Navy tour return - Rant

[Atterz]

Well thats good, Goodbye.

[Connor]

No tom you are entitled to an opinion, but when you say things like "why do I need to hear about some soldier dying" then quite frankly you open yourself for abuse. No they shouldn't be there in through first place and yes many other people die, to which nothing gets said about. But why is it so much of an "inconvenience" to you?

[4WayDiablo]

Couldnt have put it better myself connor,
And as atterz says. Goodbye

[Kezzieboy]

Preparing myself for flak here, but I don't think tom deserved that response tbh. People have a tendency to knee-jerk when on the topic of the forces, and have incredibly strong opinions on the subject.

Although I don't necessarily agree with tom on this one, what he says is logical, and basically just points to the fact that the media, and the news in particular, is shit. It never addresses the underlying issues, is mostly tabloid Bullshit, or if not that, it has huge amounts of political swing, and the ignorant masses lap it up.

For the record I am entirely against our current deployment in afghan, and previous operations in Iraq, in fact the only 'justifiable' war was the second world war. But my main point is this, just think about what tom is saying, it isn't that offensive,it isn't personal, and it has some level of logic to it, the response was unneeded.

[Matt]

Preparing myself for flak here, but I don't think tom deserved that response tbh. People have a tendency to knee-jerk when on the topic of the forces, and have incredibly strong opinions on the subject.

Although I don't necessarily agree with tom on this one, what he says is logical, and basically just points to the fact that the media, and the news in particular, is shit. It never addresses the underlying issues, is mostly tabloid Bullshit, or if not that, it has huge amounts of political swing, and the ignorant masses lap it up.

For the record I am entirely against our current deployment in afghan, and previous operations in Iraq, in fact the only 'justifiable' war was the second world war. But my main point is this, just think about what tom is saying, it isn't that offensive,it isn't personal, and it has some level of logic to it, the response was unneeded.

Very well said and totally agree

[ginge191]

a thread with arguements, not involving me, what happened?!

Anywho... i think a few of you are quite opinionated, yes, i agree with tim to an extent, a lot of the soldiers out there including my brother are not there for the soul reason to protect our country, because that's not why we are there...

Secondly, yes, it is a "comfortable" job, in the sense of it's job security, income and expenses payout.

I also when discussing the job i wanted to take with the navy from a uni lecturer, he said was the risk worth the wage - and yes, ofcourse it is..

But this thread again was merely to share some happiness and tom, you're welcomed to an opinion but putting a downer on shit really isn't worth the grief, so spread your pessimism elsewhere please./

[C.A.R.]

I can see where Tom is coming from but he worded it badly. Basically, getting killed in action is part of the risk of the job. A construction worker can be killed in action too, and whilst the circumstances will be radically different as well as the level of risk, it's unfortunately a risk that only you can consider worthy. I still think it's commendable what people do for our country abroad - I couldn't and wouldn't do it myself, but don't have a problem if people choose it as their career path.

My best mate is currently in training for the Navy, a bloke I used to go drinking with every week. I haven't seen him since Christmas now - haven't had a drink with him in even longer than that. I'm happy for him though, it's what he wants to do so he doesn't want sympathy for not being able to see his friends as often as he used to.

[Atterz]

Im a strongly opinionated person and will snap out for the smallest of things. I can see his point of view and as said there are a lot of jobs that are dangerous in there own ways in which people wouldnt appear on the news for if they sadly lost their lives.

However, as said before, there is a lot of us that also dont beleive in the conflicts we currently are involved in. Unfortunatly, and we knew it could happen, we will be sent there regardless to fight in the governments interests and for whatever reason they see fit. As a result people will be killed and maimed in action. I however still feel a 2 minute news bulletin just naming the soldier/soldiers involved/killed is more than just in a news normally populated by other shit, pointless and pathetic stories. For instance, Tulisa sucking someone off is not more important than letting the public know that unfortunatly another man/woman has lost there lives SERVING (not fighting for) this country.

In the forces we generally feel the public dont understand the job, and possibly give some of the soldiers the recognition they deserve. This is fine i guess, we all know the risks when we join.

However think about the fuel strikes, where people at my unit and no doubt other units were all stood up on wednesday ready to cover civilian fuel tankers in case of strike action. Think of the fire strikes, when soldiers took on their role in substandard equipment doing a very important service to the country. Remember that this was just before the invasion off Iraq, just or unjust, the period before a tour is stressful as it is without having to do someone elses job! Finally, the olympics where again soldiers will provide man power to do medial jobs (not security per se) because the government ran out of money in order to create enough jobs to cover the above.

Sorry for the rant Tom it may have been uncalled for.