After 2+ months of 'Help for heroes', is it time for critique? is my response irrational? - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HotUKDeals, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HotUKDeals app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit
Expired

After 2+ months of 'Help for heroes', is it time for critique? is my response irrational?

£0.00 @
I realise this post may be controversial, and I don't want to cause offence, but I do feel compelled to present another side to an issue that has been bothering me for a while - to critique it with so… Read More
Liddle ol' me Avatar
8y, 10m agoPosted 8 years, 10 months ago
I realise this post may be controversial, and I don't want to cause offence, but I do feel compelled to present another side to an issue that has been bothering me for a while - to critique it with some personal observations. Firstly, I am glad that the collection for 'Help for Heroes' is nearly over, because the whole 'campaign' has been somewhat frustrating for me. Why? Well, because I have an aversion to most things connected with the armed forces. Although I have no wish to campaign AGAINST the charity (far from it, I wish them luck), I am wondering whether my stance of deliberately not donating may be driven by an irrational prejudice of sorts. How could I possibly be against helping people who have been injured? Well, I guess my answer is buried somewhere in my moral / ethical / political convictions which make me feel that charity is better placed elsewhere (btw, I donate to two charities on a regular basis, both involved in providing education to the poor in Africa), and that if we must have an armed forces then the government should be responsible for looking after them properly. And where I'm worried that I may be reacting irrationally is that I feel that by supporting a charity like this, I would be indirectly showing my support for the military, something I wish to avoid. I would like to know if others have any similar dilemmas on this type of issue as well as hearing the arguments for me being irrational to make these connections. I am open to having my thinking changed on this and all issues, despite what some people might think. Thanks.
Liddle ol' me Avatar
8y, 10m agoPosted 8 years, 10 months ago
Options

All Comments

(158) Jump to unreadLocked
Comments/page:
Page:
#1
My personal stance is we (the british public) have to look after the armed forces becasue the half witted government is too busy giving all our money to Africa and other causes that are never going to be resolved.

and we would be in a bloody big puddle with out them!!
2 Likes #2
good thread.

I agree with you, The government should be funding the armed forces. The Military are wrongly placed in Iraq and Afghanistan killing innocent people pretending they are there for other reason.

I have seen the thread and been on the link to donate, I think that if all the names had to be "anon" they would not have reached the amount they have today

foxymissroxy
My personal stance is we (the british public) have to look after the armed forces because the half witted government is too busy giving all our money to Africa and other causes that are never going to be resolved.

they have spent hundreds of millions in Iraq and they have no solved much there, add that to the deaths of alot of UK troops...
#3
I think the whole point of this charity is to aid those who've been screwed over by the government who don't pay out enough compensation for those injured defending this hell hole of a country.

I dont know the ins and outs of exactly what they are entitled too, but were shooting a calander for manchester titans (american football team) who will be donating the proceeds to this charity, given the thread on here and what I've heard from them, thats my perception of what this charity does.
#4
black gerbil1


they have spent hundreds of millions in Iraq and they have no solved much there, add that to the deaths of alot of UK troops...


Indeed they have, but maybe fewer lives would have been lost if they had the relevent equiptment!!

We have been giving aid to third world countries for over 20 years with little improvement!
#5
foxymissroxy
Indeed they have, but maybe fewer lives would have been lost if they had the relevent equiptment!!

We have been giving aid to third world countries for over 20 years with little improvement!

big claims, I dont really know how much it has improved since 20 years ago, I would assume a lot, so ill we'll have to agree to disagree there.
#6
You can of course donate or not donate to any cause you see fit. Politicising fund raising for needy people in any country is not necessary. Please remember that we live in a democracy where the armed forces are a servant of that democracy. They carry out the will of the people via the government that happens to be in power at that time. Members of the armed forces have opinions and political views, but put them to one side in the service of their country. It can be a dangerous, thankless, task for which there is scant reward. Our injured servicemen and women deserve our support. If you do not agree with what your elected representatives are asking our service people to do, then please lobby your MP. Would you disrespect your council bin man because he only empties your bin once a fortnight ?,or would you take it up with your local councillor?. In short please do not undermine our armed forces by politicising fundraising for young men and women with life changing injuries. If you do not wish to donate then please just dont!!

Rant over!:x
#7
black gerbil1
I have seen the thread and been on the link to donate, I feel that if all the names had to be "anon" they would not have reached the amount they have today


Yes, that's another thing I was thinking. There has been a certain type of social pressure to conform on this issue (the poster of avatars etc). I suppose the claim will be that this is merely 'encouragement', but I feel it's a kind of negative encouragement (i.e. a kind of public shaming - i.e. as much to do with who is NOT there as who is)

MinstrelMan
I think the whole point of this charity is to aid those who've been screwed over by the government who don't pay out enough compensation for those injured

I dont know the ins and outs of exactly what they are entitled too, but were shooting a calander for manchester titans (american football team) who will be donating the proceeds to this charity, given the thread on here and what I've heard from them, thats my perception of what this charity does.


Yes, fair point. I can completely see the need to support the individuals concerned, and I feel extreme empathy for their situation. But again, my personal dilemma is that I don't want to indirectly support the military. If I could help them in some way that meant it was a personal donation to them without the military being involved, then I would happily do so, especially if it involved helping them get involved in education again, something I think would give them the tools to reflect better on what got them involved with the military in the first place.
banned#8
Aid for Africa - Poor people in rich countries giving to rich people in poor countries (IMHO).
#9
Bg1 do you not read the papers watch the news etc!! the pictures of the starving families have little changed hence my point of little improvement people are still dying of trivial illnesses when the aid we send is supposed to prevent such deaths.

Don't get me wrong i have no problems with the giving of aid/help to any other country but it needs to be with the people that need it and not the fat cat governments
#10
foxymissroxy
Bg1 do you not read the papers watch the news etc!!

I do not read the newspapers, they saturated with lies and one sided views etc

Liddle ol' me
Yes, fair point. I can completely see the need to support the individuals concerned, and I feel extreme empathy for their situation. But again, my personal dilemma is that I don't want to indirectly support the military. If I could help them in some way that meant it was a personal donation to them without the military being involved, then I would happily do so, especially if it involved helping them get involved in education again, something I think would give them the tools to reflect better on what got them involved with the military in the first place.[

me too, I personally dislike the military because of what they are doing today, I feel it is wrong and in-humane.
#11
Dougb1
You can of course donate or not donate to any cause you see fit. Politicising fund raising for needy people in any country is not necessary. Please remember that we live in a democracy where the armed forces are a servant of that democracy. They carry out the will of the people via the government that happens to be in power at that time. Members of the armed forces have opinions and political views, but put them to one side in the service of their country. It can be a dangerous, thankless, task for which there is scant reward. Our injured servicemen and women deserve our support. If you do not agree with what your elected representatives are asking our service people to do, then please lobby your MP. Would you disrespect your council bin man because he only empties your bin once a fortnight ?,or would you take it up with your local councillor?. In short please do not undermine our armed forces by politicising fundraising for young men and women with life changing injuries. If you do not wish to donate then please just dont!!


Yes exactly, that's my point. It's a political issue and this is a democracy where we are free to discuss our thoughts in a manner that hopefully lead towards better understandings for all. Your position is just as political as mine - in fact, maybe more so if we consider the tone! As you know, politics is actually about disagreement and resolution of differences. Let's try to keep it civil so that we can do so :thumbsup:
banned#12
Dougb1;2769786
You can of course donate or not donate to any cause you see fit. Politicising fund raising for needy people in any country is not necessary. Please remember that we live in a democracy where the armed forces are a servant of that democracy. They carry out the will of the people via the government that happens to be in power at that time. Members of the armed forces have opinions and political views, but put them to one side in the service of their country. It can be a dangerous, thankless, task for which there is scant reward. Our injured servicemen and women deserve our support. If you do not agree with what your elected representatives are asking our service people to do, then please lobby your MP. Would you disrespect your council bin man because he only empties your bin once a fortnight ?,or would you take it up with your local councillor?. In short please do not undermine our armed forces by politicising fundraising for young men and women with life changing injuries. If you do not wish to donate then please just dont!!

Rant over!:x

I disagree quite a bit. I thought the armed forces only pledged allegiance to the monarch, not the public. We are not even classed as citizens of this country, or are we?

