British Government's War On The Military - Heroes Prosecuted, Enemies Rewarded

It should be obvious to anyone who pays attention that any issue or institution will be used by the cynical and unscrupulous holders of power to gain electoral advantage over their political enemies. This covers everything from sport to the NHS and the BBC; it includes the police 'service', the Church of England,  schools,  social services,  charities, the art world, etc.

Nothing escapes the attention of politicians if there is the possibility of gaining political advantage or, in the case of the communist/socialist/progressive community, advancing their own ideological agenda.

One institution that should be free from political games is the country's military.  The men and women of the armed forces are willing to sacrifice their lives on behalf of the country and its people and therefore they and their families deserve the best support it is possible to give.

A previous post discussed how the hatred of the military by the 'progressive' community has its basis in their perverted left wing ideology but it would appear that politicians of all colours are now guilty of disrespecting the military and using it for political ends or to secure political advantage.

Shocking as it may be,  news that the British government is prosecuting three soldiers for dispatching a Taliban terrorist to hell will come as no surprise to anyone who watches the antics of the elite as it sacrifices its own soldiers to appease its enemies.

Politicians sent the military to fight a war against the Taliban on their home turf;  these are a ruthless enemy that civilization passed by in the course of history; an enemy that worships death like civilized people worship life, an enemy that spares no quarter nor expects none in return, an enemy that will never, ever give up.

Incredulously,  the government expects to defeat this formidable enemy using a stiff upper lip and the Marquis of Queensbury rules; they must think it's like a game of cricket or a few friendly sets at the Wimbledon Lawn Tennis and Croquet Club.

They claim that by topping an enemy combatant when he's vulnerable or is unable to fight back is lowering ourselves to their level and illegal;  no it isn't, killing the enemy is an unfortunate requirement necessary to win a war.

It is being claimed that the soldiers broke the rules of war as laid down by the Geneva Convention but it must be acknowledged that in any conflict or contest that is governed by rules,  both sides must adhere to those same rules.  It would be a lop sided boxing match if only one fighter obeyed the rules and the result wouldn't be in much doubt.

The three school kids that make up the current leadership of the British people don't have the first idea about conditions in a war zone or what its like to be shot at.  They won't have a clue about the fear or the adrenalin rush that results from the heat of battle, they won't know the feelings of utter despair as one sees a comrade lose his or her life and their remains repatriated to abuse from the enemy within.

Cameron, Clegg and Red Ed Miliband only care about politicking and securing the approval of the international 'progressive' community abroad and the Muslim community at home.

If the prosecution of the three soldiers from the Afghan war isn't an indication of the animosity against the military and the politicking of the political class, then the proposed prosecution of the soldiers of the Parachute Regiment for the so called Bloody Sunday Massacre should prove the point beyond all doubt.

This unfortunate incident happened forty years ago in the heat of battle;  a two hundred million pound (200,000,000),  20 year long investigation didn't prove any intent to murder but the government continues to hassle the soldiers concerned and is now threatening to prosecute.  This is a disgraceful act on behalf of the government and the British people should demand that they desist.

The Irish Republican Army (IRA) were, like the Taliban, a ruthless enemy who had a total disregard for innocent human life.  They murdered anyone, man or woman, young or old, and in the case of the Omagh outrage, the yet unborn.  These are the terrorists that brought the Improvised Explosive Devise (IED) onto the streets of Great Britain with such terrifying effects.

While the government is threatening prosecution against the men they sent to fight the IRA, the IRA terrorists and its leaders have been given amnesty;  some have even reached the upper echelons of the government itself and are funded by the people against whom they waged a bloody war.

If any action demonstrates the utter stupidity and naivety of the school kids that run the British government, then it's the proposal by the European Court of Human Rights to extend their attitudes to cover the battlefield.

This is worth repeating, they want to extend human rights legislation, together with health and safety rules,  to cover the battlefield.  Who are these people and what in Heavens name are they thinking? The biggest question of all is, why is the British government even considering this nonsense?

The biggest indication of the governments attitude to the military (and to its own public servants) is the cuts to military funding.  Putting modern technology to one side, all branches of the British military have been depleted to such an extent that they are smaller than the German military after they were disarmed by the Treaty of Versailles.

It is now accepted that it is unlikely that the British military could mount an operation to liberate the Falkland Islands should they be invaded in the near future.

On the part of British Prime Minister, David Cameron, and his Europhile government of Quislings, his evisceration of the military is in preparation for its absorption into the European Defence Force. (the EDF).

Cameron is a born and bred bureaucrat and he knows how to look after his fellow bureaucrats no matter how ridiculous and embarrassing it is.  If the Royal Navy has spent billions on an aircraft carrier that has no aircraft and has reduced its fleet to only 19 ships, it is not scrimping on officers.

The Royal Navy, once the scourge of the enemy, protector of the seven seas, the fleet that permitted unhindered global commerce and the guarantors of freedom around the world, still employs 40 Admirals and 260 Captains for its 19 ships.  The world can sleep safely in their beds knowing that the Admiralty is fully manned with Chiefs even though Indians are in short supply.

As always it is worth pointing out that our cousins across the Atlantic are being similarly embarrassed;  they are watching helplessly as their once mighty military machine is not only being eviscerated but it is being used as a huge social engineering project by their 'progressive' Commander in Chief.

Permitting open homosexuality in the ranks and feminizing the image of the military is progressing apace.  The once feared Marine Corps is about to be made a laughing stock with the release of its softer, gender neutral hat. The new hat makes a Marine look more like a member of the French gendarmerie or a railway porter at Grand Central Station.

As one commentator so rightly pointed out, they haven't got enough money for bullets but the Defence Department can find millions for a new girlie hat.

The Taliban and the enemies of civilisation around the world will be emboldened and they will lose any residual fear they may have had by watching the antics of the British and American political class......if they can stop themselves laughing that is.

Update: The prosecution reminds of the movie Breaker Morant.

Update II: I have been informed by a fellow Dissenter and renown wit that the defenders of Rourke's Drift are to be posthumously stripped of their Victoria Crosses for using rifles when the Zulu's only had spears. This is a clear case of unfairness on the battlefield and racism.

Update III:  Not to be outdone, a Scottish wit has informed me that the Scottish army of William Wallace are to be dishonourably discharged posthumously, for lifting up their kilts and showing their a*ses to the English enemy at the battle of Bannockburn. This was considered as awfully rude and using weapons of mass distraction.

Unless an Irishman has a military anecdote, there will be no further updates to this post.