eyeball Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 Bad pun. That wasn't a pun, it was a direct reference to what I've heard Canadian troops say on TV about being deployed to Afghanistan. Like Harry these volunteers clearly couldn't wait to go and this is specifically why I don't support the troops, I think their gung-ho attitude about their combat mission is disturbing. I can't think of anything that's more directly responsible for putting Canada in harm's way than these public displays of enthusiasm. Its a freedom for which hatred actually makes sense. I imagine the Taliban will also be making good use of the footage of Harry happily blasting away with his machine gun. So you don't think the death of a royal that was proudly maintaining the right and fighting for crown and country would galvanize and inspire more people to join? I can only imagine what might have happened if Diana had been killed by terrorists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 That wasn't a pun, it was a direct reference to what I've heard Canadian troops say on TV about being deployed to Afghanistan. *********** So you don't think the death of a royal that was proudly maintaining the right and fighting for crown and country would galvanize and inspire more people to join? I can only imagine what might have happened if Diana had been killed by terrorists. I thought it was a bad joke and still hope it was. Vimy Ridge was and is a glory to all free people. You are free because of their efforts, not the efforts of those who wrote "Kumbaya" and "Ohio". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capricorn Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 I doubt very much if his commanders would have allowed him to be put in any real danger. That's sheer supposition on your part. Believe what you want but that alone does not make your premise true. I'm quite ceretain we would have heard or seen evidence of real danger if there ever was any being used, as propganda. Oh yes, propaganda. I had forgotten about that. Besides there's no such thing as a real frontline in Afghanistan, just the rhetorical one. You know this how? Have you been there? You don't think his death or capture would have resulted in a greater recruitment of new soldiers dying to go? We don't need a dead royal to meet our recruitment targets. "The dangers of Canada's mission in Afghanistan have not discouraged people from signing up for the Canadian Forces, the military says. A spokeswoman for the Canadian Forces told CBC News it looks like the military will meet its recruitment target of adding more than 12,000 people by next spring." http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2006/08/29/...t-military.html Our soldiers have the courage of their conviction and yes they are "gung ho". You may find this disturbing and that's your right. In the end, they deserve we give them their due, recognize their sacrifice and respect their decision to answer the call of their country to face the enemy in unforgiving conditions. We lost another Canadian soldier in Afghanistan today, killed by an IED. My condolences go out to his family and friends. We have many brave ones who will gladly pick up the torch to take up his cause. As I said, we don't need a dead Harry to inspire valiant Canadian soldiers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 Like Harry these volunteers clearly couldn't wait to go and this is specifically why I don't support the troops, I think their gung-ho attitude about their combat mission is disturbing. I can't think of anything that's more directly responsible for putting Canada in harm's way than these public displays of enthusiasm. Its a freedom for which hatred actually makes sense. I imagine the Taliban will also be making good use of the footage of Harry happily blasting away with his machine gun. You would rather have them herded over at the point of a gun? They want to do what they signed up and trained for. Surprise surprise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melanie_ Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 Canada has military members serving in many parts of the world. Their service is no less worthy because they are not deployed to Afghanistan. Would this not also apply to Prince Harry? It seems to me that some posters here would like him to lead the charge in combat and that would be the only way he could prove his worthiness as a true soldier. I don't mean to imply that serving in non combat zones is less worthy than serving in combat zones. I just suspect that the powers that be will send William to a less dangerous assignment, regardless of what his personal preference might be. These two princes are in danger every day, regardless of whether they are in a combat zone or not. They could be targetted by an assassin on the streets of London, or meet the same fate their mother did, at the hands of the paparazzi. At least in combat, the danger and the enemy are clearly defined. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Doors Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 Again, I give Harry all the credit in the world, and "quite simply," he should have been allowed to serve his tour, same as everyone else. And that, and only that, has been my point. "Risk value" has no place in who does or doesn't serve in war. Fortunately, people who are much better at making these decisions, you know, the professionals, completely disagree with you and agree with me. He was taken out as he shuld be to deprive the enemy of a target. Your political sensibilities notwithstanding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 Fortunately, people who are much better at making these decisions, you know, the professionals, completely disagree with you and agree with me. He was taken out as he shuld be to deprive the enemy of a target. Your political sensibilities notwithstanding. Don't give Harry any credit other than not taking his Ritalin..what a joke - the privledged need to taste blood to be real men..what a disgrace..as far as him being a target..well - if he were taken out - the Royal family would bespared furture embarassment and the "enemy" would get a well diserved publicity boost. It would have been a win win for all...Can't forget the fact that the kid dressed up as a Nazi - makes you wonder what he saw at home...Germanic royalty has always been an irritation - especially when they pretend to be English - what a joke..the kid is half retarded...and said to be the son of the riding instructor...and a puking mentally disturbed mother...give me a break- I am not impressed with Harry..what's his name. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmy Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 Always interesting to hear from Oleg. Now back to your mushroom patch! -k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted March 3, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 I doubt very much if his commanders would have allowed him to be put in any real danger. I'm quite ceretain we would have heard or seen evidence of real danger if there ever was any being used, as propganda. Besides there's no such thing as a real frontline in Afghanistan, just the rhetorical one. You don't think his death or capture would have resulted in a greater recruitment of new soldiers dying to go? Of course there's nothing dangeous about being in a forward observation post....calling down artillery strikes.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted March 3, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 You would rather have them herded over at the point of a gun? They want to do what they signed up and trained for. Surprise surprise. It's hairbrained comments like his that disply perfectly the intellectual corner they paint themselves in. IF the soldiers were reticinet about doing their duty, it would be an indication for him that they should not be there. If they are proud of doing their duty, it is an indication that they shouldn't be supported. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 It's hairbrained comments like his that disply perfectly the intellectual corner they paint themselves in. IF the soldiers were reticinet about doing their duty, it would be an indication for him that they should not be there. If they are proud of doing their duty, it is an indication that they shouldn't be supported. Wow - could you imagine if it was 1943 and we had to put the picture of every Canadian soldier on the front page that was killed that day? This whole misadventure is totally silly...the people that should be doing their duty are not doing it - their job is to preserve Canadian lives and not waste them for fun...what a waste - there is no noble fire fight where heroic soldiers are squared off with the "Taliban" - there are only road kills that are akin to raccon deaths and at best a poor guy trying to make friends getting hit in the back of the head with a tribal wood chopping axe..get the hell out of their and stop wasting Canadian lives is all I can say...as far as sending peace keepers to war..well - the Harry thing explains it all..there are the elite that are so archaicc in their thinking that they still believe that the only way to be a real man is to prove yourself by killing another man..pitiful - kill a AK totting goat herder and you in your sick modernity are suddenly not a girly guy...Goofs。 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 Fortunately, people who are much better at making these decisions, you know, the professionals, completely disagree with you and agree with me. He was taken out as he shuld be to deprive the enemy of a target. Your political sensibilities notwithstanding. "Fortunately" is a matter of opinion. Your political sensibilities notwithstanding. Now here's something for you to ponder: people who make the decisions, you know, the people you see as "professionals," have made plenty of wrong decisions. But then, I'm sure you already knew that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 "Fortunately" is a matter of opinion. Your political sensibilities notwithstanding. Now here's something for you to ponder: people who make the decisions, you know, the people you see as "professionals," have made plenty of wrong decisions. But then, I'm sure you already knew that. The difference is they have to be accountable for their decisions. We do not have to be accountable for our opinions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 (edited) The difference is they have to be accountable for their decisions. We do not have to be accountable for our opinions. Whoever said they didn't? Whoever said we did? Certainly not me. But since you brought it up, here's a fact: everybody who makes such decisions is not held accountable. Some are, some aren't. Edited to add: We most definitely are held accountable for our opinions, too-- when we vote, when we support/don't support war, etc. There are consequences to our opinions, and I would say that is holding us accountable. Edited March 3, 2008 by American Woman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 Whoever said they didn't? Whoever said we did? Certainly not me. But since you brought it up, here's a fact: everybody who makes such decisions is not held accountable. Some are, some aren't. Opinions are theory. Simply thinking something does not make is so or factual. Everyone is accountable for the decisions they make..true success is the consistant flow of good and correct decisions...without vacilation..being humans and not being as righteous as we could be - we vacilate, because we have positive and negative parts..it's human and it