Should we respect our soldiers more?

[Snave]

I have massive respect for the guys n gals out in Iraq and Afghan, whilst I'm sure they're not 100% accurate, films like Black Hawk Down and The Hurt Locker show the kind of crap they're going through - I definitely don't think I'd be much help out there.

I don't have much respect for many of the troops back home however. Whilst I'm sure they're bored as hell in their camps, running around starting fights and generally smashing up places should lead to them being put in prison. The Para's in particular around my neck of the woods aren't allowed in a single pub in the town as they are known to generally be a bunch of complete arses.

[dhine31]

I'm not even joking, I really do think it all has stemmed from the lack of discipline in schools. If we brought back in a regulated version of physical punishment or embarrassment then people would learn respect. Punishment at schools are telling kids that you can do what you like and for the most part the rewards will outweigh the risks.

The risk of being suspended mirrors the fine and driving ban you get for drink driving.

If kids don't have discipline at home or at school, where are they going to get it? Prison, if that?

National service is a good idea in the sense it promotes good virtues like discipline, honour, duty, service, physical exercise, punctuality etc but I think it would infringe on your human rights too much and it would cut a period of your life out which may be vital to the economy etc? Maybe national service incorporated in schools?

[Diesel]

They are paid assassins, simple as, they deserve no respect at all.

[NeonLord]

I really hope you are joking Diesel?

[Diesel]

Originally Posted by NeonLord

I really hope you are joking Diesel?

I'm not.

[williamblah]

I'm just hoping iFreeZone is going to "Thank" me for this post. If he hasn't done so within a couple of minutes of me posting it, I shall be thoroughly disappointed.

[iFreeZone]

There you go!

Recent trend for me...

[NeonLord]

Well Diesel, you are ungrateful, and as such, worthless ...i wont bother saying anymore if this thread has you (and maybe others like you?) in it, my friends are fighting for people like you? be better of just targeting you, along with the people they are protecting the rest of us against.

[williamblah]

It just strikes me that in this day and age when we have evolved to be able to do so many incredible things, to touch the moon, to send electricity without wires, to make the world's workforce almost completely interchangeable and interactive, we cannot resolve disputes without killing other people.

We cannot say "look, whatever it is we want, we won't kill people to get it." Whether this is for land, food, pride, peace, honour or anything. You were only born wherever you were born with the roll of a dice. If you were born into a Taliban family, you would most likely be fighting British troops now, and feel that you were fighting for whatever righteous cause. Everybody fighting is fighting for a cause, and this is often forgotten (or brainwashed out of us). The only way world peace is ever going to be acheived is if every single person agreed that whatever their 'cause' was, they weren't going to kill others to acheive what they wanted.

Most of you guys would have happily slaughtered Jews if you were born and raised into Nazi Germany. And you would have been equally appauled by anyone that you felt were "ungrateful, and as such, worthless", as you would have felt you were serving and ptoecting your country and the people of your country. I am not saying that what the British army are trying to do is as bad as the Nazi aims, but what I am saying is that every individual soldier doing the fighting believes what they are doing is right, and that they deserve it, and that they are honouring their country or belief or religion, and that they are defending their country.

It is easy for NORMAL people to be 'brainwashed' into doing undoubtebly terrible things (e.g. the Holocaust), and with this in mind people should realise that they are never going to be capable of comprehending whether that person being lined up in their cross hair actually deserves to be, should be, and needs to be killed. And if a person is not physically capable of comprehending this, then should they really be putting themselves in a situation where they are in control of preventing a person from living out another year, month, day, hour, or minute of their life?

[NeonLord]

To be honest, no one in this thread, including me, deserves to comment on a thing like this, all it does is cause arguments. everyone has a point of view, some people just dont give a crap and feel the need to comment anyway, but my friends risking their lives, which is why i said what i did, and i am sure anyone here would stand up for their friends when they were putting there lifes on the line for there friends like me.
Personaly, i think this thread should be closed. None of us know what they have to go through, what they face for us, i just dont think it fair that people should be saying bad things about them when they are working so hard. Sure have your own personal opinions, but sometimes its best to keep it to yourself.
Sorry if people here think this post is out of order, maybe it is, but i just think how would i feel if i did what they do every day, and then have to read a something like this?

[williamblah]

I can understand the emotion you feel about this, and it is a very delicate subject, but you are following the irrational logic of "I have already invested so much in this, that I am going to see it out until the bitter end".

The phrase that annoys me such much when it is used (and it is used a lot), is "We must win this, and fight this through, to honour our dead servicemen, and make their fight worth something."

Whether or not they have died is irrelevant to whether or not you should carry on. If you invest all your money in shares and they do really badly, people will irrationally carry on, as they have such a heavy investment in them. Whilst yesterday they were worth £100k, today they me only be worth £80k, and to keep going to try and kid yourself that you still have £100k is completely illogical.

