kurtsimonw Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 Without question. Better to go with a bang than a whimper. Would you shout "This is Red Five, I'm going in!" as you entered the fray? I hope so. I would fight for my country it needed me, without question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 By Hitler figure do you mean , rounding people up and killing them in camps or just a general taking back land that was rightfully theirs or fighting to destroy communism , sort of Hitler figure ? I guess that was tongue in cheek but last time I knew Poland and Austria were never Germany's even then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrissmith921 Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 I'd rather fight to give the small chance that those I care about back home wont get wiped out by this invasion, than stand there and do bugger all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mozzavfc Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 if i got conscripted then yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 depends Moz, if I got conscripted (not likely at 36 !!) for WWII then would go but say for Afghanistan, Falklands or any others, would rather go to prison Moral principles also have to count Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiggyrichard Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 100% yes i would fight for my country. Would rather go out fighting till my last breath than go out on my knees begging. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thetrees Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 depends Moz, if I got conscripted (not likely at 36 !!) for WWII then would go but say for Afghanistan, Falklands or any others, would rather go to prison Moral principles also have to count I don't quite understand where your 'moral principles' are coming from Ian. The Falkland Islands are sovereign British territory populated by British subjects who had an express desire to remain as such. They were invaded by an uninvited aggressor. Afghanistan I can understand, although I would venture that in WW2 we went off to fight because of Poland, so maybe there's not too much difference. Personally I would fight for my country unconditionally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 if I got conscripted (not likely at 36 !!) for WWII then would go very admirable Ian. But do you have a time machine? 8) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 Moral principles also have to count Fair enough, out of interest - in this context - what are yours? Edit: Apologies for pretty much repeating TT's point above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 if I got conscripted (not likely at 36 !!) for WWII then would go very admirable Ian. But do you have a time machine? 8) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villal Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 Could the UK be the perpetrator in this imaginary scenario? It depends also if the war isn't founded on lies, lies and more lies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted November 20, 2008 VT Supporter Share Posted November 20, 2008 better choice is YES I would have signed up for WWII NO for any subsquent engagementI think that's me. I just voted for the "maybe" option before I'd fully read the initial post. In a WWII-type scenario I would have volunteered. For the likes of Vietnam/Iraq/Afghanistan, no. Paradoxically (perhaps, or perhaps not) I am very interested in military history, but I was aghast when two of my best mates at school joined the army. The whole military discipline of unquestioning obedience of orders I can see is necessary for a well functioning force, but would never suit my personality - I tend to question everything and I don't respond well to being TOLD what to do. But it's irrelevant now, I'm too old! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 Moral principles also have to count Fair enough, out of interest - in this context - what are yours? Edit: Apologies for pretty much repeating TT's point above. simpel the falklands is a bunch of rocks where it could be argued we could have solved the problems politically but a certain PM wanted a war to help flagging poll ratings. Now others will disagree but it is my view. WWII was clear and simple danger to the whole world and by a tyrant willing to kill millions a war was always going to happen See I mentioned Afganistan but I can see the justification there so maybe that one but certainly not Iraq I would have if conscripted gone to the Balkans for example Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
World_Domination Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 I would rather die knowing I had evolved passed primal urges to a state of enlightenment. Actually no I wouldn't, I would try to preserve and cherish my life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 but a certain PM wanted a war to help flagging poll ratings .Now others will disagree but it is my view indeed it is and one that is factually incorrect , but your entitled to have an opinion ... An honest question what is you view on Blair going into Iraq , in the bid to make that conflict his falklands .. or is that something different in your opinion ? next your be saying it was all about the oil ..... we could have solved the problems politically once invaded by an aggressor I don't see how you can politically have achieved anything personally ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 I would have if conscripted gone to the Balkans for example Ah so it religious wars your into ...assume you would have fought in the crusades as well ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarry Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 I would have if conscripted gone to the Balkans for example Ah so it religious wars your into ... You bad man! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thetrees Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 simpel the falklands is a bunch of rocks where it could be argued we could have solved the problems politically but a certain PM wanted a war to help flagging poll ratings. Now others will disagree but it is my view. I doubt that a certain PM 'wanted a war' but concede that it certainly helped her politically, as major events in history have helped others. If you can try to strip your political grievances out of it the 'bunch of rocks' is populated by human beings, who have a right to protection from aggressors as you and I do. Given that you would have 'politically' solved the problem I assume you see them as expendable? A strange thing for 'moral principles' to be founded upon in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrissmith921 Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 simpel the falklands is a bunch of rocks where it could be argued we could have solved the problems politically but a certain PM wanted a war to help flagging poll ratings. Now others will disagree but it is my view. I doubt that a certain PM 'wanted a war' but concede that it certainly helped her politically, as major events in history have helped others. If you can try to strip your political grievances out of it the 'bunch of rocks' is populated by human beings, who have a right to protection from aggressors as you and I do. Given that you would have 'politically' solved the problem I assume you see them as expendable? A strange thing for 'moral principles' to be founded upon in my opinion. Here we go, I'm suprised it took till the 3rd page to become a political thread. Any chance we can have a politics sub forum of off-topic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted November 20, 2008 VT Supporter Share Posted November 20, 2008 simpel the falklands is a bunch of rocks where it could be argued we could have solved the problems politically but a certain PM wanted a war to help flagging poll ratings. Now others will disagree but it is my view. Completelty OT, but your view is wrong. The Falklands may have been a 'bunch of rocks' but they happened to be our bunch of rocks, that just so happened to have a fair few British citizens on them, who had determined themselves as British, and it also had a shedload of oil off it's shores that we knew we might be able to get at in the future. There were a perfectly legitimate set of reasons for us to go to war over them, why it would have been wrong of us not to go to war over them. And I'm unsure of any political wrangling we could have done over it, we were dealing with a desperate regime on it's last legs who actually did want a war/victory to get people back on side. On topic, well... I'm certainly not one for the army, but I'm unsure what I would do in this very unlikely scenario. I'd do something, but I can't see myself with a rifle. I'd be dead before I could use it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts