Born Hunter
-
Content Count
17,865 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
31
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Articles
Gun Dealer's and Fieldsports Shop's
Reloading Room
Blogs
Calendar
Store
Classifieds
Everything posted by Born Hunter
-
I've met a few people from various corners of the world and 9/10 of them could speak fluent English. Our empire days have done us some good even in the present. LOL A little ignorant to be immigrant with no desire to learn the local lingo though.
-
So when do we actually find out the result? I know D-day is tomorrow but when's the official verdict? I'm in London tomorrow, which is a rarity for me. Not sure if that's a good or bad omen. LOL
-
No, of course it's not exclusive to soldiers, I was just giving a well known example. PTSD has always been recognised(Shell shock, Battle fatigue etc etc), just not understood and historically not accepted because of this. Yeah, todays society does love a victim, but lets not let that feeling cause the genuinely ill to be neglected and labeled as chancers.
-
Yeah, they're professional career soldiers who are trained by methods developed over hundreds of years of conflict. But the wars have changed too....
-
Front-line trenches could be a terribly hostile place to live. Units, often wet, cold and exposed to the enemy, would quickly lose their morale if they spent too much time in the trenches. As a result, the British army rotated men in and out continuously. Between battles, a unit spent perhaps 10 days a month in the trench system and, of those, rarely more than three days right up on the front line. It was not unusual to be out of the line for a month. During moments of crisis, such as big offensives, the British could occasionally spend up to seven days on the front line but were far m
-
You never heard of Shell shock? The Falklands and Vietnam wars suffered just as much, largely unrecognised. Also I believe that the felt intensity of modern conflicts is considered greater than historical ones. To simplify that statement, Durring WWI and WWII the actual fighting was usually short lived and so the high levels of stress less impacting. In modern conflicts infantrymen in particular are in high stress life and death situations day to day. Even the relitive safety of forward bases suffering mortar attacks daily in some cases. Having a 100% professional military these days we ex
-
LOL Jiggy, ah yes, China, the country that's well known for making top quality...... ermmmmm......... ......no wait! LOL, just f***ing with ya. They must make something decent.
-
Absolutely spot on Socks and it's something I have said before. They have no conflict of interests with other nations and no forseen potential for one. But the defence plans they have are a joke. And I'm sure I don't need to point it out but a capable military is an insurance policy and the primary concern of any government. It's not something that can be raised overnight and when a threat comes, without one the politicians are left with no options but soft ones. Who really knows what the future holds... The very fact that Scotland sits next to a country that IS a world player and often ha
-
I'm not wasting my time researching theories based on a deity when I don't believe in the supernatural. And despite many people trying to challenge my atheism, no one has ever managed to shake me. I was raised a believer and I was raised a free thinker and I was created curious and stubborn. I've found my own beliefs through my own education. I left religion behind when I left god behind. Though I find theology interesting I'd rather dedicate my time to science, theism has little interest to me. I'll add I never mock a man's faith, but I'll relentlessly mock what creationists call science!
-
Hutch, I'll have you know nobody has actually seen a sun explode therefore it's 'unscientific' and the science community are clearly liers! It's all in the bible mate. LOL
-
Spain is different, When they joined the alliance the Cold War was still hot and they are at the mouth of the Med. They were important to NATO for the same reason Gibraltar is important to the UK. Also, do they still allow the deployment of NATO nuclear weapons? I've said in the past Scotland, like Spain has a important geographical location for NATO strategic goals in countering Russia. However, Russia are not the threat they were 30 years ago and the UK (- Scotland) and Norway pretty much render the Scottish geographical argument mute. Essentially, we've got it covered already so if you
-
LOL, I'm not going over the NATO argument again. The very fact that an Independent Scotland will have intentionally hindered the nuclear capability of a nuclear alliance and also forbids the forward deployment of nuclear weapons within their territory yet still thinks they'll be eligible to be sheltered by the security of NATOs nuclear umbrella is mind boggling! In fact, it's beyond mind boggling it's plain arrogant and stupid. Again, small countries recognise their size and lack of capability and so actively support US/UK/French coalitions to gain favour with these military mights.
-
Small countries like Norway? They spend 60% more than that on defence! But meh, having an extra 25% military expenditure spent in your backyard at the expense of a MASSIVE loss in capability and security is perfectly logical! Am sure there's a few other countries , Denmark is one.. Edit: like I said I don't care how much more uk spend, how many more soldiers, more weapons and how powerful think they are.. Enough for a small country is all that's needed Yeah, quick look and the Danes spend an equivalent amount on Defence. But they're also a member of NATO and have supported
-
Small countries like Norway? They spend 60% more than that on defence! But meh, having an extra 25% military expenditure spent in your backyard at the expense of a MASSIVE loss in capability and security is perfectly logical!
-
no mate, what ment is scotland pays 3 billion to defence now, with only 2 billion of that spent in scotland. its said a iscotland budget of 2.5/3 billion spent in scotland would be good enough, for a small country.. and better than whats spent at the moment i must resist replying LOL What complete and utter bollocks, that statement shows absolutely NO understanding of the simplest concept of defence! How much of the UK Defence budget is spent directly in Scotland has little bearing on how well defended Scotland is. As it stands Scotland being part of the UK has the entire Briti
-
What an ironically arrogant statement.... To think that you 'know' the minds of free thinkers. Tell me Fraz, what lusts do I indulge in that has made me turn my back on the God hypothesis?
-
Ironically, Charles Darwin was also a theist and a Christian to the day he died! LOL
-
If that's the conclusion you have drawn from what you have seen then you can only be true to your own senses and mind and follow them...... I dare say you're not alone but I also dare say many many others have come to many different conclusions for equal reasons.
-
DD if you take that view then what's to say Christianity is the correct belief system? Just to be on the safe side best follow every belief system in history... there's a shit load! Nah f**k that, it's not possible and in many cases contradictory, you can only follow your head. There is no 'playing it safe'.
-
Thats the difference I am willing to be shown that there is a god, but as an atheist you believe categorically that there is no god so there is no point in talking about it. (Google is a wonderful tool, I just had to look it up) TC No, you've made the classic mistake of believing atheism is a closed mind. Atheism is a belief formed from what evidence we have. Much like the theory of gravity. That doesn't mean that that belief cannot change with the presentation of new evidence. However as with any theory, you cannot argue the merits and test the credibility of what is not defined. Hence
-
There is no such thing as 100% proof in a theory. You either think the theory is valid or you do not. An agnostic sits on the fence, an atheist has made a decision knowing very well that 100% proof can never be achieved. That's the same attitude a scientist takes to scientific theory.
-
It makes you open minded and unsure! LOL. I simply meant that an open mind is a trait not a belief. I am an atheist though very much open minded. I could also be termed an agnostic, like you, but I think that's a dodgy term. If we applied agnosticism to science and law then we'd never progress in our knowledge and never prosecute a single person. My first stance in any conversation regarding the existence of God would be ignosticism. A lovely term a learnt through this thread! LOL.
-
TC, strictly speaking agnosticism doesn't mean you're open minded, it just means you believe that the existence of a god is unknown and unknowable. An atheist isn't ignorant in their belief anymore than an agnostic or theist is. I only say this because many people claim atheists are ignorant and do not have an open mind simply because they have made a decision on the matter.
-
Imo the man has what it takes to be PM, I just hope he has what it takes to get his party into government.
-
turning left when approaching from inside the m25 is anti Not relevant in this case I think it's quite clear that if Socks ever actually crossed the M25 and entered the unmapped territory of Greater London he'd be lost to us forever!