If 1000 soldiers have died in a war, it makes people say things like "we must carry on fighting to honour their death and make it worth something". Surely it is stupid to send another 1000 soldiers to their death, simply because you don't want to debate whether or not the war is pointless. Lots of people would rather 2000 men died in battle, than stopping halfway through because the war pointless, and knowing that the 1000 men died pointlessly.

Debating with opposing minded people is the only way to question your beliefs and ideologies, and end up with a more correct view of the world. What you are saying is almost along the lines of "this issue is SO important to lots of people that we shouldn't even think about it." I say that we need MORE discussion and MORE debate. And not just about this, about a lot of things that simply aren't discussed enough.

People tend to 'mix with their own kind'. Most people hang out with people who are similar to them, and with similar views to themselves. This is because people are born into similar areas, and grow up with people from the same neighbourhoods (with the same incomes and similar professions), and also because people tend to gravitate towards similar people. It's just the way we are, we'll prefer to hang out with someone who is similar to us.

The problem with this, is that if you stick a number of people in a room with a similar opinion on a particular issue, and tell them to talk about this issue, when they come out, their opinions don't move towards the average like you may expect, they move towards the EXTREME! This is how extreme views and racism form and propagate.

The only way to keep moving towards a more 'correct' opinion, is to question your beliefs and ideologies, for example by debating with someone of opposite opinion to you. The only thing that will come about by discussing something with your similar minded friend, is that you both inch slightly toward a more extreme view of your opinion.

Get one hundred slightly left wing people in close proximity for a couple of weeks and encourage them to discuss politics and the economy, and the average of their views will jump closer to the extreme left.

Now try doing this, apart from for all your life, and pass it down through generations, and you can see how extreme and disgusting beliefs can come about in normal rational and everyday people.

The more important the subject matter, the more important it is that you debate it through properly.

Sorry for the essay, I am very passionate on the subject of irrational behaviour and the lack of debate in the world strikes me as an incredible failure.

[NeonLord]

I didnt say anything about seeing it through to the end. I am only saying people should show repesct for people that are doing what we dont want to know about and more every day for the sake of them. I dont agree with war, but the least we can do is help those that are out there now. you took what i said out of context.

[tombsc]

Originally Posted by Nak1

3. We (YOU) live in a society that is relatively safe from the threat of terrorism. This is due to hard work and dedication from not only our soldiers but our Government, security services and local law enforcement agencies.

Really?

I would say the UK Government is 100% to blame for having ANY threat of terrorism in the first place.

Do you think the withdrawal of troops from Afganistan and Iraq would increase the terrorism threat in the UK, or decrease the threat?

[Harvez]

Originally Posted by williamblah

I can understand the emotion you feel about this, and it is a very delicate subject, but you are following the irrational logic of "I have already invested so much in this, that I am going to see it out until the bitter end".

The phrase that annoys me such much when it is used (and it is used a lot), is "We must win this, and fight this through, to honour our dead servicemen, and make their fight worth something."

Whether or not they have died is irrelevant to whether or not you should carry on. If you invest all your money in shares and they do really badly, people will irrationally carry on, as they have such a heavy investment in them. Whilst yesterday they were worth £100k, today they me only be worth £80k, and to keep going to try and kid yourself that you still have £100k is completely illogical.

If 1000 soldiers have died in a war, it makes people say things like "we must carry on fighting to honour their death and make it worth something". Surely it is stupid to send another 1000 soldiers to their death, simply because you don't want to debate whether or not the war is pointless. Lots of people would rather 2000 men died in battle, than stopping halfway through because the war pointless, and knowing that the 1000 men died pointlessly.

Debating with opposing minded people is the only way to question your beliefs and ideologies, and end up with a more correct view of the world. What you are saying is almost along the lines of "this issue is SO important to lots of people that we shouldn't even think about it." I say that we need MORE discussion and MORE debate. And not just about this, about a lot of things that simply aren't discussed enough.

People tend to 'mix with their own kind'. Most people hang out with people who are similar to them, and with similar views to themselves. This is because people are born into similar areas, and grow up with people from the same neighbourhoods (with the same incomes and similar professions), and also because people tend to gravitate towards similar people. It's just the way we are, we'll prefer to hang out with someone who is similar to us.

The problem with this, is that if you stick a number of people in a room with a similar opinion on a particular issue, and tell them to talk about this issue, when they come out, their opinions don't move towards the average like you may expect, they move towards the EXTREME! This is how extreme views and racism form and propagate.

The only way to keep moving towards a more 'correct' opinion, is to question your beliefs and ideologies, for example by debating with someone of opposite opinion to you. The only thing that will come about by discussing something with your similar minded friend, is that you both inch slightly toward a more extreme view of your opinion.

Get one hundred slightly left wing people in close proximity for a couple of weeks and encourage them to discuss politics and the economy, and the average of their views will jump closer to the extreme left.

Now try doing this, apart from for all your life, and pass it down through generations, and you can see how extreme and disgusting beliefs can come about in normal rational and everyday people.

The more important the subject matter, the more important it is that you debate it through properly.

