Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Real heroes: soldier refuses to return to Afghanistan watch

    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    I was a Brit at the time. I'm now a dual citizen and hold both passports.
    Ah cool, what were you born?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Renner)
    Ah cool, what were you born?
    I was actually born in Belize (British Honduras at that time) to Brit parents. I was raised in the UK but emigrated to the US 8 years ago.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheJudge)
    To be considered a hero you need to do something heroic. These soldiers are given the false title of hero for just being soldiers who are fighting a rag tag geurilla force.

    I guess if you call them heros it makes you feel good. However they are anything but heroes. Just stupid propaganda the slower members of our society can eat up (thats you).
    So the soldiers who have died whilst trying to help fallen comrades and the soldiers who put on dangerous rescues to retrieve the bodies of fallen comrades so the taliban dont get their hands on them! are they not heroes?

    Im not calling every soldier out there a hero but there are heroes out there and you are not a hero for refusing orders when you signed up and said you would do what was needed!


    p.s
    And I like how you decided to put in a personal insult at the end there! I think it helps you prove your point well :woo: :rolleyes:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Richard_A_Garner)
    Yes, that is shocking. There are probably lots of heros there.

    Though I don't see why dying is either necessary or sufficient to be called a hero.
    Oh i didnt mean it was nesecary but i believe it is insulting them more than the ones who can live to defend themselves against this stupid arguement!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pads)
    So the soldiers who have died whilst trying to help fallen comrades and the soldiers who put on dangerous rescues to retrieve the bodies of fallen comrades so the taliban dont get their hands on them! are they not heroes?

    Im not calling every soldier out there a hero but there are heroes out there and you are not a hero for refusing orders when you signed up and said you would do what was needed!


    p.s
    And I like how you decided to put in a personal insult at the end there! I think it helps you prove your point well :woo: :rolleyes:

    So you agree that the only soldires that could be called heroes are the ones who have performed feroic acts.... In other words msot soldiers are not heroes and this propaganda is ridiculous.

    Its not really a personal insult, its clear that all the sun readers out there are the slower members of society and the same people who eat this propaganda up.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheJudge)
    So you agree that the only soldires that could be called heroes are the ones who have performed feroic acts.... In other words msot soldiers are not heroes and this propaganda is ridiculous.

    Its not really a personal insult, its clear that all the sun readers out there are the slower members of society and the same people who eat this propaganda up.
    Yes being a soldier alone ofcourse does not make you a hero! fighting a war does not make you a hero! It is how you act when your a soldier and fighting a war that makes you a hero! No one is saying that all soldiers are heroes! And im trying to say that a soldier who signs up and then refuses to go and do his job and backup his comrades is definately not a hero!

    Not personal? I do believe that you put in brackets "thats you"! I read the Telegraph although I sometimes disagree with its consevative views!
    Offline

    14
    (Original post by caroline147)
    When you voluntarily join the army, you forfeit the right to ethical objections.
    That is not universally true. Under the ICC's Rome Statute, you can still be prosecuted for a serious crime committed in war if the crime was manifestly unlawful. Now, naturally the Afghan War is not manifestly unlawful, nor is the soldier in a serious position of responsibility, but the underlying principle behind the law is that ethical considerations are not absolutely irrelevant for soldiers engaged in war, even if they are ordered to do something.

    Personally, I support the soldier's decision even though it was illegal -- it is nice to see someone taking moral responsibility for their actions. Those who follow their moral compass, even when it leads to punishment, should be applauded as human beings.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ploder)
    Lance Corporal Joe Glenton is bravely refusing to return to Afghanistan because he has correctly identified this as an unjust war. He is also facing up to the consequences because he is being court martialed.

    Afghan mission will fail - soldier
    http://tinyurl.com/mhlwz7

    Here is the text of the letter he has sent to downing street:

    http://tinyurl.com/n2kmyh
    Brave?

    This tool had 8 years to sign off. He simply decided he didn't want to do another tour. As a soldier it is not his decision what wars he fights, he joined while taking an oath to fight were it was decided he should be fighting, regarldess of his opinion.

    That man is an embarrassment to the uniform and I hope he spends a long time in a military prison before being thrown out on to civvy street where I hope he struggles to find a home. The letter rubbish is just a good cover for his cowardice.

