What Would You Do?

[Keith Jones 989]

In the pub the other evening we were, as always, putting the world to rights. Being politicians we all decided that the refusal of David Cameron to hold a referendum, as he had promised, would eventually cause civil unrest and riots the like of which have only previously been seen during the Poll Tax Protests (as orchestrated, of course, by the Labour Left!).

My mind wandered back to Tonypandy in 1910, when Churchill authorised the use of troops against protesting miners and I wondered what I would have done if a similar order had come through while I was still in the Army. If civil unrest does, indeed, ensue because of our government's (and now the official opposition's) disingenuity over the EU, what would you do if you were ordered to act against people protesting against that specific point, anywhere in the UK?

[Paul Hinge]

Interesting comments Keith!
As a gentleman in the prime of his life (shall we say), trying to now,with hindsight, attempting to answer the question of how you would view military intervention in civil unrest from a personal point of view is impossible.
Your viewpoint or indeed any-other persons viewpoint will be fashioned and develop as you grow as a person and have the advantage of life's experiences. Experience you would not have been able to draw when you were in the Army as a young person as well as having been trained to follow orders without question!
But a very interesting comparrison nonetheless.

Hingey

[ivor43]

interesting. i think that the military would almost certainly be called in as i do not believe that the police forces have the manpower or the equipment to deal with a major outbreak of civil unrest.
i think that there would be a similarity with 'the troubles' in Northern Ireland where i believe that a lot of time was spent dealing with civil unrest.so maybe the guys that were there could shed some light on this with regard to their feelings at the time.
my own personal feelings on this,having been a police officer, is that when you sign up you take an oath that oblige you to do certain things, there are no if's,but's maybe's, unleses or exceptions. you do as you are ordered without question.
there have been a number of cases,over the last few years, where military personel have refused postings,for various reasons and have been prosecuted. i feel that someone who is not prepared to accept what they commit themselves too is in the wrong job

[Gwyn Nicholas]

The job I was paid to do. As a professional soldier you cant pick and choose what you are and are not prepared to do. You have the option, do the job or leave for a different one. Northern Ireland was no different to anywhere else in the UK (Geographically speaking) so what difference would it make if it was Glasgow Liverpool or Cardiff. Life was difficult if not downright dangerous for the Northern Ireland boys who served as regular soldiers but they got on with it the same as the lads serving today would have to. You really cannot believe that it could happen here because Cameron didn't have a referendum on something that is done and dusted - can you? Now perhaps if John and Edward win the X- Factor there may be cause for worry??:biglaugh:

[Paul Hinge]

Gwyn we can always rely on your wit and humor to put life into perspective..Well done mate!

Hingey

[mikedonnelly]

"I was only carrying out orders" ???? where have we heard that before??

[ivor43]

yes we have heard it before many times but it is correct. civy police or military you are not there to question orders. when you sign up for these jobs you must know what is expected, so if you are not prepared to accept some hardship,being shot at etc,. then these jobs are not for you

[steve bird]

you take your countrys shilling you do your countrys bidding simple

[Dusty Miller]

That isn't the Nick that I knew and who occassionally bought me a pint if he is watching the X Factor :arghh:

As a serving Police Officer in the Met we have to police some demos in London which we are on the side of the protesters but it is your job and you get on with it as per normal.

[sox3044]

Got to agree with most of the posts , as you get older and wiser especialy in the Army you become more opinionated and may not agree with whats going on around you, i certainly felt that was the case in my last couple of years and felt it was time to move on to another career. As for NI, if it had happened in Wales im not sure i would have been in the army any way i would have probably been brought up to be the kid chucking the bricks. That being said yes if i was already in the military and had signed that dotted line then you get on with it or move on if you dont agree.

[chow]

In my humble opinion,
you do the job you are payed for.
or you find another job,.. simple...

