Forum menu
bencooper - Member
The end of an empire is always messy - are you arguing that India would be better if the British were still in charge?
No, just wrong timing because of the tall fellow from West ****stan was stirring hatred while wanting a separate state/country ...
Bencooper - you can take pride in your granddads non combatant role and helping the injured, there were many others that did not have that luxury and had to live for the rest of their life with what they had been involved in. I respect them greatly and appreciate what they did for the rest of us, especially those that died. This may not completely apply to recent wars but WWII most certainly.
It strikes me that the H4H charity became popular due to the general disregard the government of the day had for the armed forces while sending them to questionable wars. The public in many cases are donating and appreciating that the forces have been underfunded (and under valued) while serving and when returned home wounded The present government says they are supportive of the military but is happily cutting away, I really do wonder what will happen if a real emergency happens (which does seem more likely these days).
If you think H4H is a waste please take time to visit Catterick Garrison H4H and look at the work being done there. You may not like soldiering and all it entails but you'd be a hard faced git not to be moved. So given the above I'd prefer it if there was no more requirement for the military but since the collective humanity has not developed that far yet, I'll be chucking a bit of cash their way. Fancy one of those car stickers.
Jambalaya, that didn't really answer the question did it? Are you a politician by any chance?
It's not just you OP. I find the current trend to tag the term 'Heroes' onto anything the armed services does (including getting themselves shot at or blown up) is beyond pathetic.
If you have a problem with the name, just give money to BLESMA, SSAFA, the Army Benevolent Fund etc, HFH give grants to these charities anyway as they have been doing this stuff for years.
For the record, I have a mild fascination with WWII and am fascinated by the machinery and its advancement during this period (literally just got home from witnessing unfortunate crash at Shoreham air show). I also have full admiration for the home guard and the soldiers of this era on the battlefield, fighting against forces literally looking to take over the world by any means.
That was a different era, different circumstances, with national service applying too.
Should it ever come to ground invasion of Britain by a genuinely oppressive force id imagine my instinct may be to sign up and defend... In fact, the army life style even appeals to me on some levels - I can see why wielding such machinery and the camaraderie would be an exciting prospect. Does testosterone play a part? Possibly.
My main point regarding modern day service is that I then take a step back and ask what are my motives? Why/who am I going to do this for? I don't think the right answer is to commit. I don't think soldiers should be in that place, jumping on hand grenades. I wish them no harm and it's shameful how on many levels the govermnent ends up deserting them. Is that alone not enough reason for them not to sign up?
I do vote, I don't sign up for war or invasions.
Oh, my rugby mate was 5 weeks into his first tour, literally weeks after completing his training. Sorry for the confusion.
Thanks for the debate guys, I appreciate the different views. No offence intended, I realise it's a sensitive subject with many invested interests.
I feel a similar way but confess I have never taken any time to look in to the details. I often think if I had a bad fall I would receive NHS rehabilitation for my injuries, this is available to soldiers and more. I could not afford the better facilities but my injuries could be similar. Also watching the likes of Grand Designs it appears that healthy compensation is already available.
.
I find the current trend to tag the term 'Heroes' onto anything the armed services does
T'was ever so, when their primary role is to kill foreigners, a measure of propaganda necessarily follows.
Jp - good point. Should a nurse/doctor/plasterer receive dibilitating injuries in or outside the line of duty, they would most likely not recieve the same level of care or compensation (or would they?)
So for signing up to do the governments dirty work, you do seemingly become a hero.
Heck, I may be a hero in disguise, but I won't choose to go to the Middle East to prove it.
[i]I think you don't understand what pacifism is. [/i]
+1
'Tis a funny old charity. "Do you want to help people who have been wounded and maimed doing their job",
"sure, what was their job",
"wounding and maiming other people"
pretty sure the armed forces are paid for from general taxation. How do I opt out? Happy for the money to go elsewhere - health, education, international aid...If you disagree with having armed forces don't donate
Thankfully, whether we like the name or purpose or not, we are very lucky to live in such a compassionate society here in the UK, along with the individual choice of whether or which charitable cause to donate to.
There are many other countries who do not share our national compassion. I was deeply moved and saddened to see so many U.S. Forces veterans on the west coast beaches around LA, wheeling themselves on boards, no legs, some with no arms and all of them with no support or help from their administrators or public
[quote=slackalice ] I was deeply moved and saddened to see so many U.S. Forces veterans on the west coast beaches around LA, wheeling themselves on boards, no legs, some with no arms and all of them with no support or help from their administrators or publicAnd yet more young men and women sign up every year to put their lives at risk for that same administration and public. Maybe if the armed forces were struggling to recruit our governments would be a bit less aggressive in their foreign policies.
The title of the charity is to evoke, inspire and recognise that men and women comeback horribly disfigured for life.
Should we just discard them?
'Hero' is overused in modern day life.
Interms of the Americans on the French train or men facing IEDs daily I say the word is true for them.
I think the majority who sign up don't do it for Queen and country. For a lot of people it's their best chance to learn a trade.
