New Sniper Record set in Afghanistan by a UK Soldier

[Mark in Oshawa]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1270414/British-sniper-sets-new-sharpshooting-record-1-54-mile-do

Apparently the Commonwealth nations must be required for shooting straight with the US. A Canadian soldier had the record...but now a soldier from her Majesties army just broke the longest sniper kill at well over 8100 plus feet....

[Daniel]

Blimey, that's a hell of a distance.

[ShiftingGears]

Very impressive!

[markoos72]

One hell of a shot...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L115A3
The rifle used.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Craig_Harrison_%28sniper%29
the man...

[fandango]

I don't know what names I may be called for saying this, but I think it's a sad, sad world where this is considered news. I'm not outraged or angry, but it makes me sad.

Two people are killed, but it's a world record.

[Sleeper]

I don't know what names I may be called for saying this, but I think it's a sad, sad world where this is considered news. I'm not outraged or angry, but it makes me sad.

Two people are killed, but it's a world record.
Its war, people die.

[dunes]

I don't know what names I may be called for saying this, but I think it's a sad, sad world where this is considered news. I'm not outraged or angry, but it makes me sad.

Two people are killed, but it's a world record.

I also agree but see the reason for this kind of need. These could have been snipers as well or worse some kind of bombing party. I know its sad people have to die for thier couintry or beliefs but sometimes it essential that these things occur.I for one would hate to have to revert to communism just because our general couldn't beat a person on the chess board.

Still one must admit at nearly 3,000 yards; twice; is a feat worth mentioning.

[anthonyvop]

I don't know what names I may be called for saying this, but I think it's a sad, sad world where this is considered news. I'm not outraged or angry, but it makes me sad.

Two people are killed, but it's a world record.

How is it not news?

Information from a war is not News? What is news then?

Actually 2 Taliban are dead. That qualifies as GOOD news.

[gloomyDAY]

I'd love to shake that guy's hand.


I don't know what names I may be called for saying this, but I think it's a sad, sad world where this is considered news. I'm not outraged or angry, but it makes me sad.

Two people are killed, but it's a world record.I don't feel sad at all.

This is war, not some tickling contest. One more of them dead means one less American, Brit, etc. dead.

[Firstgear]

The external ballistics software program JBM Ballistics further predicts that the bullets of British high pressure .338 Lapua Magnum cartridges using 16.2 g (250 gr) Lapua LockBase B408 bullets fired at 936 m/s (3,071 ft/s) muzzle velocity under International Standard Atmosphere conditions at 1,043 m (3,422 ft) elevation (air density ρ = 1.1069 kg/m3) arrive at 2,475 m (2,707 yd) after approximately 6.017 s flight time at 251.8 m/s (826 ft/s) velocity and have dropped 121.23 m (4,773 in) on their way.

The above is from the wiki article linked above. Am I reading this right? This guy had to aim 121m above the target, and then wait for 6 seconds after pulling the trigger to see if he hit the target?

[gloomyDAY]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/afghanistan/article7113916.ece

This Harrison guy is a combat stud. :s mokin:

[CarlMetro]

Not really something to celebrate in my honest opinion and, like Fandango said, is this really news? Well I guess it beats which politician said what but only just.....

[fandango]

I'd love to shake that guy's hand.

I don't feel sad at all.

This is war, not some tickling contest. One more of them dead means one less American, Brit, etc. dead.

Yes, it's war. I know. War is sad. But one of them dead does not mean one less of anyone else. It just means one of them dead.

Make no mistake, if I had to choose I'd rather have the sniper on my side, but:

1. There have been so many of these war hero stories that have been made up that it's difficult to believe.

2. Imagine if they had a news story about a new world record Taleban suicide bomber, who managed to kill more American or British soldiers than any other suicide bomber in history. Would that merit the same pseudo-macho "hey buddy, that's war" answer?

So, I don't think that the de-humanisation of the enemy like this is good. It's necessary for soldiers, in order to do their job. But us safe citizens here, we are not in that position, much as we may like to imagine.

As further explanation I recommend the introduction to the novel Slaughterhouse 5, The March Of The Children by Kurt Vonnegut.

[Bob Riebe]

I don't know what names I may be called for saying this, but I think it's a sad, sad world where this is considered news. I'm not outraged or angry, but it makes me sad.

Two people are killed, but it's a world record.
Dead goblins should be celebrated.

[Eki]

Finland can take some credit for this macabre record too:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.338_Lapua_Magnum

[Eki]

Its war, people die.
True, it's war not a sport. Records are for sports and other entertainment, not for war.

[Bob Riebe]

Finland can take some credit for this macabre record too:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.338_Lapua_Magnum
Lapua makes some fine goblin getters.

[Eki]

Dead goblins should be celebrated.

Should we also celebrate when British or American "goblins" die by an Afghan sniper?

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/afghanistan/article7113916.ece


News of Harrison’s success comes amid concern over a rival insurgent sharpshooter who in a five-month spree has killed up to seven British soldiers, including a sniper, in and around the Taliban stronghold of Sangin.

[Daniel]

Yes, it's war. I know. War is sad. But one of them dead does not mean one less of anyone else. It just means one of them dead.

Make no mistake, if I had to choose I'd rather have the sniper on my side, but:

1. There have been so many of these war hero stories that have been made up that it's difficult to believe.

2. Imagine if they had a news story about a new world record Taleban suicide bomber, who managed to kill more American or British soldiers than any other suicide bomber in history. Would that merit the same pseudo-macho "hey buddy, that's war" answer?

So, I don't think that the de-humanisation of the enemy like this is good. It's necessary for soldiers, in order to do their job. But us safe citizens here, we are not in that position, much as we may like to imagine.

As further explanation I recommend the introduction to the novel Slaughterhouse 5, The March Of The Children by Kurt Vonnegut.

I have to agree but I also feel that it's understandable to be in awe of such an achievement. As someone who's done a bit of paintballing which was done with markers which probably couldn't hit a barn door reliably at about 50 feet I do appreciate the skill involved in such a shot.

At the end of the day it IS war and if these Taliban gents had the chance to kill him they'd have done it.

I quite enjoy shooting when I've had the chance to do it because of the skill involved in doing it well.

[Bob Riebe]

Should we also celebrate when British or American "goblins" die by an Afghan sniper?

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/afghanistan/article7113916.ece
They are not part of a religion that blows up civilians and therefore are not goblins and anyone who insinuates they are is a moron.

[CarlMetro]

They are not part of a religion that blows up civilians and therefore are not goblins and anyone who insinuates they are is a moron.

A religion no, but a country most definately.

[Eki]

They are not part of a religion that blows up civilians and therefore are not goblins and anyone who insinuates they are is a moron.
They are part of other systems that blow up civilians. Have you ever wondered why some Muslims blow up civilians of those systems? It's an eye for an eye game. The Afghan Talibans are not goblins either, they are just people who fight for their own turf and their own beliefs instead of yours.

[CarlMetro]

they are just people who fight for their own turf and their own beliefs instead of yours.

Ah yes but you see that's where they are wrong, having their own beliefs and ideals........whatever next? :p :

[ioan]

I don't know what names I may be called for saying this, but I think it's a sad, sad world where this is considered news. I'm not outraged or angry, but it makes me sad.

Two people are killed, but it's a world record.

:up:

Exactly. Those being in awe of this record should be all ashamed. :down:

[ioan]

I'd love to shake that guy's hand.

I don't feel sad at all.

This is war, not some tickling contest. One more of them dead means one less American, Brit, etc. dead.

What about you pick up a rifle and go out there have some of the medicine yourself? Let's see if you'll be as brave after a few hours of war.

[Bob Riebe]

A religion no, but a country most definately.How do you know it is an Afghan?

[Bob Riebe]

They are part of other systems that blow up civilians. Have you ever wondered why some Muslims blow up civilians of those systems? It's an eye for an eye game. The Afghan Talibans are not goblins either, they are just people who fight for their own turf and their own beliefs instead of yours.
Sure while blowing up schools and murdering women who dare to teach or are trying to get an education; yup they are JUST people fighting for their own turf while not murdering its citizens.

OH yes, and while you are at it, tell the Pakis how great they are with your obtuse rhetoric.

[Bob Riebe]

Ah yes but you see that's where they are wrong, having their own beliefs and ideals........whatever next? :p :
So you condone the murdering of women and children also, BRILLIANT!

[Bob Riebe]

:up:

Exactly. Those being in awe of this record should be all ashamed. :down:
And your shame for the women they have deliberately murdered and maimed, is that also something you wear on your sleeve.

[gloomyDAY]

Exactly. Those being in awe of this record should be all ashamed. :down: Do you have any idea how much skill is involved in that type of kill?

I can understand that you may find our awe of Harrison's kills sadistic, but it's still an extraordinary feat in the heat of battle.


What about you pick up a rifle and go out there have some of the medicine yourself? Let's see if you'll be as brave after a few hours of war.I am!

I will begin training for a position as a U.S. Army officer this summer. My goal is to one day have a rifle in hand and lead men into combat as an officer. I can think of no better high.

[Daniel]

So you condone the murdering of women and children also, BRILLIANT!
So you regularly rip childrens heads off and eat them then poop down said kids necks?!?!?!?! BRILLIANT!

Carl never said he thought killing women or children was OK.....

[gloomyDAY]

Should we also celebrate when British or American "goblins" die by an Afghan sniper?

"News of Harrison’s success comes amid concern over a rival insurgent sharpshooter who in a five-month spree has killed up to seven British soldiers, including a sniper, in and around the Taliban stronghold of Sangin."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/afghanistan/article7113916.eceFine by me. That's how you play the game. War is just that, a game. Never about patriotism or any of that nonsense. In the end war is about who gets what after the dust has settled.

Let them have their celebration because any sniper that can take out that many soldiers is a skilled marksman, but his number will come up sooner or later.

