danny Posted December 31, 2007 Share Posted December 31, 2007 Would just like to bring this charity to peoples attention. http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/index.html The charity do a great job helping in the rehabilitation of wounded service men and women from all three of the armed forces. They are currently trying to get the money together to build a swimming pool which would allow for rehabilitation to take place at headley court. And prevent a repeat of this shocking incadent. So if anyone has made a new years resolution to do more for charity. Then this is a very worthy course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platty Posted January 1, 2008 Share Posted January 1, 2008 I have already given money to this great cause. I actually give to 3 different charities. One is this one of course, then I also give to NSE (national society for epilepsy) and also donate to demelza house. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyxis Posted January 1, 2008 Share Posted January 1, 2008 It sounds like a great charity, but defence is the government's responsibility. I'm a huge fan of the military, although sadly, the vast majority of people in this country couldnt care less about defence. The military needs huge increases to its budget to fund the better treatment of its service men and more importantly, to fund equipment procurement, but defence spending is falling year after year... The government and MoD are lying to themselves to the point where it hurts. Politicians will only ever do things for votes and us Brits care more about our pathetic wasted lives (alcohol + reality tv) than the welfare of our military, who used to defend a country worth defending. Our military today is a joke. Our navy is in ruins and will never be able to do anything useful again. We arent even capable of achieving what we did at the beginning of the Iraq war. It wont be long before we're down to a couple of guys and a pair of donkeys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The fish Posted January 1, 2008 Share Posted January 1, 2008 Our military today is a total joke. Our navy is in ruins and will never be able to do anything useful again. It wont be long before we're down to a couple of guys and a pair of donkeys. Well, before the donkey comes into play, the navy will probably have some use - two Queen Elizabeth-Class aircraft carriers are entering service relatively soon - one in 2014, and the other in 2016, each carrying a compliment of 36 F-35B's. They're not exactly cheap either... That's a good charity, by the way. (Thought I should get back on topic :wink:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chairdriver Posted January 1, 2008 Share Posted January 1, 2008 My dad is in the army, and seriously, the army spends money on so much shit. For example, there is an army radio station (called "Garrison FM") which basically plays shit you can hear elsewhere 24 hours a day. I mean, what is the need? That is money pointlessly spent. Also, the army actually pays for me to go to a private school. Not that I'm complaining, but really they should spend their money in better ways; ie. on wounded service people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyxis Posted January 1, 2008 Share Posted January 1, 2008 Well, before the donkey comes into play, the navy will probably have some use - two Queen Elizabeth-Class aircraft carriers are entering service relatively soon - one in 2014, and the other in 2016, each carrying a compliment of 36 F-35B's. They're not exactly cheap either... That's a good charity, by the way. (Thought I should get back on topic :wink:) Yep, the original in service date was actually 2012, but the program has already been delayed by 2 years due to the government trying to save money from the project, which has as always just wasted millions and added cost to the carriers! The carriers havent actually been ordered, I believe that only 28 million pounds of the 3.9 billion pound carriers has actually been ordered... Pathetic. The whole carrier thing is just to make the general public believe that the government is investing in the Royal Navy, when it actually isnt. Just amongst the examples are 11 Type 42 destroyers being replaced with only 4 or 6 Type 45 destroyers (2 might be sold to Saudi Arabia) and a submarine fleet of 12 being reduced to 3 and a half (lol) Astutes...they have ordered half of the 4th submarine because they cant quite afford the full thing yet!! Our Type 23 and 22 frigates are partially going to be replaced by tiny little patrol ships instead of proper warships... The carriers are barely going to have anything to protect them and we'll probably need the US navy to protect our carriers in the future. The carriers arent that big of a deal, unless the Falklands get invaded again, which is unlikely, because we tend to use airfields when fighting wars, just like we did in Iraq and Afghanistan. In Afghanistan, our harriers are operating from airfields. In fact, we have no planes for our current 2 aircraft carriers at all! They have to resort to asking other countries to land their harriers on them so the people serving on those ships dont forget how to maintain an air group.... BTW, there will only ever be 1 carrier on operations at a time. Carriers need to spend most of the year being serviced. The same goes for our 6 type 45s, only 4 will be available at a time. Our entire country is only protected by 10 ships at the moment and I bet that will get worse! edit: Sorry about my rambling! I think the charity is a great idea, but its a real shame that our government and MoD arent doing anything for those people. Its a total failure on their part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wesley Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 I don't know why people are so shocked that the MoD spend so little on the wounded. News flash: soldiers with only one leg can't fight. So why would they care. