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

Why would anyone want to fight for this country? Watch

    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LawBore)
    That's rather worrying. Not quite sure what you're getting at, though, I hope you have no misconceptions. I advocate full, total war, if an enemy force moved against our borders and 'shot first'. Then, I'd say it was quite reasonable and noble to fight for one's country. However, I'm not hawkish in the least.
    And I thought that hawkish is one of the main features of "dark and solemn Deutcher Spirit."
    By the way nobody starts total war without previous provocations.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chrrye)
    What if it is fairly obvious that it will effect your life extremely negatively in the near future?

    Say in WW2 as Hitler took over country after country in Europe.. At which point would you enter the war?
    Like I've said already: if it looks like it will affect my life, then I advocate intervention. Things happening on the other side of the world though? I don't want to go anywhere near it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chrrye)
    Not sure girls will dig a guy with no ****...
    oh dont you worry, ill be telling them stories of my brave action in the "war"
    ahahaha!

    i think your girlfriend would appreciate my **** more than your corpse!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HappinessHappening)
    Like I've said already: if it looks like it will affect my life, then I advocate intervention. Things happening on the other side of the world though? I don't want to go anywhere near it.
    Come on then, WHEN would you have gone to war in WW2 if you were in charge of the UK? Later than we did? Earlier?

    You are fairly retarded if you think in this modern age physical distance doesnt mean increasingly little in terms of economic, political instability
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chrrye)
    Come on then, WHEN would you have gone to war in WW2 if you were in charge of the UK? Later than we did? Earlier?

    You are fairly retarded if you think in this modern age physical distance doesnt mean increasingly little in terms of economic, political instability
    That's a very difficult question, and it's not fair to answer it in hindsight. To be honest, I would probably have stayed on Hitler's good side (he didn't want war with Britain) and avoided trouble. If he suddenly turned at a later date, then sure, bring out the guns.

    As long as it wasn't threatening me, then I wouldn't care if there was a war in France. It just so happens that if the conflcit is a long way from home, you're less likely to be affected by it if you stay the hell out.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    I'm generally anti-war (especially silly wars like Iraq/Afghanistan), and I agree that the UK needs to be more bold and shut the USA's mouth when they call the soldiers to their dumb wars, but realistically, a great country needs a great army (in these times at least).
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by equinoxsolar)
    oh dont you worry, ill be telling them stories of my brave action in the "war"
    ahahaha!

    i think your girlfriend would appreciate my **** more than your corpse!
    Yeah I'm not so sure. lol
    My dead body would probably be more of a man than you..
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HappinessHappening)
    Nationalists are uneducated at best; brainwashed morons at worst.
    Compared with idealistic, brain-dead socialists?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Appeasement was a totally justified, logical, and humane approach to international diplomacy. In the end, it was pretty crucial to our victory by giving everyone else time to re-arm. War with Germany in 36-37 wouldn't have been pretty economically and from 37-38 not very pretty militarily.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HappinessHappening)
    That's a very difficult question, and it's not fair to answer it in hindsight. To be honest, I would probably have stayed on Hitler's good side (he didn't want war with Britain) and avoided trouble. If he suddenly turned at a later date, then sure, bring out the guns.

    As long as it wasn't threatening me, then I wouldn't care if there was a war in France. It just so happens that if the conflcit is a long way from home, you're less likely to be affected by it if you stay the hell out.
    Ahh the old "wait till the facist dictator with plans to 'improve the human race' has taken over the whole of Europe before fighting him" plan. Great one. You are a genius

    i certainly would want to fight for this country if you were in charge.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chrrye)
    So you think we should have done something then?
    Yes. It's the fact we didn't that gives me so little faith in the claptrap that people spew forth about our intentions abroad. Foreign policy just isn't orientated about helping people or spreading democracy. I don't understand why anyone would want to join the army after looking at our track record.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Temporal)
    Compared with idealistic, brain-dead socialists?

    You can spout your pathetic diatribe all you wish, but I doubt you would have the balls to get yourself on the front line and fight for your country.

    Haven't you got some mutilated animals to bawl your eyes out over?
    I'm not a socialist; far from it. Not all right-wingers are nationalistic, you know.

    I sure as hell wouldn't have the balls to fight; especially if it didn't bring me any personal benefit. I'm quite happy to admit that.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HappinessHappening)
    I should stress here that I consider the Second World War to be a different issue. There was a genuine cause in this instance; we needed to stop fascism and genocide.
    There was fascism and genocide in both Iraq and Afghanistan. I'm not saying I'm fully in support - just pointing that out.