    Total waste of oxygen.

    (Original post by Swi1ch)
    I kinda got bored half way through but the general gist seems to be "we're failing"

    Yes, we are. We did alright to start with and dropped off. Why? Because we didn't adapt. The only security from an unrelenting enemy is to destroy him entirely.

    I know you'll ask so I'll answer now. Why hasn't the Government dropped more troops in?


    The answer is simple. The war does not have the support of it's people. This idea is the most basic and key idea in any warfare ever conceived. Until the British population are more supportive, we're in a stalemate.
    Financial grounds actually.

    The people support the armed forces however, and if more troops means that it can be ended quicker (as it has been recently mentioned) then public will grow for more soldiers out there (as it has).
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Spoiler:
    Show


    or

    Spoiler:
    Show
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Shortarse1)
    Brave?

    This tool had 8 years to sign off. He simply decided he didn't want to do another tour.
    That means he joined up in 2001 with the best intentions of fighting for queen and country, fighting for the defence of GB. Since then we have invaded Afghanistan with the noble aim of destroying Al Qaeda and Bin Laden, terrorists who had the ability to attack us, however we soon forgot about them, and decided to attack the Taliban, who are a group of people who had no way of harming British citizens at all, while we concentrated on attacking this group, the real evil fled over the mountains and now plans to attack us again unchecked. Then in 2003 we invaded Iraq, purely in support of American foreign policy, we went against the UN and NATO and the whole international community, invading a nation of people who had no way at all of harming or attacking British citizens, heck ! they didn't even have the ability to harm their neighbours, they were a joke. At what point in those wars were we fighting in defence of the British people. I wonder how many friends this man has lost, i dont blame him for refusing to go. It is all well and good saying "oh he signed up for it he knows what he is doing". But the reality is often a shock to many who join and some just cant handle it and the rules need to change, and it isn't like he can just leave, he has to give a years notice, so no matter what he has to go back out there or be labelled a deserter and dishonurable. He cant quit his job because he will be thrown into prison and there i was thinking we were civilised...


    That man is an embarrassment to the uniform and I hope he spends a long time in a military prison before being thrown out on to civvy street where I hope he struggles to find a home. The letter rubbish is just a good cover for his cowardice.

    Or maybe he does actually have courage. The choice he is faced with is either sacrificing his job, the respect of his friends and family, the respect of a nation and an unknown amount of time in prison to stand up against something he believes is wrong. Or... he could go to Afghansitan for six months where as a member of the RLC the chances of him being badly injured or killed are very low, especially when compared to the teeth arms out there. So...which do you think is the choice which takes more courage?




    The people support the armed forces.

    Yes, but that does not mean they support the war.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by FiveFiveSix)
    :facepalm: Wrong...

    Reading some of these comments, and seeing the intensity with which some people proclaim their 'knowledge' of the Armed Forces, I'm not sure whether to laugh or cry...
    actually it is correct, i have 2 friends in the army.. well 1 now, RIP babe.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aeolus)
    That means he joined up in 2001 with the best intentions of fighting for queen and country, fighting for the defence of GB. Since then we have invaded Afghanistan with the noble aim of destroying Al Qaeda and Bin Laden, terrorists who had the ability to attack us, however we soon forgot about them, and decided to attack the Taliban, who are a group of people who had no way of harming British citizens at all, while we concentrated on attacking this group, the real evil fled over the mountains and now plans to attack us again unchecked. Then in 2003 we invaded Iraq, purely in support of American foreign policy, we went against the UN and NATO and the whole international community, invading a nation of people who had no way at all of harming or attacking British citizens, heck ! they didn't even have the ability to harm their neighbours, they were a joke. At what point in those wars were we fighting in defence of the British people. I wonder how many friends this man has lost, i dont blame him for refusing to go. It is all well and good saying "oh he signed up for it he knows what he is doing". But the reality is often a shock to many who join and some just cant handle it and the rules need to change, and it isn't like he can just leave, he has to give a years notice, so no matter what he has to go back out there or be labelled a deserter and dishonurable. He cant quit his job because he will be thrown into prison and there i was thinking we were civilised...