[Bob Riebe]

So you regularly rip childrens heads off and eat them then poop down said kids necks?!?!?!?! BRILLIANT!

Carl never said he thought killing women or children was OK.....

Yes he did: "Ah yes but you see that's where they are wrong, having their own beliefs and ideals........whatever next?"

[Daniel]

Yes he did: "Ah yes but you see that's where they are wrong, having their own beliefs and ideals........whatever next?"
Sorry? I don't see where he said killing women and children was OK? :confused:

[ShiftingGears]

They are not part of a religion that blows up civilians and therefore are not goblins and anyone who insinuates they are is a moron.

The religion doesn't blow up a damn thing.

Besides, there are US army personnel that are Muslims.

[airshifter]

Brilliant shots without a doubt.

In all fairness though, most long range rifles suffer as much from atmospheric conditions at longer ranges than the shooter. It's simply rare to get good shooting conditions at ranges that the velocity of the round can't help overcome.

Records will continue to change until someone builds a climate controlled indoor range of 5000 or so meters... then we will really see what a human and shoulder fired weapon is capable of. ;)

[anthonyvop]

As the snipers say...."don't run. You will only die tired."

[Bob Riebe]

The religion doesn't blow up a damn thing.

Besides, there are US army personnel that are Muslims.
They do it in the name of their religion, which you would know unless you have not been following the news at all for the past thirty years.

On the second point, oh yes there is that muslim soldier who-- nah this is way too easy.

[Mark in Oshawa]

To those who think this is barbaric, nothing I am going to say will make you see it any other way because you are all for this moral equivalence crap that makes you think you are superior to the rest of us barbarians.

The fact is the reason those guys are over there making these shots is because a group of fanatic muslims (not all muslims are bad, but 99% of the terrorist actions against civilians in the west in the last few years are from Muslim terror groups) basically hijacked a nation, turned it into a 13th century theocratic nightmare, where people were shot for flying kites or listening to music. These same people, supported a terror group who flew 4 perfectly loaded and good airplanes into 2 buildings in NYC and one in Washington..(ok 3, one was stopped by the brave souls on board), killed 3000 odd civilians, and then basically gave the world the finger when they were required to extradite the organizers of this scheme. So...cry me a river Argentina for the poor Taliban....I figure if we had enough troops there in 2002, The nation would be better off....

I congrat the Brit sniper for his skill, and while I don't condone killing anyone in cold blood, this gent was using a machine gun to dominate his little section of the battlefield so this Brit likely saved more than a few lives on his side. That is war...as Patton said, war isn't about dying for your country, it about making the other guy die for his country.

[Dave B]

They do it in the name of their religion, which you would know unless you have not been following the news at all for the past thirty years.
Holy wars are nothing new. Why, even as recently as this century the USA had a religious zealot in charge who believed he was doing God's work.

When in doubt try to remember Venn diagrammes from your schooldays, then draw one with Muslims and terrorists: the overlap is pretty tiny.

[Bob Riebe]

Holy wars are nothing new. Why, even as recently as this century the USA had a religious zealot in charge who believed he was doing God's work.
.
Your analogy is as weak as your logic.

[Eki]

So you condone the murdering of women and children also, BRILLIANT!
Do you too?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/5284310/US-air-strikes-in-Afghanistan-kill-dozens-of-women-and-children.html


US air strikes in Afghanistan 'kill dozens of women and children'

Air strikes by US forces in Afghanistan on Tuesday are now thought to have killed dozens of civilians including women and children, the Red Cross has said.

By Miles Amoore in Kabul
Published: 11:49AM BST 06 May 2009

The American military has announced it will investigate reports that the strikes killed scores of Afghan civilians sheltering from fierce fighting between Taliban militants and government soldiers.
Afghan officials say up to 120 non-combatants were killed when US warplanes dropped bombs on two villages in Bala Baluk, a Taliban-controlled district in the western province of Farah.



http://www.rawa.org/azizi.htm


US airstrike on Afghan village kills dozens civilians

People at the local hospital "are saying perhaps hundreds have been killed."

With a report from CTV's Janis Mackey Frayer
Up to 80 suspected Taliban militants and an unknown number of civilians died after U.S.-led coalition forces bombed a village in southern Afghanistan.


RAWA: 3 year-old Mohammad Imran in a local hospital in Kandahar. According to villagers all of his family members were killed after the coalition forces bombed their village in Panjwaee of Kandahar province.


RAWA: This person who is hospitalized in Kandahar, told journalists: "We saw that over 45 villagers, many of them women and children, were buried alive under rubbers when their homes were bombed by the US troops. Taliban come and force us on gunpoint to give them shelter in our village but they had already left the village when the air raid started."
more...
U.S. warplanes reportedly dropped bombs on an Islamic religious school and homes in which Taliban fighters had taken up position during the strike late Sunday and early Monday.

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/feb/23/world/la-fg-afghan-airstrike23-2010feb23


NATO airstrike in Afghanistan kills 27, including women and children

[Eki]

The fact is the reason those guys are over there making these shots is because a group of fanatic muslims (not all muslims are bad, but 99% of the terrorist actions against civilians in the west in the last few years are from Muslim terror groups) basically hijacked a nation, turned it into a 13th century theocratic nightmare, where people were shot for flying kites or listening to music.
Yes, they hijacked it from the communists who with the aid of the Soviet Union tried to take Afghanistan a little closer to modern times. Now, who armed and trained them so that they could fight the commies and the Soviets?

[CarlMetro]

So you condone the murdering of women and children also, BRILLIANT!

No, I'm not an American.

[Daniel]

OUCH Carl!

[CarlMetro]

99% of the terrorist actions against civilians in the west in the last few years are from Muslim terror groups

Source please........

[fandango]

Threads like this are great, aren't they? Really separates the men from the, eh, other men.

I never called anyone barbaric here.

It's strange how it's necessary to dehumanise people in order to justify killing them. It's part of the job of the soldier. (I'm saying that before anyone else gets themselves in profile, takes a long pull of their marlboro and mutters, between clenched teeth, while staring into the middle distance "It's war, man. People go down...")

Get real, people. Whether you're pro- or ant-i American, Taleban or whatever, there are far more reasons to be sad about this than be happy, whether you think it was a great acheivement or not (which technically it surely was - if it's true) It's sad that the people who died were someone's son, father, brother or whatever.

I think that to celebrate this as only good news is also to lose that freedom and democracy that this war is supposedly being fought to protect. And I can be as macho as the next guy (he says, quickly finding an oily rag to wipe down the nearest machine and lean on it at elbow height), but I can still feel sad. Emotions, I think they're called. So stop all this ridiculous posturing.

[Dave B]

(I'm saying that before anyone else gets themselves in profile, takes a long pull of their marlboro and mutters, between clenched teeth, while staring into the middle distance "It's war, man. People go down...")
Anyone want to bet how long it is before we hear a "you weren't there, you wouldn't understand" diatribe? :p

[Bob Riebe]

Do you too?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/5284310/US-air-strikes-in-Afghanistan-kill-dozens-of-women-and-children.html



http://www.rawa.org/azizi.htm



http://articles.latimes.com/2010/feb/23/world/la-fg-afghan-airstrike23-2010feb23
Muslims do it deliberately, the allies do not; try again.

[Bob Riebe]

No, I'm not an American.
So you are not an American, what is your point?

[Bob Riebe]

Threads like this are great, aren't they? Really separates the men from the, eh, other men.

I never called anyone barbaric here.

It's strange how it's necessary to dehumanise people in order to justify killing them. It's part of the job of the soldier. (I'm saying that before anyone else gets themselves in profile, takes a long pull of their marlboro and mutters, between clenched teeth, while staring into the middle distance "It's war, man. People go down...")

Get real, people. Whether you're pro- or ant-i American, Taleban or whatever, there are far more reasons to be sad about this than be happy, whether you think it was a great acheivement or not (which technically it surely was - if it's true) It's sad that the people who died were someone's son, father, brother or whatever.

I think that to celebrate this as only good news is also to lose that freedom and democracy that this war is supposedly being fought to protect. And I can be as macho as the next guy (he says, quickly finding an oily rag to wipe down the nearest machine and lean on it at elbow height), but I can still feel sad. Emotions, I think they're called. So stop all this ridiculous posturing.

That is your opinion and you are welcome to itl

[CarlMetro]

Muslims do it deliberately, the allies do not; try again.

Guess you didn't bother with the thread about the helicopter gunships mowing down the reporter and his bodyguards then?

[Bob Riebe]

Anyone want to bet how long it is before we hear a "you weren't there, you wouldn't understand" diatribe? :p
Do you have a point to make?

[Dave B]

Do you have a point to make?
I do, but I honestly can't be bothered trying to have a rational debate with certain people on this forum. It's a waste of time and energy, so I'll bite by tongue and bow out of this thread.

[CarlMetro]

I do, but I honestly can't be bothered trying to have a rational debate with certain people on this forum. It's a waste of time and energy, so I'll bite by tongue and bow out of this thread.

:up:

[Bob Riebe]

QUOTE-Dave BrockmanI - I honestly can't be bothered trying to have a rational debate with certain people on this forum.
It's a waste of time and energy, so I'll bite by tongue and bow out of this thread. http://foolstown.com/sm/bud.gif

[ShiftingGears]

They do it in the name of their religion,

And that is clearly different than saying it is the religion that causes it, which is what your wording implied.
Give some people the bible and they'd use it to justify killing many innocent people.


On the second point, oh yes there is that muslim soldier who-- nah this is way too easy.

That is one soldier in the whole US army, congratulations.

[Daniel]

Bob, you're a knob goblin.

[Eki]

Threads like this are great, aren't they? Really separates the men from the, eh, other men.

I never called anyone barbaric here.

It's strange how it's necessary to dehumanise people in order to justify killing them. It's part of the job of the soldier. (I'm saying that before anyone else gets themselves in profile, takes a long pull of their marlboro and mutters, between clenched teeth, while staring into the middle distance "It's war, man. People go down...")

