Ryan Roberts wrote:

Ground troops don't work without artillery

In your typical open conflict perhaps, but artilery stops bombardments when troops are tangled up in urban street conflicts - they should simply deploy ground forces (supported by tanks, apcs and general mechanised infantry - i have no problem with that) and sweep building, bunkers and genenrally make their presense felt... ... ... on the ground

Ryan Roberts wrote:

It is any commanders duty to spare the lives of his soldiers if possible

Even if that means killing innocents?????

"He who only hopes is forced to spend his life in the dark"

Ryan Roberts wrote:

asshole

Dont you mean arsehole? *gets ready for flames*

Ryan Roberts wrote:

Churchill

Churchill is one of the main reasons a vast mojority of europe isnt speaking german right now. I think a little kudos is in order - a waring PM when we clearly needed one.

"He who only hopes is forced to spend his life in the dark"

Mike Gaskey wrote:

for example you stood surrounded by your family and pointed a gun at me, I wouldn't hesitate to shoot no matter who was in the way.

Ouch - really scarey stuff - i dont imagine you'd have much of a problem pressing the 'ol 'red button' either. Red button aside, im not sure i would behave any different but i certainly wouldnt say 'I wouldn't hesitate'. And the war isnt being fought on those types of terms. Its bombs being dropped on innocent ppls heads. Simple as. Yeah, sure, there dropping leaflets saying 'please leave, were about to desimate the area'. But if you believe thats an effective strategy, i fear, your fundemetally mistaken. I dont agree with the war, i do think its a gross over-reaction on israels part. But, i also dont think that israel should be expected to sit back and let anyone attack their citizens (nor should the lebanon or palastine for that matter - sounds like a stalemate, eh?). If they are really that bothered about it (which they clearly are), they should have tackled this problem with a small amount of honour/foresight and moved in a ground force to ram raid possible targets, not just drop tonnes of US bought ordinance on their heads. They'd still no-doubt piss off alot of ppl, but nothing like the problems there going to have now. Last count was 400 dead and 600,000 displaced! Firstly they'd better hope that entire families were knocked out as part of the 400 killed by 'misplaced' bombs else there clearly going to have another fierce wave of terror attacks (dont doubt that hezbollah are behind the scenes as we speak creating the next wave of bombers). And the displaced? How easy is it going to be now to turn them against israel? and lets face it... they were half way there anyways. Various other countries have had similar problems at some time or another and didnt resort to full scale air bombardments. Which, imo, is the easiest way to create hate on the ground. But as always israel (and the US and the UK - well, pretty much the whole of the west) is scared stiff of losing soldiers in combat. Maybe if we started commiting ground troops are a rule of thumb the politicians wouldnt be so flippant about starting these conflicts. This, unfortunatly, promises to escalate into much much more than it is currently...

"He who only hopes is forced to spend his life in the dark"

Stan Shannon wrote:

It is absolutely black and white.

I dont see how an issue can be black and white when all the facts arent available - true it should probably be taken as propaganda, but every media hub in the world relies on those kind of tactics to get their points across. Whether the child was acting alone is certainly a grey area, and i find it more than a little strange that you can argue that. But id guess the best course of action would be to agree to disagree.

Stan Shannon wrote:

the people who control children like

Fair play, id agree with that (if the child was indeed being controlled). But i dont control children in any form and neither do i just drink up what any nutjob with a carmera/microphone/keyboard is willing to push out there (yourself included) so i fail to see how the blood is on my hands.

Ian Harrigan wrote:

Stunningly good point ...

Stan Shannon wrote:

Yeah, I know, thats why I wrote it. Thats where the brain part comes in at.

Humility is such a truly noble character trait! :rolleyes: "I learnt how to teach by being taught how to learn"

Failing Democratic Republic? No wait - that cant be right... :-D "He who only hopes is forced to spend his life in the dark"

Stan Shannon wrote:

There could be no way that some adult (the same adult who in a few years will be bravely strapping C4 onto the same child) said "Here, take this and throw it at the tank so that I can take your picture..."

I didnt say there was no way it could be that - just that it could also be the other way round, ie, its not black & white as you said in your previous post - that was my point.

Stan Shannon wrote:

The fact that you fall for this kind of idiotic propaganda says much about why Europeans believe as they do and are so incredibly icompetent politically.

I didnt 'fall prey' to anything - i was simply stating an alternate point of view. But in your typically extreme view its either 'with me, or against me', eh?

Stan Shannon wrote:

If I saw any child exposing themselves to that kind of danger I sure as hell would not be taking a picture of it. I would be trying to do something to get them out of the way of danger.

Stunningly good point (no, im not being sarcastic). Definatley does make the slant a little steeper - truely

Stan Shannon wrote:

The blood will be on your hands

Dont quite get how the blood will be on my hands, or are ya just trying to scare me into submission now? :rolleyes:

Stan Shannon wrote:

I have what I need. A brain, for example.

'grats! :zzz: "He who only hopes is forced to spend his life in the dark"

Stan Shannon wrote:

Six year olds don't do stuff like that on their own

Why cant a six year old throw things at a tank????? You have no idea of the history of the girl - if all shes learnt is to link a big bad tank with personal loss and/or destruction then i could COMPLETELY see why a child would choose to perform such a fruitless act. Have you never seen a small child get so frustrated with something they cant change that they choose to just hit out in a typically small way? i know i have

Stan Shannon wrote:

It was staged, at the risk of the child's life and you posted it to promote your world view. That tells me everything I need to know about the morality of your politics.

I really dont see how you can say it was or it wasnt! Therefore it tells me alot about ur kind of politics - i bet if it was a little american christian girl throwing a can of pepsi at a T60 iraqi tank (if they had any left) as it drove thru her home town you wouldnt have as much as a problem... hell! you'd probably champion it!

Stan Shannon wrote:

"You get that which you tolerate"

Then i doubt you have very much at all... Ian "You always get more than you bargained for"

s'pose i just assumed... what with there being 'no leaders' over here and since your (generic american 'your') government is doing such a BANG up job (pun intended) on that side of the pond i just assumed that the previous posts had a sub text of 'coz we got the right idea' to them - maybe im wrong... Or maybe your a dirty leftist like the rest of us behind-the-times socialist europians and bush really is a 'man of the world'... Ian "He who only hopes is forced to spend his life in the dark"

A real leader like bush? Yeah - what have we been doing for so long! I bow my head in humbled pacified shame... ;P "He who only hopes is forced to spend his life in the dark"

Can you say homophobe? ;P "He who only hopes is forced to spend his life in the dark"