Certainly disagree that "They carry out the will of the people via the government". The majority of the population have and always will be against the illegal invasion of a foreign country (Iraq). Afghanistan is a whole different story though.
#13
black gerbil1
I do not read the newspapers, they saturated with lies one sided views etc


Dont read the text a picture says a thoudand words! :thumbsup:
#14
csiman
Aid for Africa - Poor people in rich countries giving to rich people in poor countries (IMHO).


I'm involved in a small charity that is run completely by volunteers who take turns (3 month shifts) running a school in Nairobi for street kids. Nobody benefits except those homeless kids. If we choose our charities carefully we can help those we think are most deserving. :thumbsup:
#15
foxymissroxy
Dont read the text a picture says a thoudand words! :thumbsup:

please, everything they show in the newspaper is what they want you too see, they want to mould your opinion to what they want it to be.
1 Like #16
I think regardless of anything else. These soldiers are ours, they've been injured and generally screwed over by our government.
Most of the front line soldiers, which I presume is where the most injuries take place? are extremely young. A lot of them have gone into the armed forces to try and carve a career for themselves, sometimes because that's pretty much their only decent choice. A lot of them come from deprived areas of Britain, where jobs are not plentiful and a lot of them have not been very well educated.
They are then left injured and sent back to their former civilian lives.
I don't feel that aid should be withheld from these individuals due to us not agreeing with the reasons for fighting, the location or even that we just don't agree with fighting at all.
They are often the victims in these scenarios, in my opinion - and that's all this is by the way!
#17
csiman
I disagree quite a bit. I thought the armed forces only pledged allegiance to the monarch, not the public

Certainly disagree that "They carry out the will of the people via the government". The majority of the population have and always will be against the illegal invasion of a foreign country (Iraq). Afghanistan is a whole different story though.


Good points :thumbsup: The 'will of the people' is trampled on (or manipulated at best) when it comes to geopolitical issues.
#18
caz1cool
I think regardless of anything else. These soldiers are ours, they've been injured and generally screwed over by our government.
Most of the front line soldiers, which I presume is where the most injuries take place? are extremely young. A lot of them have gone into the armed forces to try and carve a career for themselves, sometimes because that's pretty much their only decent choice. A lot of them come from deprived areas of Britain, where jobs are not plentiful and a lot of them have not been very well educated.
They are then left injured and sent back to their former civilian lives.
I don't feel that aid should be withheld from these individuals due to us not agreeing with the reasons for fighting, the location or even that we just don't agree with fighting at all.
They are often the victims in these scenarios, in my opinion - and that's all this is by the way!


Good post caz1cool :thumbsup:

This is the kind of answer I am looking for I guess. Yes, they are victims - and not just of their physical injuries as you point out. They are also victims of a system that is loaded against them from the beginning. Your post is spot on as it keeps the conversation on the people in need and away from the military. :thumbsup:
#19
[QUOTE=black gerbil1]

The Military are wrongly placed in Iraq and Afghanistan killing innocent people pretending they are there for other reason.

QUOTE]

Innocent people?? My cousin is in the armed forces and recently came home after a stint in Afghanistan and those bas***** out there are far from innocent. What ever you believe, no, our forces don't just walk through villages and shoot anything that moves, so no, they don't just go around killing innocent people. The people they have to kill are the Taliban that are constantly attacking them, ambushing their vehicles and jumping in the back of them trying to murder the troops sat in them. And amazingly enough, the majority of the people that they capture that have been trying to kill them are speaking in a Birmingham accent!!

So if you class those people as innocent, then you're clearly as deluded as they are
1 Like #20
i believe there are more important charities that need more public funding such as Cancer Research...
banned#21
Charlie&Lola;2769890
[quote=black gerbil1;2769727]

The Military are wrongly placed in Iraq and Afghanistan killing innocent people pretending they are there for other reason.

QUOTE]

Innocent people?? My cousin is in the armed forces and recently came home after a stint in Afghanistan and those bas***** out there are far from innocent. What ever you believe, no, our forces don't just walk through villages and shoot anything that moves, so no, they don't just go around killing innocent people. The people they have to kill are the Taliban that are constantly attacking them, ambushing their vehicles and jumping in the back of them trying to murder the troops sat in them. And amazingly enough, the majority of the people that they capture that have been trying to kill them are speaking in a Birmingham accent!!

So if you class those people as innocent, then you're clearly as deluded as they are

Hmmm - article today proves you are wrong I'm afraid to say.