Get real, people. Whether you're pro- or ant-i American, Taleban or whatever, there are far more reasons to be sad about this than be happy, whether you think it was a great acheivement or not (which technically it surely was - if it's true) It's sad that the people who died were someone's son, father, brother or whatever.

I think that to celebrate this as only good news is also to lose that freedom and democracy that this war is supposedly being fought to protect. And I can be as macho as the next guy (he says, quickly finding an oily rag to wipe down the nearest machine and lean on it at elbow height), but I can still feel sad. Emotions, I think they're called. So stop all this ridiculous posturing.
True. If this a cause for celebration, then we surely must understand those who we saw celebrating after the 9/11 attacks. After all, those attacks were not easy to accomplish. They took a lot skillful planning and clever operations, maybe even courage.

[Eki]

Muslims do it deliberately, the allies do not; try again.
They know it will sometimes happen, even if you try to avoid it, especially if you use air attacks, missiles or artillery. That makes it deliberate. If they'd use only ground troops who only pull the trigger when they see the enemy, there'd be much less civilian casualties.

[anthonyvop]

You know what is really funny about guys like Eki?

If a group like the Taliban was to take over in his country he would be among the first they would line up against the wall and execute.

[Eki]

You know what is really funny about guys like Eki?

If a group like the Taliban was to take over in his country he would be among the first they would line up against the wall and execute.
Nope. I'd be fighting against them defending my country and its values, just like the Talibans are in Afghanistan.

[Easy Drifter]

Eki are you now saying you are a member of the Taliban? :D You, George Bush's half brother? :confused: :D

Kidding aside we are a long way from the title of the thread.

[anthonyvop]

Nope. I'd be fighting against them defending my country and its values, just like the Talibans are in Afghanistan.

And what are those values? Collaborating with whichever country is threatening you? History clearly points that out.

[Daniel]

The Finns had a funny way of collaborating with the Russians in WW2

[anthonyvop]

The Finns had a funny way of collaborating with the Russians in WW2
Yep. They sided with the Nazi's....Then when the Nazi's lost they sided with the Soviets.

[Eki]

Yep. They sided with the Nazi's....Then when the Nazi's lost they sided with the Soviets.
So? The US sided with the Soviets for years before the Nazi's lost, and then turned against them after WW2. In the 1980s the US sided with the Talebans and Saddam Hussein against the Soviet assisted Afghans and Iran, and then in the 1990s turned against them. The Americans are flip-floppers, you can't trust them.

[Daniel]

So? The US sided with the Soviets for years before the Nazi's lost, and then turned against them after WW2. In the 1980s the US sided with the Talebans and Saddam Hussein against the Soviet assisted Afghans and Iran, and then in the 1990s turned against them. The Americans are flip-floppers, you can't trust them.
:rotflmao:

I think you got Tony there Eki :up:

[Mark in Oshawa]

Yes, they hijacked it from the communists who with the aid of the Soviet Union tried to take Afghanistan a little closer to modern times. Now, who armed and trained them so that they could fight the commies and the Soviets?
The Americans. So...let me get this straight, you are saying this is Congressman Charlie Wilson's fault? Your circle of logic is as ever, always pointing the fingers always at uncle Sam. The ONLY nation in the world that is always responsible for the world's ills according to you.

We will take this under advisement Eki....because now you are trying to justify the Taliban...

[Mark in Oshawa]

True. If this a cause for celebration, then we surely must understand those who we saw celebrating after the 9/11 attacks. After all, those attacks were not easy to accomplish. They took a lot skillful planning and clever operations, maybe even courage.

So we should admire them? I am just trying to nail you down on where you stand? You used to defend every dictator with great zeal or look the other way...

As for understanding the Zealots...ummmm They come out and say what they stand for. Haven't you been listening? Lets see...let me consult my notes.....oh yes..

Death to any non Muslims is justified, including civilians.
The Western democracies and the USA in particular are the source of evil.
Dying in a suicide attack is fully justified if you take the infidels you hate with you.

Yup...they say all this Eki..and that is why we should celebrate a world when there is one less thinking this way. They want to die..they SAY they want to die. Funny...only Bin Laden refuses to....

[anthonyvop]

So? The US sided with the Soviets for years before the Nazi's lost, and then turned against them after WW2. In the 1980s the US sided with the Talebans and Saddam Hussein against the Soviet assisted Afghans and Iran, and then in the 1990s turned against them. The Americans are flip-floppers, you can't trust them.

Nope.

We used the commies to help in our defeat of the Nazi's.
Then we used the Mujaheddin to defeat the Commies. We used. The Finns collaborated.
The problem in the USA is the Left wing loonies who flip flop like a live sardine on a skillet.

[markabilly]

True, it's war not a sport. Records are for sports and other entertainment, not for war.
About the only thing you have ever said, i agree with. I would have thought all this was already addressed in the other thread on the chopper pilots.




Finland can take some credit for this macabre record too:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.338_Lapua_Magnum


yeah and before you climb up on your high throne of hypocrisy.....




:rolleyes:






Or perhaps like what Finnland did during WWII when it fought on the side of the Nazi and maintained concentration camps in karelia where many "innocents" died as well as the issues of torture of Russian prisoners........I especially like the sign of "Transfer camp. Entry to the camp and conversations through the fence are forbidden under the penalty of death."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuation_War

.

[Bob Riebe]

Nope. I'd be fighting against them defending my country and its values, just like the Talibans are in Afghanistan.
You mean torturing and murdering women?
Wow, what part of your country does this?

[Bob Riebe]

In the 1980s the US sided with the Tilebans and Saddam Hussein against the Soviet assisted Afghans ...

That IS a point that should never be forgotten or actually forgiven, as the reason the Soviets went into Afghanistan was to control the spread of the Muslim cancer that Carter caved into when he allowed the Ayatollah and his thugs to run wild.

[Bob Riebe]

Guess you didn't bother with the thread about the helicopter gunships mowing down the reporter and his bodyguards then?
They were where they should not have been and were treated as such; that they were actually not connected to the terrorists was never proven.

[Bob Riebe]

Bob, you're a knob goblin.
Daniel you are a knob.

[Eki]

You mean torturing and murdering women?
Wow, what part of your country does this?
That's not what I meant, but since you asked, no part. That's among the things what I'd be fighting against. What the Taliban does in Afghanistan, it's their business, but if they try to do it here, it will come my business.

[Easy Drifter]

But, Eki the Taliban are not the elected Govt. in Afghanistan, however questionable the elections may be.
Many of the current Taliban are not Afghanis but mercenaries, so how is it their country?
The Taliban are terrorists.
The IEDs are prohibited weapons, in theory.

[Eki]

But, Eki the Taliban are not the elected Govt. in Afghanistan, however questionable the elections may be.
Many of the current Taliban are not Afghanis but mercenaries, so how is it their country?
The Taliban are terrorists.
The IEDs are prohibited weapons, in theory.
Is there a law that every country must have an elected government? And if they don't have one, they'll have to be violently forced to get one by foreign countries (vote or die)?

Most of the coalition soldiers are not Afghans. What does that make them?

IEDs cannot be prohibited, they aren't any specific weapons but generally mean improvised explosive devices that can also be made from legal weapons. For example, Iraqis made IEDs from perfectly legal artillery shells. Just because they are home made or triggered by home made devices doesn't make them prohibited.

[markabilly]

don't worry about Eki and his buds. Those taliban and any other group get out of line in Finland, they will just round them up and put them in concentration camps with warnings like "conversations through the fence are forbidden under the penalty of death."


Of course Eki might not want to be "taking prisoners"......

As one might note, his comments are clearly based on the principles of whose ox is getting gored....and since he has got USA men and women fighting and dying to see that they never worm their measley way to Finland, he is free to sprew forth

I believe the word is hypocrite.

[Eki]

don't worry about Eki and his buds. Those taliban and any other group get out of line in Finland, they will just round them up and put them in concentration camps with warnings like "conversations through the fence are forbidden under the penalty of death."

As one might note, his comments are clearly based on the principles of whose ox is getting gored....and since he has got USA men and women fighting and dying to see that they never worm their measley way to Finland, he is free to sprew forth

I believe the word is hypocrite.
Really? Afghans really started to worm their measly way to Finland only after they were invaded. I don't think the Taliban have any ambitions to come to Finland if they can avoid it. Besides, the Muslims that are here don't preach their religion to non-Muslims, it's not their style. Funnily, American Mormons here do go from door to door preaching their religion. They are annoying. Maybe it's the American style, they feel that everyone should feel and think like them.

[slorydn1]

That's taking "reach out and touch someone" to a whole new level!

Great shot by the British sniper. Its sad that he had to take the shot, but since he had to, its great to see that he was able to put his training to use and carry out his orders. I live in the hometown of one of our greatest snipers, Marine Corps SGT Carlos Hathcock, and although he is no longer with us, Im sure he would definitely give it a thumbs up :up:

[anthonyvop]

That's not what I meant, but since you asked, no part. That's among the things what I'd be fighting against. What the Taliban does in Afghanistan, it's their business, but if they try to do it here, it will come my business.

So you support the US's actions in Afghanistan!!!!

The 9/11 attackers were trained and supported by the Taliban Government so it is OUR BUSINESS!

[Eki]

So you support the US's actions in Afghanistan!!!!

The 9/11 attackers were trained and supported by the Taliban Government so it is OUR BUSINESS!
Let's say Afghanistan I understand, Iraq I don't understand.

[Easy Drifter]

IED's are a form of mine. Mines are illegal weapons.
The coalition troops are members of the armed forces of recognized countries 'invited' into Afghanistan by a elected Govt. to fight terrorists. That hardly makes them mercenaries.
The Taliban now are to a large extent, especially the leaders, non Afghanis having no legal authority acting as terrorists against a duly constituted Govt.
I would call the non Afghanis mercenaries.
However they are all terrorists.
I would assume that you are still part of Finland's reserve military.
If so, as Finland has soldiers in Afghanistan, that would make you, by your own defination, a mercenary. :D

[Mark in Oshawa]

Let's say Afghanistan I understand, Iraq I don't understand.You don't understand much Eki...if you choose not to.

