You'd need to consider criticism of the Army and criticism of soldiers to be the same thing if you were to interpret it that way. I'm not going to take a guess at what the intention of those examples are without context, but saying "the Army treats injured servicemen poorly" is not the same thing as "balls to veterans".
The next Labour leader thread
- Thread starter Ricochet J
- Start date
It's almost like you're actively trying to be offended.
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2012
- Posts
- 11,698
- Location
- Surrey
You think the aim is to mock disabled vets rather than satirizing the glorification of voluntarily participating in war?
Or maybe you understand it is nothing to do with mocking disabled vets and you just want to use them as petty political forum ammunition.
I think what people dont realize, is that pretending to be offended only works if other people cared.
Last edited:
I suppose the 'Make Stuff Dead' Army Mug is simply drawing attention to the plight of the soldiers?
If you say 'I'm not going to take a guess .....' Then don't take one. Don't blabber on about how I'm wrong, when you clearly have no idea of the context of the photograph as you just admitted.
Exactly how does that mock army vets
Join the Army, free prosthetic limbs
You don't get to be right just because you were first.
And I didn't take a guess at the meaning of the objects in the photo, I made two separate statements.
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2012
- Posts
- 11,698
- Location
- Surrey
Drawing attention to the potential consequences of being a soldier more like and that can apply to the one holding the gun or at the end of it.
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Jun 2005
- Posts
- 7,614
It’s just the usual self-loathing lefty crap. Fortunately these grown adults with sixthformer ideology have no chance at power.
The point, which is seemingly missed by both you and the clueless buffoon responsible for that sad little bit of propaganda, is that the Army doesn't choose which war it gets told to fight. That is the responsibility of the elected government. The Labour government, frequently.
If you say so. Labour are a bloody disgrace.
Maybe if the Labour party as a whole was better connected to the armed forces and not so openly disrespectful if not downright hostile it wouldn't have been quite so to keen to use it as an extension of our foreign policy over the last 20 years. Just a thought.
So something is beyond criticism and parody if it gets told what to do by a government?
I thought it was the right that liked to shout about freedom of speech all the time, and "PC nonsense". Are certain subjects exempt from that?
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2012
- Posts
- 11,698
- Location
- Surrey
I am no labour fan. In fact, i have never voted labour (despite being called a lefty by the far right on the forum) and there is plenty to criticize when you talk about any British political party. This picture is quite a stretch though.
When they specifically give up their right to freedom of movement, freedom of speech, freedom of association and others for the duration of their service yes damn right they are beyond criticism. They are not allowed to reply.
Be critical of the government policy that got them sent to whichever war they got sent to, but not them. Its just asinine. Its like mocking social workers or nurses because you don't like what they do. Not them setting the policy and at least they can reply.
Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
That's not mocking Army vets though - it's highlighting the futility and cost of war.
You're right, soldiers never kill anyone, ever.
I'm in no way a pacifist and I respect our soldiers and the role our armed forces play in the world at large, but that doesn't mean that the armed forces can't (or shouldn't) be open to criticism or held to account for actions taken. It's certainly possible to respect the individual but criticise the organisation - nay, it's should be a requirement to be critical of a machine whose main purpose is war.
Last edited by a moderator:
It is reminiscent of an OZ magazine stall outside a schoolboys and girls exhibition in the sixties. Trying to be anti establishment but childish with it.
I know of people that would put Laurence Olivier to shame with their acting skills and the ability to pull the wool over the authorities and professionals eyes alike. Oscars and Bafta's don't get a look in.
Of course there are people in need but I'll wager there are also a good number who are playing the system.
Last edited: