Crossing a line? I think not.
I going to be a little controversial here but its been building up in me and I have to say something. Why is it when a family loses a member who was serving as a soldier in Iraq they suddenly "question the legality of the war" and complain about Blair lying and seek legal action? If they felt that way then why did it take their loved one's death before they said anything? Is it just an unwillingness to acknowledge that the very reason the person was so well paid for their job was that one day they might be called to put their life in danger? Isn't that the point of serving in the armed forces? I'm sorry but people going into these careers have to know what that decision entails, risk of life, and if thats a problem then don't join up. Maybe I'm being a little cynical here but I get the impression of some, not all, of these people as joining up expecting to see little to no action and basically getting good money for little work. I would be far more inclined to sympathise were these soldiers conscripted as US soldiers were in Vietnam but, as it is, these people chose to join up and were aware of the assosciated risks.

1 Comments:
I fully agree.
While people may wish to question the legality of the war it still stands that as a member of the armed forces, their loved ones signed up to a profession which carries certain risks.
When it all boils down to it, the role of a soldier is to kill and possibly be killed for their country, no more, no less. It matters not where the killing and dying takes place, it is still the fundamental role of any military employee in a front line position.
Post a Comment
<< Home