You must be new, they could run into hundreds of pages doing just this.

er, not really….this sums it up!

I can’t wait for next years poppy thread.

Just keep this one running.

Wear, it don’t wear it, I really couldn’t give a flying monkeys, but the minute you start looking down on someone for their choice, you wouldn’t get a pint off of me post night ride.

What moose said.

This. (I’ll even forgive the “off of”, it’s “from”!. Grrr 😉 )

Moving words from Moose

The hijacking of poppy wearing by politicians and the media judgements on those who choose not to wear one do a dis-service to ex-soldiers.

“TBH, that’s not the fault of the poppy, it’s the fault of the gutter press using any means possible to throw stones at people they don’t like. Which seems to be anyone who isn’t a fascist spunkbubble these days.”

But it has become politicised. There’s no escaping that.

As such, I think the decision by FIFA to not allow the displaying of poppies on British nations in football matches is correct. But then, this actually exposes the hypocrisy of FIFA’s own rules regarding ‘religious symbols’; many nations have crosses or other religious symbols as part of their team badges. So whilst I agree with the FIFA decision (these are, after all, the rules), I do think that it should be up to individual players to chose whether or not to wear the symbol. In the context of the England v Scotland game, I see no issue with players wearing poppies. But regarding the Wales V Serbia game; the poppy is a symbol of remembrance of British war victims, so I don’t think it’s appropriate to wear it at that game. I have no issue at all with it being worn in club sports here. Or by supermarket workers, or council office staff, to indeed anybody. It should be a matter of personal choice.

Salutes Moose. Red poppy and the money to support the work of the British Legion.

But it has become politicised. There’s no escaping that.

Isn’t wearing a white poppy as a symbol calling for peace a deliberate act of politicising remembrance?

the poppy is a symbol of remembrance of British war victims,

Are you sure about that?

You might want to tell the other countries that wear them in case they hadn’t realised.

As an ex-soldier, although only of 5 years service, i can fully support what Moose says, there is no glory in conflict at all and i can honestly state that i never met anyone serving in the UK military that i would ever have deemed a warmonger.

What the wearing of a red poppy symbolises to me is those men and women, who did not have a choice whether they wanted to fight, but who died in their droves in WW1 and WW2 and who came home to no or little support, often with terrible injuries and to who people like the British Legion were a lifeline. My nan lives in a British Legion supported bungalow. They did not have a choice and those two generations of lives and the world itself was changed forever.

Whether you wear a red poppy, a white poppy (which i personally feel is just seeking to be political and there are places you could direct your money and your effort to, such as Bikebouys donation to Red Cross), i don’t really care, just do not make a mockery of what generation after generation of men went through.

There are still young men and young women coming home today, who did not choose where they were deployed, but did not question it, who have terrible physical and psychological injuries who deserve our support. They don’t want political slogans or forum arguments, they want treatment, support and help to get back on their feet, that is what charities like the British Legion provide .

/\ and that

I wouldn’t promote the wearing of a red or white poppy, both are nonsense.

I’d rather advocate people read a history book or 5, at anytime throughout the year, rather than take part in pointless “remembrance” once a year.

There are still young men and young women coming home today, who did not choose where they were deployed, but did not question it, who have terrible physical and psychological injuries who deserve our support.

I completely agree, and they should be getting that support from the government, not from a charity. The fact that the government doesn’t support them enough, but is willing to go along with the poppy thing to make the public support them is particularly distasteful.

There are still young men and young women coming home today, who did not choose where they were deployed, but did not question it

Personally, I’ve got a serious issue with that concept. They choose to volunteer and following orders should not absolve you of blame.

“Are you sure about that?

You might want to tell the other countries that wear them in case they hadn’t realised.”

Back in your box mate. You know exactly what I meant, and are just trying to start a needless argument. go find something else to do instead please. Thanks.

“I completely agree, and they should be getting that support from the government, not from a charity. The fact that the government doesn’t support them enough, but is willing to go along with the poppy thing to make the public support them is particularly distasteful.”

This.

Plus, as has been mentioned, the poppy has been hijacked by those wishing to prove their ‘patriotism’, which again is disrespectful to the fallen.

We should be looking at expanding remembrance to the victims of all wars. The poppy is a particularly powerful and apt symbol. If it is to be politicised, then it should represent a unified call to end war. Plastering them all over a war plane is the ultimate insult, and really quite disgusting.

Personally, I’ve got a serious issue with that concept. They choose to volunteer.

Indeed, and that’s the fundamental difference between WWI/WWII and modern conflicts. They were conscripts, who had no choice. Modern soldiers are professionals who have chosen to do a relatively dangerous job, like fishermen or builders.

Neither poppy for me. Will observe the silence, and will happily give to the British Legion.

Stopped wearing it in 2003/4 i think for two reasons. One it seemed increasingly hypocritical at a time of political warfare. Two, it seemed to become a thing there was incredible pressure to comply with, which isn’t respect, its bullying.

That has changed now but I’ve not felt inclined to wear one again.

I have no problem whatsoever with them being worn, put on things, its just not for me, I would feel uncomfortable and disingenuous wearing one.

True, some jingoistic elements of society have hijacked the poppy (the red one) to celebrate war and “our glorious dead”. All the more reason why I want to wear one, because if we give up the true meaning of this symbol, to commemorate all the dead of war, and to support the victims, the Daily Mail loons have won.

Analogous to regarding the cross of St. George as the badge of the xenophobe, don’t let those who want to twist and pervert symbol claim it for themselves.

What clodhopper said up there ^ in various posts.

I agree with HughStew.

Having read through this thread, it got me thinking about the royal British legion and the work they do.
Do they get any government funding or funding from the royals? After all they support the people and their families who have served, surely our government don’t just leave people without support after serving?

“surely our government don’t just leave people without support after serving?”

Sadly, this is all too common, in far too many cases. A friend works for an organisation that deals with drug and alcohol dependency, and an extremely disproportionate number of service users are ex-military. Many are homeless/sleep rough, and all have mental health issues of often quite severe degrees. Instead, there is a massive reliance on charities, who are often overwhelmed.

Beyond that, are the families of individuals who are affected by the death/injury/trauma suffered by many service personnel. Support for these people is again, woefully inadequate.

bencooper – Member
Personally, I’ve got a serious issue with that concept. They choose to volunteer.
Indeed, and that’s the fundamental difference between WWI/WWII and modern conflicts. They were conscripts, who had no choice. Modern soldiers are professionals who have chosen to do a relatively dangerous job, like fishermen or builders.

Whilst i agree that in this day and age it is a person’s choice to join the military in this country, there seems to be this feeling that those that join the forces do so with the sole aim of wanting to go to war. Most of the young lads that i served with did so for a number of reasons, but a lot of the time it was because they came from areas with high employment, they misguidedly thought that it would be a life of excitement and action, a sense of maybe misguided patriotism (not the Daily Mail version) or because they saw it to be a way to a trade in anything from communications to medical roles, despite later finding out that your experience or qualifications often don’t carry over to civvy street. Not one did i ever meet said they joined because they really want to hurt people.

What you have to realise is that when the British public was lied to about the true implications of the Gulf War and Iraq, the forces were told the same, and it is them that paid the highest price.

Many comments above seem to think the military is just there to bring war, much of our work was as a peacekeeping force, i was there when they started to discovering the mass graves near Kosovo and it hit home the true implications of what men are capable of against each other and what could happen in the name of religion. Friends in the RAF and Navy have spent more time assisting in aid operations then they have at war. I’ve been a fire man for a few weeks, others have covered the bin rounds whilst they striked.

I also agree the Government should be responsible for looking after ex-serviceman and women, but they don’t, that is why charities supporting them exist. In the same way that my Type 1 diabetic daughter should be able to have the best care from the NHS, but they can’t afford it, so much of the support and information came from charities, in a perfect world, there would be no need for charity (or war).

Once i was invalided out of the army (from playing rugby against matlows), i realised what i missed was mates, seeing parts of the world i would not of not seen and the physical side of it, so i bought two old army trucks, kitted them out for expedition use and spent years taking paying punters to North and West Africa including Libya and Algeria, so i have vast experience and discussed at length the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan with every sort of person and religion in seeking to fully understand it.

Indeed, and that’s the fundamental difference between WWI/WWII and modern conflicts. They were conscripts, who had no choice. Modern soldiers are professionals who have chosen to do a relatively dangerous job, like fishermen or builders.

Quite agree with this (and Ben’s other posts on this issue).

White poppy wearer here, but also donate to RBL…………..

What you have to realise is that when the British public was lied to about the true implications of the Gulf War and Iraq, the forces were told the same, and it is them that paid the highest price

lied to but everyone and their granny knew the truth, plus it wasn’t the British forces that paid the highest price in that war.

I’d rather advocate people read a history book or 5, at anytime throughout the year, rather than take part in pointless “remembrance” once a year.

My Grandfather in Law has told me many stories of his time in WW2 and subsequent battles since, although he never gives the full details.

I can remember as a child a neighbours Grandad served in a tank regiment in WW1, tanks are exciting when you are a kid, but he never said it was exciting, however he never said much about it either, you could see the sadness/pain/fear in his eyes. He died probably 30 years ago.

Every year I go to my Grandfather in Laws cenotaph for rememberance. They gave up their lives for us, surely we can spoare 30 minutes to remember them?

