vortexring

How could they do better, specifically? "Stop murdering innocent children" doesn't cut it. IDF are conducting door to door raids today in an effort to isolate Hezbollah in numerous towns. If they didn't give a shit, they'd just bomb the shit out of EVERY thing. As it is, they are taking out what they need to take out in order to stop the enemy. And yes, innocents are suffering for it, all by the design of Hezbollah. Again, got any specific recommendations for Israel? Yes, read previous threads from this post, Goldie

that's the funniest post yet. bet the drugs in your fantasy world are great - all the dopamine with none of the nasy side effects - all thanks to mythical technology. What makes you think I'm on drugs? Do you think my posts that stupid? Is achieving an aim worthwhile, even if innocents are killed? Is achieving an aim worthwhile, even if you encourage more people to join the regime your trying to destroy? Do you work for the U.S. Government? Do I need to say what I think of you? Of course I don't. You know. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Gee, you make it sound so easy. But as put forth in the other million war threads here, Hezbollah is what makes isolating Hezbollah impossible. I think Israel is doing the best they can to defend itself. No - they could do better. What planet am I from? A professional one in regards to these matters. See original post. Sorry. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Eye for an eye? Tooth for a tooth? You killed our guys? We'll kill yours? Bollox. It's a case of one side wanting to destroy the other. Hey, question here. When I was in Israel, how come I heard lots of American accents? P.S. Who's the biggest threat to international stability? P.P.S. What foreign policy caused this threat? P.P.P.S. Golden Triangle? Afghani poppies? Now how the fuck did all these areas become established? Of course, nasty evil Soviets! Nasty evil Arabs! Fair enough. JUSTIFICATION? Please, see the original post. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

It involves a lot more than defending oneself, as I'm sure your aware. Why shouldn't Hezscumbags attack Israel? Seriously, why the fuck shouldn't they? 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Sorry - you caught me unawares - a sensible question! What should Israel do? Stop murdering innocent children. Stop murdering innocent women. Stop murdering blokes with dodgy teeth. DESTROY Hezscumbags. They have the technology. They have the experience and the skill. They have the support. No excuses. Ever heard the advice of asking the person your going to punch a question? Even an irrelevant one? Think about it. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

quote>"That's kind of hard on the British. We have a government that's increasingly untrustworthy and corrupt, I'd say. I like our system, but the people in it (now and in the recent past) are a bunch of turdsuckers. " > You like your system...thats increasingly untrustworthy and corrupt! Yeah, sounds brilliant! In fact, sounds British! Fuck. DISREGARDED!!!! hahahahaaaa Wish it was that easy.

Anyway - as usual SC posts being bypassed by immature comments. Anyone got a sensible point to make? Without me having to disregard you? As egotistical as it may sound, there is no argument. Regarding the justification of murdered innocents in the pursuit of defeating one's enemy - there is no justification. The big man will explain that one to you at the gates. Reckon there's going to be a bit of a line. Get a fuckin' grip. Start sparking you disregarded people. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Oh fucking really - you sure of that sunshine? 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

And yes, I voted for Georgie because the competition sucked even worse. So you only had a choice of two? edited to add: sorry, nothing was better than Georgie? Fucks sake, what kind of Government d'you guys have? A British one? 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

hahaha - I disregard myself

Yeah, because I want the details of the espionage charge (stemming from his service aboard a top secret Los Angeles class attack submarine) spattered all over so the world can see the details of our naval forces' TTPs. So, in a way, the damage may already be done, I see no reason why more details need to made public. He's a "Fire Control Technician", which pretty much means he knows everything about our attack subs' offensive weapons systems' capability. If he's found not guilty, hopefully more will be known, but I wouldn't hold my breath. I can agree some things need to kept secret (such as the spying stuff w/ his knowledge) But to keep him incommunicado w/ no one knowing or no civilian oversite. The fuckin military can't just do as they please US military does - have you not seen the news? 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Yeah fair one Gwain - orange boiler suit? 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Refer to the original post - that's the one at the start. There's no argument. Turn a country into a smoking hole? Shall I even bother to debate this? Will I fuck. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Ok Bill point taken, but how can you argue with these people????????????? 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

But you know I can effectively reply. Your upset I'm not falling for your bait in regards to your childish comment about making a country a smoking hole. Can I refer you to my original post? Who I'd disregard? Happy? Your now partially disregarded. Because from the sound of things you sound like the USA's strategic policy maker. God you guys know how to win international support. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

To all stupid people - I have no side with Hezscumbags. If you feel I do, fine. You are....... disregarded. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Just read this> "However, the strikes early Friday hit the affluent Christian locality of Jounieh, north of the capital, for the first time. The bombing against the picturesque coastal resort marked a sharp expansion of Israel's attack on Lebanon, which now threatens Christian areas where Hezbollah has no support and no presence." WTF? ????????????????????? 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

How can you agree with my fantasy world? I don't have one. I think, despite replying to your utterly stupid thread, you'll be disregarded. Hey, its your fantasy world. Do with it what you want....but I would fire your interior decorator if I were you. You are disregarded. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

You are disregarded. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

How can you agree with my fantasy world? I don't have one. I think, despite replying to your utterly stupid thread, you'll be disregarded. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Looking at recent events in the Middle East. Israel - Hezscumbags - Syria - Iran - Afghanistan - Iraq....you can see where I'm coming from. Looking at recent posts and threads here on SC regarding these events. Well, this one is perhaps different. It has no links or references. It's all mine. We know, to varying extents, Western and Middle Eastern military capabilities. (Obviously a minority do not - I generally have to disregard these people.) Israel has a right of defence. Is this a right to kill innocents? A justification of killing children? An argument of targeting the enemy - but hey, so sorry! Your kids are dead? Your Mrs? Your bloke with dodgy teeth? Blame Hezscumbags! It's they're fault! .......for fucks sake! When did two wrongs make a right? You do not have to be a Christian to see that all thats happening in this recent conflict is morally WRONG. So many people take so much pride in their nations superior technology. Why are these nations not taking the morally higher ground? Why are they not achieving their aims through this superior technology? Is the enemy that effective!!!!??? Basics! Getting rid of terrorists? More like recruitment! C'mon! Could it be, perhaps, there is a leadership element at fault here? Anyone military? What's the goal? What's the aim? ACHIEVE THE MISSION. Isn't mission success everything? Of course it is. Look at Iraq in 2003. Military goal achieved. Mission accomplished(Like FUCK) - well, is it accomplished? No argument, is there? It baffles the fuck out me how Georgie got voted back into power. Was his competition that bad? In fact, I know why he got voted back in. If I explained why I'd probably receive a lifetimes ban - I fuckin' wonder sometimes though. I wonder sometimes why people can be all for their war and weaponary. War and weaponary in the sense of aggressive conflict - not SELF-defense. I'd love a chat with you guys. I really would. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

>Your definition of murder is askew. That's why you just don't get it. There will be less sewing and reaping when nations like Iran and Syria are held to account instead of hiding behind murderous surrogates and implausible deniability. It used to be that you used to have some tennuous fig leaf to hide behind to claim you're not involved in crap like this before you'd get the benefit of the doubt. Syria and Iran's fuelling of this situation is overt and they get a pass, and it leads to more of the same. I sometimes wonder if they're just astounded that they can get away with this. Their support and encouragement is the elephant in the living room and as long as it is ignored this situation will not improve< Well whats the solution Dorbie? Force? Could you fire, say, an MLRS or perhaps fire a 30mm cannon into an area habited by the enemy and women and children? It certainly happened in Iraq, as an example. If you seen the ruptured little bodies of children from your weapon systems that you'd fired what would you call this? edited to add: murder is murder. Sorry. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

>>it is a matter where strong passions are generally matched by weak understanding and limited knowledge.

I know he's only stating the bloody obvious but for once I couldn't agree more: >To defeat it will need an alliance of moderation that paints a different future in which Muslim, Jew and Christian, Arab and Western, wealthy and developing nations can make progress in peace and harmony with each other," Blair said in the speech. Blair has been engaged in intense diplomatic efforts to halt the fighting between Israel and Hizbollah guerrillas but his failure to call for an immediate cease-fire and his support for the U.S. position has drawn sharp criticism at home. Blair said the war in the Middle East was in part a fight between "reactionary Islam and moderate mainstream Islam." "My argument is that we will not win the battle against this global extremism unless we win it at the level of values as much as force, unless we show we are even handed, fair and just in our advocation of those values to the world. "In reality we are at present far away from persuading those we need to persuade that this is true," the speech added. "Unless we reappraise our strategy, unless we revitalise the broader global agenda on poverty, climate change, trade, and in respect of the Middle East, bend every sinew of our will to making peace between Israel and Palestine, we will not win and this is a battle we must win," he said in the speech. Blair is wrapping up a five-day visit to the United States during which he held talks with U.S. President George W. Bush over the Middle East crisis. His speech came as three British soldiers were killed in Afghanistan and one was killed in Basra in southern Iraq.