Attitudes to politicians

I know I give the impression of being part of the anti-war groupies, but I'm not. The 'other' site, where septics apparently have group hugs while telling themselves they always do the right thing, shows there is a fundamental difference in sherman and brit military attitudes to their politicians and what they do/say.

We Brits have always had a cynical side and don't blindly follow where the top man leads, and we always question authority, command and the reasons we do what we do, while at the same time doing what we're told. To me this is healthy for what we're supposed to be and why we joined the military in the first place.

Sorry it's a bit long winded, but here's what I posted on another forum:

I welcomed the war, but the pro-war lobby has been ignoring issues to the detriment of the aims of why we did, or should, go to war, and to the detriment of democracy. While I welcomed the war, I thought it was ill conceived, ill timed and the run up a disgrace to freedoms we espouse to support in the US/UK.
They ask questions like how else would Saddam be removed; but that wasn’t why we went to war. We didn’t war against Iraq OR Afghanistan to liberate the people of those countries; we went with stated aims, and we failed, miserably, in those aims. Any question on any issue other than the stated aims is a false premise that hides those failings.

Saddam was a murderer who had used WMD in the past; but we supported him in an aggressive war against Iran when he used those WMD. In short it was us who gave him initial legitimacy as a murderer and user of WMD, and it was us who supplied the means and raw materials for him to develop WMD, in the full knowledge of what he was, and what he was doing.

But the war in itself is a side issue and merely the end result of the actions taken prior to the war; these actions are the real issue we need to concentrate on.

The real question anyone concerned with freedom, democracy and world peace and security should be asking is, were we lied to, manipulated and deceived into ‘A’ war by our leaders? Anyone, even with bias, would self-evidently say of course we were. And as this is the case, it is a far more dangerous precedent than anything the terrorists or tin-pot dictators could do to affect insecurity around the world.

The next war could be driven by lies and deceit could result in many thousands of deaths of our own men, and escalate, and for what? A lie? Would you support a war you didn’t agree with because you knew you were being lied to?

The very worst thing any politician can do is lie, that’s a given, and gross manipulation, regardless of the reasons, is just as bad, because it makes a mockery of everything we hope to gain through being democracies and claiming we are free. What is the point of being free, as in the UK/US, if that freedom is a lie? How can we make free choices if those choices are based on lies and deceit?

Blair and Bush should go and go now, not because they prosecuted the war, not because many died, not because they removed Saddam, not even because they were wrong; because in the final analysis they lied, cheated, manipulated and deceived. If you accept the concept of freedom and democracy you must accept that the majority will rules, and if that means no war, then so be it, otherwise your fight for freedom and democracy against tyrants is just so much rhetoric.

How can you fight for freedom for others against dictators, when you relinquish your own?
Most of this, obviously, is aimed at the pro-war lobby of the US as they are the ones who led this, and they are the ones who are desperately trying rationalise the whole thing.

IMO, you can be against a war and still be a supporter of the military, and still be a supporter of pre-emptive action, but please, don't be a fcking lemming and just follow whatever shyte is trotted out as justification to lay your life down. :lol:
Shotgun said:
.... we always question authority, command and the reasons we do what we do, while at the same time doing what we're told. To me this is healthy ....
I disagree, although not with the general tone of your post. We do not do these things. We tend to have people in and under command who think along the same channels as we do, and so when a decision is made and an order given, there is little reason to question it. We do, however, also occasionally disagree with decisions made at the political level of command, which is very healthy.

Latest Threads