OP – Thank you for brining white poppies to our attention, although I do not quite see your motive, it should be about remembering, not encourage differences, which is the start of all conflicts.

lied to but everyone and their granny knew the truth, plus it wasn’t the British forces that paid the highest price in that war.

Benefit of hindsight more like. I remember this forum at the time being very pro bomb Sadam and the few of us who thought it was ridiculous were ridiculed.

Ffs, a post about poppies is soon to rehash British foreign policy choices. Again.

I presume we had a relatively large professional standing army at the outbreak of world war 1 and 2. Should we also separate these soldiers out from the conscripts along with their modern counterparts when remembering, lacking empathy or apportioning “blame”?.

It seems the nature of the modern HM Forces will be increasingly rapid reaction with no knowledge of what’s around the corner. As suggested above much of the work is peace keeping or aid work – large numbers of medics were shipped out with zero notice to help with the Ebola crisis or on a daily basis work on NHS wards between deployments.

@ Clodhopper:

Back in your box mate. You know exactly what I meant,

No, you were wrong, you’d be more of a man if you could admit it.

@BenCooper

difference between WWI/WWII and modern conflicts. They were conscripts, who had no choice. Modern soldiers are professionals

You might want to actually read on that up a bit, the BEF were very much professional soldiers, far more so than any of their contemporaries at the start of the war, whereas conscription didn’t come in until 1916, and only 46% of those who served were conscripted, as opposed to the 54% of volunteers

We, rightly, remember them all.

FunkyDunc – Member
Benefit of hindsight more like.

They same hindsight that millions and millions all around the world had.

moose – Member
Ffs, a post about poppies is soon to rehash British foreign policy choices. Again.

They are inextricably linked.

Only because some of you damn well keep beating that drum. You are one of the biggest culprits.

I make no apologies for it. The jingoism of the remembrance day crap is highly political imo.

This is going to end well.

Cougar – Moderator
This is going to end well.

true. i’ll leave it at that.

seosamh77 – Member
What you have to realise is that when the British public was lied to about the true implications of the Gulf War and Iraq, the forces were told the same, and it is them that paid the highest price
lied to but everyone and their granny knew the truth, plus it wasn’t the British forces that paid the highest price in that war.

So you knew exactly what was going on?

In the opening days of the original Gulf War, the reason for going to war was WMD’s and that Saddam had invaded Kuwait. Whilst the actual “weapons of mass destruction” were never found, you have to remember that this on the back of him using chemical weapons against the Kurds and state funding of terrorist groups such as Abu Nidal, and where Sunni brutally repressed Shia. What became clear later was the fact this may have been what we were told, but as usual behind this was the old politics of the US backed Saudi Arabia and the previously Russian backed Iraq, before you get started on oil rights.

And yes you are right, the innocent people of Iraq paid the highest price, a price they are still paying now, but until you come up with the solution to Sunni killing Shia, killing Kurd, then you are a better man than I.

As we see in Syria, it is the innocents that pay the highest price and haven’t we been so welcoming of them as a country??!

Can we have a graph of red poppies v jingoism? Just to make things clear.

Scud, I thought the 1st Gulf War was purely to do with the invasion of Kuwait and WMDs were the excuse for the 2nd Gulf War.

Current sat at Wloo station enjoying the band of the Coldstream Guards in all they splendour entertaining folk wonderfully and helping to raise lots of money for a great cause. Marvellous.

Of course it won’t end well cougar. OP has argument on social media, transfers argument to STW, gets picked up on false points, makes new false points., picked up again, cue bickering and thread closure. Same leopard, same spots. On the bright side great for the click count/revenues. 😉

Only because some of you damn well keep beating that drum. You are one of the biggest culprits.

Yep, it’s people on a bike forum who are mostly to blame for the way the poppy campaign has become fused with British foreign policy and support for ‘our boys’.

Politicians and the media may have played some small role but it’s mainly bike forum users.

slowoldman – Member
Scud, I thought the 1st Gulf War was purely to do with the invasion of Kuwait and WMDs were the excuse for the 2nd Gulf War

You are right, and much of my phrasing was relating to the Gulf War as it is what i was directly involved in, we had been told that as background when justifying the war and what we were to expect that Saddam had been using chemical weapons of various guises since the early 80’s (with help from UK and US!) and they pointed to the Kurdish regions etc as proof. The initial reasoning for the second conflict, the Gulf War, was when he then wouldn’t allow UN inspectors in to monitor his NBC capabilities, monitoring that came about after investigations from the first war. no fly zones were established to seek to protect the shia and kurdish areas and it was used as justification of the Gulf War that Saddam had sought to re-establish NBC capabilities and that these no-fly zones had been infringed on. The threat of the usage of chemical weapons especially was there throughout both conflicts although he only used them against his own people.