Remembrance sunday

[Scully]

5 minutes ago, Rem260 said:

What tosh. Most fight because that is what their country requests of them. They then fight to keep themselves and their mates alive. As you say a lot were conscripted which means they didn't have a choice and weren't fighting for an ideal.

😄 It’s your initial post that’s tosh! You can’t prove any of it! Absolute rubbish! 
You don’t even know for a fact that ‘most’ fought because that is what their country requested of them! You’re simply expressing an opinion as fact to suit your bias. 
There was a glut of impressionable young lads who signed up in 1914, but when they were splattered all over Flanders conscription soon followed, and that’s a fact. 
My Dad and his brothers were conscripted to fight for the freedom of choice they were denied. My Dad said the best thing about it was the more or less regular meals! 
The only thing you got right is that once there they fought for each other, regardless of the campaign. 

[Rem260]

16 hours ago, Scully said:

😄 It’s your initial post that’s tosh! You can’t prove any of it! Absolute rubbish! 
You don’t even know for a fact that ‘most’ fought because that is what their country requested of them! You’re simply expressing an opinion as fact to suit your bias. 
There was a glut of impressionable young lads who signed up in 1914, but when they were splattered all over Flanders conscription soon followed, and that’s a fact. 
My Dad and his brothers were conscripted to fight for the freedom of choice they were denied. My Dad said the best thing about it was the more or less regular meals! 
The only thing you got right is that once there they fought for each other, regardless of the campaign. 

You're full of contradictions. On one hand you say they fought for an ideal against oppresion and dictatorship and then you say they weren't given a choice and forced to. Make your mind up.

If the 2 world wars where fought for freedom of choice then how come Russia was allowed to continue with its oppression of the masses after ww2. After ww1 we even sent troops to Russia to try and stop the Russian peasants from breaking free from the oppression and dictatorship imposed on them.

Edited November 10, 2023 by Rem260

[welsh1]

Remembrance Day 2004.

More British soldiers dead

In another British war.

 

Yesterday some of their parents

In anguish and anger went to Downing Street

To lay a wreath

To lay the blame

At the door

Of the man most responsible

For our latest war.

 

But their sons are gone.

 

And Iraq's cities are in ruins.

In many thousands Iraq, too, has lost its sons.

Their sons are gone, their children maimed.

Chaos and trauma are everywhere.

For the shattering of this nation

We share the blame.

 

No fine words can give these crimes

The slightest gloss.

 

Parents grieve. Such a quantity of grief.

Such needless destruction. Such needless pain.

Parents grieve.

Let us reflect on

Their needless loss.

 

Let us reflect on their needless loss.

 

David Roberts

[Scully]

5 hours ago, Rem260 said:

You're full of contradictions. On one hand you say they fought for an ideal against oppresion and dictatorship and then you say they weren't given a choice and forced to. Make your mind up.

If the 2 world wars where fought for freedom of choice then how come Russia was allowed to continue with its oppression of the masses after ww2. After ww1 we even sent troops to Russia to try and stop the Russian peasants from breaking free from the oppression and dictatorship imposed on them.

Really? What point is it you’re trying to make? Wasn't it the governments stated intent that the war was against a tyrannical dictatorship intent on ultimately taking over the world after invading Poland? 
There will have been many already in the services and those who immediately joined up to fight for that cause, like a couple of Uncles of mine, but in fact none were really given a choice the choice because of conscription. 
As for your second paragraph, who knows? Who cares? Perhaps the rest of the world was weary of war by then? None of it prevented a campaign to fight another dictatorship in Korea though. Maybe you should ask a historian as I'm not really that interested about the Cold War; I was just responding to your emotional reaction that no one can prove or disprove, to my initial  post. 
Everyone knows peasants are revolting! 🙂

[Rem260]

27 minutes ago, Scully said:

Really? What point is it you’re trying to make? Wasn't it the governments stated intent that the war was against a tyrannical dictatorship intent on ultimately taking over the world after invading Poland? 
There will have been many already in the services and those who immediately joined up to fight for that cause, like a couple of Uncles of mine, but in fact none were really given a choice the choice because of conscription. 
As for your second paragraph, who knows? Who cares? Perhaps the rest of the world was weary of war by then? None of it prevented a campaign to fight another dictatorship in Korea though. Maybe you should ask a historian as I'm not really that interested about the Cold War; I was just responding to your emotional reaction that no one can prove or disprove, to my initial  post. 
Everyone knows peasants are revolting! 🙂

What is Rememberance Day other than Emotional ? 😞 I'll leave it at that.