UK troops 'kill Afghan civilians'



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7567169.stm
1 Like #22
I agree entirely.

I take offense to this whole culture of soldier worship. How are they heroes? They're hired killers who only got injured because they had the misfortune of trying to kill someone who could shoot back. Doctors, nurses, carers, social workers, fire fighters, police, teachers. They're heroes. They save lives, not take them.

I could never kill anyone. I've experienced death of someone close, and know how bad it hurts. It's a pain I would wish on no-one. I wouldn't rip someone's family and social group apart for money, and since that's what a soldier does, I just can't see myself having anything in common with them. Why would I, or anyone, give money or things for someone who they wouldn't like, that they owe nothing to?
#23
Charlie&Lola;2769890
[QUOTE=black gerbil1]

The Military are wrongly placed in Iraq and Afghanistan killing innocent people pretending they are there for other reason.

QUOTE]

Innocent people?? My cousin is in the armed forces and recently came home after a stint in Afghanistan and those bas***** out there are far from innocent. What ever you believe, no, our forces don't just walk through villages and shoot anything that moves, so no, they don't just go around killing innocent people. The people they have to kill are the Taliban that are constantly attacking them, ambushing their vehicles and jumping in the back of them trying to murder the troops sat in them. And amazingly enough, the majority of the people that they capture that have been trying to kill them are speaking in a Birmingham accent!!

So if you class those people as innocent, then you're clearly as deluded as they are


that's bound to spark a lot of debate.
#24
Charlie&Lola
Innocent people?? My cousin is in the armed forces and recently came home after a stint in Afghanistan and those bas***** out there are far from innocent. What ever you believe, no, our forces don't just walk through villages and shoot anything that moves, so no, they don't just go around killing innocent people. The people they have to kill are the Taliban that are constantly attacking them, ambushing their vehicles and jumping in the back of them trying to murder the troops sat in them. And amazingly enough, the majority of the people that they capture that have been trying to kill them are speaking in a Birmingham accent!!

So if you class those people as innocent, then you're clearly as deluded as they are


I get the point you are trying to make, but attacking one generalisation with a host of your own won't work. And I think you should probably take back your point about "Birmingham accents". It's clearly an exaggeration, and, tbh, is offensive to a minority group in the UK who you are unfairly representing by saying such a thing. Thanks :thumbsup:
banned#25
Liddle ol' me;2769924
I get the point you are trying to make, but attacking one generalisation with a host of your own won't work. And I think you should probably take back your point about "Birmingham accents". It's clearly an exaggeration, and, tbh, is offensive to a minority group in the UK who you are unfairly representing by saying such a thing. Thanks :thumbsup:

well said :thumbsup:
#26
csiman;2769900
[quote=Charlie&Lola]
Hmmm - article today proves you are wrong I'm afraid to say.

UK troops 'kill Afghan civilians'



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7567169.stm



Right, and read through the article again. They had people on a roof aiming at them with weapons. They shot at the people. what else were they supposed to do, hide behind a bush and hope they'd go away? It's unfortunate that there were people in the building that the people attacking them chose to climb on, but how were our troops supposed to know that in the split second they have to react? Surely the blame for the innocent people getting hurt lies with the attackers for choosing an occupied building to attack from.

It's not like they were just walking through a village and shot someone that moved for no reason. If your life is threatened, you react to save it - it's human nature. Would be interesting to see if you were placed in that exact same situation whether you'd fight to save your own life or go for the hide behind the bush option, just incase there was anyone in the building...
#27
Charlie&Lola
[
Innocent people?? My cousin is in the armed forces and recently came home after a stint in Afghanistan and those bas***** out there are far from innocent. What ever you believe, no, our forces don't just walk through villages and shoot anything that moves, so no, they don't just go around killing innocent people. The people they have to kill are the Taliban that are constantly attacking them, ambushing their vehicles and jumping in the back of them trying to murder the troops sat in them. And amazingly enough, the majority of the people that they capture that have been trying to kill them are speaking in a Birmingham accent!!

So if you class those people as innocent, then you're clearly as deluded as they are


Your cousin is part of an invasion force. Anyone shooting at your cousin is trying to defend themselves and their land.

