Your point was that we shouldn't have ceremonial soldiers, because they're trained, and if they go down in a , a trained person goes down. My point was that ceremonial soldiers around the world are trained soldiers, and so their being trained is irrelevant. Hence your point was moot.
Yeah, and a trained one. Just like the ceremonial soldier in Tienanmen Square, Red Square, Capitol Hill, etc. They're put there not just to serve as decoration.
You implied so. Your course of argument was that we shouldn't have ceremonial soldiers at Wagah, because if they fall to an attack (which they're trained to repel), then the monies spent on their training goes to waste. My response to that, was that it didn't matter if we have ceremonial soldiers at Wagah. They're not the only ones guarding the border, and there are men in combat uniform tasked with preventing those in ceremonial uniform from getting into harm's way.
You stand in the middle of a big smoking city the whole day, and compare your health to a guy who performs a 30-minute ceremony at a lush-green international border outpost, in a mostly rural setting.
There are worse things that can affect a soldier's health. Performing that ceremony won't be the only thing they'll do in their careers. Armies rotate ceremonial jobs among their various divisions and subdivisions.
The economy of hundreds of people living along the road between Amritsar and the border, and the public image of the Army in the eyes of ordinary people who aren't DFI members, who don't get their daily dose of 9PM television-outrage, and who probably don't hang around on the internet much.
Your point was that we shouldn't have ceremonial soldiers, because they're trained, and if they go down in a , a trained person goes down. My point was that ceremonial soldiers around the world are trained soldiers, and so their being trained is irrelevant. Hence your point was moot.
Where did I say so?
You need to read carefully Mr.
Ceremonial soldiers at wagah are also fully trained for combat. We can't loose (discharged from combat duty) a trained soldier due to injuries sustained during this kind of parade/ceremony.
Yes, a trained soldier should not go down for a ceremony And specially not for a ceremony which even doesn't follow basic drill rules. Any ceremony which hampers with the primary objective of a soldier should be done away with.
So, you referring to them as 'ceremonial soldiers' is both moot and demeaning. They very best be described as on ceremonial duty.
Yeah, and a trained one. Just like the ceremonial soldier in Tienanmen Square, Red Square, Capitol Hill, etc. They're put there not just to serve as decoration.
Did I say not trained? It was I who said they are trained for combat which is their primary duty. Even Republic day was toned down during Kargil war, as those soldiers were serving their primary duty.
Not decoration but tradition. And wagah foot thumping are neither. And more over it is infantile and in contravention of basic drill rules.
You implied so. Your course of argument was that we shouldn't have ceremonial soldiers at Wagah, because if they fall to an attack (which they're trained to repel), then the monies spent on their training goes to waste. My response to that, was that it didn't matter if we have ceremonial soldiers at Wagah. They're not the only ones guarding the border, and there are men in combat uniform tasked with preventing those in ceremonial uniform from getting into harm's way.
I never implied so, if you feel so, your cognition and deduction error.
What 'attack'? The OP and I am talking about is a infantile way the ceremony is carried out. Especially I am highlighting 'goose steps'. Where did the OP write about any attack by terrorist attack?
You surely read the OP article? He is merely reflecting on the issue after the suicide blast.
And, to make it clear, the foot tromping needs to go, but the ceremonial lowering of flag, which follows a certain military decorum will stay.
You stand in the middle of a big smoking city the whole day, and compare your health to a guy who performs a 30-minute ceremony at a lush-green international border outpost, in a mostly rural setting.
Yes, a 30 minute drill can be more hazardous depending on various factors than the situation mentioned above.
There are worse things that can affect a soldier's health. Performing that ceremony won't be the only thing they'll do in their careers. Armies rotate ceremonial jobs among their various divisions and subdivisions.
Yes, many things can go wrong, means a thing that is systematically going wrong and you know about it, you have studied it in detail shouldn't be corrected? What a logic.
In the same argument, HAPO bags for Siachen shouldn't have been developed isn't it? Many other things can go wrong, why bother?
The economy of hundreds of people living along the road between Amritsar and the border, and the public image of the Army in the eyes of ordinary people who aren't DFI members, who don't get their daily dose of 9PM television-outrage, and who probably don't hang around on the internet much.
Economy is a strawman's argument. The last time the ceremony was toned down, it didn't affect, and will not affect if further toned down. The article about it is posed in my earlier reply.
Army's image isn't hinged on the goose stepping BSF jawan. And it is a tough ask if you want to risk a soldiers health for PR exercise for army/bsf.
That will show that you are bankrupt as far as ideas are concerned.
