Prince Harry

I never said he was a hero what he is, is one of many thousands of serving personnel in the armed forces and such should at least be respected for that. For people to sit back in comfort in this country and make cheap shots\points is distasteful in the extreme as they are not prepared to do the job but are willing to criticise. You don't have to like harry as a person (though lets all be honest in his position would we have been any better) but throwing insults and as someone said in another post "not caring if he got blown to bits" is pathetic and smells of envy.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by BBKing

You'll be telling me next that if I don't like it I should go and live under the Taliban.

You'll be telling us next that the Taliban should have been left in power...

[handyman]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

You'll be telling us next that the Taliban should have been left in power...

I think we (the normal atheist/agnostic cf members) are of absolute unity behind the thought that this could have all been handled better
. However we have complete democratic control of the UK and things are far from being in control. Let's give this a few years to settle in.

[kronas]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

perhaps by his deeds and actions whilst there? Just because it's a naff war doesn't mean you can't conduct yourself in a heroic mannor, in keeping with the best traditions of the army.

these days when your in the army your nothing more than a political pawn, the definition of being a solider in war for honourable reasons is changing.

it does not wash with me, the only heroes i see are the ones who fought in the wars before i was born, back in the 1940's when it was about freedom, liberty, independence of this nation to stay under british control not be under threat by nazi germany and previous attempted occupations.

im not saying its easy to go in to a war, but NO ONE can justify what has happened and what continues to happen right now.

you cannot seriously expect me to believe the invasions we have seen were to 'liberate' these people, vested interests are already in place as i noted before and will continue, if democracy (in its current form can you call it that these days) we would be in zimbabwe, darfur, rounding up genocidal maniacs and allowing african countries to attempt to get backup to a standard where fearing for your life or watching people being killed around you is NOT an everyday occourance.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by kronas

these days when your in the army your nothing more than a political pawn, the definition of being a solider in war for honourable reasons is changing.

it does not wash with me, the only heroes i see are the ones who fought in the wars before i was born, back in the 1940's when it was about freedom, liberty, independence of this nation to stay under british control not be under threat by nazi germany and previous attempted occupations.

im not saying its easy to go in to a war, but NO ONE can justify what has happened and what continues to happen right now.

you cannot seriously expect me to believe the invasions we have seen were to 'liberate' these people, vested interests are already in place as i noted before and will continue, if democracy (in its current form can you call it that these days) we would be in zimbabwe, darfur, rounding up genocidal maniacs and allowing african countries to attempt to get backup to a standard where fearing for your life or watching people being killed around you is NOT an everyday occourance.

So someone who, while under fire, risking their own life, rescues a group of civilians and leads them to safety isn't a hero in your mind?

Those soldiers who defended civilians in Kosovo etc aren't heros? Their actions to you weren't worth considering honorable? The risk to their own lives insignificant?

You're happy with Iraq being invaded and Saddam punished for his crimes though I take it, after all, he killed more Iraqi's than Mugabe killed Zimbabweans.

[kronas]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

So someone who, while under fire, risking their own life, rescues a group of civilians and leads them to safety isn't a hero in your mind?

i never said you cannot be a hero in a war, but if your there because you were sent by a government who initiated and engaged in something which nobody asked to happen within a country then yes it does NOT matter, the ends do not justify the means.

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Those soldiers who defended civilians in Kosovo etc aren't heros? Their actions to you weren't worth considering honorable? The risk to their own lives insignificant?

ok yes kosovo maybe, but the point im trying to make is nobody has made a signficant positive diffarence in afghanistan, as the country is in its current state.

whilst i can understand the depth at which someone joins the army for and puts themselves on the line for others its still a finely poised game of politics, especially these days!

Originally Posted by Xaccers

You're happy with Iraq being invaded and Saddam punished for his crimes though I take it, after all, he killed more Iraqi's than Mugabe killed Zimbabweans.

who put saddam there ? mugabe has shown himself to be more of an aggressive tirant than saddam, he (saddam) did do unsavoury things, but that was not the 'main issue' call for the war there it was WMD which has turned out to be false.

[danielf]

Originally Posted by kronas

these days when your in the army your nothing more than a political pawn, the definition of being a solider in war for honourable reasons is changing.

it does not wash with me, the only heroes i see are the ones who fought in the wars before i was born, back in the 1940's when it was about freedom, liberty, independence of this nation to stay under british control not be under threat by nazi germany and previous attempted occupations.

