SteveThaiBinh Posted January 17, 2009 Posted January 17, 2009 1. We are short staffed in most respects and need defence cash for the main event in Afghanistan And then some. Do we still have troops in Cyprus? In any case, Obama has said his main focus will be Afghanistan, and if he manages not to get bored and wander off to Iraq or Iran, he might even have a chance at success, or at least, making things somewhat better than they are now. Definitely the British should be in there giving what support we can. 2. It makes it look like the UK and the Israeli govt are on the same wavelength which I can't agree with But we're not on the same wavelength, and I don't see, in this case, the value of pretending that we are. I don't think Israel is unreasonable in attacking Gaza, though I'm not sure it's wise, but I certainly don't see why the UK government should tie itself to the Israeli government's position. 3. It won't achieve anything tactically, as I'm sure Hamas will still get enough munitions to kill people It creates problems for Hamas, and increases the risks for them of pursuing a military strategy. They don't want to be seen to be killing peacekeepers. 4. It won't achieve anything strategically because, as I say, I don't believe any end is possible. Pessimist. The end is quite easy to see, though very hard to get to. "An electric puddle is not what I need right now." (Nina Kalenkov)
Killian Kalthorne Posted January 17, 2009 Author Posted January 17, 2009 (edited) I don't thikn the civilian casualties would be all that high if Hamas would stop using civilians as human shields. Of course they are cowards and won't engage an enemy in open battle. It does seem that a cease fire is on the way but I bet Hamas will be the first to break it. Edited January 17, 2009 by Killian Kalthorne "Your Job is not to die for your country, but set a man on fire, and take great comfort in the general hostility and unfairness of the universe."
Volourn Posted January 17, 2009 Posted January 17, 2009 (edited) "In such a situation, how can you say that Hamas are attacking civilians unprovoked?" Are the civilians attacking them? No, so yeah, it's unprovoked. And, the key her,e is their purpsoefull targetting civilians. By, your logic, Isreal has the right to attack civilians too as they aren't doing so unprovoked but as a response to PALESTINIAN rocket attacks. "As for the Hamas murdering Palestinians, could you provide me with the relevant link?" The fact that you deny this is laughable. I guess it's easy to ignore things that makes your favored group look bad. "Israel has resorted to collective punishment. A tactic that Edited January 17, 2009 by Volourn DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250.
Walsingham Posted January 18, 2009 Posted January 18, 2009 " "It wasn't lies. It was just... bull****"." -Elwood Blues tarna's dead; processing... complete. Disappointed by Universe. RIP Hades/Sand/etc. Here's hoping your next alt has a harp.
Calax Posted January 18, 2009 Posted January 18, 2009 " Victor of the 5 year fan fic competition! Kevin Butler will awesome your face off.
Gorgon Posted January 18, 2009 Posted January 18, 2009 The Geneva convention doesn't address irregular warfare. Not that I'm trying to make Hamas out to be guerrillas, just saying they are rules for regular armies that should supposedly make wars a little less gruesome. Na na na na na na ... greg358 from Darksouls 3 PVP is a CHEATER. That is all.
Killian Kalthorne Posted January 18, 2009 Author Posted January 18, 2009 (edited) If the Hamas doesn't follow Geneva Conventions of warfare and treatment of POWs why should Israel, Yuusha? If you want to destroy the government of a nation you do not attack that government, nor the military of that government. You attack and kill the civilian populations that is the support structure of that government and military. That is the mindset of a terrorist, the mindset of Hamas and Hezbollah. That is the tactics they have used in their rocket attacks and suicide bombings. They do not follow the Geneva Convention, and Israel should return such kindness back at them. Use their rules of engagement against them. Edited January 18, 2009 by Killian Kalthorne "Your Job is not to die for your country, but set a man on fire, and take great comfort in the general hostility and unfairness of the universe."
Gorgon Posted January 18, 2009 Posted January 18, 2009 So wanton destruction and callous disregard for civilian death is ok because the people you are fighting are just as bad. Na na na na na na ... greg358 from Darksouls 3 PVP is a CHEATER. That is all.
