> the Army serves us best if it ensures it takes on the best soldiers available to it, rather than discriminating on grounds of colour or religious belief.
Yes, that’s what I’m saying. What the Chief of Staff is saying, however, is that the armed forces should discriminate on grounds of colour and religious belief.
> Actually, are we doing this kind of thing to try and get Catholics to join the PSNI?
Contrary to Sinn Fein’s propaganda, Catholics were rather well represented in the RUC. The only barrier to Catholics wishing to join the PSNI is the high risk of being murdered by the IRA in order to discourage Catholics from joining the police in order to make Sinn Fein’s propaganda come true.
]]>2) The MCB denounces nutters like Sheikh Omar; it’s not a BNP equivalent. Obviously, I don’t approve of it any more than I approve of other conservative religious organisations – but if we had a problem getting Catholics to join the army, I’d certainly support a recruitment campaign where the Army allied with Catholic church leaders. Actually, are we doing this kind of thing to try and get Catholics to join the PSNI?
*thinks* You’re not confusing the MCB with the MAB, are you? I would be disturbed were the Army to meet with that lot.
]]>He also praised the MCB for helping to create a just and tolerant society. That’s just bollocks. Next he’ll be speechifying to the BNP, telling them what good work they’ve done to combat fascism and you’ll be defending him.
]]>I’d question the motives and/or sanity of someone who’d hear a speech like Sir Michael’s and think "evil dhimmitude and generals meddling in politics, the world and our freedoms are going to end".
]]>And do you believe that the point of the armed forces is to reflect cultural, ethnic, and religious diversity? Personally, I think it’s nice if they do, but it’s not what they’re there for, and I think the job of the head of the armed services is to ensure that they’re good at fighting. If anyone is to try and socially engineer the armed services, it should be the government, who are elected and who therefore can be got rid of. What if the head of the armed services decided to get black people out of the army? Would that be OK? Of course not. That’s why we have the simple principle Dumbjon mentioned: the army keep out of politics. That’s not a right-wing idea: it protects right-wing and left-wing ideals equally.
How did you manage to infer that bravery has anything to do with it? You don’t half talk some crap sometimes.
]]>Otherwise, a brilliant example of a tortured argument from utterly false premises. Is there a Latin phrase for "Argument From Utter Wrongness?" I’ll check the Adam Smith institute.
]]>