Friday, April 06, 2007

British Cowards

I believe we Americans should be very happy that we do not have to rely for our defense upon the likes of those British "warriors" we saw on TV this Good Friday.

=========
=====
==

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

It's bad form to call someone a coward from behind a keyboard without knowing all the details.

I'm not sayin'. I'm just sayin'.


-Marty

Bud said...

You make a good point, Marty, and probably you are right. Who am I to call names?

But, I listened to the press conference from Britain this morning. I listened to the military "hostages" tell about their experiences, and was more convinced than ever that these people are in the wrong business. If you venture to be in the fighting business, you ought to throw a punch when you're assailed.

I probably could be expected to surrender under such a circumstance, but I would hope those who opted to carry the weapons and make a career out of conflict would at least make a show of defending themselves. Otherwise, you might as well send me, God forbid!

Jim Thill said...

I think it's the accent that makes them seem wimpier than they really are.

Anonymous said...

All things being equal, "coward" would be a harsh word. However, seeing as how the British forces have blamed American forces (for actually fighting and capturing Iranian forces inside Iraq) as causing their problems, it certainly seems to apply here.
Add to that the British habit of using any possible American problem as a chance to kick us while we are down and point out the "superior training and experience" of Brit forces and, well...with no one dead I'm just enjoying the hell out of watching the British training on display. I can better understand how Dunkirk became a British highlight of WWII. Running (instead of capture) is a "courageous" act to them.