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danny Posted January 2, 2008 Author Share Posted January 2, 2008 I don't know why people are so shocked that the MoD spend so little on the wounded. News flash: soldiers with only one leg can't fight. So why would they care. BECAUSE ITS THE FUCKING RESPONSABILITY TO CARE. THTAS WHY WE SIGN AWAY OUR RIGHTS!!! I believe gGarrison FM is for out in Germany primeraly although i could be wrong. SO the soldiers and there familys can listen to english music etc. But know they also play it here. I very much doubt that a carrier will be in service in 6 years. They havent even cut the steel yet. Or constructed the buildings it will be built inside. The navy is very much on the bones of its arse. Trust me im a matloet. What little funding there is. Is directed towards the army and raf as that is where the current need is. Which in principle sounds like a good idea. But this is an island nation. And the navy is what made this country what it is today. And you never know when it will be needed again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wesley Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 So you've just realised that the MoD think of you all as tools? It's a very worthy charity, don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to disrespect anyone within the armed forces or anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danny Posted January 2, 2008 Author Share Posted January 2, 2008 Well it was a stupid comment. Anyone wounded out there should get priority treatment on the NHS. Why should someone who has been shot have to wait behind some dickhead chav who crashed his saxo in to a tree pissed up? If people didnt voluenter to join up then there is a simple answer. Its been used before. Its called the draft. Lets see how much it would matter to you then if you had no fucking legs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoogleViper Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 Does anybody think we should still have national service? Although in this day and age there would be loads of people faking disability to get out of it. I considered joining the RAF but I can't due to my asthma. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wesley Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 Well it was a stupid comment. Anyone wounded out there should get priority treatment on the NHS. Why should someone who has been shot have to wait behind some dickhead chav who crashed his saxo in to a tree pissed up?If people didnt voluenter to join up then there is a simple answer. Its been used before. Its called the draft. Lets see how much it would matter to you then if you had no fucking legs. I don't really agree with it being a stupid comment. Neither do I agree that people in the service should be prioritised above all others. In situations like you just stated (one obviously requiring a "chav" to go to accident and emergency) I don't think time should be wasted in making possible life or death decisions based on "I'm-better-than-you-bullshit". Or if you mean in general, as I think you were trying to point out, that armed service men and woman should be prioritised over civilians, then, again; I don't agree. I think service men, as they sign up, realise that what they're doing is their choice and they accept the risks. And then when they are in need not to simply be pushed on top of all others in need. You signed up as a service to your country and country-men. You didn't sign up to be part of a higher ranking species. And it's quite possible that a draft in my lifetime will come into effect and I'll happily join. Of course I'm sure only a draft will come in place when there's actually a situation that could possibly harm us as a country and our freedom. But then, of course, as with everything, that is down to opinion. As I said before. I'm not arguing with your charity, it's very worthy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shorty Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 would it be anti-charitable to point out that your signature is 100px too wide for our rules? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wesley Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 Does anybody think we should still have national service? Although in this day and age there would be loads of people faking disability to get out of it. I considered joining the RAF but I can't due to my asthma. I think that there should be... it would help, or even solve, quite a few problems that this country is facing. It could possibly boost numbers in the military, could help with the weight problem in the UK, help with patriotism, the growing distance between social and racial classes, etc, etc. I'd love to of done National Service. But, like you, I couldn't get into the military for disability reasons. I did try and was pretty damn upset about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danny Posted January 2, 2008 Author Share Posted January 2, 2008 I don't really agree with it being a stupid comment. Neither do I agree that people in the service should be prioritised above all others. In situations like you just stated (one obviously requiring a "chav" to go to accident and emergency) I don't think time should be wasted in making possible life or death decisions based on "I'm-better-than-you-bullshit". Or if you mean in general, as I think you were trying to point out, that armed service men and woman should be prioritised over civilians, then, again; I don't agree. I think service men, as they sign up, realise that what they're doing is their choice and they accept the risks. And then when they are in need not to simply be pushed on top of all others in need. You signed up as a service to your country and country-men. You didn't sign up to be part of a higher ranking species. And it's quite possible that a draft in my lifetime will come into effect and I'll happily join. Of course I'm sure only a draft will come in place when there's actually a situation that could possible harm us as a country and our freedom. But then, of course, as with everything, that is down to opinion. As I said before. I'm not arguing with your charity, it's very worthy. Yeah well ok. But we used to have millitary hospitals. Give us back our own hospitals and we woudnt need to use the NHS. We then wouldt have muslims giving recovering servicemen abuse for killing there people. This has happened. And someone who has given there legs and seen there friends die. Does deserve better treatment than everyone else. Does anybody think we should still have national service? Although in this day and age there would be loads of people faking disability to get out of it. I considered joining the RAF but I can't due to my asthma. National service woudnt work in this country and isnt cost effective. It woudnt work as we have huge foreign populations who just would not go to fight in places like iraq and afghanistan due to there beliefs. And it isnt cost effective as it would only be for 2 years. 