[Gwyn Nicholas]

I think Mike has a valid point. There will always be those who will take advantage of a situation to suit personal ambition or gain. The Raping and pillaging in the Napoleonic wars, a crime punishable by death yet often "overlooked" by many senior commanders as a "supplement" to the soldiers pay. Stealing from dead soldiers on the battlefields under the guise of searching for intelligence information. (maps etc). The atrocoties commited by the Nazis and those in Bosnia all supposedly "following orders".
Even in Northern Ireland there were case of soldiers overstepping the mark and punished for it. ("Lets go crack some skulls" is a term I recall quite vividly) I do feel however, that now more than ever, commanders on the ground are prepared to question the rights and wrongs of the situation and indeed this is backed up by the Senior Officers whom in recent times have made a stand, spoken out and even resigned their commissions rather than continue to do something they find either morally wrong or badly supported by the powers that be. The fact remains, it's a dirty job but somebody has to do it or anarchy will ensue and that is a road we really do not want to go down.

Dusty I also enjoy listening to the Carpenters, I am totally in touch with my feminine side but I do draw the line at wearing PINK! It was also more than the "occasional" pint as my bank manager will bare witness.

[jungle1810]

Hello All,
Re the trouble over the referendum of the Lisbon treaty, and civil disobediance. Firstly if any trouble broke out in Wales at the turn of the century it is highly possible that troops from another part of Britain would be sent to quell the riots (Anarchy) The Lisbon treaty was turned down by 3 countries (France, Ireland, and the Dutch). This was conveniently ignored by the mandarins of Europe and the UK. So with bribes and other motives these three countries were ordered to hold another referendum until the required vote was obtained, even if the Lisbon treaty was still 90% of the original cause of saying NO. The point made by many of the forum scribes were spot on. If you take the Queens shilling you do exactly as ordered.But a fact I find most depressing is we were refused a referendum by an unelected PM after their manifesto stated we would have the benefit of being consulted on the "So called new Lisbon Treaty" how come when the dice come out against the European Mandarins they can conjure up 3 more referenda P.D.Q. And use strong arm methods to make Poland and Czechoslovakia sign up to nullify the UK's wishes. I am most annoyed that the UK can be disenfranchised by an unelected PM. That is what is most annoying with the state of UK politics
in the UK

RBD

[neil(george)wilson]

My view is and always was is that if an individual voluntary signs up to join the Army then he is obliged, without question, to follow the orders of the government of the day his employers. Governments of the day however, are not as stupid as they appear. They don't usually send in, troops to sort out civil unrest of same national peoples. What I mean by that is, when I was serving in N. Ireland I never once saw an Irish Ranger there? As for a referendum I think we've lost it anyway, aren't we run from Brussels all ready?

N.G.

[Davies GW]

If we assume that the level of unrest was big enough that the police force couldn't cope and the military was called in to assist then we are looking at a potential civil war. At this point, a soldier would have to consider his own feelings on the subject. His decision needs to be based on what he feel is best for his country.

At the start of every military career you swear an oath to the Queen her heirs and successors and promise to obey the orders of those that she places above you. If you feel that to continue in this service is to act against the best interests of the people of the UK then I would say that you are actually duty bound to refuse to serve. We swore an oath to the Queen but really it was a promise to defend the British people.

Soldiers get little or no ethical training, it is unnecessary and could be obstructive. If you have a soldier analysing the ethics of every shot fired then people will die while he makes the decision. The reality is that the politicians set soldiers objectives and at the point that those objectives become unethical then a soldier is duty bound to refuse to carry them out. The Nuremburg trials blew the " I was only obeying orders" defence out of the water.

This is all ideal world stuff, in reality, I suspect that the police would call for assistance and the great majority of serving troops would answer call.

The question is what would I do?? Ask me when it happens.

[HOWIE WILLIAMS]

Any community's arm of force - military, police, security - needs people in it who can do necessary evil, and yet not be made evil by it. To do only the necessary and no more. To constantly question the assumptions, to stop the slide into atrocity.