You sign up for a multitude of reasons.
You can learn a trade AND sleep peacefully in your own bed.
[quote=Mackem ]I think the majority who sign up don't do it for Queen and country. For a lot of people it's their best chance to learn a trade.
Absolutely. However it's not right that, for many, it's the best option available.
Well, that's the biggest problem isn't it?
I've no issue with H4H as such, but the public do seem to have had a bit of a collective chubby on for the military for the last couple of years and it's not really one I share.
Most people I think, think the recent wars in Iraq and Afgan were a mistake, Iraq especially, equally most people don't blame the 'rank and file' for that, but these lads knew what they were signing up for, a lot of them were still in primary school when it started, it's not like they signed up for 4 years and it broke out suddenly so they have to assume some responsibility for their mental and physical issues if it goes wrong - "ah, but they're doing it for us!" People say, why? I ask, the same people who call for Tony Blair to be burnt at the stake for lying to us and getting us into these wars, are usually the most vocal in the worship of the people who stuck their hands up to get involved.
I can't help but think H4Hs was just part of a propaganda job, focus on the troops and forget the wars and its snowballed into a vote winner - I know this is an emotive subject for some, but it's just my opinion.
Not all of them have been trained to kill people, some of them are techies etc.
Have they abolished the yearly range qualification and BFT for all service personnel then?
bencooper - Member
I assume the people with help for heroes stickers in there car windows are the ones reposting Britain First stories on Facebook
There does seem to be quite a lot of intersection on that Venn diagram.
Can you give some examples of the extensive research you've done to support that statement?
I assume you've spent some considerable time interviewing people with H4H stickers in their cars, and checking their Fb posting history in order to be so certain of what you've posted.
I do donate to H4H, there have been members of my family across several generations who've been in the military, and I also post the wiki description of Britain First into any BF post shared by friends on Fb.
BF's propaganda is very clever, I'm pretty sure most people just react to the message being promoted, which is often fairly benign, not being aware of what a bunch of scurrilous asswipes they really are.
FWIW, I have a several times Great Grandfather who was a Royal Marine, serving on RN ships hunting Portugese slavers, on one of which he survived the captured crew escaping and slaughtering the prize crew despite having his throat cut and beaten with a belaying pin, (he beat two to death with his bare hands), he survived the sinking of the [i]Birkenhead[/i] off the South African coast, the wreck established the principle of women and children first*, and he survived the Crimea; my dad who was ground crew in the RAF managed to survive being a POW in Changi Gaol in Singapore, and my step-brother survived the sinking of HMS Coventry in the Falklands, despite being three decks down when she was bombed.
He was a CPO, his job was catering. (He's retired from the Navy now).
As far as I'm concerned, they were/are, all heroes.
*There is a book about it, called [i]The Drums of the Birkenhead[/i]
http://www.old-merseytimes.co.uk/troopshipbirkenhead.html
Be nice if a big chunk of the military budget went on education and training so young people could learn a trade without joining up. Could even send some of them overseas to help out where needed.
[quote=Mackem ]Well, that's the biggest problem isn't it?Aye, but you can't expect the government to do something about it. They'd rather spend £13Bn on two floating penis extensions than apply those funds to creating more non-military training opportunities and thereby also reducing their ability to wage war.
Do those subs actually get used? Actually. Have they finished building them? Complete farce.
Anyone who serves in the armed forces is there for us. The civies, yes sometimes its not the right theatre; Iraq 2003. However anyone there would also have been to Bosnia, Afghanistan, etc etc.
There may not be any physical injuries on some but there will be memories etc that trouble at times.
There does seem to be quite a lot of intersection on that Venn diagram.
Sadly there are people who think like the BNP and Britain First.
H4H is one of the main charities I support. One of my biggest regrets is not at least joining up for the reserves when I was younger. Our armed forces are more than a fighting force and I have the utmost respect for them and gratitude for any of them, especially the ones who have lost their lives or been injured. As for Britain First, I don't think my views can be any further from theirs. I am only too happy for the UK to help people fleeing war and poverty any way we can.
I can see the op's point. Many might not be hero's but I tell you what despite my pacifist leanings and anti war ideals, anyone who goes and does what they do on our behalf should have the best of everything when they return. Which brings to my wider point why are these things funded by charity. Its wrong, lile macmillan, it should just be done on the nhs.
I was referring to the aircraft carriers. One is "nearing completion" the other has a bot currently sailing around Scotland to Rosyth.
Mind you we won't have an operational fixed-wing capability on them until at least 2020.....
Charities are the cheap alternative for the government, charities are enablers. It allows the government to get away with woefully inadequate levels of support for the injury/hardship/etc. The more of these charities that pop up, the less they have to do for their current/former employees.
As a side note, I'm still serving and I've never given a penny to H4H and nor will I, having had the inside line on the finances and wages, it left me with a bitter taste. My money goes to the RBL and the ABF. They have stood by the Army in particular for many years and offer a far wider range of support options to those serving and those not.