[Scully]

5 minutes ago, Rem260 said:

What is Rememberance Day other than Emotional ? 😞 I'll leave it at that.

I’ll agree it can be for some, but not for all. Again, people are free to choose how they respond to Remembrance Day. 
You tried to make a claim which simply can’t be proved or disproved, that’s what I was responding to. 🤷‍♂️

[B725]

Just seen on the news that they are advising our proud armed forces not to wear anything that can identify them until they get to the service. How have we allowed our country to sink so low ? This government apart from a few are utterly spineless it makes you feel embarrassed to be British.

[JohnfromUK]

6 minutes ago, B725 said:

How have we allowed our country to sink so low

1. Because many who come from different customs and cultures do not 'see things our way'.
2. Many who are 'allowed' in now are so called 'asylum seekers'.  They are seeking 'asylum' because they have fallen foul of the rules set by the Gov't's of the country from which they have 'fled'.  If true (and I doubt many are true asylum seekers), remember that the main official reason for asylum is disobeying the authorities in the country they have left.  That might mean that they are basically what is known as 'trouble makers'.
3. There is no doubt that many now don't take the 'agree to disagree' attitude (that I occasionally use on these forums!), but try to take 'revenge' on people who don't see things in the way they do.
4. People are of course entirely free to wear a poppy or not as they see fit.  I was interested that on a radio discussion panel, as a parting question, the presenter asked the panel "How many of you will be wearing a poppy?"  I didn't get the exact numbers, but one would wear a poppy and several (4 or 5) wouldn't be wearing one.  They were not asked why.
5. It is trendy on the left (much of which was encouraged in Corbyn's time as a party leader) to support any demonstration anywhere that is 'anti Gov't' in any possible way.  He was particularly close to Palestinian causes and anti Israel.  Corbyn did have a strong following among the 'rent a mob' crowd who are present at many of these demonstrations, LACS, ALF, JSO, ER, Insulate Britain, Anti Capitalist - they all have a common thread and many common members (basically anarchists).

[welsh1]

I knew a simple soldier boy
Who grinned at life in empty joy,
Slept soundly through the lonesome dark,
And whistled early with the lark.

In winter trenches, cowed and glum,
With crumps and lice and lack of rum,
He put a bullet through his brain.
No one spoke of him again.

You smug-faced crowds with kindling eye
Who cheer when soldier lads march by,
Sneak home and pray you'll never know
The hell where youth and laughter go.

Siegfried Sassoon

[JohnfromUK]

On 08/11/2023 at 15:04, 12gauge82 said:

Thank you John very much appreciated.

Though I'm not sure reading that I would have rather not known. We must be the laughing stock of the world.

He is (allegedly) far from alone.  It seems there are many who 'sympathise' in positions of responsibility.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12736449/Hamas-apologist-job-nuclear-plant-Revealed-roles-held-key-members-extremist-group-backed-October-7-killers.html

[old man]

14 hours ago, JohnfromUK said:

