snafuWith apologies for labouring the point and this will be my last word on the subject – in the real world your month’s net salary is several months’ salary for many and equally many do not even have the luxury of an overdraft.
Labour it some more – he could have generated some good will and employed a chauffeur for the twelve months he was off the road…;o)
snafuThought you’d be pleased with French threats to cut off the continent…;o)
snafuI was thinking like an accountant.
Did we have body armour in the age of Bren guns?
snafuYou don’t make it easy, do you!
With reports of another hostage sadly meeting his fate at the hands of IS and almost daily pronouncements from deluded British women out in Syria its time there was any pretence this threat is going away !
And, I ask again, how do you propose to do that?
You need to read rather than cut and paste – I am not proposing anything in that statement -I am saying there is a clear and present threat which isn’t going to evaporate.
As for the rest of your text -there are boots on the ground -there are aircraft in the sky and there are airstrikes being directed by drone and fast jets. Some part of you doesn’t understand that the West’s war
against IS is well and truly started.
Yes, the war is starting to roll. But the boots on the ground at the moment are not western front line boots, worn by trained soldiers ready to go into action. Action in Afghanistan (and Pakistan) has shown that what shows up on air recon images and real time drone footage is either misinterpreted or plain ignored, resulting in bad feeling by the families and survivors of missile attacks on wedding parties, for example. Nothing replaces good old expertise on the ground, as we will discover when the Kurds complain they’ve suffered casualties from friendly fire or groups of fleeing civilians are blown up by mistake, witnessed by Al Jazeera or some other news team that can’t be paid off.
Do we let the Iraqi military have the keys to the toy box again -ehh IS is in Iraq -I cannot see why you would even suggest that the Iraqi Army wouldn’t be supplied with weapons ! . A great number of arms
have come from numerous countries -are you suggesting every Army in the region should disarm in case they get attacked and loose their weapons???
No. I am suggesting that IS was embarrassingly able to obtain weapons and munition’s from armouries left deserted by those who could have used them for the defence of their localities and their people rather than disappear – as happened, apparently, numerous times – several hours before IS arrived.
The Afghan government is in chaos and so is the military; why not give it all to the Kurds instead?
Iraq’s neighbours aren’t interested; maybe Iran, undoubtedly with their own agenda, but who else? -‘maybe Iran’ -Iran has been operating drones in Iraq for some time – they have also had Republican guards fighting in Syria to support Assad. They support the Assad regime -you seem to have failed to notice .
Not failed to notice: concentrated more on the situation in Iraq, where there has been little apparent from Kuwait or Saudi Arabia. The other Arabic states haven’t displayed much either – more interested in bombing Libya through Egypt, maybe.
BUT Iraq’s neighbours need to be involved, they need to make a decision about where their own best interests lay, because IS doesn’t need to halt at Iraq’s borders. -IS formed in Syria and came into Iraq -therefore Iraq’s neighbours are already involved and IS hasn’t halted at any border so far.
Is it really a NATO thing? Might it not be a UN thing? Shouldn’t we go by the book this time and not go play Rambo in someone else’s country by our collective selves, bullying others into either being with us or against us?
I guess your also unaware of the conduct of UN soldiers in Bosnia who did little to stop genocide -are you really suggesting peacekeepers against fanatical Islam ??? How about a group of girl guides ???
Fully aware of the blunder with the Dutch in Bosnia, and the embarrassment that occurred in Rwanda too. But try measuring up the reputations of armies who have worn the UN blue beret against the reputation world-wide of Britain and America after going against the UN mandates in Iraq and Afghanistan…We look like gung ho bullies to nearly the entire world, no matter how justified you may feel those action’s were – that and doing stupid things like shooting dead wounded Afghans on video camera (and all the things, crazy stupid and bored shoot ups, murders, gunning down for kicks, even rape, that the US forces did in Iraq) does rather justify their actions in the minds of those wannabes who flee to Syria to be a martyr for IS.
