Mother of Mark Quinsey dies

Seachmall

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Are you talking spoof or do you actually think there average British soldier kills at least a few innocent Afghanis?

Yamanoto

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Guaranteed employment for 12 years and a reasonable pension on exit is understandably attractive to many prospective recruits.

The man was killed before he went to Afghanistan! I have no idea why some of you here are blaming him for killing people that are not even dead!

darced

This post has been deleted.

galwayrush

Mario Jardel wrote: »

All I'm saying is that the grief that this poor woman suffered would have been prevented if she stopped her son from joining the army in the first place.

That's like saying a Polish mother should have stopped her son becoming a pizza delivery guy.

Seachmall

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Indirectly?

Oh, I hope you expand on that

darced

This post has been deleted.

Trotter

People talk about Afghanistan like the locals doing the shooting aren't the ones blowing up schools that allow girls to attend and aren't the ones executing rape victims for bringing 'shame' to their families and aren't the ones pumping Western Europe with heroin.

Seachmall

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I really can't, please go on!

catallus

Trotter wrote: »

People talk about Afghanistan like the locals doing the shooting aren't the ones blowing up schools that allow girls to attend and aren't the ones executing rape victims for bringing 'shame' to their families and aren't the ones pumping Western Europe with heroin.

I suppose this thread is so far off topic now but I have to ask what kind of statement is this, to justify the sending of occupying soldiers to a country on the other side of the world bringing untold misery to them because of what you deem to be their unacceptable culture?

Seachmall wrote: »

I really can't, please go on!

If you have to ask then you don't need to know.

Seachmall

catallus wrote: »

If you have to ask then you don't need to know.

I can't help but feel all this ambiguity is simply masking bullshit.

darced

This post has been deleted.

catallus

He's not being ambiguous, he's obviously trolling and you are trying to get him to say more outrageous stuff, for whatever reason i can't begin to guess

hare

Trotter wrote: »

People talk about Afghanistan like the locals doing the shooting aren't the ones blowing up schools that allow girls to attend and aren't the ones executing rape victims for bringing 'shame' to their families and aren't the ones pumping Western Europe with heroin.[/QUOTwhats that got to do with the brits.they have been in every country round the globe slaughtering people .

gurramok

Any soldier of the major aggressive nations(UK, USA, perhaps France) in the modern era know what they signed up for, they will be deployed in areas where they maybe a target in any place of the world which is hostile to them. It just so happens in this case it was not expected in the BA's eyes as NI was supposed to be at peace. There are lots of alternative career paths for young people, the army should be the last resort.

darced

This post has been deleted.

hare

gurramok wrote: »

Any soldier of the major aggressive nations(UK, USA, perhaps France) in the modern era know what they signed up for, they will be deployed in areas where they maybe a target in any place of the world which is hostile to them. It just so happens in this case it was not expected in the BA's eyes as NI was supposed to be at peace. There are lots of alternative career paths for young people, the army should be the last resort.

seen 1 of their career posters yrs ago.join the army and see the world.some header had sprayed below.aye the next world.

Sound of Silence

My deepest sympathies rest with the Quinsey Family.

Although I wouldn't advise anyone hold their breath in awaiting a similar display of concern and reverence for the victims of British Forces in Northern Ireland. Those concerns should be "consigned to the dustbin" as they've argued in the past.

Seachmall

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I think your definition of "indirect" is a bit loose. Simply wearing a uniform does not make you responsible for the actions of others, directly or otherwise.

A Garda in Dublin is not "indirectly" responsible for police brutality in Limerick.

Fromthetrees

Seachmall wrote: »

I think your definition of "indirect" is a bit loose. Simply wearing a uniform does not make you responsible for the actions of others, directly or otherwise.

A Garda in Dublin is not "indirectly" responsible for police brutality in Limerick.

The Brits have been in two wars over the past decade. You know that if you join the BA there is a big chance you'll see combat.

By joining the BA you are agreeing to be a murderer.

catallus

Fromthetrees wrote: »

The Brits have been in two wars over the past decade. You know that if you join the BA there is a big chance you'll see combat.

By joining the BA you are agreeing to be a murderer.

Being a soldier who kills is quite different from being a murderer.

Seachmall

Fromthetrees wrote: »

The Brits have been in two wars over the past decade. You know that if you join the BA there is a big chance you'll see combat.

By joining the BA you are agreeing to be a murderer.

That's quite a comment but it does nothing to address the post you quoted.

gurramok

Sound of Silence wrote: »

My deepest sympathies rest with the Quinsey Family.