Sorry for the essay, I am very passionate on the subject of irrational behaviour and the lack of debate in the world strikes me as an incredible failure.

Well I'm glad our forefathers didn't think like you or I would no doubt be talking German now.

[williamblah]

But millions of lives would have been saved.

I just cannot believe that so many countries have nuclear weapons, and spend billions of pounds creating and maintaining them. If we were nuclear bombed by a country, I would NOT want to send a nuclear bomb back over to kill millions MORE people. Just because they go by a different 'label' - German, British, whatever - the point I am making is if you were born into Germany, you would more than likely be fighting the British. What I am saying is that people CANNOT comprehend the answer to disputes this large.

Say 90% of British supported fighting German troops in WWII, and 10% of British people didn't want to join the war because they agreed with the German perspective. This is just example figures that I grabbed out of the air, but they prove my point never the less. This would suggest that 9 out of 10 rational people support fighting the Germans.

Now let us look at the German support for fighting British people. I would imagine the figures are similar, 90% supported fighting the British, and 10% of Germans supporting the British cause, and hoping for a German surrender..

This means that MAXIMUM of 20% of people would hold the judgement were they born in either country. The other 80%, or more, of people would grossly change their opinion were they born in the alternative country, and as such, should be allowed no input in the decision, as they merely represent the views of who is in government, who is in charge of propaganda, whoever it is that has 'brainwashed'/changed/altered their opinion.

If you were put onto a desert island with a small number of people, I am sure you would make an agreement very soon that nobody on the island was to kill another, and you would stick to it. If you had a dispute, I am confident you would not kill one another. If some of you found another island and went to live their, you would still not kill one another. Yet multiply this by factor one million, and you end up with people killing each other. When you have 10 in your "world", dispute are relatively easy to solve, whereas when there are millions and millions of people involved, disputes become incomprehendable, and this is when people are told by their government, or by whoever, that the solution is to kill people.

[NeonLord]

Ok, you arn't even aarguing the right point anymore, there is a difference between supporting your troops and supporting war and so on. Troops deserve respect. end off.

[williamblah]

I was never arguing that troops didn't deserve respect! And in fact, I am agreeing with you when you say how much they go through and what an incredibly different life they have to most of us. They obviously go through SO much, and that is why I was saying it was vital to make sure it is the right decision to send x number of people to their deaths, each of whom have a primary aim to send x of the enemy's people to death.

The reason they have such a difficult time is because the Taliban make it difficult for them, because the British make it difficult for the Taliban, because the Taliban make it difficult for the British.

They are so removed from one another they seem to forget that were they to be born in the other man's shoes they would more than likely be fighting from the other position.

[Harvez]

Originally Posted by williamblah

But millions of lives would have been saved.

I just cannot believe that so many countries have nuclear weapons, and spend billions of pounds creating and maintaining them. If we were nuclear bombed by a country, I would NOT want to send a nuclear bomb back over to kill millions MORE people. Just because they go by a different 'label' - German, British, whatever - the point I am making is if you were born into Germany, you would more than likely be fighting the British. What I am saying is that people CANNOT comprehend the answer to disputes this large.

Say 90% of British supported fighting German troops in WWII, and 10% of British people didn't want to join the war because they agreed with the German perspective. This is just example figures that I grabbed out of the air, but they prove my point never the less. This would suggest that 9 out of 10 rational people support fighting the Germans.

Now let us look at the German support for fighting British people. I would imagine the figures are similar, 90% supported fighting the British, and 10% of Germans supporting the British cause, and hoping for a German surrender..

This means that MAXIMUM of 20% of people would hold the judgement were they born in either country. The other 80%, or more, of people would grossly change their opinion were they born in the alternative country, and as such, should be allowed no input in the decision, as they merely represent the views of who is in government, who is in charge of propaganda, whoever it is that has 'brainwashed'/changed/altered their opinion.

If you were put onto a desert island with a small number of people, I am sure you would make an agreement very soon that nobody on the island was to kill another, and you would stick to it. If you had a dispute, I am confident you would not kill one another. If some of you found another island and went to live their, you would still not kill one another. Yet multiply this by factor one million, and you end up with people killing each other. When you have 10 in your "world", dispute are relatively easy to solve, whereas when there are millions and millions of people involved, disputes become incomprehendable, and this is when people are told by their government, or by whoever, that the solution is to kill people.

your talking utter ****e mate, so if the british DIDNT goto war with germany no lives would have been lost ? BS its more a case of how many were saved. I doubt if germany hadnt had its arse kicked there would be any Jewish people left in this world.

[williamblah]

You seem to have completely missed my point. If the German people believed that no matter what their cause, they shouldn't kill, Jews would not be killed either. I am not talking about the position of one country, I am talking about worldwide peace.

[Snave]

Worldwide peace isn't ever going to happen.

You put 3 people in a room, eventually they're going to start fighting.

You put 3 countries next to each other, eventually they're going to start fighting.

That's humans for you.