Iraq I can understand in context, but not in results. The fact you get Afghanistan is stunning as an admission as we have ever gotten from you....I guess that means because Finland is involved, you are loathe to be too critical or is it because you truly do understand why NATO troops are there?

[Mark in Oshawa]

Is there a law that every country must have an elected government? And if they don't have one, they'll have to be violently forced to get one by foreign countries (vote or die)?
No...but when the autocratic religious theocracy shelters a terrorist organization with the same values as your theocracy, and that organization kills 3000 civilians in one day in the way they did, they basically have to either extradite the terrorists, or stand with them. They stood with them, and the civilized world decided they wouldn't tolerate it any more.


Most of the coalition soldiers are not Afghans. What does that make them? Peackeepers, libreators, and people trying to do good in a part of the world that doesn't understand or seem to grasp that the future is theirs to make a better life for their citizens, if only they would eliminate corruption. The fact that Karzai is an idiot doesn't change the motives or values of the troops on the ground.


IEDs cannot be prohibited, they aren't any specific weapons but generally mean improvised explosive devices that can also be made from legal weapons. For example, Iraqis made IEDs from perfectly legal artillery shells. Just because they are home made or triggered by home made devices doesn't make them prohibited.

They are not prohibited, until they are used by terrorists in a manner. That said, it is a pretty cowardly way to fight. Canadian soldiers coming home (including one today as I type) have been mainly attacked by IED's. Not losing people in combat situations, but IED's is frustrating.

Lets put it this way Eki, IED's are not illegal, but landmines have been sanctioned against and eliminated from a lot of nation's military arsenals....so if they are not illegal, they are frowned upon by most of the civilized world. That said, they are effective....

[Eki]

I would assume that you are still part of Finland's reserve military.
If so, as Finland has soldiers in Afghanistan, that would make you, by your own defination, a mercenary. :D
That's debatable. Even the Finnish parliament is debating if Finland is in war in Afghanistan. Some, including the Finnish troops in Afghanistan, claim they're not. Some say they are, and want to get them home.

The politics in the Finland seem to be very confusing when it comes to war. For example, the Finnish law says that Finnish companies are not allowed to export weapons material to countries in war, so some members of the parliament tried to stop the Finnish company Patria from selling a manufacturing license of a grenade launcher system to the US, because the US is in war. No success. And now I read that the sniper record was done using ammo from the Finnish company Lapua and that they are used also by the American military, not just the British. So, unless those ammunitions were exported before 2001, I guess the law only applies in exporting weapons material to small and insignificant countries in war.

PS. I thought mercenaries got paid for being in the military. I'm not currently paid by the Finnish military.

[Mark in Oshawa]

That's debatable. Even the Finnish parliament is debating if Finland is in war in Afghanistan. Some, including the Finnish troops in Afghanistan, claim they're not. Some say they are, and want to get them home.

The politics in the Finland seem to be very confusing when it comes to war. For example, the Finnish law says that Finnish companies are not allowed to export weapons material to countries in war, so some members of the parliament tried to stop the Finnish company Patria from selling a manufacturing license of a grenade launcher system to the US, because the US is in war. No success. And now I read that the sniper record was done using ammo from the Finnish company Lapua and that they are used also by the American military, not just the British. So, unless those ammunitions were exported before 2001, I guess the law only applies in exporting weapons material to small and insignificant countries in war.

PS. I thought mercenaries got paid for being in the military. I'm not currently paid by the Finnish military.

Finland is finding out what many nations figure out. Governments are great at proclamations and laws that do "good" deeds, but very poor at enforcing the actual law to stop the exportation of miltary hardware. I guess the pols figure the guy in the plant making the grenade launcher or the ammunition likes to have a job and may not with out the export. I suspect also that like most of these sort of laws, the actual details of how and why you would enforcement are not thought of....

Don't worry Eki, most of us realize the Finnish are not out to sell arms to the entire world and inflame us all in an epic conflict.

As for your role in Afghanistan, your troops likely are not in open combat, but may be targets if not vigilant.

[Eki]

As for your role in Afghanistan, your troops likely are not in open combat, but may be targets if not vigilant.
They have been targets and in gun fights against ambushing locals few times, but they have orders not to shoot first.

[Eki]

Lets put it this way Eki, IED's are not illegal, but landmines have been sanctioned against and eliminated from a lot of nation's military arsenals....so if they are not illegal, they are frowned upon by most of the civilized world. That said, they are effective....
The Taliban has not ratified the ban of mines and neither has the US.

The UK, on the other hand, was eager to join the ban. They are not a sparsely populated country sharing a 1300 km land border with Russia (who BTW haven't joined the ban). They probably would not be as eager to join a ban of sea mines.

[Mark in Oshawa]

They have been targets and in gun fights against ambushing locals few times, but they have orders not to shoot first.

Orders not to shoot first? Are they at least allowed to defend themselves?

Those sound like orders written by a deskbound bureaucrat who doesn't understand that sometimes shooting first means you go home vs the other guy....

[Mark in Oshawa]

The Taliban has not ratified the ban of mines and neither has the US.

Nope..and you and I agree, they are not illegal. Of course, one might point out the Taliban are no longer in a position to ratify or agree to anything....

They wouldn't ratify anything anyhow. That involves debate, discussion, free exchange of ideas and a vote. The Taliban doesn't believe in any of that...which is why defending anything they do is fraught with peril...

[Eki]

Orders not to shoot first? Are they at least allowed to defend themselves?

Those sound like orders written by a deskbound bureaucrat who doesn't understand that sometimes shooting first means you go home vs the other guy....
Yes, they are allowed to defend themselves, but the danger has to be imminent and clear, not just potential.

[Mark in Oshawa]

Yes, they are allowed to defend themselves, but the danger has to be imminent and clear, not just potential.

Very True. Just you should trust one's military to make the call on their own in a war zone. Desk bound politicians shouldn't be putting soldiers in to a potential war zone with artificial rules of conduct. In this case, If the Finnish government is going to deploy the army, just state in general what the goals of the mission are, and let the men on the ground conduct themselves. Finland, like Canada raises pretty smart young people and they know what is right. We also know if they cross the line, there is a process for that too....

[Eki]

Finland is finding out what many nations figure out. Governments are great at proclamations and laws that do "good" deeds, but very poor at enforcing the actual law to stop the exportation of miltary hardware. I guess the pols figure the guy in the plant making the grenade launcher or the ammunition likes to have a job and may not with out the export. I suspect also that like most of these sort of laws, the actual details of how and why you would enforcement are not thought of....

Don't worry Eki, most of us realize the Finnish are not out to sell arms to the entire world and inflame us all in an epic conflict.

That's not what I worry about. I worry about the hypocrisy and partiality. If you sell to one party of a war, you should also sell to the other, or sell to neither. So, if they sell grenade launcher and sniper rifle technology to the US and Britain, they should also sell them to the Afghan and Iraqi insurgents.

[Bob Riebe]

That's not what I worry about. I worry about the hypocrisy and partiality. If you sell to one party of a war, you should also sell to the other, or sell to neither. So, if they sell grenade launcher and sniper rifle technology to the US and Britain, they should also sell them to the Afghan and Iraqi insurgents.
If one is devoid of morals that works out fine.

Only a hypocrite would sell to both sides, whilst rationalizing that there is nothing wrong with that.

[Bob Riebe]

Yes, they are allowed to defend themselves, but the danger has to be imminent and clear, not just potential.
Oh yes, that is the logic used by Reagan in Lebanon, where he did not allow them to initiate action in their self-defense.
Three hundred some dead soldiers later, some one actually wondered if that was such a good idea.

[Mark in Oshawa]

That's not what I worry about. I worry about the hypocrisy and partiality. If you sell to one party of a war, you should also sell to the other, or sell to neither. So, if they sell grenade launcher and sniper rifle technology to the US and Britain, they should also sell them to the Afghan and Iraqi insurgents.

Now THAT is where you are out of your MIND! IF you really believe that the modern society we live in has less value or equal value to a bunch of insurgents who would impose a thirteenth century religious dictatorship down your throat if they let you live at all, then you really are delusional.

Whatever faults the US and UK have or don't have, you want a world THEY run as opposed to one where the insurgents are running the show.

Moral relativism is a coward's choice and is intellectually bankrupt.

[Tomi]

That's debatable. Even the Finnish parliament is debating if Finland is in war in Afghanistan. Some, including the Finnish troops in Afghanistan, claim they're not. Some say they are, and want to get them home.

The situation of the mission they did go too has changed a lot, so its understandable, it gets tougher also to find volunteers, that may also be a reason why some politicians try to spoil the debate.

[Eki]

Oh yes, that is the logic used by Reagan in Lebanon, where he did not allow them to initiate action in their self-defense.
Three hundred some dead soldiers later, some one actually wondered if that was such a good idea.
They should have wondered if it was such a good idea for Americans to be in Lebanon to begin with. What's it to them? What Americans did in Lebanon was one of the main reasons why 9/11 attacks happened:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10079-2004Oct29.html


God knows it did not cross our minds to attack the towers. But after the situation became unbearable and we witnessed the injustice and tyranny of the American-Israeli alliance against our people in Palestine and Lebanon, I thought about it. And the events that affected me directly were that of 1982 and the events that followed -- when America allowed the Israelis to invade Lebanon, helped by the U.S. 6th Fleet.

[Mark in Oshawa]

The situation of the mission they did go too has changed a lot, so its understandable, it gets tougher also to find volunteers, that may also be a reason why some politicians try to spoil the debate.
Tougher to get volunteers? Maybe so...but the enlistment rate for people joining the forces in Canada is UP and people are volunteering because the mission is pretty clear, and the people can support or not support it based on that.