Although I wouldn't advise anyone hold their breath in awaiting a similar display of concern and reverence for the victims of British Forces in Northern Ireland. Those concerns should be "consigned to the dustbin" as they've argued in the past.

That is some propaganda piece there, you'd swear it was written by a BNP activist.

Yitzhak Rabin

gurramok wrote: »

Any soldier of the major aggressive nations(UK, USA, perhaps France) in the modern era know what they signed up for, they will be deployed in areas where they maybe a target in any place of the world which is hostile to them. It just so happens in this case it was not expected in the BA's eyes as NI was supposed to be at peace. There are lots of alternative career paths for young people, the army should be the last resort.

Would you also argue that if you attended a civil rights rally in the 70s you had to expect a rubber bullet to the head. They knew the risks. Could have chosen a different path, right?

Fromthetrees

catallus wrote: »

Being a soldier who kills is quite different from being a murderer.

Well that depends really doesn't it. Joining an advanced military power that's bombing countries into the stone age doesn't strike me as particularly noble or heroic.

humbert

Yitzhak Rabin wrote: »

Would you also argue that if you attended a civil rights rally in the 70s you had to expect a rubber bullet to the head. They knew the risks. Could have chosen a different path, right?

Specious comparison.

Yitzhak Rabin

humbert wrote: »

Specious comparison.

How so, both are victim-blaming statements. To say you have to expect to get shot while collecting a pizza if you join the BA is ridiculous.

Fromthetrees

Seachmall wrote: »

That's quite a comment but it does nothing to address the post you quoted.

You made a comparison between a Garda in a uniform and a BA soldier in a uniform.

They're not comparable to me.

token101

Praetorian Saighdiuir wrote: »

Well, there's a few rules.

Broken when it suits though.

catallus

Fromthetrees wrote: »

Well that depends really doesn't it. Joining an advanced military power that's bombing countries into the stone age doesn't strike me as particularly noble or heroic.

Well, yeah, it does depend really.

It doesn't justify you saying you're a murderer the second you enlist.

I have no doubt a lot of them signed up with the actual aim of killing someone.

But it doesn't mean all of them are killers.

Seachmall

Fromthetrees wrote: »

You made a comparison between a Garda in a uniform and a BA soldier in a uniform.

No I didn't.

I made a point that one should not be held responsible for the actions of others simply because they have the same employer.

humbert

Yitzhak Rabin wrote: »

How so, both are victim-blaming statements. To say you have to expect to get shot while collecting a pizza if you join the BA is ridiculous.

By joining the army you agree to put yourself in the line of fire for reasons that you have no control over. Hostilities don't stop when you clock out.

This is not comparable to someone engaged in a non-violent protest over something they believe in just because they both involve risk.

It is the understanding and agreement to use violence that separates them.

Fromthetrees

catallus wrote: »

Well, yeah, it does depend really.

It doesn't justify you saying you're a murderer the second you enlist.

I have no doubt a lot of them signed up with the actual aim of killing someone.

But it doesn't mean all of them are killers.

It means they're agreeing to be killers. The same way if you join the RIRA you're agreeing to be a killer.

The world would be a better place without these types of scummy people around.

Seachmall

humbert wrote: »

By joining the army you agree to put yourself in the line of fire for reasons that you have no control over. Hostilities don't stop when you clock out.

A member of the Garda ERU gets shot collecting a take-away.

Is it acceptable to be outraged or should we just accept it was a career choice he made?

gurramok

Yitzhak Rabin wrote: »

Would you also argue that if you attended a civil rights rally in the 70s you had to expect a rubber bullet to the head. They knew the risks. Could have chosen a different path, right?

What? Civil rights protesters should not get shot by an army who are suppose to respect the law of a sovereign state, they should not shoot their citizens. They are supposed to shoot at other soldiers.

A soldier is armed and trained to be armed, they expect danger when on patrol in a hostile environment. Seriously you sound by a TUV advocate.

catallus

Seachmall wrote: »

A member of the Garda ERU gets shot collecting a take-away.

Is it acceptable to be outraged or should we just accept it was a career choice he made?

What is with you trying to mix-up a foreign army with a police force? What's your point?

Seachmall

catallus wrote: »

What is with you trying to mix-up a foreign army with a police force? What's your point?

I'm not mixing up or comparing the British Army with the Gardaí, I'm comparing comparable situations.

It's the context you should be looking at, not the titles.


Let me simplify it,

1. Person A chooses a career where he knowingly puts himself in danger and knows he may have to kill.
   
2. Person A gets shot while off duty.

Why is this acceptable if Person A is a British soldier, but not when he is a Garda? Or is it acceptable in both situations?

catallus

You're completely oversimplifying the situation.

The situations are not comparable.