1. Because many who come from different customs and cultures do not 'see things our way'.
2. Many who are 'allowed' in now are so called 'asylum seekers'.  They are seeking 'asylum' because they have fallen foul of the rules set by the Gov't's of the country from which they have 'fled'.  If true (and I doubt many are true asylum seekers), remember that the main official reason for asylum is disobeying the authorities in the country they have left.  That might mean that they are basically what is known as 'trouble makers'.
3. There is no doubt that many now don't take the 'agree to disagree' attitude (that I occasionally use on these forums!), but try to take 'revenge' on people who don't see things in the way they do.
4. People are of course entirely free to wear a poppy or not as they see fit.  I was interested that on a radio discussion panel, as a parting question, the presenter asked the panel "How many of you will be wearing a poppy?"  I didn't get the exact numbers, but one would wear a poppy and several (4 or 5) wouldn't be wearing one.  They were not asked why.
5. It is trendy on the left (much of which was encouraged in Corbyn's time as a party leader) to support any demonstration anywhere that is 'anti Gov't' in any possible way.  He was particularly close to Palestinian causes and anti Israel.  Corbyn did have a strong following among the 'rent a mob' crowd who are present at many of these demonstrations, LACS, ALF, JSO, ER, Insulate Britain, Anti Capitalist - they all have a common thread and many common members (basically anarchists).

A good summation John.

[harrycatcat1]

15 hours ago, JohnfromUK said:

1. Because many who come from different customs and cultures do not 'see things our way'.
2. Many who are 'allowed' in now are so called 'asylum seekers'.  They are seeking 'asylum' because they have fallen foul of the rules set by the Gov't's of the country from which they have 'fled'.  If true (and I doubt many are true asylum seekers), remember that the main official reason for asylum is disobeying the authorities in the country they have left.  That might mean that they are basically what is known as 'trouble makers'.
3. There is no doubt that many now don't take the 'agree to disagree' attitude (that I occasionally use on these forums!), but try to take 'revenge' on people who don't see things in the way they do.
4. People are of course entirely free to wear a poppy or not as they see fit.  I was interested that on a radio discussion panel, as a parting question, the presenter asked the panel "How many of you will be wearing a poppy?"  I didn't get the exact numbers, but one would wear a poppy and several (4 or 5) wouldn't be wearing one.  They were not asked why.
5. It is trendy on the left (much of which was encouraged in Corbyn's time as a party leader) to support any demonstration anywhere that is 'anti Gov't' in any possible way.  He was particularly close to Palestinian causes and anti Israel.  Corbyn did have a strong following among the 'rent a mob' crowd who are present at many of these demonstrations, LACS, ALF, JSO, ER, Insulate Britain, Anti Capitalist - they all have a common thread and many common members (basically anarchists).

👍👍👍👍

[clangerman]

as we can now see which side is the one chanting hate and fighting with police some red faces are in order braverman should be arrested for inciting the violence full marks to the police stood fast and defended a right provided by the brave fallen and shame on those disrespecting them for it! 

Edited November 11, 2023 by clangerman
spelling

[Rem260]

1 hour ago, clangerman said:

as we can now see which side is the one chanting hate and fighting with police some red faces are in order braverman should be arrested for inciting the violence full marks to the police stood fast and defended a right provided by the brave fallen and shame on those disrespecting them for it! 

The Met have openly admitted seeing peace marchers in Hamas headbands and hearing chants of 'From the river to the sea" But instead of intervening they are collecting evidence so they can react at a latter time. However they are reacting straight away against the counter idiots. Reason given that they are not tackling the peace marchers. There is too many and it may inflame the situation.

This is being reported by Sky news.

Edited November 11, 2023 by Rem260

[Newbie to this]

2 minutes ago, Rem260 said:

The Met have openly admitted seeing peace marchers in Hamas headbands and hearing chants of 'From the river to the sea" But instead of intervening they are collecting evidence so they can react at a latter time. However they are reacting straight away against the counter idiots. Reason given that they are not tackling the peace marchers. There is too many and it may inflame the situation.

This is being reported by Sky news.

Yes, Braverman was correct.

[amateur]

https://x.com/eleventhhourph1/status/1723389716312068194?s=46&t=rzNeHuFr0iVhZ330bOllWQ

My son-in-law in the middle of this escorting Gove through the station.

[amateur]

This looks almost peaceful, but just check out the video above

[Scully]

Did any of the protests today disrupt the Remembrance parades or services up and down the country? 

[ordnance]

Appropriate place to stop for my tea this week. 