Walsingham Posted January 18, 2009 Posted January 18, 2009 So wanton destruction and callous disregard for civilian death is ok because the people you are fighting are just as bad. No. But pot-kettle-black rings true. "It wasn't lies. It was just... bull****"." -Elwood Blues tarna's dead; processing... complete. Disappointed by Universe. RIP Hades/Sand/etc. Here's hoping your next alt has a harp.
howling1 Posted January 18, 2009 Posted January 18, 2009 Dont Feed The Trolls... Because what you really want in life is a hungry troll? No, because I want the little Troll S.O. B. to starve... "For The Love Of Carnage And Discord, I Bring Annihilation And Cheap Beer!" - Mad Dwarf "Watch that howling1. His sig used to eat cities." - Synaesthesia "Beat me with a wet noodle huh? " - Feargus Urquhart "the term "Board Troll" ain't a thing ta be proud o', lads" - Sargallath Abraxium "The line between comedy and tragedy is pretty thin in these parts." - Overseer " Grrr... ...Argh." - Darque
howling1 Posted January 18, 2009 Posted January 18, 2009 (edited) The Geneva convention doesn't address irregular warfare. Not that I'm trying to make Hamas out to be guerrillas, just saying they are rules for regular armies that should supposedly make wars a little less gruesome. Technically the Geneva Conventions *DO* cover irregular warfare. A warcrime is a warcrime is a warcrime, whether you wear a uniform or not. Under the Geneva Conventions, Hamas is *GUILTY* of warcrimes meerly by hiding their rocket launchers behind innocent civilians. Such are the actions of cowards pure and simple. If I had done such a thing while I was in uniform, I would have been prosecuted and executed for warcrimes. I have no sympathy whatsoever for Hamas. They deserve what they get at the hands of the Israelis. Hamas broke the rules... Edited January 18, 2009 by howling1 "For The Love Of Carnage And Discord, I Bring Annihilation And Cheap Beer!" - Mad Dwarf "Watch that howling1. His sig used to eat cities." - Synaesthesia "Beat me with a wet noodle huh? " - Feargus Urquhart "the term "Board Troll" ain't a thing ta be proud o', lads" - Sargallath Abraxium "The line between comedy and tragedy is pretty thin in these parts." - Overseer " Grrr... ...Argh." - Darque
Killian Kalthorne Posted January 18, 2009 Author Posted January 18, 2009 So wanton destruction and callous disregard for civilian death is ok because the people you are fighting are just as bad. As I said, there are no good guys in this fight. "Your Job is not to die for your country, but set a man on fire, and take great comfort in the general hostility and unfairness of the universe."
Blank Posted January 19, 2009 Posted January 19, 2009 (edited) Here's a question. What you guys are saying, I think, is great. Israel wants to protect its people from terrorism, and has the right to because Hamas broke the cease-fire deal. But Israel should not be hurting innocent civilians, and Hamas should stop wanting to erase the people of Israel from existence. Pretend you are Israel. Given the parameters: 1) Not wanting any more of your own people to die from Hamas' rockets 2) Not wanting any innocent Palestinian civilians to die 3) Understanding that Hamas will continue to fire rockets as long as it is able How would you do things differently than you are doing them now? One thing I would suggest is for Israel to ask a neutral, trustworthy group who is capable of a peacekeeping mission (like the Swiss army) thoroughly search the humanitarian aid shipments to Gaza (to ensure no military aid to Hamas takes place) and accurately administer the assistance to the innocent civilians who are suffering from the blockade. Also, UPDATE: Israel 'wants rapid Gaza pullout' Edited January 19, 2009 by Blank
