I wont be donating to the red cross anymore.

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by brokerboy, May 26, 2010.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Biped

    Biped LE Book Reviewer

    I never did, so no loss.
     
  2. Why? The priciple of the Red Cross is to be independant of both sides, a lot of POW's were very thankfull of this during WWII.

    The Red Cross is not the preserve of the western world.
     
  3. I'm glad someone put this up.

    I saw this article this morning but struggled to articulate an opinion over it. I understand ICRC's requirement to remain neutral but also ground my teeth over the fact it was an irregular, murderous bunch of b'stads receiving the support. I wonder if it were delivered under the auspices of the Red Crescent?

    In the end, I think we have to accept it as a demonstration that we're more civilised than Terry.
     
  4. Not that I've ever donated to the Red Cross....
    But they are either strictly neutral in their approach or they aren't. They aren't doing anything that they haven't always done. Impartiality is something the Red Cross has always practiced and thats what they are doing with this.
     
  5. I dont donate to anyone other than Help4Heroes so no probs.

    However, the Red Cross are training people to give first aid and leave them to it, we on the other hand, fly enemy fighters out in our helicopters, treat them and feed them in our field hospital using our personnel, equipment, medical supplies, food and water, whos the mugs?
     
  6. Its one thing being impartial in a war between sovereign nations, but are we not in Afghan fighting terrorists.

    This same organisation fundraises on the streets of the UK, then takes that money and treats the scumbag terrorist b*astards, that are trying to murder the British soldiers who the British public perseve to be there heroes.

    Absolutely morally wrong, FCUKing shockin if you ask me.
     
  7. Interesting thing about the cab drivers being trained. I would have thought they knew better to pick up armed insurgents as they tend to get hosed down by air assets. The fact that your (now dead) cabbie is (was) a Red Cross trained first aider is neither here nor there. And for all the stink they (the RC) tried on they got fecked off at high port.

    Top tip if your an Afghan cabbie; don't take armed fares who have just 'broken' contact and are carrying a mucker squirting claret all over the shop. Civvies are fine (just tell them no guns in the cab).

    Does the Red Cross give free first aid training to the UK or any other military or do they have to pay?
     
  8. I've stopped giving anything to any charity except Service charities like St Dunstans, Combat Stress, RBL etc etc
     
  9. I've given first aid to a Taliban fighter.

    Can't see anything wrong with it, they might even use it to keep an ISAF soldier alive if only to do a prisoner exchange or behead him later.
     
  10. It's a civil war in Afghanistan by any other name. The Afghans we're fighting would claim they are a soveriegn nation. Just not the one we're supporting. I remember having and losing this argument with a Red Cross official years back when they were helping a particularly scummy bunch of murderers in the far east who also claimed to be an army. The rule was simple. If there's a battle combatants get treated. What one side calls the other isn't relevant.
     
  11. Whilst I believe it is within the remit of the Red Cross to offer medical assistance to all, regardless of who's side they are on, I do think you have a point about fund raising.
    If Red Cross funds are to be used to train and/or treat the Taliban then it should be made clear in their fund raising activities. It is only fair that people who are asked to donate are made aware of what they are funding and able to make a decision accordingly.
     
  12. Half the bloody Taliban were fighting aren't even Afghani's or maybe thats a bit of an overstatement. How would anyone have felt if the Red Cross had set up camp on the Falls Rd or in the Creggan Estate or the fields around Bandit country to treat scumbag provo's injured trying to ambush British soldiers?

    Ps, the same people who have been found guilty of at inquests of murdering British soldiers, may have been treated by these so called Florence fcuking Nightingale's.
     
  13. Would this be the same Red Cross that banned Christmas decorations from its UK shops due to its policies on "impartiality and neutrality".

    BBC Link

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but if the Red Cross are treating enemy combatants and recycling them back to active service, doesn't that mean that they lose their protection under the Geneva Convention and international law?

    If they're contributing to enemy combat effectiveness then they become legitimate targets, just like the casualty receiving ships operated by the RN and RFA.

    Those big red crosses they paint on everything would make bloody good targets.
     
  14. Do take your size 11s out of your mouth sunshine.

    Do you understand "The official mission of the ICRC as an impartial, neutral, and independent organization is to stand for the protection of the life and dignity of victims of international and internal armed conflicts."?

    One of the few charities I give to.