Yes you are right with that, but still, if the civilians died as collateral damage, they should be reported as that, for any side.
And anyway, it doesnt changes the fact that this war is illegal, and whatever US is doing there is too. Obviously, the State and its soldiers are responsible for all the mess there is in Iraq since they are the occupying force. Was iraq in this mess before Americans arrived? Was this the pathetic state of lives of common Iraqis before Americans arrived? And democracy? people mentioned democracies? WHY does America still support so many dictators? one in my country too… where is the democracy here? Its just demoncracy…what about Palestinians? Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait…list goes on..so dont even mention the democracy here. Its just a lame excuse…just another lie in State Policy for conquest.
And the Policy of the State is pretty clear when we saw that American soldiers rushed to Ministry of Oil as soon as Baghdad fell. Why should I beleive whatever ‘devine’ words American Government/ State has to say? What is their credibility I ask you. When American Elected Head of State lied on the faces of its own people, what should I expect from the person to cover up the killings or from his minions?
And again, If you arent with America, you suddenly become Al-Qaeda sympathiser, hello, The World doesnt belongs to you and you cant make sweeping statements like that. You see the world in Black and White…just like the extremists. Death is a Death..wether you behead someone or you blow his pieces to bits by your $2m cruise missile.
Let me explain something about the legality of the Iraq war, whether Illegal or notis up for debate and in reality is a matter of interpretation of the existing UN charter and of the Iraq related resolutions, these can be interpreted to fit almost any point of view. In many cases this was the intention as it made it easier for multiple partys to agree.
Secondly International law under the UN charter is artificial, it was made by states and it can be changed and broken by states, it is not some god spoken series of cammandments merely a collection guidelines with with various interpretations. So welcome to the real world.
Yes you are right with that, but still, if the civilians died as collateral damage, they should be reported as that, for any side.
And anyway, it doesnt changes the fact that this war is illegal, and whatever US is doing there is too. Obviously, the State and its soldiers are responsible for all the mess there is in Iraq since they are the occupying force. Was iraq in this mess before Americans arrived? Was this the pathetic state of lives of common Iraqis before Americans arrived? And democracy? people mentioned democracies? WHY does America still support so many dictators? one in my country too… where is the democracy here? Its just demoncracy…what about Palestinians? Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait…list goes on..so dont even mention the democracy here. Its just a lame excuse…just another lie in State Policy for conquest.
And the Policy of the State is pretty clear when we saw that American soldiers rushed to Ministry of Oil as soon as Baghdad fell. Why should I beleive whatever ‘devine’ words American Government/ State has to say? What is their credibility I ask you. When American Elected Head of State lied on the faces of its own people, what should I expect from the person to cover up the killings or from his minions?
And again, If you arent with America, you suddenly become Al-Qaeda sympathiser, hello, The World doesnt belongs to you and you cant make sweeping statements like that. You see the world in Black and White…just like the extremists. Death is a Death..wether you behead someone or you blow his pieces to bits by your $2m cruise missile.
Let me explain something about the legality of the Iraq war, whether Illegal or notis up for debate and in reality is a matter of interpretation of the existing UN charter and of the Iraq related resolutions, these can be interpreted to fit almost any point of view. In many cases this was the intention as it made it easier for multiple partys to agree.
Secondly International law under the UN charter is artificial, it was made by states and it can be changed and broken by states, it is not some god spoken series of cammandments merely a collection guidelines with with various interpretations. So welcome to the real world.
Not only am I a hardcore Jihadi, I also have ridiculously bad taste in ties and my feet stink.. 😎 Something I forgot?
BTW, I am sure you love to think that I am being upset because of what you have written, but, frankly, you’d have to be MUCH better than this. You are only publicly embarassing yourself, feel free to continue. 😉
I hate to have to break it to you, but people who call known terrorists who enjoy cutting the heads of innocent civilians courageous are nothing but terrorist scum themselves, we all know you hate democracy and freedom but please get a grip.
I find it very interesting that when i give a reply attempting to explain the situation you simply ignore it- typical terrorist just ignore the facts that mess with your il-informed world view.
Not only am I a hardcore Jihadi, I also have ridiculously bad taste in ties and my feet stink.. 😎 Something I forgot?
BTW, I am sure you love to think that I am being upset because of what you have written, but, frankly, you’d have to be MUCH better than this. You are only publicly embarassing yourself, feel free to continue. 😉
I hate to have to break it to you, but people who call known terrorists who enjoy cutting the heads of innocent civilians courageous are nothing but terrorist scum themselves, we all know you hate democracy and freedom but please get a grip.
I find it very interesting that when i give a reply attempting to explain the situation you simply ignore it- typical terrorist just ignore the facts that mess with your il-informed world view.
A number of south american countries, Brazil and Peru certainly have shot down a number of drug smuggling aircrfaft in the past.
Yak-130.
Weapons would be cheaper.
Its a trainer, its not meant to use weapons unless it realy has to, and only the single seat version of the Yak-130, which has yet to be built has provision for a radar. :rolleyes:
Hardly surprising seeing as India operates the MKI and is going to procure the Scorpene having had years of experience with subs.
Now that is Bizaare.
Sure, buddy.. and after that dream you woke up in the bathroom and found your left hand in your chamber pot..
Return to building your LEGO castle and make my day.
Wow some Jihadis realy do get upset when they are outed.
Sure, buddy.. and after that dream you woke up in the bathroom and found your left hand in your chamber pot..
Return to building your LEGO castle and make my day.
Wow some Jihadis realy do get upset when they are outed.
Once again rumour time !!!
Recent post on CMF with an aircraft with clipped/folding wings. Next to some JH-7s. Have you guys seen this on Google Earth? Coords are 31 18 49.34″ N 121 25 03.75″ E (posted by Zephyr106 at the CDF)
But I’m very sceptical esp. as the right wing looks errased by photoshop ! :confused:
Any comments ???
Deino
It does indeed appear to be a JH-7 with folding wings (i am assuming that the other two aircraft are also JH-7s) as the aircraft with the short wings has the same tale. But it also appears to have forward wing extensions or possibly forward canards. An interesting point is that the Su-33 was given Forward canards to improve its carrier performance. If you add this to the recent report of the Varyag being fitted out and a set of engines being built for her this adds real credibility to the idea that the chinese are now only months possibly as little as twenty from having an identifiable sea worthy carrier. Of course the reports could be wrong and this could just show a plane with parts of its wings removed.
There is no point what so ever buying both, they both use different engines and will have different maintenance requirements. It realy depends wheth you lean towards the Russian defence industry, ie you use fulcrums and flankers or to the west.
Indeed, this is a mistake that many people make. They assume that Soldier and state are the same thing which they are not. The policy of the state and the Military high command may be to conduct a war in a manner which reduces as far as possible collateral damage but if a soldier comes across a village with a sniper in it he just wants that sniper dead and generally isnt to fussed as to how it happens. Equally troops on the ground are human beings they are subject to the same emotions and instincts as everybody else, including anger and a desire for revenge as well as self preservation, often these instincts and emotions force deviations from what the planned strategy is. The real problem is that you get ignorant people (who almost without exception have little or no knowledge of armed conflict and have certainly never studied it at an academic level) who then equate the actions of troops on the ground (massacres etc) as state policy or as an indication of the opinions of the masse of a countrys population. Zarqawi on the other hand openly claimed that his strategy was to ignite a civil war through the deliberate killing of civilians, thus anyone who has an IQ worth counting realises that the differences are in the intentions and strategy rather than of the actions of individuals on the ground. Although a further note should be added to that last point, one should look at the vast number of activitys carried out by the occupying force each day then put the number of civilian casualtys in to perspective this then further seperates US policy from that of people like Zarqawi.
Indeed, this is a mistake that many people make. They assume that Soldier and state are the same thing which they are not. The policy of the state and the Military high command may be to conduct a war in a manner which reduces as far as possible collateral damage but if a soldier comes across a village with a sniper in it he just wants that sniper dead and generally isnt to fussed as to how it happens. Equally troops on the ground are human beings they are subject to the same emotions and instincts as everybody else, including anger and a desire for revenge as well as self preservation, often these instincts and emotions force deviations from what the planned strategy is. The real problem is that you get ignorant people (who almost without exception have little or no knowledge of armed conflict and have certainly never studied it at an academic level) who then equate the actions of troops on the ground (massacres etc) as state policy or as an indication of the opinions of the masse of a countrys population. Zarqawi on the other hand openly claimed that his strategy was to ignite a civil war through the deliberate killing of civilians, thus anyone who has an IQ worth counting realises that the differences are in the intentions and strategy rather than of the actions of individuals on the ground. Although a further note should be added to that last point, one should look at the vast number of activitys carried out by the occupying force each day then put the number of civilian casualtys in to perspective this then further seperates US policy from that of people like Zarqawi.
I realy dont know enough to comment.