More court martials?
- Thread starter AdamW
- Start date
Sponsored Links
jasy said:
Jasy, I'm beginning to have doubts about your claims of a career in the armed forces... I have highlighted the key word in your response. Engagement. Engaging the enemy. However, as I have explained in very simple and plain words, this situation falls under the remit of the Army Act.
Traitor? Slogger, let me just point out that YOU are the one who tries to incite hatred against some groups of citizens in my beautiful motherland, England. Incitement to riot, and during a time of war! If that isn't treachory I do not know what is. You are the worst type of traitor, a traitor who believes he is a patriot. You haven't got the slightest clue about the history of this country, it's conflicts, nor what makes it the best place on Earth.
Why you are both so keen to support some people who have dirtied the reputation of this great nation, I do not know why. "English" is still a word associated with justice, fairplay, respect and order in most parts of the world. Every time we let our soldiers off the hook for criminal acts, we errode that reputation.
Without that reputation we would be a small island to the north-west of Europe instead of a world-leader with an armed force that is feared by our enemies and worshipped by those we protect.
Sponsored Links
Depends how you look at it.
The enemy combatants wear civilian clothes and use civilians as human shields. Our RoE forbid our soldiers from knowingly shooting civilians, and they won't shoot blindly into a crowd of 100 people in the hope of hitting the one individual hiding in the middle, but if they have a shot they can and will take it.
The enemy chooses to fight in this cowardly, underhanded way, and I agree with you that they use it to their advantage.
HOWEVER, the Geneva Conventions (to which even Iraq is party) mean that all combatants have to distinguish themselves from civilians.
If they do not, then we can do pretty much what we like to enemy combatants, i.e. we can treat them as spies, terrorists, whatever. Which means if they start crying cos they are injured or want to surrender, we don't have to give them the benefit of PoW status.
If they were in uniforms, we would only be entitled to know name, rank and number. But they aren't in uniforms, which allows our forces to "stress" them for information.
But the civilians still have the protection of the Geneva Conventions.
? 2 cowards scared to be seen to show patriotism to you country ?? or is this not your country hmmm as some of you show contempt for our forces who knows
ban islam now if nothing else it would be less places for islamic scum to learn there trade as they do in the mosky training camps
i am definetely going to vote for a far right wing group now we need to show ENGLAND wont be treat like this
lets go so far as to give pakistan an ultimatum too either get rid of the training mosks or we go to war on you
stop all people going there from the uk no more flights in or out
lock the borders with armed guards under orders to shoot to kill regardless
ban islam now if nothing else it would be less places for islamic scum to learn there trade as they do in the mosky training camps
i am definetely going to vote for a far right wing group now we need to show ENGLAND wont be treat like this
lets go so far as to give pakistan an ultimatum too either get rid of the training mosks or we go to war on you
stop all people going there from the uk no more flights in or out
lock the borders with armed guards under orders to shoot to kill regardless
Slogger said:
Ah, yes, what sensible measures... if your aim is to incite riot and hatred amongst the peoples of England. Which in a time of war would be the acts of a traitor.
Might I suggest you read up on Pakistani policy on religious extremism? You'll find that President Musharraf has been struck right off the Eid card list of every terrorist group and islamic zealot in the world.
Stop being such a silly girl, and I'll give you some candy.
AdamW said:
Hmm doubts eh. Those rules of engagement you go on about do not cover an enemy dressed in a uniform of an opposing force like the good old days they cover SITUATIONS. How an individual interperets those situations is down to them (the governments umbrella) Great on paper ,and my god you love to quote rules and regulations, but putting them into practice is another thing. I know what i have done i have nothing to prove to you adamw and i know that you ain't.
Slogger said:
I don't think you are patriotic. You would like to turn our country into an insular, bigotted, aggressive police state, whereas a truly patriotic person would surely choose to keep the freedoms we have at the moment.
I think that views like yours pose a danger to our country, and if we could exile all the people who hold these kind of views it would make the country a better place than exiling any number of muslims.
M
Moz
slogger .
I did a 12 under 15 yr service
I servered with the best Inft regd,
who had more Battle Honours/medals ..
than any other Regt ..
QUEENS LANCASHIRE REGIMENT 1BATT
QLRs...A TOP PROFESSIONAL INFANTRY BATT
a wonderful .. if hard training regt but you know like paras you got the best with QLRs when you made it ..
brother in laws did the karoke , they went too Territorial ARMY , Both now run platoons at 4 QLRS ..
there more init as before me ... guess their betterr
I did a 12 under 15 yr service
I servered with the best Inft regd,
who had more Battle Honours/medals ..
than any other Regt ..
QUEENS LANCASHIRE REGIMENT 1BATT
QLRs...A TOP PROFESSIONAL INFANTRY BATT
a wonderful .. if hard training regt but you know like paras you got the best with QLRs when you made it ..
brother in laws did the karoke , they went too Territorial ARMY , Both now run platoons at 4 QLRS ..
there more init as before me ... guess their betterr
Sponsored Links
Similar threads
- Locked