howling1 Posted January 19, 2009 Posted January 19, 2009 (edited) One thing I would suggest is for Israel to ask a neutral, trustworthy group who is capable of a peacekeeping mission (like the Swiss army) thoroughly search the humanitarian aid shipments to Gaza (to ensure no military aid to Hamas takes place) and accurately administer the assistance to the innocent civilians who are suffering from the blockade. Also, Israel 'wants rapid Gaza pullout' Why do you think that the Israelis wanted the Turks for the job? 1) The Turks are Muslim, hense less friction with the Palestinians. 2) The Turks cant be bribed to look the other way. 3) The Arabs know that if they mess with the Turks, the Turks will come after them & to hell with international opinion or the UN... 4 ) The Arabs need to learn that there are far nastier things out there in the dark than the mere Israelis... Edited January 19, 2009 by howling1 "For The Love Of Carnage And Discord, I Bring Annihilation And Cheap Beer!" - Mad Dwarf "Watch that howling1. His sig used to eat cities." - Synaesthesia "Beat me with a wet noodle huh? " - Feargus Urquhart "the term "Board Troll" ain't a thing ta be proud o', lads" - Sargallath Abraxium "The line between comedy and tragedy is pretty thin in these parts." - Overseer " Grrr... ...Argh." - Darque
Blank Posted January 19, 2009 Posted January 19, 2009 Why do you think that the Israelis wanted the Turks for the job? 1) The Turks are Muslim, hense less friction with the Palestinians. 2) The Turks cant be bribed to look the other way. 3) The Arabs know that if they mess with the Turks, the Turks will come after them & to hell with international opinion or the UN... 4 ) The Arabs need to learn that there are far nastier things out there in the dark than the mere Israelis... Unfortunately that may be what Israel wanted, but like I said, I think Israel should change what it is doing by having a neutral, trustworthy party to arbitrate humanitarian aid. Perhaps this is unreasonable thinking, but my advice to Israel would be for them to solicit the assistance from other countries whom they trust will do the most they can to prevent more death (thus not allowing munitions/war aid for Hamas, and hopefully maximizing the efficacy of humanitarian aid distribution). Getting help from another country to do this would not mean Israel is weak, but as it is now, for Israel to distribute aid themselves might cause more deaths, because Hamas might just start killing the Israelites assisting, and the civilian Palestinians might be distrustful of Israel's intentions at this point. If the Turks are who you say they are, they are obviously not a good pick, and so I would recommend Israel reconsider.
howling1 Posted January 19, 2009 Posted January 19, 2009 Why do you think that the Israelis wanted the Turks for the job? 1) The Turks are Muslim, hense less friction with the Palestinians. 2) The Turks cant be bribed to look the other way. 3) The Arabs know that if they mess with the Turks, the Turks will come after them & to hell with international opinion or the UN... 4 ) The Arabs need to learn that there are far nastier things out there in the dark than the mere Israelis... Unfortunately that may be what Israel wanted, but like I said, I think Israel should change what it is doing by having a neutral, trustworthy party to arbitrate humanitarian aid. Perhaps this is unreasonable thinking, but my advice to Israel would be for them to solicit the assistance from other countries whom they trust will do the most they can to prevent more death (thus not allowing munitions/war aid for Hamas, and hopefully maximizing the efficacy of humanitarian aid distribution). Getting help from another country to do this would not mean Israel is weak, but as it is now, for Israel to distribute aid themselves might cause more deaths, because Hamas might just start killing the Israelites assisting, and the civilian Palestinians might be distrustful of Israel's intentions at this point. If the Turks are who you say they are, they are obviously not a good pick, and so I would recommend Israel reconsider. Well you can rule out Arabs, Europeans, & Russians. The Jewish experience with them has not been a pleasant one... "For The Love Of Carnage And Discord, I Bring Annihilation And Cheap Beer!" - Mad Dwarf "Watch that howling1. His sig used to eat cities." - Synaesthesia "Beat me with a wet noodle huh? " - Feargus Urquhart "the term "Board Troll" ain't a thing ta be proud o', lads" - Sargallath Abraxium "The line between comedy and tragedy is pretty thin in these parts." - Overseer " Grrr... ...Argh." - Darque
Blank Posted January 19, 2009 Posted January 19, 2009 Well you can rule out Arabs, Europeans, & Russians. The Jewish experience with them has not been a pleasant one... Hmm, true. History shows there's a bad track record there. Who would you suggest?
