[WOMBAI]

Originally Posted by Shasown

That is one of the processes of government. Debate did take place. Sometimes extended debate cant take place in the run up to the possible deployment of troops into an operational environment. Nor can national referendums. That is one of the reasons you vote for those you want to run the country.

If you disagree with the use of troops over there I suggest you take it up with your MP. Ask if there is anyway we can change our constitution to something that allows everyone to make decisions in all cases.

He signed on the dotted line. He accepted the terms and conditions. He got pop stars wages for doing a relatively easy job. He was told he was going back out, if he didnt want to or was medically unfit go back out there are procedures, he decided to leg it.

I would say more people oppose this war than support it - that is what should count - not the underhand tactics of a bunch of public schoolboy politians who would never allow their own sons to enlist and take such risks!

I also feel that they have undermined their position of authority by failing to supply troops with the necessary support and equipment for the job - so therefore have no right to expect the soldiers to carry out said 'orders'. In my book they have broken their side of the deal - so why should the soldiers be obliged to meet their side! I would applaud any soldier who refused to fight with inadequate equipment!! Neither the polititians or the army give a damn about them - it is up to them to stand up for themselves!

And where did the 'pop stars wages' come from - are you serious - they get paid a pittance in relation to the risk they take! The soldiers are more deserving of pop star wages than the so called pop stars themselves. And as another poster mentioned didn't he attempt to raise the issue with his sergant who refused to listen. It all sounds rather dubious to me!