Its you who's got this wrong, there is no argument to lose by stating an unpleasant truth. I am debating the merits of an individual who has voluteered to serve in this countries armed forces and endure the hardships and risk associated with it.

If there were not enough people volunteering for the forces, there would be conscription or national service. Then it would be "people like you" or indeed "us" who would be fighting and dying in whatever political/financial/territorial dispute the powers that be thought fit.

The military is nothing other than a political stick to wave at other nations, it always has been, its just that its no longer required for defense of the mainland anymore.

I personnally think if Comonwealth citizens serve 12 years or more in the forces residency/nationality should be guarenteed.

I can't imagine any government, of any hue, being very 'popular' on trying to introduce that.

An argument can well be made that there is already, in effect, economic conscription. It is no coincidence, for instance, that none of Tony Blair or David Cameron's children are ever likely to join up. We were holidaying on Anglesey some years ago and the friend we were staying with, drove us around the island quite a bit. There were vast adverts for the military – because it was a massive recruitment ground for the military because it was an area that offered young people very little else.



On this we agree.

I completely agree with both these statements. But I have to say that as unpopular as conscription or national service may appear to us, necessity and the fear created by the media with "what if" scenarios would facilitate its introduction.

Its a sad fact that the forces has for many centuries consisted of the very poor being led by the very rich . It was also an alternative to prison for many years for troubled working class youths. It seems to be a fact in many countries the world over that recruitment has been focussed in areas of significant economic hardship (Michael Moores Fahrenheit 911 piece on Flint, Michigan is another example)

I also think Commonwealth citizens should be awarded the same residency rights as those of European Union states regardless of whether they have served in the forces.

Unfortunatley a change in the Rehabilitation of Offenders Acts has meant that charges and punishments under "Military Justice" [sizecan[/size be equated to a criminal conviction. Whilst I'm no legal buff, I am an ex-serviceman who has had sight of files of horendous crimes committed by military personnel, which where never recorded as criminal convictions. It's right that certain "criminal actions" taken by military personnel for which they have been punished should be put on a criminal record but my own view is that it should only be those that have been tried at a Courts Martial, the nearest vehicle the military judical system has with it's civil counterparts and not those which have been dealt at "Commanding Officer" level such as "Bales". As Mr Bumble said "The laws an ass". And I hope that the legislation is changed sooner rather than later.



Yes it does. Commonwealth ex-service personnel are an easy target for an under fire government agency who are hell bent on achiving their targets so their suits can collect their bonuses and their ministers will be off their backs.

Bale does not have a criminal record. Under changes to The Rehabilitation of Offenders Act he has on record a military misdemenour that [sizeCAN[/size and that the Home Office and the UKBA has chosen to equate as a criminal conviction.

So have you or will you sign the petition to help change the law and an injustice???

No, I wont, because I don't see it as an injustice.