Should Soldiers get compensation for Injury during war?

[JP]

In my opinion if you "join up" then you have accepted that you may have to kill someone who could be just like you fighting for the other side. At the whim of who ever is in no.10 at the time, no matter what your role is in the military. The guy who packs the ammo is just as responsible as the guy who pulls the trigger.
I think life in the services would be great apart from this fact, its the single reason I have not got involved.

There are no good guys/ bad guys just people, like us.

Please don't say the wars Iraq and Afghanistan are in the name of "preserving our freedom" as it simply isn't true.

We are all contributing to this war by virtue of our consumerism, by buying fuel for our car, home and all those other things that are imported and transported... We also fund these wars for oil by virtue of the TAX we pay, however little !
So unless anyone here can honestly say they live in a cave eating only the food produced by themselves, without access to elec-trickery or running water, then in my book, that makes us as guilty as the bloke who pulls the trigger for us !

Without this OIL we would be living in the stone age.

I know there are a lot of gun happy psycho's in the world, of that there is no doubt, but there is no place for these in the British force's.... The screening process filters out these headcase's.....on the whole British servicemen are highly trained and disciplined, but thats not to say once in, during the "heat of battle" an ordinary man cannot turn into one.

War will and does always bring out, both the worst and best in people.

IMO

Incidently

My cousin's son joined up @ 17 some 6 yrs ago because the employement prospects in his area were NIL......and he now permenantly sleeps in a graveyard in yorkshire....... but that was his choice !

 

[Goz]

even I conciede that people who fight for the freedom of someone else is someone to be praised

Sorry ... can't let this comment slip ... but do you not understand that the, vast majority, of soldiers are trained to accept orders and what those above them say? And those above them SAID (and ordered them to) "fight for the freedom of someone else" ... They were told the Iraqi people needed to be freed from the tyranny that is Saddam Hussein and his WMD. So surely, by your own definition, they are to be praised? As part of that, surely, compensating them for the fact they lost limbs, or whatever, in this fight for freedom is perfectly justified?

Anyway ... just a though ...

 

[trancetheory]

considering the massive support for the Stop the War campaign, i'm afraid i cant see how any soldier culdnt have had doubts about what they where about to do.

pherhaps they all really believed they where doing the right thing for the people of Iraq, does that make it right? certainly it lends sum justification to the cause and the responsabilities of the soldier, but as it was based on lies from the US & UK government, then it is the Goverment who should be held accountable certainly.

 

[Goz]

considering the massive support for the Stop the War campaign, i'm afraid i cant see how any soldier culdnt have had doubts about what they where about to do.

pherhaps they all really believed they where doing the right thing for the people of Iraq, does that make it right? certainly it lends sum justification to the cause and the responsabilities of the soldier, but as it was based on lies from the US & UK government, then it is the Goverment who should be held accountable certainly.

Its our goverment that give our soldiers their orders. Go back to my points earlier in the thread about how soldiers are damned if they do and damned if they don't. They really don't have much choice but to follow those orders. however you look at it .. they are doing what OUR government has told them is "right". They desreve compensation REGARDLESS of whether "our" governement is right or not (And the governement decide first what an illegal order is). The government is elected under our laws. Their decisions are legal by UK laws (Well they believe they are). I don't think you should be arguing whether soldiers deserve compensation, where they obviously do, but about the fact that our government is wrong.

If you asked ... is our government acting illegally you'd get far far more support over your ideas. As it is you are taking out your frustration of the current governement on TOTALLY the wrong people.

 

[trancetheory]

i'm not taking anything out on anyone, i dont have any ideas, i have only diffrent opinions on diffrent subjects that havnt yet made my mind up

I'm not interested in getting support for an idea, i'm interested in what people think about it

 

[Goz]

i'm not taking anything out on anyone, i dont have any ideas, i have only diffrent opinions on diffrent subjects that havnt yet made my mind up

I'm not interested in getting support for an idea, i'm interested in what people think about it

Ok then ... it "sounds" with your INCREDIBLY emotive choice of language like you ARE taking it out on the poor bastards sent out on our government's orders.

Regardless though ... i would like you to explain how, in contrast to what im saying, anyone could justify NOT compensating these poor bastards. Surely this is part of the discussion. Ignoring these points to defne your own viewpoint its immaterial (I don't care either way what you think ... and im saying that not a a personal attack but as someone who holds a differing viewpoint). Im just interested in how given the weight of evidence against that anyone could say its wrong to compensate them? So please stop wriggling your way round the argument and answer it.

 

[dave arc-i]

it is one of two things

either john is completely morally bereft to need to ask the question in the first place

or

he is a selfish cunt like i suggested he was a hundred or so posts ago

 

[trancetheory]

dave, ur constant rudeness and agression is really really boring.

Goz I gave my reasons behind the arguments I presented, dont think i need to go over them again, i'm not ignoring anything, and i've still not decieded what I think of this.

However, choice is choice, regardless of whether its following an order or not. and this is where my problem lies. Choosing to kill does not sit well with me.

 

[Goz]

However, choice is choice, regardless of whether its following an order or not. and this is where my problem lies. Choosing to kill does not sit well with me.

Im not disagreeing with that but you said soldiers fighting for freedom are to be respected and then, in tyhe other hand, are saying that people who are TOLD, and believe, they are fighting for freedom can go f**k themselves. THis is so contrary its silly. Please answer this. How can you say these soldier by believe they are going into fight for freedom (due to their being lied to) are any less deserving of compensation than the people that DO (by YOUR definition)?