    Or maybe he does actually have courage. The choice he is faced with is either sacrificing his job, the respect of his friends and family, the respect of a nation and an unknown amount of time in prison to stand up against something he believes is wrong. Or... he could go to Afghansitan for six months where as a member of the RLC the chances of him being badly injured or killed are very low, especially when compared to the teeth arms out there. So...which do you think is the choice which takes more courage?



    Yes, but that does not mean they support the war.
    Ok, why don't you go and educate yourself about how the army works and stop calling the praises of the coward.

    He had 8 years to sign off, because we have been deploying troops there to fight the Taleban for EIGHT YEARS. Not that he joined in 2001, in all likeliness, he joined knowing he would be fighting in Afghanistan.

    We went against the UN and NATO by going into Iraq which makes the war unjust (although the UN later got involved). Fair point.
    However, it was in the news today that one of the inspectors who led the inspection of Iraq prior to the invasion is claiming that there was the potential for gas attacks, and that it was the reason Dr. David Kelly was killed. So I wouldn't come to any decision about that JUST yet.
    But Afghanistan was a UN led mission and as youyourself said that Iraq was unjust because they didn't condone it, how can Afghanistan still be unjust?
    Soldiers who go out to warzones and then 'crack up' are sent home, I know, because my dad has recommended soldiers in his troop were sent home, so the rules don't really need to change, they just don't account for cowardice.
    He gives a years notice, but can not be deployed in his last year unless he volunteers.
    They can not leave once given notice of a deployment (for practicality reasons) although there is also time in between tours where they can sign off.
    You make it seem as if he wasn't aware of all that before he joined and was posted to his squadron. He was well aware of it, as it is mentioned in military law. What you fail to understand is the Army is not a democracy, you do as you're told because that's the only way it can effectively work. When you join it, you play by the rules or are punished, you are not as mollycuddled as you are in civvy street, but you knew that when youwere joining.

    He was scared to go, and self preservation like that tends to be more important than what people think of you, which isn't much. OoO, hark at you, you know the term 'teeth arms'. Although you're too thick too understand that the line between the teeth arms and the support arms has become blurred because of the insurgents style of fighting. It is still a very dangerous job trying to maintain good logistics when the roads are full of IEDs.

    You are someone who has learnt much of what he knows from the news in terms of the way the military operates, maybe slightly more terminology than other people, but you haven't taken the time to fully understand the Army and that shows. A soldier who is prepared to go out to a warzone, is ALWAYS braver than the guy who would rather do prison time...and be definatly survive. So, again, being a proper soldier and not a wimpy coward is more couragous.

    All theyned to do is support the soldiers, which is what they do, you haven't really countered my argument here rather than just repeated your point, so I won't say any more.


    See? I can write annoyingly long posts too
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Shortarse1)
    However, it was in the news today that one of the inspectors who led the inspection of Iraq prior to the invasion is claiming that there was the potential for gas attacks
    Gas attacks against who!? Not Britain or the US or Europe, not even Isreal, and are we the west going to be hypocritical enough to tell Saddam not to use chemical weapons against his neighbors, when we helped him develop these weapons of mass destruction in the 80's and practically encouraged him to use them in the Iran/Iraq war. Even if it turned out Iraq did have chemical weapons. That is still no reason to invade! North Korea is suspected of having nuclear weapons! Pakistan has nuclear weapons! We invaded Iraq in the name of American foreign policy and to secure the dominancy of the petro dollar plain and simple. The sad thing is that so many young soldiers lost their lives for it.


    But Afghanistan was a UN led mission and as youyourself said that Iraq was unjust because they didn't condone it, how can Afghanistan still be unjust?
    Because we went into Afghanistan to find Bin Laden and destroy Al Qaeda. When we first sent forces in, it was justified, they attacked us, we attack them. However not even one year later,we had let Osama and Al Qaeda get away at the battle of Tora Bora, instead of working with the pakistani's on the border to continue hunting him down we turned our attention to nation building in Afghanistan and the installation of a pro western Government. All the while Al Qaeda made their escape and our new enemies were men who had absolutely no way of harming British or American or European citizens. And please dont use the excuse that the Taliban were a threat because there was terrorist training camps because that is a moot point. They were Al Qaeda training camps, the same kind that we have seen on sattelite in Somalia and Syria. BBut we arent invading them, we arent fighting the rebels in Somalia or the Syrian government which harbours terrorists just as enthusiastically as the Taliban did... That is why i believe this war is unjust. All we are doing now is putting British soldiers in the firing line of men who would otherwise not have a chance to harm British citizens..

    Soldiers who go out to warzones and then 'crack up' are sent home, I know, because my dad has recommended soldiers in his troop were sent home, so the rules don't really need to change, they just don't account for cowardice.
    Just because a soldier doesn't have a breakdown, doesn't mean he is a coward, on the contrary if this guy was a coward, then why is he not faking 'cracking up'. He is making his opinion known and is ready to take all the consequences that come with that.

    He gives a years notice, but can not be deployed in his last year unless he volunteers.
    Thats rubbish. I served in the forces for 5 years, and during my years notice was deployed for 6 months and had to be flown back 1 month before i was due to leave, i did not have a choice in the matter, no matter what the rules said. Manpower is so tight at the moment, all three services don't mind bending these rules a little.

    They can not leave once given notice of a deployment (for practicality reasons) although there is also time in between tours where they can sign off.
    More rubbish. On joining you are required to serve a minimum of 4 years, however you get a six month PVR period. After that period is up, you are not allowed to put you notice in for at least 3 years.

    You make it seem as if he wasn't aware of all that before he joined and was posted to his squadron. He was well aware of it, as it is mentioned in military law.
    Squadron?? :lolwut: The warry side of the forces seems cool to everyone, but you cannot say for sure that you were well aware for what you signed up for untill you are on the battle field with bullets buzzing past your head. Often at that moment when the reality kicks in that this was nothing like the movies or basic, a few men decide they can't handle it. This soldier obviously wasn't one of these men because he has been on multiple tours. But you sitting in your comfy armchair typing on your pc at home, have no right whatsoever to call these men cowards.

    What you fail to understand is the Army is not a democracy, you do as you're told because that's the only way it can effectively work. When you join it, you play by the rules or are punished, you are not as mollycuddled as you are in civvy street, but you knew that when youwere joining.
    Ha! I can tell you from experience you are mollycuddled to a much, much greater degree. The Forces decide where you eat, what you eat, where you sleep, when you sleep, where you live, who you live with, when you shower, when you shave, when you get you haircut etc.. etc.. If that is not moollycuddling i don't know what is.
    .

    You are someone who has learnt much of what he knows from the news in terms of the way the military operates, maybe slightly more terminology than other people, but you haven't taken the time to fully understand the Army and that shows.
    Well, actually i have just left the Royal Navy after serving 5 years and participating in 2 operational tours, one being a short tour on the ground in Iraq, and with tri-service being what it is nowadays, ill take a guess that i am a great deal more informed than you are. Sitting on your computer all day playing call of duty and reading the army website, does not give you sufficient knowledge to comment intellligently on things you have no first hand experience of, let alone label a man who has served in a warzone a coward.


    All theyned to do is support the soldiers, which is what they do, you haven't really countered my argument here rather than just repeated your point, so I won't say any more.
    The British public do support the soldiers, and that is a good thing. But many, many people do not support the war and how it is going. Even MP's are speaking out, as you may have seen today with the report into the conflict being presented to Parliment. Support for our boys and girls does not mean support for the war in which the Government is sending them to die in.


    See? I can write annoyingly long posts too
    No... You can write annoyingly innaccurate posts
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rachhyyyy)
    actually it is correct, i have 2 friends in the army.. well 1 now, RIP babe.
    No, actually it's wrong. Again, you're a civvy, with shag-all knowledge of the Armed Forces. Having a mate in the Army doesn't make you informed love, and your posts are perfect examples of that.

    Oh, and I hope you're not trying to use your mate's death to back up your point, or my next comments will be unprintable.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Shortarse1)
    Ok, why don't you go and educate yourself about how the army works and stop calling the praises of the coward.