    To an extent I think it was only fair to try and make some attempt to sort out Afghanistan after all the mess the Americans made there in the last 40 years or so. It was their funding of terrorist groups in Afghanistan which lead to the demise of a relatively pleasant government, the collapse of women's rights and the rule of the extremist Taliban - all in the pursuit of anti-communism.

    As for Iraq, I really believe it was worth it to stop Saddam. The man restricted the freedoms of an entire country, he committed genocides and ethnic cleansing, he tortured children to punish their dissident parents.

    You shouldn't judge soldiers as you have done. Even if you were completely opposed to their involvement in both Afghanistan and Iraq - what about British contributions to UN peacekeeping forces? Or the army's essential peacekeeping role in Ireland? For the most part the current role of soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq is peacekeeping - literally defending the people who are now attending schools, or have joined the new police, or have helped the Americans, or believe in democracy from being murdered. Doesn't sound selfish or evil to me.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HappinessHappening)
    I'm not a socialist; far from it. Not all right-wingers are nationalistic, you know.

    I sure as hell wouldn't have the balls to fight; especially if it didn't bring me any personal benefit. I'm quite happy to admit that.
    Using that mentality, why should the troops ever bother to defend you, if an enemy decided to invade Britain? Considering it provides them with no personal benefit.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bagration)
    Appeasement was a totally justified, logical, and humane approach to international diplomacy. In the end, it was pretty crucial to our victory by giving everyone else time to re-arm. War with Germany in 36-37 wouldn't have been pretty economically and from 37-38 not very pretty militarily.
    The war in 45 against a Hitler dominated Europe would probably be a whole lot worse though, I think youll agree. Appeasement to delay war, sure. But not "only if it comes right to my door" ?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Temporal)
    Using that mentality, why should the troops ever bother to defend you, if an enemy decided to invade Britain? Considering it provides them with no personal benefit.
    I'll free ride on the fact that they have to defend everyone else around me. It's not like the soldiers can say, "yeah, bomb that guy's house because he doesn't support us; but not the others'."
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Fat Controller)
    Yes. It's the fact we didn't that gives me so little faith in the claptrap that people spew forth about our intentions abroad. Foreign policy just isn't orientated about helping people or spreading democracy. I don't understand why anyone would want to join the army after looking at our track record.
    This.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I like the sense of having a 'duty to your fellow man' but I agree, people seem to just join up to the Army thinking civilians will see them as 'heroes' whilst living a fun lifestyle (they do all kind of exercises like white water rafting, trips abroad, boxing, rugby etc), earning a salary and figuring out what they want to do in life. Such people are not heroes. The real heroes are invisible - many soldiers in WW2 did, I'm sure, fight altruistically but equally you didn't need to be a soldier to be a hero; the nurses? the code-breakers? the women on the Home Front looking after the country?

    I get the feeling the real question you want to ask, OP, is 'why would anyone want to fight for this government', not 'why would anyone want to fight for this country'.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Fat Controller)
    Yes. It's the fact we didn't that gives me so little faith in the claptrap that people spew forth about our intentions abroad. Foreign policy just isn't orientated about helping people or spreading democracy. I don't understand why anyone would want to join the army after looking at our track record.
    I think our army has done operations of benefit as well in places like Sierra Leone and Serbia. The soldiers don't know where they will be posted, but they do have the discipline to carry out their orders as given. I don't think that is reason to hold them in contempt like the Op does.
    I think they join with the conviction (and I'm not saying its 100% true) that what they will be asked to do is for the benefit of the country and world. If that is enough reason for them, let them sign up and get on with their job.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chrrye)
    The war in 45 against a Hitler dominated Europe would probably be a whole lot worse though, I think youll agree. Appeasement to delay war, sure. But not "only if it comes right to my door" ?
    Maybe. This country had incredible resources. We could probably have fought Hitler to a standstill simply because we're an island and we're naturally defensive. I think the biggest problem would actually be what the Japs do, tbh. I think it became obvious that it was difficult for Britain to defend the home islands, the Med, and the Far East at the same time somewhere in 1941 :P

    But if we're talking alternate "what if" history, Britain usually comes out on top.

    Also, just as an NB: I'm very pro military (servicemen, anyway.) I just like the idea of isolationism
 
 
 
  • 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.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • 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.

  • 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

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