howling1 Posted January 19, 2009 Posted January 19, 2009 Well you can rule out Arabs, Europeans, & Russians. The Jewish experience with them has not been a pleasant one... Hmm, true. History shows there's a bad track record there. Who would you suggest? I'm just mean enough to side with the Israelis & insist on the Turks, or no cease fire... "For The Love Of Carnage And Discord, I Bring Annihilation And Cheap Beer!" - Mad Dwarf "Watch that howling1. His sig used to eat cities." - Synaesthesia "Beat me with a wet noodle huh? " - Feargus Urquhart "the term "Board Troll" ain't a thing ta be proud o', lads" - Sargallath Abraxium "The line between comedy and tragedy is pretty thin in these parts." - Overseer " Grrr... ...Argh." - Darque
Blank Posted January 19, 2009 Posted January 19, 2009 (edited) How about the Aussies? Just one of them could tame thousands of crocodiles (RIP Steve), and they successfully deterred the rampant overpopulation of rabbits on the continent. Edited January 19, 2009 by Blank
julianw Posted January 19, 2009 Posted January 19, 2009 I am still in favor of Kafty's plan involving dozens of school buses and moving the Palestinians to somewhere like China far away from the Jews. Remember the Sichuan earthquake here made 4 million people homeless and forced 11 million to relocate and we still got through that. Taking in 1.5 million Palestitians is a piece of cake.
Blank Posted January 19, 2009 Posted January 19, 2009 I am still in favor of Kafty's plan involving dozens of school buses and moving the Palestinians to somewhere like China far away from the Jews. Remember the Sichuan earthquake here made 4 million people homeless and forced 11 million to relocate and we still got through that. Taking in 1.5 million Palestitians is a piece of cake. Perhaps the refugees would welcome a better habitat for living. It would be problematic, though, if they wanted to stay as close the their holy lands as possible. How do you think such a scenario would go down? Who would contribute to the effort? How would we know there are enough people who want to leave to justify the effort? Who would practically give land to host the people?
Wrath of Dagon Posted January 19, 2009 Posted January 19, 2009 Gordon Brown pledges UK Forces to police Gaza blockade. I have to say that on first consideration this is possibly the worst move imaginable for the UK short of directly shelling Palestinian hospitals. 1. We are short staffed in most respects and need defence cash for the main event in Afghanistan 2. It makes it look like the UK and the Israeli govt are on the same wavelength which I can't agree with 3. It won't achieve anything tactically, as I'm sure Hamas will still get enough munitions to kill people 4. It won't achieve anything strategically because, as I say, I don't believe any end is possible. Preventing arms smuggling is not a blockade. It's the one thing the international community can realistically do to insure decreased levels of violence in the future. "Moral indignation is a standard strategy for endowing the idiot with dignity." Marshall McLuhan
julianw Posted January 19, 2009 Posted January 19, 2009 I was only joking... I don't really think that the conditions have gone so far south that the Palesitians would want to leave their homeland. However, if you will indulge in my nonsense, here is another suggestion. How about we force the region to desegregate. I remember watching a documentary many years ago about basketball camps involving Palestitian and Israeli youth. While the young boys and girls stayed the camps, they grew to love and respect each other. What if we make the entire region a huge 'basketball camp'? Wonder if that will work...
Calax Posted January 19, 2009 Posted January 19, 2009 Well you can rule out Arabs, Europeans, & Russians. The Jewish experience with them has not been a pleasant one... Hmm, true. History shows there's a bad track record there. Who would you suggest? Japan? Victor of the 5 year fan fic competition! Kevin Butler will awesome your face off.
Trenitay Posted January 19, 2009 Posted January 19, 2009 Canada. Hey now, my mother is huge and don't you forget it. The drunk can't even get off the couch to make herself a vodka drenched sandwich. Octopus suck.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now