**** me, I'm anti war as much as anyone and I'm an ex squaddie.
The point is, these people were sent to war by someone elected by the british people on our behalf.
You can't just rinse your hands of it.
Blair got 40-odd% of the votes in 97 and 2001 and 30something % in 2005 well after the wars were started.
Thinking that wars are wrong is absolutely correct in the vast majority of cases, it doesne't mean you can't have compassion for those hurt by it (on both sides).
And jesus christ, all this trained killer nonsense is pure bullshit espoused by those with a serious misunderstanding of what drives most people to join the forces.
wrecker - Member
**** me, I'm anti war as much as anyone and I'm an ex squaddie.
The point is, these people were sent to war by someone elected by the british people on our behalf.
You can't just rinse your hands of it.
Blair got 40-odd% of the votes in 97 and 2001 and 30something % in 2005 well after the wars were started.
Thinking that wars are wrong is absolutely correct in the vast majority of cases, it doesne't mean you can't have compassion for those hurt by it (on both sides).
And jesus christ, all this trained killer nonsense is pure bullshit espoused by those with a serious misunderstanding of what drives most people to join the forces.
Nope, I definitely joined because I wanted to go to far off places and kill the locals. 🙄
I'm with AA and wrecker above.
Frankly, I'm not getting the OPs point. It's a charity. If you don't like it, don't give it any money. If you don't like what it calls itself, why GAF?
Nope, I definitely joined because I wanted to go to far off places and kill the locals.
How did you end up a clerk then?
DP
Frankly, I'm not getting the OPs point. It's a charity. If you don't like it, don't give it any money. If you don't like what it calls itself, why GAF?
I can see where you're coming from. The problem is that there's a chain of logic:soldiers are heroes -> support our troops -> don't criticise the wars they're in
I think BenCooper nailed it above.
If you don't like what it calls itself, why GAF?
I guess perhaps some people feel that if you describe everyone who wears a uniform as a "hero" it might devalue the term and the achievements of some genuinely heroic individuals. On the basis that they don't all receive medals for bravery/heroism we can probably assume that the term in this particular case is being misused.
I can understand why that might windup some people. Although I don't know if that's the case for the OP as apparently slimjim is a pacifist. I don't know if pacifists feel that the term hero shouldn't be devalued, probably not I would imagine.
Isn't only because of our forces that people in this country have the freedom to be pacifist (whatever that entails)? I am anti-war but I think I am also a realist. Anybody wiling to put their life on the line to protect my freedoms may not be a "hero" but they are definitely worth my support when they return.
I think the charities will accept your money to support the casualties even if you don't agree with Blair's Jingoism.
wrecker - Member
Nope, I definitely joined because I wanted to go to far off places and kill the locals.How did you end up a clerk then?
Well, originally I wanted to join the SAS, but they weren't recruiting so they suggested the AGC as their training is just as tough....
if you describe everyone who wears a uniform as a "hero"
Help For Unlucky Buggers doesn't have quite the same ring though! (Sometimes it is just blind luck who survives unscathed from contact).
I'm with AA and wrecker above.
I feel dirty 😉
The individuals can be heroes even if the cause itself is unjust. The best way to help our forces is to not send them off to fight people in places we can't find on a map for reasons of made up bullshit, but as long as we keep doing that, we should look after them when they come home in bits. Of course, the government should be doing that but it seems like they like the invading much more than they like the consequences.
heroism.POSTED 6 HOURS AGO # REPORT-POST
barkm - Member
How many of the people supported by H4H were injured in action?
I ask because of a trip to Kenya where a party of H4Hs were present. One was an officer who had broken her back and was in a wheelchair. She had broken her back skiing.It doesn't matter. Assuming she was receiving support from H4H, H4H is a welfare charity for all service men and women providing support irrespective of how they received their wounds or injuries.
All here on the website, so you don't have to make assumptionsFrom that FAQ;
Help for Heroes considers anyone who volunteers to join the Armed Forces, knowing that one day they may have to risk all, is a hero. It's that simple.
I made no assumptions at all. And my question hasn't been answered.
It matters because people give money to the charity to support servicemen wounded in the line of duty, not those hurt on holiday, even if those might only be a small proportion.
I feel dirty
I feel aroused.
The individuals can be heroes even if the cause itself is unjust. The best way to help our forces is to not send them off to fight people in places we can't find on a map for reasons of made up bullshit, but as long as we keep doing that, we should look after them when they come home in bits. Of course, the government should be doing that but it seems like they like the invading much more than they like the consequences.
typically reasoned post NW, well said.
Anybody wiling to put their life on the line to protect my freedoms may not be a "hero" but they are definitely worth my support when they return.
I think I'm willing to put my life on the line to protect your freedom, im fairly convinced your freedom would be perfectly safe without having sent a single troop outside of our borders in the last 25-70 years.
I'm genuinely interested to hear squaddies/ex squaddies reasons for signing up, and whether they think Britain would not be free without military intervention within above timeframe.