If I walked into your house with a gun, what would you do?
#28
Charlie&Lola

Innocent people?? My cousin is in the armed forces and recently came home after a stint in Afghanistan and those bas***** out there are far from innocent. What ever you believe, no, our forces don't just walk through villages and shoot anything that moves, so no, they don't just go around killing innocent people. The people they have to kill are the Taliban that are constantly attacking them, ambushing their vehicles and jumping in the back of them trying to murder the troops sat in them. And amazingly enough, the majority of the people that they capture that have been trying to kill them are speaking in a Birmingham accent!!

So if you class those people as innocent, then you're clearly as deluded as they are


Im glad they do, if you enter someone else's country like the military have what do you expect, they just trying to protect there land, good for them, I hope the UK would fight back if this country go invaded by another country!. your opinion is too one sided
#29
Liddle ol' me
I get the point you are trying to make, but attacking one generalisation with a host of your own won't work. And I think you should probably take back your point about "Birmingham accents". It's clearly an exaggeration, and, tbh, is offensive to a minority group in the UK who you are unfairly representing by saying such a thing. Thanks :thumbsup:


No, it wasn't an exaggeration and my cousin isn't a liar. He actually lives in Birmingham when not posted abroad, so I was saying how shocking it was for him to be faced with people trying to kill him that spoke in a clear Birmingham accent, the same as he does. I'm not saying the whole of Birmingham is a terrorist camp obviously, just saying that from someone who's actually been there and seen everything that happens, how much isn't actually reported in the papers and the distorted opinion the press can actually put across
#30
dxx
I agree entirely.

I take offense to this whole culture of soldier worship. How are they heroes? They're hired killers who only got injured because they had the misfortune of trying to kill someone who could shoot back. Doctors, nurses, carers, social workers, fire fighters, police, teachers. They're heroes. They save lives, not take them.

I could never kill anyone. I've experienced death of someone close, and know how bad it hurts. It's a pain I would wish on no-one. I wouldn't rip someone's family and social group apart for money, and since that's what a soldier does, I just can't see myself having anything in common with them. Why would I, or anyone, give money or things for someone who they wouldn't like, that they owe nothing to?


Yep, maybe that's what bothers me too. It is a kind of 'soldier worship'. The whole concept of 'hero' is being misused - and I agree totally with where you say the label should be used. But I still think that caz's post about these soldiers being innocent victims of a system that keeps them trapped so that they can't see their actions is a line worth taking. You and I can clearly see the consequences of their actions; unfortunately most of them obviously cannot. Training has a lot to do with this of course, but language-use does too. And the use of the word 'hero' is a good example of how reality can be manipulated to hide some awful truths.
#31
dxx
Your cousin is part of an invasion force. Anyone shooting at your cousin is trying to defend themselves and their land.

If I walked into your house with a gun, what would you do?



I certainly wouldn't pick up the rocket launcher and numerous automatic weapons that just happened to be lying around :? And I certainly wouldn't kill anyone that came within a few miles of my house, just incase they thought of walking in, pre-emptive strike and all that. I agree, if our troops were just walking into peoples homes and killing whoever they could, that would be completely wrong, but that's not what's happening out there. There are certain situations where troops are not necessary, I agree, but Afghanistan just isn't one of them
banned#32
Charlie&Lola;2769935
Right, and read through the article again. They had people on a roof aiming at them with weapons. They shot at the people. what else were they supposed to do, hide behind a bush and hope they'd go away? It's unfortunate that there were people in the building that the people attacking them chose to climb on, but how were our troops supposed to know that in the split second they have to react? Surely the blame for the innocent people getting hurt lies with the attackers for choosing an occupied building to attack from.

It's not like they were just walking through a village and shot someone that moved for no reason. If your life is threatened, you react to save it - it's human nature. Would be interesting to see if you were placed in that exact same situation whether you'd fight to save your own life or go for the hide behind the bush option, just incase there was anyone in the building...

