OT. The futures Bright, the Futures Brexit!!!

[AngryRam]

Narcissist! Lol!!

1. Your definition of ‘milked it’ equals ‘basked in the adulation’ apparently. Mine equals ‘exploited’. Either way...she was very unpopular pre the Falklands and as you agree...’basked in the adulation’ afterwards. Not much difference.

2. Keep your hair on Tricky...’I’ve never denied that the Falklands were ‘invaded’ but given all the circumstances...was the reaction from the Government and PM of the time the only way to go about things? In my opinion the whole reaction was politically orchestrated and young lives, both British and Argentinian, were lost unnecessarily.

3. I am not of the same mindset as Corbyn in any way. I don’t approve of his leadership and I believe it’s a tragedy that his inadequacies as leader of the opposition are partly responsible for the mess we are in today.
I’m not aware of him having any intent to ‘abandon’ the Falkland Islanders although he has spoken of the need for talks to resolve an issue which continues to be something of an ‘open sore’ between the two countries. Given the geographical location of the Falklands that seems quite reasonable to me.
As far as ‘stripping the forces to the bones’ is concerned...that possibly has already happened and the ‘Cuba/axis against capitalism’ point is just not worth a response.

4. Clearly I don’t ‘ignore every part of posts I don’t accept’ or I wouldn’t be replying to you would I...and how exactly did the EU ‘help the enemy’ against us?

5. What a strange comment from you of all people.
Obviously those who ‘join up’ are making a conscious decision which will involve, depending on circumstances and situation, putting their lives in danger. To that extent I agree with you.
Beyond that, if you think that governments then abandon all responsibility for actions which put the lives of our troops in danger for, in this case, very dubious reasons then I fundamentally disagree with you.

Nope, I think ‘weird just weird’ just about covered it..
You live in a strange place rA..

[Geoff Parkstone]

That is the place of the idealist, rather than the pragmatist? Many years ago I would, and did, share your views on a lot of these things rA, but have slowly come to realise that they have no traction in real life.

The pursuit of equality is a senseless pursuit, for it can never be achieved. All people have different skill sets, some of which are in greater demand than others: and are remunerated accordingly.

The skill sets applicable to the armed forces are an ability to die a death and happily kill other people, to do what you are told and to learn to do whatever you are told to do to carry out your job. For which you are remunerated sufficiently to be attracted to the role in sufficient numbers.

So the lives lost were not "unnecessary" but were a direct result of the individual knowingly accepting the risk, taking up the job and its risk premium enhanced remuneration. Nobody forced the individuals to take up that job and remuneration package (contrast the two world wars where conscription existed).

Every death is unfortunate, sad for all the relatives and friends etc, but when you voluntarily put yourself out there in that position, it's not unnecessary. One could almost argue that its disrespectful to those killed to describe what they were doing as unnecessary.

[ramAnag]

Personally I find Derbyshire a lot less strange than Brentford, AR.

Probably the most cynical post I’ve ever read on here, GP.
I’m not sure where the ‘pursuit of equality’ fits into it but your description of the ‘skill sets of the armed forces’ as being, ‘to die a death and happily kill others’ is nothing less than shocking.
I understand that there is a world of difference between ‘professional soldiers’ and those who were conscripted during the two World Wars and I’m with you on that.
I’ll even share your possible dismay at the concept of every serviceman being hailed a ‘Hero’, but they should surely not be simply regarded, as you seem to be suggesting, as either killing machines or cannon fodder to become tools of political expediency.

[Geoff Parkstone]

OK rA, I accept the allegation of cynicism. But tell me then, what is the modern army for save to kill or be killed in the nae of the realm?

[AngryRam]

Personally I find Derbyshire a lot less strange than Brentford, AR. .

Not Derbyshire, just your own little bubble.

[ramAnag]

Not Derbyshire, just your own little bubble.

Oh really! Sorry, forgot you need ‘joke alert’.

Not totally at odds with you GP...or your cynicism. I’d hope though that the armed forces amounted to more than kill or be killed and I certainly feel they should be worth more than that.
We live in increasingly harsh times but it is disturbing, even for one who shares much of your cynicism, to find someone as relatively intelligent as yourself being quite so blunt, outspoken and perhaps elitist as to describe the functions and ‘skill sets’ of the armed forces as ‘to die a death and happily kill others’.

[mistaram]

That is the place of the idealist, rather than the pragmatist? Many years ago I would, and did, share your views on a lot of these things rA, but have slowly come to realise that they have no traction in real life.

The pursuit of equality is a senseless pursuit, for it can never be achieved. All people have different skill sets, some of which are in greater demand than others: and are remunerated accordingly.

The skill sets applicable to the armed forces are an ability to die a death and happily kill other people, to do what you are told and to learn to do whatever you are told to do to carry out your job. For which you are remunerated sufficiently to be attracted to the role in sufficient numbers.

So the lives lost were not "unnecessary" but were a direct result of the individual knowingly accepting the risk, taking up the job and its risk premium enhanced remuneration. Nobody forced the individuals to take up that job and remuneration package (contrast the two world wars where conscription existed).

Every death is unfortunate, sad for all the relatives and friends etc, but when you voluntarily put yourself out there in that position, it's not unnecessary. One could almost argue that its disrespectful to those killed to describe what they were doing as unnecessary.

Lucky for you then Geoff that sufficient people have volunteered their lives so you can speak so freely But the 243,000 who died in two world wars didn't volunteer they were conscripted

[ramAnag]

Lucky for you then Geoff that sufficient people have volunteered their lives so you can speak so freely But the 243,000 who died in two world wars didn't volunteer they were conscripted

Tbf mista, I suspect Geoff would be the first to differentiate between conscripted and ‘professional’ soldiers.
It was also a great deal more than the quarter of a million you speak of who died in the two World Wars.

[Geoff Parkstone]

I did indeed differentiate between conscripts and professional in my original post

[Geoff Parkstone]

We live in increasingly harsh times but it is disturbing, even for one who shares much of your cynicism, to find someone as relatively intelligent as yourself being quite so blunt, outspoken and perhaps elitist as to describe the functions and ‘skill sets’ of the armed forces as ‘to die a death and happily kill others’.

I ask again then, what do you feel that the purpose of an army is other than as I defined? What have I missed here? Peace keeping is essentially minimising the deaths or injuries, predominantly on your side. Isn't everything else all about being prepared for the primary two functions?

Not sure how you could consider my views elitist - as noted already, the military forces are now volunteer, career oriented individuals. Not a career I would have chosen to pursue, but I don't look down on them for selecting that career path, quite the opposite if anything: they do something I wouldn't chose to do: kill and get killed. (and don't forget marching up and down the square - thankyou, Michael).

Maybe I'm just a good old fashioned pacifist, a conscie perhaps, in old money. But in an era where good old Uncle Don could start a global annihilation at the press of his finger, what does an army do?