Michael Moore on Support the Troops

[Resonance10]

Is it even flaming though? From where I'm sat Moore doesn't say anything particularly contentious.

Change a few of the numbers and everything he says there rings true for the UK, and no doubt scores of other countries:

The Government sends its armed forces on highly dubious foreign ventures.
The Government doesn't look after its armed forces.
The Government doesn't look after its veterans.
People claiming to support the troops are likely just paying lip service.

It's hardly breaking news, is it?

I think 'Support the Troops' here in the UK is more of a response to the 'Stop the War' movement where quite often our troops are equated with babykilling murderers..(among the tin hat brigade especially).

Highly dubious foreign ventures are what the military is for. The world is'nt as black and white as it was in past.

Michael Moore is a statistic fiddling populist pamphleteering blatant liar, and a socialist Jesus in his own mind.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...nheit_911.html

It annoys me because he fucks what could be good causes with his propagandist bollox..in a revolution he would be toadying up to the new 'masters' and sending sinners to the camps.

Or as Devil put it: He's a ****.

[Eddie Hardon]

Is it even flaming though? From where I'm sat Moore doesn't say anything particularly contentious.

Change a few of the numbers and everything he says there rings true for the UK, and no doubt scores of other countries:

The Government sends its armed forces on highly dubious foreign ventures.
The Government doesn't look after its armed forces.
The Government doesn't look after its veterans.
People claiming to support the troops are likely just paying lip service.

It's hardly breaking news, is it?

...and its cost us £36Billion so far....quite apart from Service Deaths, Life changing injuries and the £Millions of Equipment we shall shortly leave behind.

Yet Dubya, Cheney and Rummy never actually put their own lives at Risk in the Service of their Country - nor their Children - but were quite happy to Risk the children of others....

That minor provocation apart, remember that in Blighty we've always had an ambivalent approach to, for example, the Army. That dates back to our Feudal Past and how they were often equated with the Squirearchy - so to speak - and their potential capacity to act as an Instrument of Repression.

Kipling caputured this best in his poem:

"It's Tommy this an' Tommy that,
And Throw Him Out, The Brute,
But its Saviour of his Country
When the guns begin to Shoot".

It's only much more recently that attitudes have shown a change for the positive. Remember the recent Riots after the Police shooting dead of that geezer with the illegal gun? The outcry from Joe Public was for the Army to be out on the streets to reassert control. When was the last time THAT sentiment happened???

Of course, we have insufficient military personnel to actually provide that function hence our move toward an Army Reserve, instead of the TA augmented by the Reserve of ex-Military still providing liability to support the Colours, and also the release of current Regulars. We're moving toward a small Coastal Defence Force ;-)

[Resonance10]

...and its cost us £36Billion so far....quite apart from Service Deaths, Life changing injuries and the £Millions of Equipment we shall shortly leave behind.

Yet Dubya, Cheney and Rummy never actually put their own lives at Risk in the Service of their Country - nor their Children - but were quite happy to Risk the children of others....

I don't understand wtf politicians own kids have to do with anything. Also the level of cynicism required to think sending soldiers to war is easy and has no emotional consequence for the decision makers is on par with the cynicism they are accused of imo.

It's only much more recently that attitudes have shown a change for the positive. Remember the recent Riots after the Police shooting dead of that geezer with the illegal gun? The outcry from Joe Public was for the Army to be out on the streets to reassert control. When was the last time THAT sentiment happened???

Well Joe Public felt a little unprotected, **** was on fire and no police were to be seen, mob rule seemed very possible and any authority figures with some clout would have been welcomed. People were also saying the police should be armed with guns.

That Kipling poem captures much.

[mike321]

I don't understand wtf politicians own kids have to do with anything. Also the level of cynicism required to think sending soldiers to war is easy and has no emotional consequence for the decision makers is on par with the cynicism they are accused of imo.

Politicians used to make sure their kids saw combat to improve the family political outlook. So politicians actually trying to protect their kids might be an improvement.

[Resonance10]

Politicians used to make sure their kids saw combat to improve the family political outlook. So politicians actually trying to protect their kids might be an improvement.

Automatic enlistment for politicians kids is the way forward then.

[Scrapper]

This does not belong in the Armory.