I promised myself not to return, it is likely I debate with some one who understands nothing of a ship at sea cut in half.
Or the dreadful night, the near half century fighting for compensation.
It seems I debate with one who lays the charge of COWARDICE without understanding the man was a victim.
And another poster ,full of indignation tells me I am one of my lifetime opponents the very left.
And in some way responsible for Muslim migration.
Can you see a thread of miss understanding here?
Australian service men and women are not tourists on holiday.
At any second they could be at war, this event took place 80 plus died, a night of horror.
Some here, must not know the details of that night, some of the acts of bravery are such that we should be proud.
It takes bravery to say I was wrong, those who claim this sailor was a coward should do that , and re read the thread and ask did I know enough to say that?
If you do not understand the times you get it wrong you can never improve, and while some never see faults in their thinking ,it is clear to the world, coward? sorry you have no enedence for that statement.

When I served at the Iron curtain, before becoming a regular, in the NATO, people were being shot, we were under the aim of East Germans, etc, etc, and this was an obvious strain. I did not volunteer for this but nevertheless served. I was trained to kill or be killed, this while ordinary I oppose the killing of a human being, even a death sentence by the judiciary.
I was no coward for serving. And I was no coward to try to make money out of it either. I never even considered such a scheme! And this is what I perceive EasyTimes is about. He does not seek to slander those serving not just in the armed services, hospitals, ambulance services, etc, but rather criticise what he deems, as I understand it to be, is the cowardly use of compensation.
Let the man have some compensation but lets keep it reasonable.
Why should this kind of traumatic event, be awarded while many who served lost a limb or more and didn’t get a penny?
When you serve in jobs dealing with trauma, you know that you could be attending to your colleagues, one day.
Soldiers in, WWI and WWII (to mention some) had to deal with their dead mates, being perhaps killed along side of them. How many of them perhaps abused the compensation system to claim compensation for this? I doubt anyone would have done so.
Police at times attend to a scene of an accident involving their colleague, this can be traumatic but something that can be expected as can be for doctors, nurses, etc.
Compensation must be considered as to what can be expected in that regard and also consider the alternatives available. Perhaps we just lack proper screening to get people serving who are suitable for the job?
Perhaps I should sue the federal government for being married to my at times nagging wife? Or let be clear about it, we are heading the USA way to go crazy to sue and in the process those who really deserve compensation are likely missing out.

VERY well put Mr GH. S-H. I agree.

My objection was and is however, that this gentleman was called a coward.

He is not. He was not.

Come justify the use of the word COWARD here.
Tell me the threads author understood the man was a victim.
Count the court costs from an event that took place in 1964.
Ask how much did the legal costs amount to?
And was that a reason for the large sum?
How much will he get?
Will it be half or less?
Say half, divide by all those years.
41 of them how much per year?
Service personnel do get the TPI pension, after a battle as hard as you think it will be then more.
Sometimes they die while waiting for COMPENSATION,
justify the use of the word COWARD.
I can not express my contempt for its use enough on what evidence is he a COWARD?