If you're looking for someone to say killing anyone in uniform, on duty or not, is "acceptable" then I'm questioning your motives: Why exactly are you asking?

Seachmall

catallus wrote: »

You're completely oversimplifying the situation.

No, I'm using the criteria and justifications presented in the original comment being addressed.

If you're looking for someone to say killing anyone in uniform, on duty or not, is "acceptable" then I'm questioning your motives: Why exactly are you asking?

The expose the hypocrisy and fallacious special pleading permeating this thread.

It's my job. I'm the Internet Police.

Chuck Stone

Yitzhak Rabin wrote: »

Would you also argue that if you attended a civil rights rally in the 70s you had to expect a rubber bullet to the head. They knew the risks. Could have chosen a different path, right?

Ah yes because the seeking of equality by attending a protest is the same as signing up to an army and being trained to kill.

A Captain Picard facepalm award goes to you.

0066ad

Yitzhak Rabin wrote: »

Would you also argue that if you attended a civil rights rally in the 70s you had to expect a rubber bullet to the head. They knew the risks. Could have chosen a different path, right?

You are a idiot :rolleyes:

humbert

Seachmall wrote: »

A member of the Garda ERU gets shot collecting a take-away.

Is it acceptable to be outraged or should we just accept it was a career choice he made?

I was making the point that the poster's comparison wasn't reasonable. To take the point any further in this direction would be to start comparing the ethics of what a soldier does to what a Garda in the ERU does which is certainly not relevant to this thread.

If it helps, I don't see much benefit in becoming outraged at all, especially at the behest of the Daily Mail.

Chuck Stone

0066ad wrote: »

You are a idiot :rolleyes:

Don't use real bullets or you'll only bring heat on yourself.

Use the plastic ones and aim for the head.

catallus

Fromthetrees wrote: »

It means they're agreeing to be killers. The same way if you join the RIRA you're agreeing to be a killer.

The world would be a better place without these types of scummy people around.

It is not the same thing at all. And if you need explaining why you can't compare an army, any army, and the bloody RIRA then you need to get a grip.

0066ad

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Don't use real bullets or you'll only bring heat on yourself.

Use the plastic ones and aim for the head.

I wonder was he told to aim for the head, that's not standard procedure

Seachmall

humbert wrote: »

To take the point any further in this direction would be to start comparing the ethics of what a soldier does to what a Garda in the ERU does which is certainly not relevant to this thread.

No, that'd be a red herring.

The point originally made by gurramok and extended upon by others was that if you choose a career that puts you in danger you should not be surprised when you get killed. Regardless if you believed you were out of danger. Others seem to have inferred that as a result sympathy is somewhat unwarranted.

However, when I take those exact criteria and apply them to an Irish man nobody wants to back the point.

So as far as I can tell it's less about the choices he made in terms of a career path but more a politicised attack on the BA. Which is a shame because as far as I can tell he never killed an innocent civilian. We're painting him with a tainted brush despite him never having done anything wrong.

Chuck Stone

0066ad wrote: »

I wonder was he told to aim for the head, that's not standard procedure

Standard procedure is for civilians. Kill your neighbour and you'll do twenty years. Kill a protester while wearing a state issued camouflage costume and you'll get a pension, a career and maybe even a shiny badge from the QE2.

Fromthetrees

Seachmall wrote: »

No, that'd be a red herring.

The point originally made by gurramok and extended upon by others was that if you choose a career that puts you in danger you should not be surprised when you get killed. Regardless if you believed you were out of danger. Others seem to have inferred that as a result sympathy is somewhat unwarranted.

However, when I take those exact criteria and apply them to an Irish man nobody wants to back the point.

So as far as I can tell it's less about the choices he made in terms of a career path but more a politicised attack on the BA. Which is a shame because as far as I can tell he never killed an innocent civilian. We're painting him with a tainted brush despite him never having done anything wrong.

No. If you choose to join the army of an aggressive military power then you've given up your right to be respected in my book.

You keep comparing a Garda, someone who trained to do a job so he/she could help protect and serve their community with a soldier who will be deployed to fight and kill in nonsensical wars.

You can't compare the two.

Seachmall

Fromthetrees wrote: »

No. If you choose to join the army of an aggressive military power then you've given up your right to be respected in my book.

You keep comparing a Garda, someone who trained to do a job so he/she could help protect and serve their community with a soldier who will be deployed to fight and kill in nonsensical wars.

You can't compare the two.

This is the red herring I mentioned.

Congratulations on finding it.

Yitzhak Rabin

0066ad wrote: »

You are a idiot :rolleyes:

The adults are talking here. Off to bed now, you little scamp you