You have not answered this. In fact having re-read this thread all i can see is you avoiding answering this point. So please answer it. If you HAVE answered it and i am missing the point, then please doas i am doing and re-iterate it. So far i find your opinion untenable by your OWN arguments. You have done nothing to change this opinion in my mind ... please do so.

 

[dave arc-i]

dave, ur constant rudeness and agression is really really boring.

and a not dissimilar word is boorish

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=e...:boorish&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title

Definitions of boorish on the Web:
[SIZE=-1]

• ill-mannered and coarse and contemptible in behavior or appearance

which as far as i am concerned hits the nail on the head regarding the thought processes that are going on inside your head[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]maybe you would be so kind as to post my quote where i was being aggressive - of couse if you cant find one then an appology would do instead[/SIZE]

 

[trancetheory]

Im not disagreeing with that but you said soldiers fighting for freedom are to be respected and then, in tyhe other hand, are saying that people who are TOLD, and believe, they are fighting for freedom can go f**k themselves. THis is so contrary its silly. Please answer this. How can you say these soldier by believe they are going into fight for freedom (due to their being lied to) are any less deserving of compensation than the people that DO (by YOUR definition)?

You have not answered this. In fact having re-read this thread all i can see is you avoiding answering this point. So please answer it. If you HAVE answered it and i am missing the point, then please doas i am doing and re-iterate it. So far i find your opinion untenable by your OWN arguments. You have done nothing to change this opinion in my mind ... please do so.

as i've said over and over, i dont have an answer, only conflicting opinions

 

[Goz]

as i've said over and over, i dont have an answer, only conflicting opinions

So give me the opinion that conflicts that point? Preferrably with justification ...

Afterall i can say i beleieve the sky is green but its a worthless opinion unless I am willing to justify it in some way. Surely?

 

[trancetheory]

wtf are you talking about?

i've said the thoughts that have come to me, i cant be arsed to go over them again, for the 20,0000th time

 

[Goz]

The problem is .. im not getting these thoughts .. so can you, one last time, list out the reasons why freedom fighters are to be respected (and thus, im assuming DESERVE compensation) but that people who only BELIEVE they are freedom fighters, due to being lied to by our government, do not deserve to be respected (and thus not deserving of compensation).

Its just that so far you say you've explained it 20,000 times, and maybe im just missing your points ... but im not seeing these explanations. A list of bullet points would probabyl help.

 

[dave arc-i]

So give me the opinion that conflicts that point? Preferrably with justification ...

Afterall i can say i beleieve the sky is green but its a worthless opinion unless I am willing to justify it in some way. Surely?

wtf are you talking about?

i've said the thoughts that have come to me, i cant be arsed to go over them again, for the 20,0000th time

this is why you get yourself into problems like this john - you just dont have the mental capacty for debate

and i am still waing for you to post an "aggressive" quote by me in this thread directed towards yourself by me or an applogy

 

[bigmichelle]

i definitely think soldiers should be compensated. They have to go through so much shit and experience some horrific things at war, their pay is rubbish, thier badly equipped and thier activities are making the people in power very rich. I think whoever profits the most from war should pay compensation to everyone who is damaged by war. Its all wrong. Soldiers come back mentally traumatised with no offer of help. For many people being a soldier has ruined thier lives because they have essentially been turned into killing machines during the war. Its not till the soldiers get home and back to everyday life that the reality of what they have seen and done really sinks in. You wouldn't believe how many ex soldiers are in mental homes, homeless, and/or suffereing from substance abuse and addiction to escape from the reality of what they've been through.

 

[JPsychodelicacy]

this is why you get yourself into problems like this john - you just dont have the mental capacty for debate

He does Dave, but he has some pretty nasty dyslexia which means he has problems expressing himself in writing in the terms in which he's thinking. In person he's a very smart and erudite guy.

For all I disagree with what he's been saying here, his articulation has come on in leaps and bounds since he first started posting here, so the last thing I want to do is discourage him from trying.

J.

 

[Goz]

TBH Joe when I met John I came away thinking hes a really top chap ... but he has hit against a subject i didn't even realise i felt strongly about. All im after is some form of explanation. He says he has given that and i can't see it ... so all im asking is if he can explain it in words of 2 syllables for me (as evidently im being a bit thick). Thats not an unreasonable request is it?

Btw ... On my damned if you do .. damned fi you don't point ...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4905672.stm

8 months for refusing to follow a "lawful" order? What else can the others do? I suppose at least he is alive .. but he gets no pension ... he has to server time in a military prison ... He got done properly up the arse for doing exactly what John has advocated, ie using his conscience. I really don't see that soldiers have any choice and, as a result, i really don't see that WE have any choice but to compensate them for what happens as a result of orders from out, legally elected (however ridiculously so), government.

I feel that this ought to be a question of "Should we oust our government?" rather than "Should soldiers be compensated?". Both questions have only one answer as far as i can see ... yes.

 

[JP]

He does Dave, but he has some pretty nasty dyslexia which means he has problems expressing himself in writing in the terms in which he's thinking. In person he's a very smart and erudite guy.

For all I disagree with what he's been saying here, his articulation has come on in leaps and bounds since he first started posting here, so the last thing I want to do is discourage him from trying.

J.

Good Post and well said !!!

:iyes:

We all from time to time wish to express ourselves in a given way, but find in hard without being face to face.

I'm all up for meeting people and siting down talking man to man or man to woman, because so much feeling is lost in this virtue space !

 

[dave arc-i]

i am fed up with being accussed of being aggressive when i havent been - if he cant apologise - which has nothing to do with dyslexia and continues making such stupid statements then i for one will not be getting my teeth out of him