THE ARMED FORCES

In "sophisticated" circles it is normal to denigrate the armed forces.

As an ex-military man myself I tolerate such opinions, because it has always been that way. I could talk for hours on the subject but I have learned not to. The maxim "...there are none so blind as those who will not see..." covers it.

But the world changes and, just maybe, a re-evaluation is needed.

Those who are currently deemed to be "the enemy" are fighting a very different kind of war. The parameters are becoming blurred, which in turn blurs the rules of engagement. And rules, in any conflict, have always been open to interpretation, dependent upon the circumstances. It seems that no-one is innocent any more. There are no more no-go areas. I'm not referring to western armed forces here - we still have to abide by rules, even if those rules are interpreted in different ways by different people. Dig deep enough and you'll find "War Crimes" in the most unlikely places, perpetrated by the most unlikely people. But we do have to watch where we tread...others step wherever they wish, with regard for absolutely no-one.

How do you fight that? Or do you stop trying?

The 2017 attack on parliament

Assume - for a moment - that the brave policeman who lost his life trying to stop the attacker, represents our armed forces...and the terrorist himself represents, say, ISIS or Al Qaeda. Would we grumble about the outcome? Those two movements eradicated?

I doubt it

Go one step further...imagine that that policeman had travelled - say - to Syria, and had killed the man there, thereby not allowing him to even get as far as London, what would we say then?

I have an idea of how that scenario would play out in the public mind. And I can visualise the headlines.  (and to say that this man had possibly never set foot in that country would be to miss the point entirely!)

NATIONAL SERVICE

The reasons for mass conscription are deemed to be long gone.

But conscription (National Service) had many off-shoots going for it.

It taught the young something they couldn't learn anywhere else. It bred self-discipline and co-operation. It under-scored the need for toleration of other ideas and personalities whilst existing in the wider community. In short, it made them better-rounded people, more able to flourish in the greater school of life.

THE GULF WAR

This one has so many complex issues surrounding it that it's difficult to know where to begin!

I do remember taking it all at face value in the beginning, and wasn't moved to take a particular stance until it became obvious that Saddam was finished. Now, I thought, they'll be able to show the Iraqi people what a democratic regime can be like.

Then, when it was all over bar the shouting, it all started to go wrong.

I simply could not comprehend why the victors weren't doing more to help the Iraqis ; water, power, transport...everything, in fact! These people were crying out for aid, and they received precious little. To my mind, this was an opportunity squandered. All the allies seemed to achieve was bad feeling, a vacuum that was recognised and filled by Al Qaeda and others...and with a vengeance!

How was it possible for all these brilliant minds in the US and the UK governments to miss it? I mean, hell fire, they have departments to think these things through! Or was there another agenda that we don't know about.

I don't think the word stupidity covers it!

THE VIETNAM WAR

Whether this war was necessary or whether it wasn't, had little to do with the people who fought it. Soldiers go where they are sent, and they do what they are told to do. If they didn't, or if they were allowed to make up their own minds about it, the result would permeate through into civilian life and, in not too much time at all, anarchy would reign.

Anarchy is the slippery slope to chaos.

What disgusted me about the Vietnam war was the American people themselves. Or a huge majority of them. The people they should have been spitting their venom at were the politicians who decided that the war was necessary in the first place. I do know that some did just that, but mostly they went for the soft target - the returning veterans and those on leave who still had to face sometimes unspeakable odds. That was gross and unforgivable. It was the lynch-mob mentality at work, and if anyone knows what the lynch-mob mentality is all about, it's the Americans. I think they may have invented it.

I do hear - and loud and clear - those who say that if someone decides to be a soldier in the first place, then these people must be natural-born war-mongers who deserve all they get. I hear them...but they're wrong! I do accept that most soldiers haven't really thought it through to all the possible ramifications and conclusions, but the same applies to life itself.

So we're all guilty of that!

THE FRENCH WAY

The French do it differently. Their veterans have a seats reserved for them on public transport

Each and every week they hold a memorial service at the Arc de Triumph. And a memorial flame burns there 24/7.

By comparison: In 2010, the U.S.Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) estimated that on any given night there were 76,000 homeless veterans sleeping on American streets. Today, that number is closer to 50,000. Could there be a glimmer of hope there?