Torpar Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 3 minutes ago, topcat(The most tip top) said: Groundsman? Possibly, a quick Google search suggests the current Ibrox groundsman joined after working at Killie, I guess at Rugby Park they just send out one of the youth team players with a Hoover 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 2 hours ago, G51 said: Being a legally responsible adult doesn't mean you can't be daft, vulnerable and exploited by someone offering you one last chance to get out of Dodge. If you're going to recruit these kids when they're too young to really understand the choice they're making, then you owe it to them to support them through whatever it is they suffer as a result of that employment - whether that's PTSD, loss of limbs, whatever. No, you really don't. If a 17 year old does not know what the fucking army does before signing up for the goodies on offer then that's a failure of their own volition. It is not incumbent on the rest of society to both give them the cushy terms while in service, and also extra freebies because they didn't know fighting a war might be dangerous. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 virginton has switched his ridiculous trolling from teachers to squaddies. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
101 Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 1 minute ago, bennett said: virginton has switched his ridiculous trolling from teachers to squaddies. It was shop assistants not too long ago as well. Genuinely feeling pity if this is his view of the world, it's really quite sad. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coprolite Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 A guy i went to school with joined up in his late twenties because he wanted to "shoot arabs". There was no expectation that they might shoot back, or cheat by hiding bombs under roads. I don't know whether that means he should get a plastic leg on the nhs or not. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsimButtHitsASix Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 5 minutes ago, coprolite said: A guy i went to school with joined up in his late twenties because he wanted to "shoot arabs". The Cure have a lot to answer for 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coprolite Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 2 minutes ago, AsimButtHitsASix said: The Cure have a lot to answer for Funnily enough, he did find that song unaccountably funny when we were kids. I don't think he appreciated the homage to Camus' study on alienation so much. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G51 Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 3 minutes ago, virginton said: No, you really don't. If a 17 year old does not know what the fucking army does before signing up for the goodies on offer then that's a failure of their own volition. It is not incumbent on the rest of society to both give them the cushy terms while in service, and also extra freebies because they didn't know fighting a war might be dangerous. It's possible to know what the Army does and still not quite have it sink in. You don't necessarily think about it all that much. Plus, they don't really lead with "we kill people" when they're recruiting - the chat is more about the cutting edge technology they use, the choice of careers you can have, the skills that you'll learn and how attractive that will make you to future employers. It's very easy to see why that looks like a good deal to someone with an awareness of what their life looks like if they turn it down. I know this because it was nearly me. I left school when I was very young with pretty much no prospects whatsoever, so I got the pitch from them. My brother got the same thing when he left. It was pure chance that I didn't end up signing up for it, and by the time my brother got the pitch I was old enough to talk him out of it. But it's always very sobering to think about how close we both came to being Army squaddies. It's a reminder to me that the difference between the person I am now and the person turned into a killer by the British state is very, very small. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miguel Sanchez Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 4 hours ago, G51 said: The Armed Forces generally recruit 16-18 year olds who have flunked school and have a choice of either joining the Army or spending the rest of their life on the dole/working in the Co-op/selling drugs/a mix of all three. When you consider that the Army will actually offer career progression, decent pay and a level of respect from their peers and elders in society, then it's no wonder the kids choose the Army over the life of poverty at home. There are very few 16 year olds that are capable of making a moral decision on whether it's good or bad to join the Army, and the ones that are capable aren't flunking their Standard Grades. It's not as simple as "You know you're getting paid to kill people when you join the Army, so you shouldn't receive veteran support after". For most of the bairns that sign up, that's not really a factor that they consider. The Army knows exactly the type of person it's targeting - those who know service in the Armed Forces is the last opportunity they're going to get in life to earn a decent wage and a bit of respect. you saying "flunking" twice is much more objectionable than nutting or tittyfucking rabbits 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G51 Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 5 minutes ago, Miguel Sanchez said: you saying "flunking" twice is much more objectionable than nutting or tittyfucking rabbits top tip: if you have apologised for talking about something wildly inappropriate (e.g. tittyfucking lola bunny) then you can actually continue to talk about it without incurring additional scorn/shame 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillyAnchor Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 I have to say I came in expecting to hear that poppies should now be worn in March or you're an ungrateful unpatriotic cad. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bairnardo Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 top tip: if you have apologised for talking about something wildly inappropriate (e.g. tittyfucking lola bunny) then you can actually continue to talk about it without incurring additional scorn/shameI like to think it's the Americanisms that Mr Sanchez is finding objectionable 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G51 Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 2 minutes ago, Bairnardo said: 4 minutes ago, G51 said: top tip: if you have apologised for talking about something wildly inappropriate (e.g. tittyfucking lola bunny) then you can actually continue to talk about it without incurring additional scorn/shame I like to think it's the Americanisms that Mr Sanchez is finding objectionable that’s weird. i would have thought carnal relations with a cartoon rabbit were much more objectionable 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bairnardo Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 8 minutes ago, G51 said: that’s weird. i would have thought carnal relations with a cartoon rabbit were much more objectionable Not for me tbh. Unsure if I am an outlier here.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trainspotter Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 5 hours ago, G51 said: The Armed Forces generally recruit 16-18 year olds who have flunked school and have a choice of either joining the Army or spending the rest of their life on the dole/working in the Co-op/selling drugs/a mix of all three. As opposed to the Navy which seems to recruit exclusively from butchers shops in the North East. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 Charities probably do a better job of looking after ex Forces members than the government would, but that doesn't make it right that the government practically washes its hands of ex Forces once they become ex. On the other hand, the government would probably just waste whatever extra they raised from taxation which was designed to help ex Forces. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat(The most tip top) Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 19 hours ago, topcat(The most tip top) said: Future benefits would be part of the deal they signed up for so cutting those would be like Robert Maxwell raiding the pension fund But that’s irrelevant because the premise of story is bollocks anyway Veterans funding is actually planned to drop because there are expected to be less veterans https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/775151/20190107_Enclosure_1_Population_Projections_-_UK_Armed_Forces_Veterans_residing_in_Great_Britain_-_2016_to_2028.pdf To clarify The MoD define "Veteran" as anybody that's ever served a day in the forces The bloke with one leg, PTSD and a dog on a string is very much the exception most people leave the services fit and healthy and they're about as good at finding work and staying out of jail as the rest of the population which is why the bulk of "funding for veterans" is simply the Armed Forces Pension Scheme. You can save some defence spending by downsizing and immediately cutting the numbers you have to pay wages to but you don't see the drop in the pension liabilities till decades later once people start shuffling off their mortal coil which is where we are now. virginton's suggestion of making the stupid cripple loser b*****ds pay for their own wheelchairs (loosely paraphrased) may appeal to some and appal others but it misses the point that there isn't a massive expenditure on wheelchairs in the first place and the expenditure can be expected to drop anyway. The article from joe.co.uk quoted earlier would seem to be based on the idea that the UK government should really just give double pensions if there's half as many people. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnydun Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 3 hours ago, coprolite said: A guy i went to school with joined up in his late twenties because he wanted to "shoot arabs". Don't see an issue here. I'm pushing 40 and would jump at the chance to pick off @Szamo's_Ammo. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmic Joe Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 I don't think the issue is that ex armed services individuals do not deserve financial support. There are people in far more desperate need on this planet today. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Ferrino Posted March 25, 2021 Share Posted March 25, 2021 We are a victim of our own successes. Next time we need fewer survivors. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.