This just irritates me a lot. I just want to challenge those posters that suggest that every one of us need to actively engage in battle, in order to suggest that it is right that our respective democracies do so. The idea is preposterous.
Presumably we would have Gordon and George leading the cavalry charge and the rest of us on zimmers and clutching our copies of 'Free Inquiry".

Our people decide that that we need armies to defend our democracies. Currently these are voluntary positions (unless you want to get into the whole poor, duped, no-hope, army gives you a life arguments). It is perfectly correct for ANY of us to suggest to our MP's that our fighting forces get involved in protecting our democracy in any place that we see a danger. I have absolutely no guilt about that, even if hand-to-hand fighting is not my forte.

It is also our right to kick the government out if we think the money would be better spent on hospitals while we wait for the Caliphate! Lucky us.

But while we continue to agree as a nation that my taxes are spent in this way, I can see no reason why I should not have a say in what struggles we are involved in.
So to all of you that think I should shed my blood before opening my mouth on any issue with regard to deployment of our forces. You are just dead wrong in holding such a naive position.