2019/20 Cenk Tosun

[Dwight K Schrute]

How and why military people are sent into situations is not the point, and not why ppl support armed forces. They are supporting the people and individuals that are actually doing the “work”.

Not every person listed is put on front line, or even fires a weapon.

the support is of these individuals dedicating their career and life for others.

An overly simplistic view of things I am afraid. This is a huge part of the problem of military actions throughout history - the notion that unswerving support should be offered in the manner of which you speak.

This notion of dedicating their career and life for others that you speak of, is to entirely miss the point that I was making. If they are risking their life for a cause that is wrong then support should not be offered without question. How and why military people are sent into a situation is precisely the point. If we all adopted views like you and Tosun, it removes our ability to objectively criticize the actions of our governments when it comes to military interventions - something they play upon by always using the 'our brave armed forces' card.

I have had friends who have served, yet still feel this strongly and have voiced this to them. They have no problem with this view.

 

[HKIV]

people decrying Irishmen for not wearing poppy, Turks for saluting their army. We are supposed to revere our British army though.
Dont worry about the many thousand innocent people we have bombed in places we know very little about, or changed sides halfway through the war, or bombed despite evidence that said we should not, or torturing and killing unamarmed civilians and military.
And ask most people throughout the world about 100 years ago who the worst/most evil army in the world was and most would say Britain.

 

[Disgruntledgoat]

people decrying Irishmen for not wearing poppy, Turks for saluting their army. We are supposed to revere our British army though.
Dont worry about the many thousand innocent people we have bombed in places we know very little about, or changed sides halfway through the war, or bombed despite evidence that said we should not, or torturing and killing unamarmed civilians and military.
And ask most people throughout the world about 100 years ago who the worst/most evil army in the world was and most would say Britain.

I'm not sure who you're arguing with here.

 

[Pabbers]

An overly simplistic view of things I am afraid. This is a huge part of the problem of military actions throughout history - the notion that unswerving support should be offered in the manner of which you speak.

This notion of dedicating their career and life for others that you speak of, is to entirely miss the point that I was making. If they are risking their life for a cause that is wrong then support should not be offered without question. How and why military people are sent into a situation is precisely the point. If we all adopted views like you and Tosun, it removes our ability to objectively criticize the actions of our governments when it comes to military interventions - something they play upon by always using the 'our brave armed forces' card.

I have had friends who have served, yet still feel this strongly and have voiced this to them. They have no problem with this view.

Its not my view, its a fact as to why people support and have the right to support the Military.

I have not said my opinion on the matter, but I respect what opinions people have, yours also.

 

[HKIV]

The biggest fake news in the history of the world is that through a culture of military reverance in every country in the world just about every young person in each individual country is led to believe that their army is the most civilised, just, decent.

Its absolutely laughable.

If you asked 100 brits which country had the most decent, civilised, just, honest army in the world I bet over 90 would say Britain.

Its a bit like we were born in a christian country so if your bonkers enough to believe in God your 98% likely to believe he is white and christian.

 

[mightymoyes]

He's an idiot b

Noting you name, so trying to be sensitive to the McLean issue, but I think they're very comparable. Both are political gestures arising from a nationalist viewpoint. McLean refused to, as he saw it, support the British army. Tosun is not pretending to be a soldier, but is supporting his own nation's army, despite their doing something that most of the world is against.

No the political gesture is idiot Premier league clubs like Everton putting the poppy on their shirts.

 

[Groucho]

ok mate.

Idiots saying he is supporting the attacks of children need to take a long look at themselves.

The man was supporting his country military, simple as that.

People need to seriously consider whether it is appropriate to offer unswerving support to their armed forces. I don't see why it is always seen as a virtuous action to offer support. If the military action being taken is aggressive, unjust, illegal or just morally wrong, support should not be offered without criticism.

This veneration without question of armed forces around the world is always played upon by unsavoury politicians (look at what Trump does atm with his constant mention of 'vets' and 'our patriot armed forces') as a means to get effective public support for their military interventions. Yes, they are men and women who are sent into dangerous situations by their politicians, but that does not automatically make them heroes and it does not automatically make them worthy of our support. It is possible to wish that no harm befalls them without giving tacit support to their actions. People need to realise that.

This Tosun situation is just awful. Personally I wouldn't care if it was Messi doing it at our club - I want him gone.

How and why military people are sent into situations is not the point, and not why ppl support armed forces. They are supporting the people and individuals that are actually doing the “work”.

Not every person listed is put on front line, or even fires a weapon.

the support is of these individuals dedicating their career and life for others.

An overly simplistic view of things I am afraid. This is a huge part of the problem of military actions throughout history - the notion that unswerving support should be offered in the manner of which you speak.

This notion of dedicating their career and life for others that you speak of, is to entirely miss the point that I was making. If they are risking their life for a cause that is wrong then support should not be offered without question. How and why military people are sent into a situation is precisely the point. If we all adopted views like you and Tosun, it removes our ability to objectively criticize the actions of our governments when it comes to military interventions - something they play upon by always using the 'our brave armed forces' card.

I have had friends who have served, yet still feel this strongly and have voiced this to them. They have no problem with this view.

people decrying Irishmen for not wearing poppy, Turks for saluting their army. We are supposed to revere our British army though.
Dont worry about the many thousand innocent people we have bombed in places we know very little about, or changed sides halfway through the war, or bombed despite evidence that said we should not, or torturing and killing unamarmed civilians and military.
And ask most people throughout the world about 100 years ago who the worst/most evil army in the world was and most would say Britain.

This is not a thread about Turkish politics.

Back to topic.

 

[Frang]

people decrying Irishmen for not wearing poppy, Turks for saluting their army. We are supposed to revere our British army though.
Dont worry about the many thousand innocent people we have bombed in places we know very little about, or changed sides halfway through the war, or bombed despite evidence that said we should not, or torturing and killing unamarmed civilians and military.
And ask most people throughout the world about 100 years ago who the worst/most evil army in the world was and most would say Britain.

Yeah but we don't all stand and salute after the match at goodison do we

 

[Groucho]

I absolutely despise army people of any kind, sign up to kill people, scum the lot of them.

I despise people going off topic. Knock it off.

 

[HKIV]

We got the bagpipes out for Duncan after his incarceration for assault.

 

[HKIV]

What about if Sly can get his mate Trump over for a game.

I would tolerate a US airforce show of strength over Goodison if it meant a few years of fun with him at the helm. I would even salute.

Ps. He would take one look at the little Potuguege midget and send him over the channel before lunch.

 

[Disgruntledgoat]

What about if Sly can get his mate Trump over for a game.

I would tolerate a US airforce show of strength over Goodison if it meant a few years of fun with him at the helm. I would even salute.

Ps. He would take one look at the little Potuguege midget and send him over the channel before lunch.

@Groucho 's trigger finger is itching... make his day.

 

[Groucho]

What about if Sly can get his mate Trump over for a game.

I would tolerate a US airforce show of strength over Goodison if it meant a few years of fun with him at the helm. I would even salute.

Ps. He would take one look at the little Potuguege midget and send him over the channel before lunch.

You were told. Have a warning and ban.

 

[BlueStevie35]

You were told. Have a warning and ban.

Can it be a permanent one?

 

[mkrudden]

I don't think Cenk is the answer. To me, all available minutes should be given to Kean.