So if someone came into your house and held you and your family hostage and then started shooting from a window, it would be ok for a tank to come along and blow your house up :whistling:
#33
Charlie&Lola
No, it wasn't an exaggeration and my cousin isn't a liar. He actually lives in Birmingham when not posted abroad, so I was saying how shocking it was for him to be faced with people trying to kill him that spoke in a clear Birmingham accent, the same as he does. I'm not saying the whole of Birmingham is a terrorist camp obviously, just saying that from someone who's actually been there and seen everything that happens, how much isn't actually reported in the papers and the distorted opinion the press can actually put across


You said "And amazingly enough, the majority of the people that they capture that have been trying to kill them are speaking in a Birmingham accent!!" Sorry, but I simply can't believe this to be the case. The majoity? Are you sure it is not you who is trying to distort opinion..?
banned#34
Charlie&Lola;2769982
I certainly wouldn't pick up the rocket launcher and numerous automatic weapons that just happened to be lying around :? And I certainly wouldn't kill anyone that came within a few miles of my house, just incase they thought of walking in, pre-emptive strike and all that. I agree, if our troops were just walking into peoples homes and killing whoever they could, that would be completely wrong, but that's not what's happening out there. There are certain situations where troops are not necessary, I agree, but Afghanistan just isn't one of them

Hang on, it was the army that used the rockets!

Are you David Miliband in disguise? ;-)
#35
csiman;2769984
[quote=Charlie&Lola]
So if someone came into your house and held you and your family hostage and then started shooting from a window, it would be ok for a tank to come along and blow your house up :whistling:


The people that they are fighting out there don't just use little guns, which is why our forces have to go in so heavy handed, to protect their own lives. In the time he was out there, he saw 3 of his friends killed, one of them ripped in two in front of him where they had an explosive device thrown at them as they were just doing a routine patrole. Knowing that these people can't be reasoned with and will kill you for no reason, then I can see why they make sure that they take them out first because it really is a 'them or us' situation
banned 1 Like #36
Charlie&Lola;2770015

The people that they are fighting out there don't just use little guns, which is why our forces have to go in so heavy handed, to protect their own lives. In the time he was out there, he saw 3 of his friends killed, one of them ripped in two in front of him where they had an explosive device thrown at them as they were just doing a routine patrole. Knowing that these people can't be reasoned with and will kill you for no reason, then I can see why they make sure that they take them out first because it really is a 'them or us' situation

No reason? I think an invading force is reason enough in their eyes.
#37
Charlie&Lola
The people that they are fighting out there don't just use little guns, which is why our forces have to go in so heavy handed, to protect their own lives. In the time he was out there, he saw 3 of his friends killed, one of them ripped in two in front of him where they had an explosive device thrown at them as they were just doing a routine patrole. Knowing that these people can't be reasoned with and will kill you for no reason, then I can see why they make sure that they take them out first because it really is a 'them or us' situation


erm ... I think by that comment it is clear that you are the type of person who can't be reasoned with! To take just one small point, isn't it obvious that everyone would have a reason for such an action?! Lol - how can you say they kill for no reason? You have to understand their reasons as a first step. I'm not saying you need agree with them, but at least acknowledge that your words are very clearly lacking in any reason - they are, to put it bluntly, unreasonable :)
2 Likes #38
Liddle - why did you mention "Help for heroes" in the title? is because you thought this would be more contentious than "Should we have military forces?" Are you upset with the "Help for hereos" thread because it displaces your numerous discussion threads from the first page of Misc?

I think that HDUK does not meet your need for intellectual stimulus and you should get out more...
#39
pikachu12
i believe there are more important charities that need more public funding such as Cancer Research...


I agree with you. We don't have national service so people are in the forces by choice.
People do not sign up to get cancer, alzheimers or meningitis.
#40
Liddle ol' me
You said "And amazingly enough, the majority of the people that they capture that have been trying to kill them are speaking in a Birmingham accent!!" Sorry, but I simply can't believe this to be the case. The majoity? Are you sure it is not you who is trying to distort opinion..?


No I'm not, I have no reason or need to. His patrol doesn't cover the whole of Afghanistan, only certain areas, and in the areas that he's patrolling, the majority of the Taliban there are seemingly from the UK or have been in the UK so long that they've picked up the accent. I'm sure that in other areas of Afghanistan, there are Taliban with all sorts of other accents and languages, but the point I was making is that the papers don't report a lot of what goes on out there, and out of everything he's seen, the most shocking has been having Taliban trying to kill him that are taking in the same accent as he has, and the actual number of them they've captured in relation to the Taliban that don't actually talk English

Post a Comment

No more comments can be posted to this thread.
Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!