Edited November 11, 2023 by ordnance

[enfieldspares]

On 06/11/2023 at 14:14, clangerman said:

braverman and sense must be why she’s now under fire for saying homeless is a lifestyle choice while thousands of ex servicemen freeze under canvas on the streets lest we forget? try Tory’s couldn’t care less! 

This. And tomorrow the High Commissioners of the Commonwealth will lay their tributes at the Cenotaph. Yet the grandchildren of those who they honour had during Britain's membership of the EU, less right to enter this country than did the Rumanians. 

Edited November 11, 2023 by enfieldspares

[amateur]

13 hours ago, amateur said:

https://x.com/eleventhhourph1/status/1723389716312068194?s=46&t=rzNeHuFr0iVhZ330bOllWQ

My son-in-law in the middle of this escorting Gove through the station.

Well, my SIL's left ear and a bit of his hat made the front page of the Mail on Sunday.

Idiot Gove had decided that he wanted to go shopping before he caught his train home. Instead he went home in a BTP paddy wagon.

At least the rumpus cleared the sit in that the unwashed had decided to hold in Victoria Station.

[Yellow Bear]

15 minutes ago, amateur said:

Well, my SIL's left ear and a bit of his hat made the front page of the Mail on Sunday.

Idiot Gove had decided that he wanted to go shopping before he caught his train home. Instead he went home in a BTP paddy wagon.

At least the rumpus cleared the sit in that the unwashed had decided to hold in Victoria Station.

One has to ask how many of these "unwashed" were arrested.   If they had been "right wing" "hassling" Lammy I'm sure it would have been several.

Most of the usual suspects among the MSM are being quiet about the Hammas supporters that were causing problems and not arrested.  Still some mention was  made  so we know it was probably as many problems as the "right wing".

But hey-ho it does not fit the left's antisemitic agenda. 

Edited November 12, 2023 by Yellow Bear

[amateur]

AFAIK no arrests at Victoria, but SIL was more concerned with getting Gove away and clearing the sit in.

[Newbie to this]

49 minutes ago, Yellow Bear said:

One has to ask how many of these "unwashed" were arrested.   If they had been "right wing" "hassling" Lammy I'm sure it would have been several.

Most of the usual suspects among the MSM are being quiet about the Hammas supporters that were causing problems and not arrested.  Still some mention was  made  so we know it was probably as many problems as the "right wing".

But hey-ho it does not fit the left's antisemitic agenda. 

Yes, Braverman was correct.

And it will probably cost her, her job. The establishment can't have politicians telling the truth, especially when it doesn't fit the agenda.

Edited November 12, 2023 by Newbie to this

[steve1066]

On 10/11/2023 at 18:03, JohnfromUK said:

1. Because many who come from different customs and cultures do not 'see things our way'.
2. Many who are 'allowed' in now are so called 'asylum seekers'.  They are seeking 'asylum' because they have fallen foul of the rules set by the Gov't's of the country from which they have 'fled'.  If true (and I doubt many are true asylum seekers), remember that the main official reason for asylum is disobeying the authorities in the country they have left.  That might mean that they are basically what is known as 'trouble makers'.
3. There is no doubt that many now don't take the 'agree to disagree' attitude (that I occasionally use on these forums!), but try to take 'revenge' on people who don't see things in the way they do.
4. People are of course entirely free to wear a poppy or not as they see fit.  I was interested that on a radio discussion panel, as a parting question, the presenter asked the panel "How many of you will be wearing a poppy?"  I didn't get the exact numbers, but one would wear a poppy and several (4 or 5) wouldn't be wearing one.  They were not asked why.
5. It is trendy on the left (much of which was encouraged in Corbyn's time as a party leader) to support any demonstration anywhere that is 'anti Gov't' in any possible way.  He was particularly close to Palestinian causes and anti Israel.  Corbyn did have a strong following among the 'rent a mob' crowd who are present at many of these demonstrations, LACS, ALF, JSO, ER, Insulate Britain, Anti Capitalist - they all have a common thread and many common members (basically anarchists).

Spot on!