is natural- to be more devine or extend nature to a super nature or supernatural and devine state...consistancy in decision making is a must..this is a greatly sought after attribution that only the wise knows exists...for us common dumb folk- we are all over the place and problems result...human imaginations and speculations are what opinions are made of. To take our own speculations seriously or as reality is a human failing...and we all fail because we are all curse by dellusion to some degree...............getting back to Prince Harry - I saw his glowing idiotic picture on the front page. He was sitting like a smiling fool behind a 50 calibre human killer...as if it was a toy and killing was fun - this is dellusionism at it's best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 The difference is they have to be accountable for their decisions. We do not have to be accountable for our opinions. If that really true then George Bush and Tony Blair would be facing criminal charges for illegally attacking, invading and occupying Iraq. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted March 3, 2008 Author Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 If that really true then George Bush and Tony Blair would be facing criminal charges for illegally attacking, invading and occupying Iraq. There was nothing illegal about it as you no doubt been pointed out to you on numerous occasions and you chose to ignore. Ill advised to be sure, but not illegal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 If that really true then George Bush and Tony Blair would be facing criminal charges for illegally attacking, invading and occupying Iraq. Having them face crimminal charges is like haveing a powerful and corrupt lawyer face crimminal charges- it's impossible - when that lawyer appoints the judges. As for Blair and Bush - you can't expect "satan to cast out satan". I mentioned earlier this month that some of the most powerful men in the world may be mentally ill...and that mental illness is not just for the poor and weak.. I also mentioned that greed was a from of mental illness - a member here said..and I para phrase that greed - was not on the list of disorders offically...well that was quite funny - because the greedy men that finance the head doctors and sit on the boards of most hospitals - always will get a clean mental bill of health - seeing they own the god damn insitution - and to insinuate that a powerful man may be nuts will result in unemployment of the assessing doctor...NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. Bush and Chaney are mentally ill - Blair is not..that's why he cut the social climbing Bush loose after to many embarrassments - besides the Queen has a rep to maintain - and she is not nuts - Chaney is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 The law is an ass if that's the case. Anything goes in this world now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 The law is an ass if that's the case. Anything goes in this world now. I like to be literal and biblical to amuse myself and I will say in metaphor..even the devil plays by the rules - mankind has taken a tumble...hope we recover..rule of law is all important...Christ the King of Judea was a superb judge and lawyer..he said.."I have not come to abolish the law but to fulfull every stroke and letter of the law"....Rules and codes of behaviour have to be adhered to or we will all suffer..looks like logic and visionism is rare..there are those that really can not figure out the results of their actions and are incapable of viewing future results..maybe they just don't give a damn and as long as they eat drink and be merry and feel power in the domination of their fellows - they are happy...at the expense of the good - and kind. There is no law at present...if there was we would see evidence of the effect of law. What I realized is that orgainized crime that origniated over 50 years ago is now in full bloom and has over whelmed all of our institutions - America - Russia - Canada - are all mafia run - what do we expect from the sons and grandsons of men that would do anything for the sake of power and money? This is the results of great human crimminal ambition - and we are stuck living in this human waste. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capricorn Posted March 3, 2008 Report Share Posted March 3, 2008 I don't mean to imply that serving in non combat zones is less worthy than serving in combat zones. Thank you for that clarification Melanie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted March 4, 2008 Report Share Posted March 4, 2008 Whoever said they didn't? Whoever said we did? Certainly not me. But since you brought it up, here's a fact: everybody who makes such decisions is not held accountable. Some are, some aren't.Edited to add: We most definitely are held accountable for our opinions, too-- when we vote, when we support/don't support war, etc. There are consequences to our opinions, and I would say that is holding us accountable. A vote is not an opinion it is a conscious act. You may have to live with the results of that act but no one holds you personally accountable for the actions of who you elected. The government which sent Harry to Afghanistan would be held responsible for anything that happened, not the average Brit who voted Labour. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Doors Posted March 4, 2008 Report Share Posted March 4, 2008 "Fortunately" is a matter of opinion. Your political sensibilities notwithstanding. Now here's something for you to ponder: people who make the decisions, you know, the people you see as "professionals," have made plenty of wrong decisions. But then, I'm sure you already knew that. Not in this case. Carry on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.