6 months of that would be in training. This is the reason they stopped it. It was all very well and good nwhen they just wanted men in barracks during the cold war incase the reds came. But for the sort of wars we are fighting now it woudnt work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wesley Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 Yeah well ok. But we used to have millitary hospitals. Give us back our own hospitals and we woudnt need to use the NHS. We then wouldt have muslims giving recovering servicemen abuse for killing there people. This has happened. And someone who has given there legs and seen there friends die. Does deserve better treatment than everyone else. I agree that the ever-failing state of the military hospitals is beyond appalling and is something that needs much more attention; by the media as well, for much of the public is largely unaware. And again, I don't agree that something who has given their legs and who has seen their friends die deserve better treatment. I'm not saying they deserve less attention or anything daft like that. It's simply that you cannot judge and evaluate people's needs so quickly like that. Some people in this country have gone under such strains and problems with their life, whether or not equal or more than soldiers at war, it doesn't matter. The NHS was made for the people, and therefore military ranking should not be a priority. I agree with you about the National Service. We all know, and it's well documented, why we no longer have it. I think a new system should be implemented though; one in conjunction with immigration requirements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Domo Kun Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 A bit off topic, but on a more general note about charities with no particular reference to this one, why have more than one charity for the same thing? Doesn't this charity just do what the poppy appeal does? Doesn't Oxfam do the same thing as Unicef? Wouldn't they be much more efficient if they all joined together? Similarly, why doesn't this charity just become a wing of a huge umbrella charity organisation? The umbrella could have a wing for those affected by war, whether they be soliders or civilians and regardless of which side they were on. The only reason I can fault my idea is that people may not like the amount this umbrella charity spend on say, starvation, if they considerd those affected by violence or those who're homeless to be a worser situation... but in return, I'd say that the charity should be able to prioritize accordingly if it's a truly philanthropic organisation. And if they have researchers in the right places, they'd know who needs it more than others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danny Posted January 2, 2008 Author Share Posted January 2, 2008 I agree that the ever-failing state of the military hospitals is beyond appalling and is something that needs much more attention; by the media as well, for much of the public is largely unaware. And again, I don't agree that something who has given their legs and who has seen their friends die deserve better treatment. I'm not saying they deserve less attention or anything daft like that. It's simply that you cannot judge and evaluate people's needs so quickly like that. Some people in this country have gone under such strains and problems with their life, whether or not equal or more than soldiers at war, it doesn't matter. The NHS was made for the people, and therefore military ranking should not be a priority. I agree with you about the National Service. We all know, and it's well documented, why we no longer have it. I think a new system should be implemented though; one in conjunction with immigration requirements. I dont mean immediate A&E obviasly that comes as and when needed. What i mean is rehabilatation work. The falklands war has claimed more lives in suicides since the end of the war than during the actual conflict. This is because vets were not given the correct treatment and when they were not soon enough. The same is happening now. These people have already given enough for this country and do deserve better. If not priority on the NHS then give us back our old sysytem that is what we would all prefer anyway. A bit off topic, but on a more general note about charities with no particular reference to this one, why have more than one charity for the same thing? Doesn't this charity just do what the poppy appeal does? Doesn't Oxfam do the same thing as Unicef? Wouldn't they be much more efficient if they all joined together? Similarly, why doesn't this charity just become a wing of a huge umbrella charity organisation? The umbrella could have a wing for those affected by war, whether they be soliders or civilians and regardless of which side they were on. The only reason I can fault my idea is that people may not like the amount this umbrella charity spend on say, starvation, if they considerd those affected by violence or those who're homeless to be a worser situation... but in return, I'd say that the charity should be able to prioritize accordingly if it's a truly philanthropic organisation. And if they have researchers in the right places, they'd know who needs it more than others. Because people like to give to a charity which they feel close to. Im in the forces so i want to know my money is going to help people like me, my freinds or possably even me. People are the same with cancer charitys if a family member dies of a certain cancer they like to give to a charity that helps that perticular condition. And this charity is much more about troops coming back from the front line today and tomorrow. Where as the poppy appeal covers a much larger time scale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoogleViper Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 National service woudnt work in this country and isnt cost effective.It woudnt work as we have huge foreign populations who just would not go to fight in places like iraq and afghanistan due to there beliefs. And it isnt cost effective as it would only be for 2 years. 6 months of that would be in training. This is the reason they stopped it. It was all very well and good nwhen they just wanted men in barracks during the cold war incase the reds came. But for the sort of wars we are fighting now it woudnt work. Well it would need reworking but a similar system could be implimented. And if the foreigners don't agree with it then they shouldn't come to our country. I wouldn't move to another country if I wasn't prepared to fight for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danny Posted January 3, 2008 Author Share Posted January 3, 2008 Well it would need reworking but a similar system could be implimented. And if the foreigners don't agree with it then they shouldn't come to our country. I wouldn't move to another country if I wasn't prepared to fight for them. Saying that is all very well and good. But implementng it is something very different. Many of these people are british. But there culture dosent agree with the wars we are fighting. And the millitary isnt what it used to be. As in they cant shoot you if you dont fight. It really just woudnt work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts