well, LL, I said that British wars in the past have only been legal because the British government has defined them as such (and the idea of the British legal system influencing the govt on its own in a matter like war, is laughable, sorry. They might be able to give advice about what would be prosecuted in the international court, that is about the limit of their influence over the military.).
You said "you appear to be avoiding the topic"
then you said
"I'd also suggest that you target your considerable anger at the British Government who, as you mentioned, take us into war in the first place. "
I said "you KNOW what they are like, so why join up, and become cannon fodder or a killer, to make them richer? "
You took offence at the term cannon fodder, and did not answer the question.
Instead, you dragged out WW2, and I said I didnt agree with everything about the official version of events as written by the victors.
Then you ducked out of the discussion with the following comment "You seem bound and determined to question everything - your last post makes it clear that there is no point furthering this discussion"
So I would say it is you who avoids the question, not me.
I think this comment from McDreamy also deserves scrutiny
"You see life is difficult enough without having to justify our existence to people like yourself"
you mean, the people who pay your salary?
I think this comment sums up the closeted world of the armed forces, and nothing I have read on this thread, makes me feel more comfortable about the very one-sided FS topic.