Since your military is mandatory, but the mission is voluntary, it sort of muddies the waters on obligation....which is why a voluntary army to my mind is more fair, equitable and will produce a better soldier. You have those who are motivated to be there and for the right reasons you hope...

[Daniel]

Daniel you are a knob.

You're just a boorish loudmouth who puts words in people's mouths so coming from you it's sort of a compliment. I don't agree with Tony or Fousto most of the time but I have a lot more respect for them than I have for you.

Perhaps you should take a leaf out of Mark in Oshawa's book and have your views but try to show respect for others, you might find you get some of that respect back.

[Mark in Oshawa]

They should have wondered if it was such a good idea for Americans to be in Lebanon to begin with. What's it to them? What Americans did in Lebanon was one of the main reasons why 9/11 attacks happened:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10079-2004Oct29.html
This is assuming Eki that someone who can rationalize the death of 3000 civilians as just part of his morning rationale for running a terrorist organization bent on killing anyone who doesn't subscribe to his version of Islam. Taking his motives on face value, ignores the reality that Ronald Reagan isn't President anymore, and why hasn't the Bin Laden's of this world actually gone to Israel and had it out with the Jews? Really....why is Al Quaida just messing around bombing NY and Madrid? Oh right..because this isn't about Israel, and it never HAS been. IT is a red herring, and per usual, he sucks in libreals who hate Israel, like yourself into believing he has a point. You have NO point when you fly civilian airliners into buildings that I want to listen to, I just want you DEAD...

[Bob Riebe]

They should have wondered if it was such a good idea for Americans to be in Lebanon to begin with. What's it to them? What Americans did in Lebanon was one of the main reasons why 9/11 attacks happened.[/url]
You are correct that fact the U.S. cut-and-ran from the Muslims, is one reason Osama was as bold as he was.

[Mark in Oshawa]

You are correct that fact the U.S. cut-and-ran from the Muslims, is one reason Osama was as bold as he was.

I believe the Black Hawk Down incident and how Clinton handled that, and the slow escalation of attacks and the non response by Clinton such as the Cole and the bombings in Saudi and in Africa against Americans told Bin Laden that you guys would not react. Since he wants this war, and he WANTS to inflame the democracies to attack all of Islam, he just ratcheted up the pressure and attacks. He has failed in the sense though that the democracies still are free, and still hold values that Bin Laden hates, so I fail to see how he has succeeded...but it all goes back to this...and not Israel as Eki would have anyone believe...

[Bob Riebe]

Perhaps you should take a leaf out of Mark in Oshawa's book and have your views but try to show respect for others, you might find you get some of that respect back.
http://foolstown.com/sm/kngt.gif

[Tomi]

Since your military is mandatory, but the mission is voluntary, it sort of muddies the waters on obligation....which is why a voluntary army to my mind is more fair, equitable and will produce a better soldier. You have those who are motivated to be there and for the right reasons you hope...

It's actually very simple, we are obligated to defend our country if someone attack us, this afganistan thing is everything else but that.

[Daniel]

This is assuming Eki that someone who can rationalize the death of 3000 civilians as just part of his morning rationale for running a terrorist organization bent on killing anyone who doesn't subscribe to his version of Islam. Taking his motives on face value, ignores the reality that Ronald Reagan isn't President anymore, and why hasn't the Bin Laden's of this world actually gone to Israel and had it out with the Jews? Really....why is Al Quaida just messing around bombing NY and Madrid? Oh right..because this isn't about Israel, and it never HAS been. IT is a red herring, and per usual, he sucks in libreals who hate Israel, like yourself into believing he has a point. You have NO point when you fly civilian airliners into buildings that I want to listen to, I just want you DEAD...
You can't deny though that the western world has given a lot of Islamic people a bad deal by supporting people they shouldn't support (The Taliban and Saddam as examples) as well as supporting Israel. I think the problem with the situation is that Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel and other things which seem like anti-Muslim crusades give people like Bin Laden the ammunition to suck in people who would otherwise not be involved.

Or as was said in the bible "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone"

[Daniel]

http://foolstown.com/sm/kngt.gif
http://www.planetsmilies.com/avatars/simpsons/simpsons0007.gif

[Daniel]

http://foolstown.com/sm/kngt.gif
http://www.planetsmilies.com/avatars/simpsons/simpsons0007.gif

[Eki]

You have NO point when you fly civilian airliners into buildings that I want to listen to, I just want you DEAD...
Then you maybe have some understanding when someone wants DEAD those who bomb schools and homes without caring who are inside them. No? Didn't really think so.

http://www.rawa.org/azizi.htm


U.S. warplanes reportedly dropped bombs on an Islamic religious school and homes in which Taliban fighters had taken up position during the strike late Sunday and early Monday.

[Mark in Oshawa]

Then you maybe have some understanding when someone wants DEAD those who bomb schools and homes without caring who are inside them. No? Didn't really think so.

http://www.rawa.org/azizi.htm

Right...so of course the Taliban are to be excused to be hiding behind the kids and women in the school? Just no blame apportioned AT all? Got news for you Eki, they would hold kids and women hostages for the rest of time if someone didn't call the bluff. IN the end, maybe more kids and hostages would be killed. Hard to say. Morally wrong for sure, and I don't condone bombing the school, but negotiating with terrorists usually means you end up with dead hostages and the terrorists doing it again.

[dunes]

I don't mean to get involved with the two of you and your yea/nay side of things but really, cant you see that the enemy are just that "enemies of humaity. They dont follow rules and use women and children as a just means to inflict terror on anywhere in the world. Even in your little towns. This should not be seen as the allies being right or wrong but as someone has to stop these people before they hurt more innocent people and nations. Lets not bicker between ourselves
.
I'm sure we all agree whats happening is horrible but the alternitive is very much worse.

[Malbec]

I have to agree but I also feel that it's understandable to be in awe of such an achievement. As someone who's done a bit of paintballing which was done with markers which probably couldn't hit a barn door reliably at about 50 feet I do appreciate the skill involved in such a shot.

At the end of the day it IS war and if these Taliban gents had the chance to kill him they'd have done it.

I quite enjoy shooting when I've had the chance to do it because of the skill involved in doing it well.

There is another reason why its such an achievement. In a world where just about everything is taken over by electronics and computers sniping resolutely remains a test of human skill. Yes I know you can get wind gauges etc etc that have helped tremendously but ultimately it is all down to the skill of the sniper. This is why it strikes more of a chord than, say, longest distance kill by a tank or a fighter plane.

I've had the luck to use one of these rifles or more accurately its predecessor, the L96. Its typical high end British engineering, lovely to use but I almost cut my fingers on its crappy plastic mould lines.

[Eki]

Morally wrong for sure, and I don't condone bombing the school, but negotiating with terrorists usually means you end up with dead hostages and the terrorists doing it again.
You always end up with dead hostages if you bomb them, and cause more people want to revenge the bombing by becoming terrorists and doing it again. Have you seen what's been happening in Palestine? Israel has bombed Palestinians for over 60 years, but they still don't give up. It obviously doesn't work.

[Easy Drifter]

Well I see Eki has, with his usual proclivity for staying on topic, taken the shooting of Taliban terrorists in Afghanistan by a British sniper into one of his favourite topics, the bashing of and hatred for the Jewish nation and people.

[DexDexter]

I've stayed out of Chit Chat for a while and nothing has changed. You guys go on about the same thing, really. The topic changes somewhat but usually it ends up as North America vs. Europe. :rolleyes:

[ioan]

Well I see Eki has, with his usual proclivity for staying on topic, taken the shooting of Taliban terrorists in Afghanistan by a British sniper into one of his favourite topics, the bashing of and hatred for the Jewish nation and people.

To be fair Eki only gave an example, he drew a parallel, that proves his point pretty well. Then you came along and tried to portray it as antisemitism. IMO Eki is right and you are wrong.

[Easy Drifter]

Ioan, I have not seen you on Chit Chat much. Maybe you have been reading it. If you have you would know that Eki tries to turn every thread he participates in to bashing Bush/the US and or Israel. He rarely stays on topic especially when he is losing a debate and this is a prime example.
You must also admit that Hamas have not succeeded in destroying Israel with their constant use of terrorism.

[ioan]

Ioan, I have not seen you on Chit Chat much. Maybe you have been reading it. If you have you would know that Eki tries to turn every thread he participates in to bashing Bush/the US and or Israel. He rarely stays on topic especially when he is losing a debate and this is a prime example.
You must also admit that Hamas have not succeeded in destroying Israel with their constant use of terrorism.

I know what Eki does and if you check back a couple years ago I actually defended Bush, in the Chit Chat section, when Eki was posting some of his usual.

I do not take sides because of political views, I chose the side that I think is right in a certain situation that is being discussed.

[Mark in Oshawa]

You always end up with dead hostages if you bomb them, and cause more people want to revenge the bombing by becoming terrorists and doing it again. Have you seen what's been happening in Palestine? Israel has bombed Palestinians for over 60 years, but they still don't give up. It obviously doesn't work.

Eki, those people decided to hate the US when the US ignored them. They hate the US when they pay attention to them. They hate the West and US whether we care or not. They hate us no less when we send aid to them when there is a famine in a Muslim state, the hate them when a Christian charity shows up to do anything, and they hate them when everyone starves. At some point, the rational, thinking person can only conclude this is just a waste of everyone's time to try to be liked. Some people are irrataional, and a good lot of them felt it was a good idea to bomb civilians 8000 miles away in 2 buildings with airliners. You don't negotiate with that kind of stupidity, and use the same bile and hate you use on Americans on the kind of cowards that hide behind women and children in a school. The last time I looked, US soldiers didn't put kids on their tanks to deter the locals from shooting at them....

[Bob Riebe]

You always end up with dead hostages if you bomb them, and cause more people want to revenge the bombing by becoming terrorists and doing it again. Have you seen what's been happening in Palestine? Israel has bombed Palestinians for over 60 years, but they still don't give up. It obviously doesn't work.
It does but only if you kill enough to make them impotent; Israel has been too easy on them.
Of course we still hear nothing about the so called palestinians permanently kicked out of Jordan. Why deal with the facts when that makes one's rhetoric look foolish.

[Mark in Oshawa]

Bob...Eki thinks the terrorists are the reasonable ones....

He must, he keeps demanding people stop killing them...because it creates more of them in his opinion. So I guess the best way to deal with them in his eyes is to let them have their way. People irrational enough to justify the killing of women and children as "Allah wills it" are not rational enough to talk to. You don't negotiate with terrorists. You know it, I know it, Eki knows it if he admitting it to himself...but alas, as you say, why let facts get in the way?

[Eki]

Bob...Eki thinks the terrorists are the reasonable ones....

He must, he keeps demanding people stop killing them...because it creates more of them in his opinion. So I guess the best way to deal with them in his eyes is to let them have their way. People irrational enough to justify the killing of women and children as "Allah wills it" are not rational enough to talk to.
It's not for "Allah wills it". The 9/11 attacks were in revenge for what Americans had done in the Middle East, for example helping Israel to fight Palestinians and Lebanese, which has caused the death of many Muslim women and children, and putting troops to Saudi-Arabia, which is "holy land" for the Muslims. If the US had stayed out from the Middle East to begin with, the 9/11 attacks would not have happened.

Using your logic, one could imagine that also people who were irrational enough to justify the deliberate killing of thousands of Japanese women and children by atom bombs are not rational enough to talk to either, especially when they don't even give you a chance to talk to them.

[Easy Drifter]

BS Eki!
Could we get this thread back on topic and get away from Eki blaming the world's problems on the US?

[Mark in Oshawa]

It's not for "Allah wills it". The 9/11 attacks were in revenge for what Americans had done in the Middle East, for example helping Israel to fight Palestinians and Lebanese, which has caused the death of many Muslim women and children, and putting troops to Saudi-Arabia, which is "holy land" for the Muslims. If the US had stayed out from the Middle East to begin with, the 9/11 attacks would not have happened.

That is crap and you know it. If Israel didn't exist, these religious fanatics would have another reason. You are defending people who are terrorists Eki. TERRORISTs who hate anything that isn't their version of Islam. They SAY so. Israel hasn't been attacked by Bin Laden, because he knows they will come after him with Mossad and everything else. He also hasn't gone AFTER them directly. He has targeted western society in general, and the way you and I live. He has said this on many occasions. You just refuse to believe him or wish it wasn't so. Irrational people do NOT grasp when someone is trying to kill you, you don't offer to shake hands with them....


Using your logic, one could imagine that also people who were irrational enough to justify the deliberate killing of thousands of Japanese women and children by atom bombs are not rational enough to talk to either, especially when they don't even give you a chance to talk to them.

The people of Japan were locked in a war they were not winning, could not win, and it was obvious to them as early as the Spring of 1944. Every battle the their military fought was basically to the last man, to the last ounce. It was a war that their populace supported (through brainwashing by the Tojo regime) and Japan brought about through their own actions. Should the US have dropped the Atom bomb? Assume I agree and say no.....then the direct invasion of the home islands was the only way the was going to end, and based on the experience of the US military in Okinawa, and Iwo Jima, it was clear that the causalties to the Japanese would have been in the Millions.....

So...millions of military and civilian Japanese casualties, or 140000 in two atom bomb drops? one thing was for sure, Japan had no sign of quitting.

Now...you wont listen to reason, and you have succeeded in quickly turning a thread about a UK marksmen beating the existing record of a Canadian soldier into yet another one of your vicious anti-American diatribes. Good job...u have once again established your bona-fides as a thread killer...

[Bob Riebe]

Using your logic, one could imagine that also people who were irrational enough to justify the deliberate killing of thousands of Japanese women and children by atom bombs are not rational enough to talk to either, especially when they don't even give you a chance to talk to them.
No you are not applying logic in any form, you are trying to make words fit your rhetoric regardless of fact.
The Japanese started the war and any mean of ending it, if fair playing for the country attacked.
The only reason ANY supposed rules of war, are not less valuable than used toilet paper is the fear of what goes around comes around, period, not because anyone gives a damn what the rules are.

[Mark in Oshawa]

No you are not applying logic in any form, you are trying to make words fit your rhetoric regardless of fact.
The Japanese started the war and any mean of ending it, if fair playing for the country attacked.
The only reason ANY supposed rules of war, are not less valuable than used toilet paper is the fear of what goes around comes around, period, not because anyone gives a damn what the rules are.

Didn't you know Bob, Japan was justified in ignoring the Geneva Conventions and torturing and killing millions? I guess he never heard of what the Japanese were doing in China....

No...there are people in Japan today that may not like the fact they had the Atom bomb dropped on them, but I suspect there are a few that realized something had to be done to jolt them back into reality in 1945. Japan was a nation bent on suicide....

[Eki]

He has targeted western society in general, and the way you and I live.

He has not targeted Finland and Canada, and you know it.

[Eki]

Didn't you know Bob, Japan was justified in ignoring the Geneva Conventions and torturing and killing millions? I guess he never heard of what the Japanese were doing in China....

I guess you've never heard two wrongs don't do right.

[Mark in Oshawa]

He has not targeted Finland and Canada, and you know it.

Really? Funny, I heard Bin Laden mention Canada by name...

AS for Finland, I am sure when a willing Muslim in Helisinki can be found to join the Jihad...

You are really naive...

We just had trials in Toronto where a home grown cell of willing warriors for the Jihad and supporters of Bin Laden were tried for acquiring explosives for a threat to blow up Bay St. (our financial capital), and the Parliament buildings in Ottawa.

I am not going to be as naive as you are. Again...you moral equivalance is a nice theory but has never worked in reality.

Two wrongs don't make a right? Fine..so when Bin Laden murders through his proxies 3000 Americans, they should all just go to the local mosque and say I sorry?

It just is just a weird habit you have of holding western society to a standard you wont hold known thugs, dictators and terrorists to. It is simple....you ignore reality.

[Bob Riebe]

I guess you've never heard two wrongs don't do right.
There were not two wrong and it would be moronic to say the allies were wrong for what they did.

[Mark in Oshawa]

There were not two wrong and it would be moronic to say the allies were wrong for what they did.

In Eki's world, pacifism is always the only option open. Funny, Neville Chamberlain proved how well it doesn't work in the late 30's.....but Eki wont look at that as an example of its failure...

[dunes]

Really? Funny, I heard Bin Laden mention Canada by name...

AS for Finland, I am sure when a willing Muslim in Helisinki can be found to join the Jihad...

You are really naive...

We just had trials in Toronto where a home grown cell of willing warriors for the Jihad and supporters of Bin Laden were tried for acquiring explosives for a threat to blow up Bay St. (our financial capital), and the Parliament buildings in Ottawa.




After England, Canada has the largest known group of not only terrorist cells but also recruitment areas than anywhere else in the world. They have every right to be just as vigilant as we in the States are. Its allready in their front yard, not back yard but right there on any main street.If you're not aware of this in your home town you might want to stay indoors.

[Eki]

In Eki's world, pacifism is always the only option open. Funny, Neville Chamberlain proved how well it doesn't work in the late 30's.....but Eki wont look at that as an example of its failure...
If you compare the Nazi-Germany to al Qaeda or Taliban, you're being naive. Al Qaeda and Taliban aren't large national armies you can win by conventional warfare. Instead you should concentrate on better intelligence gathering, better border and airport control and better law enforcement. As you say, they are thugs. Thugs should be taken care of by law enforcement, not by the military.

[Eki]

Really? Funny, I heard Bin Laden mention Canada by name...

AS for Finland, I am sure when a willing Muslim in Helisinki can be found to join the Jihad...

That's a possibility now that Finland has troops in Afghanistan. But there's no other reason.

[Mark in Oshawa]

After England, Canada has the largest known group of not only terrorist cells but also recruitment areas than anywhere else in the world. They have every right to be just as vigilant as we in the States are. Its allready in their front yard, not back yard but right there on any main street.If you're not aware of this in your home town you might want to stay indoors.

I aint panicing. I do know this much. I think one of the reasons they leave Canada alone is because they use this country for staging getting people into the US. Taking advantage of the world's largest undefended border wont work if they kill a thousand Canadians or so dropping a skyscraper. The Toronto "18" that were on trial were jihadists, but not officially Al Quaida.

[Mark in Oshawa]

That's a possibility now that Finland has troops in Afghanistan. But there's no other reason.

No Eki, they wont bother you because of that. The reason they wont bother you because the streets of Helsinki are devoid of mosques, immigrants from Arab nations where they can fit in and ferment dissent and hate. Canada, the US and the UK all have sizable numbers of Pakistani and Arab immigrant populations. Not hard to get local recurits to the jihad if you have people in your ethnic group and religion to start with. In a nation of 5 million or so Eki, I bet there is damn few Muslims.....

You simplfy things always and you only see things through the Finnish prism. The problem is, what works in Finland only works there, so do try to explain then why Canadian's who would try to blow up the national parliament in a jihad? People born here, to immigrant parents who were shocked when they found out their kids had gone to some radical imam spreading hatred towards "infidel" values. In the papers at the time, all the talk was on how the radical Imams spread their doctrine of Islam, based on their hatred of corrupt western values. Israel wasn't even a motive, it is all about fighting for Islam, and being a martyr. Israel is a convenient excuse, as is the Western nations in Iraq.

The harsh reality is the western nations could be out of Afghanistan and Iraq tomorrow, but the same people who claim to want those soldiers OUT keep fighting and allowing the President or leaders of the nations to justify keeping the soldiers there. If the Talilban and insurgents in Iraq just melted into the wood work for about 2 years, most of the soldiers would be home. The reality is, the reason the insurgents and the Taliban and Al Quaida keep fighting is because the fight is more glorious than the actual goal. It is the act of jihad that makes them feel vindicated and holy, and a peaceful nation with people going on with their lives isn't what they want. They could care less. It is why Taliban fighters take Afghani's as hostages if they can when faced with the Western military. They could care less about the average guy in the field and how he may want to live. They want to use him as a pawn in their game of jihad.

No Eki, you really are either naive, or willingfully blind to what this is all about, because the terrorists have said more than once that it is the way Christian nations in particular live that really fuels their anger. We give our women the right to vote, the right to dress in a "shameful fashion", we have democratic values and freedom from religion or freedom to practice it. In their world, this cannot be...and they don't want anyone in the Middle East getting it into their head these values are worth emulating....

[Eki]

No Eki, you really are either naive, or willingfully blind to what this is all about, because the terrorists have said more than once that it is the way Christian nations in particular live that really fuels their anger.
I have not heard them say that. Can you provide a link?

[Roamy]

Great News!! Is it on utube?

[Mark in Oshawa]

I have not heard them say that. Can you provide a link?

How many tapes has Bin Laden put over the years? too many to count.....it is in there trust me. I am not going to go bother listening to his mindless drivel over again to win an argument you have used to hijack yet another thread.

[Eki]

How many tapes has Bin Laden put over the years? too many to count.....it is in there trust me. I am not going to go bother listening to his mindless drivel over again to win an argument you have used to hijack yet another thread.
I haven't heard those, but I've heard this:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,137095,00.html


In the video, bin Laden accused Bush of misleading Americans by saying the attack was carried out because Al Qaeda "hates freedom." The terrorist leader said his followers have left alone countries that do not threaten Muslims.

"We fought you because we are free ... and want to regain freedom for our nation. As you undermine our security we undermine yours," bin Laden said.

He said he was first inspired to attack the United States by the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon in which towers and buildings in Beirut were destroyed in the siege of the capital.

"While I was looking at these destroyed towers in Lebanon, it sparked in my mind that the tyrant should be punished with the same and that we should destroy towers in America, so that it tastes what we taste and would be deterred from killing our children and women," he said.

"God knows that it had not occurred to our mind to attack the towers, but after our patience ran out and we saw the injustice and inflexibility of the American-Israeli alliance toward our people in Palestine and Lebanon, this came to my mind," he said.

[Bob Riebe]

I haven't heard those, but I've heard this:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,137095,00.html
OH you mean the ones where Binny hears what the western press is using as their reasons for muslims murdering people, and then thinks, hey- I can use that, sounds good to me.

[Mark in Oshawa]

I haven't heard those, but I've heard this:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,137095,00.html

Whatever Eki, you ask me to accept HIS terms of this war and his acts of violence and yet condemn the Western powers involved in hunting this jerk to the ground. Yet both feel justified. Only difference is, Bin Laden believes civilians are fair game. They hide amongst the innocent in Afghanistan and northern Pakistan like cowards. Yet they claim to not fear death. Muslim radicals always are game to see other die for their cause, but somehow never seem to die themselves. These are people who will send 14 year old kids with suicide bombs into Israeli markets...and yet claim a moral high ground? You give it to them with your tripe....

[Eki]

Whatever Eki, you ask me to accept HIS terms of this war and his acts of violence and yet condemn the Western powers involved in hunting this jerk to the ground. Yet both feel justified. Only difference is, Bin Laden believes civilians are fair game. They hide amongst the innocent in Afghanistan and northern Pakistan like cowards.
What else means do they have? Aircraft carriers? Fighter jets? Cruise missiles? Tanks? Their opposition hides behind those.

[Garry Walker]

What else means do they have? Aircraft carriers? Fighter jets? Cruise missiles? Tanks? Their opposition hides behind those.

They should use you as a human shield.

[Easy Drifter]

So Eki you condone the terrorist Taliban cowering amongst innocent civilians, including babies, while they try to murder Afghani and allied soldiers possibly including your fellow Findlandia soldiers.
We won't consider the the innocent Afghanis murdered by Taliban suicide bombers or the schoolchildren who have had acid thrown in their faces by those brave Taliban fighters of defenceless civilians.
I am sure the other reservists in your unit would be happy to have you covering their backs in a battle.

[Eki]

So Eki you condone the terrorist Taliban cowering amongst innocent civilians, including babies, while they try to murder Afghani and allied soldiers possibly including your fellow Findlandia soldiers.

I'm not condoning anything. I'm just trying to see it their way, what would I do if I were in their shoes fighting a superpower with any means I can find. Desperate situations need desperate methods.

[anthonyvop]

What else means do they have? Aircraft carriers? Fighter jets? Cruise missiles? Tanks? Their opposition hides behind those.

Nope but they can high-jack airliners and fly them into buildings killing 3000 INNOCENT people.

Are you really defending them?

[anthonyvop]

I'm not condoning anything. I'm just trying to see it their way, what would I do if I were in their shoes fighting a superpower with any means I can find. Desperate situations need desperate methods.

So you are defending them?

Here is a question for you.

How many Arab Muslims would you say it is OK to kill if it would save 1 life of your countryman.?

[Cooper_S]

That question is a double edged sword...

how may of his countrymen must be killed before you say it is OK to kill just 1 Arab Muslim?

The answer is most probablly the same.

[anthonyvop]

That question is a double edged sword...

how may of his countrymen must be killed before you say it is OK to kill just 1 Arab Muslim?

The answer is most probablly the same.


Not even close......The killing of even one of my countryman is not acceptable.

[Eki]

That question is a double edged sword...

how may of his countrymen must be killed before you say it is OK to kill just 1 Arab Muslim?

The answer is most probablly the same.
True.

And the question shouldn't be "how many" but "who". And the answer should be "those who are about to kill my countryman", unless that particular countryman had killed one of them first. If he had, we'd owe him to them.

[Cooper_S]

Not even close......The killing of even one is not acceptable.


Corrected....

[anthonyvop]

Corrected....

Only in your world of Unicorn and Rainbows. The death of those trying to harm is is totally acceptable.

Now....Does anyone want to answer the question?

[anthonyvop]

True.

And the question shouldn't be "how many" but "who". And the answer should be "those who are about to kill my countryman", unless that particular countryman had killed one of them first. If he had, we'd owe him to them.

Answer the question!!! If you can't then save your sorry moral relativism for somebody else.

[Eki]

Answer the question!!! If you can't then save your sorry moral relativism for somebody else.
Answer you this. How many innocent civilians it is justified to kill in the process of killing just 1 terrorist?

[Mark in Oshawa]

I'm not condoning anything. I'm just trying to see it their way, what would I do if I were in their shoes fighting a superpower with any means I can find. Desperate situations need desperate methods.

Eki...you wouldn't be in that desparate situation because you respect the law. What you keep doing is trying to make the Taliban and Al Quaida the "equal" of coalition forces. They are not, and you know it.

There is a difference, you just refuse to see it.

[Easy Drifter]

There is no point in arguing with Eki here.
He has aready said he accepts the terrorist Taliban hiding amongst civilians.
He accepts their suicide bombers killing innocent Afghanis.
He accepts them throwing acid into the faces of girls just because they dared to go to school.
He finds nothing wrong with their use of IED's, which often kill Afghanis as well as coalition troops.
He agrees with them killing innocent people all over the world.
He doesn't care that they may even be his own countrymen.
With an ally like that you sure don't need enemies.

[Eki]

Eki...you wouldn't be in that desparate situation because you respect the law.
So did the Taliban. They were the law in Afghanistan.

[Eki]

With an ally like that you sure don't need enemies.
Ally? I try to be neutral (not with you, nor against you).

[Mark in Oshawa]

So did the Taliban. They were the law in Afghanistan.
You support their idea of law? Aiding and abetting a terrorist organization? They would be in power today if they extradidted Bin Laden.

[Eki]

You support their idea of law? Aiding and abetting a terrorist organization?
No. I didn't support Bush's idea of law either, but I still wasn't for invading the US. At least not before he invaded Iraq against the will of the World. If Americans live on streets without healthcare or fry in electric chairs or choke in gas chambers, it's not my business, but if they invade other countries at will without a valid reason, it pisses me off.

[anthonyvop]

Answer you this. How many innocent civilians it is justified to kill in the process of killing just 1 terrorist?


Answer my question first then I will answer yours.

[Eki]

Answer my question first then I will answer yours.
As many it takes to kill those who are coming to my country to kill my countrymen. In the Winter War it is estimated that it took about 125,000 Soviets for about 25,000 Finns, so it was about 5 to 1:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_war

Not many civilians though.

Your answer is?

[Mark in Oshawa]

No. I didn't support Bush's idea of law either, but I still wasn't for invading the US. At least not before he invaded Iraq against the will of the World. If Americans live on streets without healthcare or fry in electric chairs or choke in gas chambers, it's not my business, but if they invade other countries at will without a valid reason, it pisses me off.

You just don't see the difference do you? You don't support a legitmate government asking for someone to be extradited for trial do you? Last time I looked, whether it was in Helsinki, Tokyo or New York, flying an airliner hijacked full of passengers and fuel is a crime. Nice try avoiding the reality..but your Bush hatred wouldn't matter. Obama if faced with the same situation would be asking for the arrest and extradition of a terrorist. AS would any other leader in any other democracy. You just keep dancing around the facts because they don't support your world view.

[Bob Riebe]

Ally? I try to be neutral (not with you, nor against you).
Ah, the women in Afghanistan who were murdered, raped and beaten by family members, (or the Taliban themselves), with the Taliban's rules and blessings, really must love hypocrites like you.

[Cooper_S]

The death of those trying to harm is is totally acceptable.

If the 'harm doing' was one sided you might have a point... however it is far from one sided, you just happen to be submerged in one side and cannot see that.