History is written by those who win the war?

Originally Posted by kronas

these days when your in the army your nothing more than a political pawn, the definition of being a solider in war for honourable reasons is changing.

it does not wash with me, the only heroes i see are the ones who fought in the wars before i was born, back in the 1940's when it was about freedom, liberty, independence of this nation to stay under british control not be under threat by nazi germany and previous attempted occupations.

im not saying its easy to go in to a war, but NO ONE can justify what has happened and what continues to happen right now.

you cannot seriously expect me to believe the invasions we have seen were to 'liberate' these people, vested interests are already in place as i noted before and will continue, if democracy (in its current form can you call it that these days) we would be in zimbabwe, darfur, rounding up genocidal maniacs and allowing african countries to attempt to get backup to a standard where fearing for your life or watching people being killed around you is NOT an everyday occourance.

Sorry kronas I respect you a lot but I have to say this time you are talking rot...A hero is a hero is a hero whomever they are fighting for or protecting.Just because governments are crap at picking wars and what to defend does not make the men and women who end up doing the fighting any the less heroes.Plus going by your reasoning you would be saying that WW1 was a justified war when it was nothing but a futile exercise in wasting lives that blighted a whole generation to the point that we nearly failed to stand up to someone much worse.If WW1 hadn't taken place we might not have had to fight WW11.

No war is ever justified but neither is sitting back and doing nothing.Also picking wars on the premise that we shouldn't fight to protect resources as well as to protect lives is nonsense.Neither reason is a good enough reason to be fighting IF negotiations can achieve the same result.

BUT to say anyone who selflessly puts their lives on the line to serve their country is not a hero because you don't agree with the war is morally bankrupt.I may not approve of war but I would never say that those who fight don't deserve the epitaph of hero if they fight the wars that they have sworn to fight on behalf of the democratically elected government.

[kronas]

Originally Posted by Incognitas

Sorry kronas I respect you a lot but I have to say this time you are talking rot...A hero is a hero is a hero whomever they are fighting for or protecting.Just because governments are crap at picking wars and what to defend does not make the men and women who end up doing the fighting any the less heroes.Plus going by your reasoning you would be saying that WW1 was a justified war when it was nothing but a futile exercise in wasting lives that blighted a whole generation to the point that we nearly failed to stand up to someone much worse.If WW1 hadn't taken place we might not have had to fight WW11.

wars will happen irrespective of whether they are right or wrong, but sometimes you have to think about the justification of a war and whether your indivdual participation in something is for the best or worst of YOUR country, if your fighting a war in another country for unjustifiable reasons then i dont see how someone can be displayed as a hero, if your going to follow the definition that those in a war are heroes then everybody is classed as a hero no matter what they do, what about soldiers who rape, kill, innocents, your going to say 'the war got to him/her' let them fade away ?

Originally Posted by Incognitas

No war is ever justified but neither is sitting back and doing nothing.Also picking wars on the premise that we shouldn't fight to protect resources as well as to protect lives is nonsense.Neither reason is a good enough reason to be fighting IF negotiations can achieve the same result.

sometimes you HAVE to go to war granted, obviously civility dictates you should not but you have to do whats right, even if your resources are stretched..

Originally Posted by Incognitas

BUT to say anyone who selflessly puts their lives on the line to serve their country is not a hero because you don't agree with the war is morally bankrupt.I may not approve of war but I would never say that those who fight don't deserve the epitaph of hero if they fight the wars that they have sworn to fight on behalf of the democratically elected government.

im not disrespecting soliders who put their lives on the line, its the most unselfish thing to do, but again i personally draw a line on what is right and wrong in going to war for the merit of reasons, the media showed itself to push its own agenda with the harry thing as with any other government out there and ultimately it had to take an american media outlet to let it out!

Originally Posted by danielf

History is written by those who win the war?

history is written by a war and those who are in it and the winner.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by kronas

i never said you cannot be a hero in a war, but if your there because you were sent by a government who initiated and engaged in something which nobody asked to happen within a country then yes it does NOT matter, the ends do not justify the means.

You're trying to say that if you don't agree with a war, than no matter what anyone does in that war, it cannot be heroic?
Yet later on you say:

Originally Posted by kronas

ok yes kosovo maybe, but the point im trying to make is nobody has made a signficant positive diffarence in afghanistan, as the country is in its current state.

