nope, not that interesting (212)
39.33%

Watched Threads

View All