Robsk II

Hmm. Probably not worth the jail sentence / loss of job etc. Mind you, it can be a bit awful, because some of them you can look at, quite objectively, and know that if you were 15/16, you'd fancy them. Of course, subectively, you don't, but you know.

I'm glad to be mentioned twice on Stu's list. It's gratifying in that he doesn't annoy me at all. Proves once and for all that he is by far the most easily wound up, "take the internet seriously" kind of chap on here.

It's been part of my job for the last 4 years...

My mum

Fight fight fight!

Well - it is arguable that a fan would not do something to the detriment of his club, but I guess it's one of those subjective things. Some would say a fan is just following a team, or liking the game itself, regardless of anything else.

I guess it's a normal reactio to acknowledge, to stop you feeling uncomfortable. But yeah, I know what you mean. Particularly when it's not appropriate to nod, not even at the end of a point.

Racist

You're such a great poster and a valued member who makes wonderful contributions to the board that I might pay it for you, AV.

Thanks for clarifying.

Have a good one EastleighSoulBoy.

Oh, YOUR boys. I see.

Much better.

How altruistic.

Stu, if you wish to discuss things, try to avoid getting into personal attacks. We both know I'm not actually ginger, I'm not sure why you persist. I know plenty of people in the forces, and recall plenty that joined at 16. My point is only that as a general rule, a lot of those that join up straight from school are the less academic types, or, perhaps, those who have had less opportunities or encouragement in the past. Of course there are plenty of exceptions, and plenty of people who simply want to be in the army anyway. But most will at least want to head towards officers rather than infantry, and I don't know how you can argue with this. I'm not even saying there is anything wrong with this. Again, we need people in the infantry, and some people are better suited to it than others, physically, mentally, etc. And Draganov, I'm aware this is also the case with the other areas of service. If you bothered to try to read what I'm saying rather than just taking it as an attack on the armed forces, you would understand better Stu. Plenty of people who have done service come out the other side all the better for it; probably a lot more than who get bullied to death. Many come out with experiences that have changed their lives positively, having seen and done good things they never would have otherwise. Many come out more qualified than they otherwise would have. More mature, more socially adjusted and responsible, etc. I know you'd love it if I was blinkered as to this debate, but I'm not. Also, without knowing my life story, you're a little rash to assume you'd had ever such a better life than me by 21. Sure, I'd not served in the armed forces, but I'd done a whole lot more than most people by that age and seen a lot more of the world etc too. You served your country over an extended period, I represented mine. I did a whole lot of things that make me consider myself lucky. Care to devalue that? If I had a different path to you, you shouldn't judge it so easily. I have just as much contempt for people who've done nothing with their lives and then go to uni and **** about and get ****ed and be dicks and do little else. You're just as swift to promote your life choices over everyone elses as those people you seek to condemn are about theirs.

Draganov, I'd take anything anyone on here says with a pinch of salt. To be honest, that old "say it to the face" stuff isn't going to help either, it's a fairly weak defence. Ultimately, of course he was on a wind-up, but on the other hand, the pongos have long had a reputation for being of a somewhat more.. angry disposition and more neanderthal intelligence on average than that of the population at large. Not many people would say that this isn't a trend. The stereotype exists for a reason, as most do. Clearly, most stereotypes are also not a fair representation of a whole group, and can be outdated and so on. Equally, most recognise that if we have an army, some people need to be infantry, and there are some people who fill that role better than others, as are there some who fulfil medic, officer etc roles better than others. If an infantryman joined up at 16, it's fair to suggest he may at the very least be less educated than his social peers, and also - of a somewhat different mindset and with different values and views. I'm not implying worse. Just different. Defend the rank and file, by all means, but do it with honesty and rationale rather than whether or not someone would win in a fight.

Nice one John.

F*cking ****ty stupid c*nt saints.

I'd spend £1m on various properties, becaise despite value going down and up, barring disasters, I believe you can't go wrong with property and rent will always be a valuable asset to be able to take from people legitimately. I'd give £1m to my parents and let them retire etc. I might give £1m to the rest of my family, split between various people. £1m I'd give to charity, one in particular; I have a friend building an orphanage in Rwanda and I know she'll not be frivolous with the money and use it to make a genuine impact on many people's lives. I guess I'd keep £500,000 in a high interest account, and then live reasonably well from rent paid to me and any other bits of the money left over, whilst working freelance on something without having to worry about making too much cash. maybe write a book or something, but probably not work for anyone else, put it that way.

I salute you, sirrah.

I see.

**** the wife. I mean, it's the least she could do after 1.2 grand on her.

Good old mortgages. I'm still on rent Mine would be: New monitor New clutch Rent

I'm not as good at posting this kind of "list your stuff" or "what is on your.." drivel, so I am making amends. Go on then. Last three outgoings of money over, say, £100ish.

As it happens - and as I always say, I am a pragmatist before an idealist - I for one totally understand and agree that the army training process is necessarily different in need to others. Some of the standard rules simplyt don't apply, and it should be clear that soldiers do need 'toughening up' physically and mentally to face the challenges they might. My only complaint is when these things go above and beyond what is acceptable. Of course that's subjective, which is where the problems lie. Anything with these gray areas is open and prone to abuse, as we have seen. In the same way that the world and political climate has changed, so has the population of Britain. New recruits are, in my opinion, quite a lot less likely to be able to look after themselves in a situation outside of what constitutes a norm for them. Believe it or not, if I joined up, I have a feeling I'd do a whole lot better than many - not because I'm older, but because, even at that age, I was wiser than mosty peple who join. Many young people - more than 10 or 20 years ago - have genuine problems taking responsibility for their actions and the consequences of them. Problems with social integration. Problems with authority. Etc etc etc. Whether we like it or not, the training system has to change as a result, even if that means mollycoddling a few a bit more than was once needed. You have to train groups at the speed of the slowest learner, as it were, if you can't kick them out, anyway. Getting young men and women today to the point where they are ready for active service probably does need to be approached differently, in terms of approach with them and approach with how this is presented to the public - as well as with expectation in terms of timescale and end result. You could certainly argue that one suicide in the army due to bullying is not acceptable, and there are more than that. Also, it's not valid to say that it's all part and parcel for recruits to systematically bully one person over a period of time- it's this kind of thing that I do think needs stopping. I'm sure it's a difficult call to make, because sometimes leaving it might well end up with good results, forcing people to stand up for themselves etc. Equally, most PT trainers are not psychologists, or counsellors, or anything else professionally qualified to make that kind of call - which is never really safe anyway. Many people could take 'a slap', and would gladly do so over time peeling potatos.. the problem is that in this world - again, whether we like it or not - some things are indeed "OVER" PC (though again, it needs to be looked at on a case by case basis, not in generalisations and sweeping statements), and often paperwork and policy demands that we reassess and change the way we do things. The paperwork and gumpf is always meant for a good reason - to stop abuses of power, to stop stupid use of grey areas, to protect those that need it. As usual, though, there are times when it just gets in the way, and times when it can be directly harmful to a process. You have to ask the question, I suppose - which system causes the most harm, and which causes the most benefit - and what are the trade-offs? These are the only thing that matter. Bottom line for me is that the army may always need to use some tough methods, and rightly so. But there SHOULD be public outcry or consequences and so on if genuine abuses go on.