Even though (someone correct me if I'm wrong) but there was no UN resolution for foreign forces to enter the former Yugoslavia....
As for significant positive difference in Afghanistan, perhaps you should actually talk to some of the people who have served there rather than basing your opinion on your own gut feeling?

Originally Posted by kronas

whilst i can understand the depth at which someone joins the army for and puts themselves on the line for others its still a finely poised game of politics, especially these days!

The political and fighting aspects of war are a million miles appart Kronas, unless you're saying that all soldiers act in idential manners for the same political gain.

Originally Posted by kronas

who put saddam there ? mugabe has shown himself to be more of an aggressive tirant than saddam, he (saddam) did do unsavoury things, but that was not the 'main issue' call for the war there it was WMD which has turned out to be false.

Mass slaughter of Shia muslims and the deaths of maybe as many as 100,000 Kurds are less unsavoury than what has been going on in Zimbabwe to you? Interesting.

[ginge51]

Originally Posted by Nidge

Has been on the frontline in Afgahnistan, well done to him. He's not affraid of getting his hands dirty.

Well done to him.

Marvellous.

[kronas]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Even though (someone correct me if I'm wrong) but there was no UN resolution for foreign forces to enter the former Yugoslavia....
As for significant positive difference in Afghanistan, perhaps you should actually talk to some of the people who have served there rather than basing your opinion on your own gut feeling?

ive heard what people who served have said it doesent change my stance.

Originally Posted by Xaccers

The political and fighting aspects of war are a million miles appart Kronas, unless you're saying that all soldiers act in idential manners for the same political gain.

ok, in that case why be a soldier at all ? you want to shoot people ? legally ?

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Mass slaughter of Shia muslims and the deaths of maybe as many as 100,000 Kurds are less unsavoury than what has been going on in Zimbabwe to you? Interesting.

in iraq, things are no better now, the factions have turned it to civil war, when he was there, there was fear, so its a lose lose situation, so it would seem.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by kronas

but sometimes you have to think about the justification of a war and whether your indivdual participation in something is for the best or worst of YOUR country

Thankfully, British forces consider humanity rather than just Britain when dealing with conflicts.
In WW1 and WW2, Korea, Sierra Leone, Kosovo etc it could have been argued that the best for Britain would have been to either not get involved until we as a nation were attacked, or just turn our back as the conflict was so far away.

Originally Posted by kronas

im not disrespecting soliders who put their lives on the line

Oh yes you are, and to suggest you aren't is ridiculous!

[ginge51]

Originally Posted by RizzyKing

I am not buying what your saying either or what you say your saying you seem to have a problem with him because of what he is. It isn't his fault he is a royal and he didn't HAVE to join the forces but he did. So like i said unless you have served ?? don't comment on those that put on the uniform or try and find smart ways to degrade what they do. So many people now taking cheap shots at the armed forces from the comfort of a chair in the UK.

Omfg why do you like "prince" Harry so much?
What has he done for you so we give him a proportion of our "hard worked" for money?
I agree wit rizzyking, he's had them cameras with him shooting off that gun to make him lok as if he's actually doing something good.
When the cameras stop no doubt he'll be off back to a tent with a ps3 16 stacks of budwieser,full fridge, air conditioning,sky tv,the lot.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by kronas

ive heard what people who served have said it doesent change my stance.

Bully for you.

Originally Posted by kronas

ok, in that case why be a soldier at all ? you want to shoot people ? legally ?

It's obviously something you'd never understand, otherwise you wouldn't need to ask the question.

Originally Posted by kronas

in iraq, things are no better now, the factions have turned it to civil war, when he was there, there was fear, so its a lose lose situation, so it would seem.

When were the Kurds last gassed Kronas?
For that matter, when were Zimbabweans (as you tried to make out the situation there under Mugabe is worse than Iraq under Saddam) last gassed, or rounded up to be shot and dumped into mass graves?

---------- Post added at 01:25 ---------- Previous post was at 01:21 ----------

Originally Posted by ginge51

Omfg why do you like "prince" Harry so much?
What has he done for you so we give him a proportion of our "hard worked" for money?
I agree wit rizzyking, he's had them cameras with him shooting off that gun to make him lok as if he's actually doing something good.
When the cameras stop no doubt he'll be off back to a tent with a ps3 16 stacks of budwieser,full fridge, air conditioning,sky tv,the lot.

Says the bloke who's obviously never heard of Wellchild, Sentebale or MapAction.
How about for once, before you comment, you actually do some research into the subject?
Go on, I dare you, actually look up what the Royals do.