    You are someone who has learnt much of what he knows from the news in terms of the way the military operates, maybe slightly more terminology than other people, but you haven't taken the time to fully understand the Army and that shows.
    Haha, not to take sides mate, but you do know Aeolus is ex-Forces, right? :rofl:

    Edit - Just seen his response. Looking forward to your grovelling apology!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aeolus)
    Gas attacks against who!? Not Britain or the US or Europe, not even Isreal, and are we the west going to be hypocritical enough to tell Saddam not to use chemical weapons against his neighbors, when we helped him develop these weapons of mass destruction in the 80's and practically encouraged him to use them in the Iran/Iraq war. Even if it turned out Iraq did have chemical weapons. That is still no reason to invade! North Korea is suspected of having nuclear weapons! Pakistan has nuclear weapons! We invaded Iraq in the name of American foreign policy and to secure the dominancy of the petro dollar plain and simple. The sad thing is that so many young soldiers lost their lives for it.

    I didn't take a stance on whether or not the war was right, I simply threw that information into the mix and questioned your reasoning beind Afghanistan being an unjust war...


    Because we went into Afghanistan to find Bin Laden and destroy Al Qaeda. When we first sent forces in, it was justified, they attacked us, we attack them. However not even one year later,we had let Osama and Al Qaeda get away at the battle of Tora Bora, instead of working with the pakistani's on the border to continue hunting him down we turned our attention to nation building in Afghanistan and the installation of a pro western Government. All the while Al Qaeda made their escape and our new enemies were men who had absolutely no way of harming British or American or European citizens. And please dont use the excuse that the Taliban were a threat because there was terrorist training camps because that is a moot point. They were Al Qaeda training camps, the same kind that we have seen on sattelite in Somalia and Syria. BBut we arent invading them, we arent fighting the rebels in Somalia or the Syrian government which harbours terrorists just as enthusiastically as the Taliban did... That is why i believe this war is unjust. All we are doing now is putting British soldiers in the firing line of men who would otherwise not have a chance to harm British citizens..

    ...and that is the sort of answer I was looking for



    Just because a soldier doesn't have a breakdown, doesn't mean he is a coward, on the contrary if this guy was a coward, then why is he not faking 'cracking up'. He is making his opinion known and is ready to take all the consequences that come with that.

    So rather than sign off after his most recent tour, he decides to wait until he has been told h is going out again, then decides he doesn't want to go. Since when has it been a soldiers choice as to where they fight?


    Thats rubbish. I served in the forces for 5 years, and during my years notice was deployed for 6 months and had to be flown back 1 month before i was due to leave, i did not have a choice in the matter, no matter what the rules said. Manpower is so tight at the moment, all three services don't mind bending these rules a little.

    If that was the case I would have thought you would have more than enough reason to complain? Also isn't the Army nearing full manpower now?



    More rubbish. On joining you are required to serve a minimum of 4 years, however you get a six month PVR period. After that period is up, you are not allowed to put you notice in for at least 3 years.

    Unless you are really determined to get out, like this guy...

    Squadron?? :lolwut: The warry side of the forces seems cool to everyone, but you cannot say for sure that you were well aware for what you signed up for untill you are on the battle field with bullets buzzing past your head. Often at that moment when the reality kicks in that this was nothing like the movies or basic, a few men decide they can't handle it. This soldier obviously wasn't one of these men because he has been on multiple tours. But you sitting in your comfy armchair typing on your pc at home, have no right whatsoever to call these men cowards.

    Yes, as in 44 Sqn RLC, 240 Sqn (V) and 217 Sqn (V).

    Again, if he hated the tours so much and disagreed with the wars, why wait until he found out he was going back out there?

    I don't call these men cowards. I call that man a coward because I don't believe that he would wait until being told he was going out there again to decide he didn't want to.




    Ha! I can tell you from experience you are mollycuddled to a much, much greater degree. The Forces decide where you eat, what you eat, where you sleep, when you sleep, where you live, who you live with, when you shower, when you shave, when you get you haircut etc.. etc.. If that is not moollycuddling i don't know what is.

    And it proves that it is more 'democratic' then...? Rather than focus on an admittadly incorrectly used term...tackle the main point.


    Well, actually i have just left the Royal Navy after serving 5 years and participating in 2 operational tours, one being a short tour on the ground in Iraq, and with tri-service being what it is nowadays, ill take a guess that i am a great deal more informed than you are. Sitting on your computer all day playing call of duty and reading the army website, does not give you sufficient knowledge to comment intellligently on things you have no first hand experience of, let alone label a man who has served in a warzone a coward.

    You're right, the Royal Navy have much more experience at identifying cowardice

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6484279.stm

    I haven't played CoD in ages actually. But while I do draw from the army website, I draw more from the experience from being around the Army.


    The British public do support the soldiers, and that is a good thing. But many, many people do not support the war and how it is going. Even MP's are speaking out, as you may have seen today with the report into the conflict being presented to Parliment. Support for our boys and girls does not mean support for the war in which the Government is sending them to die in.

    However equipping them properly and ensuring they live is still a great matter the public does support that. I think that extends to adhering to the calls for nough manpower in theatre.



    No... You can write annoyingly innaccurate posts
    Hardly as riddled with error as you claim, you disagree with opinions then focus on one mistake attentively.

    Oh, and if you've had enough time to do five years in the Navy, wtf are you doing on a student forum?


    (Original post by FiveFiveSix)
    Haha, not to take sides mate, but you do know Aeolus is ex-Forces, right? :rofl:

    Edit - Just seen his response. Looking forward to your grovelling apology!
    Sorry to dissapoint.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Shortarse1)
    Hardly as riddled with error as you claim, you disagree with opinions then focus on one mistake attentively

    Sorry to dissapoint.


    Ok then, i can see your misplaced arrogance and cowardly judgements are not going to be remedied by a lecture from somebody on the internet. I am just going to have to hope that you will grow up and mature. Who knows, maybe one day you will crawl out of your mummy's basement and see for yourself what the real world is like, maybe you might gather the courage to actually join the forces and then we can meassure your courage. Until then i would advise you to think before you speak. Because at the end of the day, no matter what your dad does, your still just a civvy mouthbreather to most servicemen and women, and it wont be a strongly worded reply on an internet forum that you get for saying such arrogantly obnoxious ****. It will be fists and boots
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Shortarse1)
    .

    Oh, and if you've had enough time to do five years in the Navy, wtf are you doing on a student forum?

    Think about it genius...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aeolus)
    Ok then, i can see your misplaced arrogance and cowardly judgements are not going to be remedied by a lecture from somebody on the internet. I am just going to have to hope that you will grow up and mature. Who knows, maybe one day you will crawl out of your mummy's basement and see for yourself what the real world is like, maybe you might gather the courage to actually join the forces and then we can meassure your courage. Until then i would advise you to think before you speak. Because at the end of the day, no matter what your dad does, your still just a civvy mouthbreather to most servicemen and women, and it wont be a strongly worded reply on an internet forum that you get for saying such arrogantly obnoxious ****. It will be fists and boots

    Does already being mid-process count?
    I take it you didn't like the Royal Navy joke then?

    Personally I thought I was much more collected in my reply than my first reply. The reason I'm being a **** with you is because you are telling me I can't take this stand point because you have a service record and disagree.

    I'm nicer to people I like

    (Original post by Aeolus)
    Think about it genius...
    Ok, I'll assume you're a mature student, who's doing a degree while working.
    A majority of the members in this forum are 'proper' students, ie: haven't properly left the education system yet and are all very young. So if i'm right, and I may not be, you're a matured adult who comes online to argue with students and teens?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Shortarse1)
    I take it you didn't like the Royal Navy joke then?

    Personally I thought I was much more collected in my reply than my first reply. The reason I'm being a **** with you is because you are telling me I can't take this stand point because you have a service record and disagree.

    I'm nicer to people I like

    I never said you couldn't take this stand point. Instead i dissagreed heavily with your assumptions, accusations and arrogance. Which coincidently was all based on bull-****. You accused a serving British soldier who has been on more thann one operational tour of being a coward. I disagree with you calling him that, seeing as the only experience of a warzone you have is what you see on your computer and TV.

    Then you proceed to assume you were in a better position to comment on forces life and routine than i was without considering that there might be ex-forces on this website (and im not the only one ) considering that being a student does not depend on age. So i countered your gross overestimisations of yourself with my service record and first hand experience.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.