[Mark in Oshawa]

Ah, the women in Afghanistan who were murdered, raped and beaten by family members, (or the Taliban themselves), with the Taliban's rules and blessings, really must love hypocrites like you.

Eki is all for human rights...except those who fight America...and in which case he is all for whatever they do to their women.

That said, The USA and the NATO coaltion didn't go there to allow little girls to go to school, we went there to kick the Taliban to the curb and destroy the terrorist apparatus of Bin Laden. The fact we are giving some people who were totally oppressed by a bunch of Muslim radicals some new hope is a nice thing, but that wasn't anyone's goal on Sept. 10/2001

[anthonyvop]

As many it takes to kill those who are coming to my country to kill my countrymen. In the Winter War it is estimated that it took about 125,000 Soviets for about 25,000 Finns, so it was about 5 to 1:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_war

Not many civilians though.

Your answer is?
How many innocent civilians it is justified to kill in the process of killing just 1 terrorist?

None on purpose which is the policy of the USA......But if the enemy is hiding among civilians??? Too bad. The enemy must die.

[Eki]

You just don't see the difference do you? You don't support a legitmate government asking for someone to be extradited for trial do you? Last time I looked, whether it was in Helsinki, Tokyo or New York, flying an airliner hijacked full of passengers and fuel is a crime.
Sure it's a crime. The police force handles the crimes here, not the military. We don't send troops to another country if there's a crime in our own. I don't even think we have an extradition treaty with Afghanistan.

[Eki]

How many innocent civilians it is justified to kill in the process of killing just 1 terrorist?

None on purpose which is the policy of the USA......But if the enemy is hiding among civilians??? Too bad. The enemy must die.
So, in a hostage situation you never accept negotiations to save the hostages, even if the hostages were your own countrymen? They must die with the enemy?

[Mark in Oshawa]

Sure it's a crime. The police force handles the crimes here, not the military. We don't send troops to another country if there's a crime in our own. I don't even think we have an extradition treaty with Afghanistan.

Crime? Bin Laden didn't knock over a bank, he killed 3000 people with an act of war.....and in any case, Afghanistan didn't want to extradite this criminal. Again, when unreasonable people don't follow civilized conventions Eki, what happens then? Just shut up and go about one's business???

Glad you don't run the world Eki.....you are just too naive to be entrusted to decide what happens next, because using your theory, nothing would happen. There is consequences Eki...when you attack the world's last superpower (or one of two or three of them); you don't really think they will just sit there and take it? You think the Russians wouldn't have pounded any place flat with bombs if someone attacked them like that? You want to speculate what would the Chinese would do if someone did a 9/11 style attack on Shanghai? You want to know why people don't do this sort of thing to the Chinese? I know why...because they know they would not have the luxury of time or negotiations....the retribution would be quick and final.....and they woudln't care about who THEY killed. They don't give a fig about their own people really, you think they wouldn't turn Afghanistan upside down to get at Bin Laden if he attacked China in such a manner? Naiveity doesn't become you Eki...

[Bob Riebe]

So, in a hostage situation you never accept negotiations to save the hostages, even if the hostages were your own countrymen? They must die with the enemy?
Sadly that is the way it is, the instant goblins learn that hostages can prevent the other side from acting, hostages will quickly become the next IED.

Jimmy Carter's action or lack of it, is a prime example.
Thousands have now died as result of his lack of action.

That is a fact of life.

[Bob Riebe]

Eki is all for human rights...except those who fight America...and in which case he is all for whatever they do to their women.

That said, The USA and the NATO coaltion didn't go there to allow little girls to go to school, we went there to kick the Taliban to the curb and destroy the terrorist apparatus of Bin Laden. The fact we are giving some people who were totally oppressed by a bunch of Muslim radicals some new hope is a nice thing, but that wasn't anyone's goal on Sept. 10/2001
They did not go there but that is one of the main reasons we are still there; to cut and run now would make the U.S., and it allies, the laughing stock of women's rights anywhere.

[Eki]

Jimmy Carter's action or lack of it, is a prime example.
Thousands have now died as result of his lack of action.

Where? Iran has only fought Iraq since the hostage situation, and it had nothing to do with Carter and the hostages except the US supported Saddam Hussein's Iraq against Iran and was therefore partly responsible for the death of about 500,000 to 1 million Iranians (Saddam started the war by invading Iran):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Iraq_War

[Bob Riebe]

Where? Iran has only fought Iraq since the hostage situation, and it had nothing to do with Carter and the hostages except the US supported Saddam Hussein's Iraq against Iran and was therefore partly responsible for the death of about 500,000 to 1 million Iranians (Saddam started the war by invading Iran):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Iraq_War
Put your thinking cap on, hostages made the U.S. impotent, they did nothing , unlike the Israelis, who when hostages are taken by muslims outside of their country, act decisively.

Result: Israelis are no longer taken hostage outside of their country while U.S. concerns are captured or killed often.

If the Wiki is your only source of information, it speaks volumes about why your logic and rhetoric is faulty.

[Eki]

Put your thinking cap on, hostages made the U.S. impotent, they did nothing , unlike the Israelis, who when hostages are taken by muslims outside of their country, act decisively.

Result: Israelis are no longer taken hostage outside of their country while U.S. concerns are captured or killed often.

Israelis are still taken hostage. Israel invaded Lebanon, because Hezbollah had snatched some of their soldiers. Here's from some other source than Wikipedia:

http://www.britannica.com/blogs/2009/01/israels-forgotten-hostages/


Israel’s Forgotten Hostage (The Case of Gilad Shalit) Mitchell Bard - January 27th, 2009

While global media, the United Nations and political organizations around the world express outrage over the plight of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, no attention has been given to the inhumane treatment of a young Israeli held captive by the rulers of Gaza for more than 900 days.

Corporal Gilad Shalit, then 19-years-old, was kidnapped on June 25, 2006, by Hamas terrorists who infiltrated Israel from the Gaza Strip. Since the day of his abduction, Shalit has been hidden, his whereabouts unknown, and all of Israel’s attempts to negotiate his release with Hamas have been frustrated by the group’s demands for the release of hundreds of convicted Palestinian criminals and refusal to negotiate.

According to the Geneva Convention and international humanitarian law, Hamas, as the ruling power of the Palestinian government, is required to extend humane treatment to its prisoners. Similarly, Hamas must give updates on its prisoners and allow communication between a prisoner and his family.

Hamas has not complied with these obligations.

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has contacted Hamas leaders in an effort to confirm that Gilad is alive as well as to visit him; however, Hamas has refused to cooperate. Meanwhile, Shalit’s parents have received no word on their son’s status since the armed Palestinians abducted him two and a half years ago.

In the past, Palestinian organizations such as Hamas have relied on the ICRC to document accusations against Israel and often demanded that Israel allow its representatives to verify the conditions of Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails. Israel, through negotiations with the Red Cross, has allowed the families of convicted Palestinians to visit the prisons. Israel has also routinely permitted the Red Cross to enter Palestinian territories to deliver food and medical care.

A similar situation occurred after the Lebanese terrorist group, Hezbollah, abducted soldiers Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev on July 12, 2006. Although the ICRC made many attempts to learn the fate of Goldwasser and Regev, Hezbollah repeatedly refused to allow the organization access to them. The Goldwasser and Regev families begged for a sign that their sons were alive and Hezbollah denied them even this token expression of humanity. On July 16, 2008, two years after their capture, the corpses of the two soldiers were delivered to Israel in exchange for six Lebanese militants, including convicted murderer, Samir Kuntar. The Lebanese terrorists were delivered in healthy condition.

And I'm sure Hamas and Hezbollah will do it again, if they get a chance. And they will still send rockets to Israel.

[Eki]

Crime? Bin Laden didn't knock over a bank, he killed 3000 people with an act of war.....and in any case, Afghanistan didn't want to extradite this criminal. Again, when unreasonable people don't follow civilized conventions Eki, what happens then? Just shut up and go about one's business???
.
If the police can't stop few airline passengers with box cutters, neither can the military. While the US military is Afghanistan, al-Qaida may be in the US plotting a new strike and some of them for example in Somalia training.

[Bob Riebe]

Israelis are still taken hostage. Israel invaded Lebanon, because Hezbollah had snatched some of their soldiers. Here's from some other source than Wikipedia:


Nice try but as usual not analogous.

[Eki]

Nice try but as usual not analogous.
More analogous than your posts anyway. You tried to draw parallels between the 1979 hostage crisis in Iran and terrorism of today.

[Bob Riebe]

More analogous than your posts anyway. You tried to draw parallels between the 1979 hostage crisis in Iran and terrorism of today.
NO I said it was the direct result of Carter and how he handled Iran, which is what Osamy Bin Laden also said.

He said the U.S. showed a track record of, doing nothing or cut and running, so he thought, and they still believe, there nothing to lose.

Unlike you, to give the muslim killers, credit where credit is due, they put together 2+2+2+2 and got 8, not 2,222 like you seem to do.

To Pres. Bush's credit, there was an article in I think Time (used to get several so I forget exactly which) that the Taliban in Afghanistan, in their own words, were flabbergasted to the point of panic when not only were they attacked but the severity of the attack.

Sadly he snatch chaos from the jaws of tranquility because of the incompetence of the people in the pentagon at the time.

[Eki]

NO I said it was the direct result of Carter and how he handled Iran, which is what Osamy Bin Laden also said.

He said the U.S. showed a track record of, doing nothing or cut and running, so he thought, and they still believe, there nothing to lose.
When and where did he say that? Got a link?

[Bob Riebe]

When and where did he say that? Got a link?
Go look it up, I am not your wiki.

Zstar Electronic Co.Ltd, Sell fire cards for DS/NDSL/NDSi, also have Wii, DSiLL, NDSi, NDSL, PSP2000, PSP3000, PS2, PS3, PSP go, PSP, Xbox360 accessories, all kinds of phones are available
http://www.zstar.hk
http://www.tigersupermall.com