What exactly do you mean by go by the ‘book’ ??? Which book exactly ??
It is a term of phrase, an idiom: going by the book, for example. I am surprised you’ve never heard it.
It means to follow the rules, in this case not to jump in and go mediaeval-stylee hacking and slaying before finding out exactly what we are fighting for, who we are fighting for and against, where we are going, and why it can only be us who gets involved, again.
Last time they used a UN resolution for the start of military action -is there anything above that ???
Oh, you got me there. Care to remind…?
As for playing Rambo – he was a fictional character that you seem to be fixated with !
NOOOOOOOOOO! Say it ain’t so…
You really have no idea how many soldiers modelled their ‘war’ personas on Stallone’s character?
Colonel Tim Collins (Royal Irish Regiment, retired) advised his troops before the invasion of Iraq to ignore what he referred to as the Rambo training video, giving them all a good laugh. A Croatian unit, under the command of an HVO officer called Rajic, fired up it’s men by showing them non stop Rambo movies when they weren’t in action, during the Bosnian war. I believe the SAS use the name for anyone displaying a sort of stupid gunfighter attitude – to go steaming in and expect to catch everybody off guard with little regard for themselves or possible hostages, etc.
As for my being fixated…I think I’ve mentioned the name twice. There is a slight chance I’m possibly more fixated with the word mollycoddle or maybe even Kurds (certainly used that word several times, but only on this thread), so I guess you are reaching a little too hard there.
Laughable your hanging onto the notion that there is any ‘for’ or ‘against’! -they are against and you will find its not a case of changing minds -its a case of eradication.
Eager as you appear to be to jump to conclusions, you appear to have grabbed the rather smelly end of the stick…;o)
For or against, I was not referring to IS but – as I said, if you’d care to read it again – the bullying that goes into twisting the metaphorical arms of other nations into doing what we tell them. Who can forget Freedom Fries and the Cheese-eating Surrender Monkeys, for example…both terms used to show that some were not America’s allies, in this case criticising France, and therefore they were against American plans.
snafuI am relishing the irony, unintended or not, of those words. The italics are mine!
Charlie – quotes here are all in italics; you mean the script in bold.
snafu…though I’m not sure a high IQ is any more a measure of responsibility than anything else! 😉
Would hopefully rule out the kind of dozy idiots who brandish their guns like a proudly-won trophy if they needed to have an IQ of 140+…;o)
If at any time you’ve tried to impress your friends by saying ‘Look, I’ve got a gun!‘ or muttering about them only taking your gun from your cold, dead fingers then you really don’t qualify. Manufacturers t-shirts or caps with gun slogans on, more excellent disqualifiers.
In the interest of equality the same should be said about unnecessary hunting knives; I mean, who really needs a 9 inch, razor sharp blade in a city where they are never going to encounter anything remotely dangerously wild except another loon with a blade-size fixation?
That is a myopic statement at best and paranoid at worst.
If you think they teach how to kill people, you live in a very small sad world.
I guess then also, the Olympic trap shooters are just trained killers out practicing how to kill more efficiently, brilliant.
So you don’t believe that children should be taught how to discuss their feelings, their problems, and how to conduct social intercourse effectively?
Of course he wasn’t talking about teaching kids how to kill each other – is that all you can focus on? Obviously killing each other is a byproduct of such instruction – the handling and familiarisation with such weapons so that they don’t appear so scary to kids is what is happening at those schools, ‘hopefully’ leading to the kids obtaining their own (legally obtained, maybe?) guns afterwards. Let me guess – it is sponsored or has the backing of the NRA?
Which country is this country – Sudan? Somalia?
Just because it is happening doesn’t make it right. — In what manner does this have even a tiny relation with the Sudan or Somalia.
Your narrow minded ignorance is overriding your thought process.
Category: kids and guns. Actually I was trying to work out where you were from, where it is considered acceptable for children to fire guns, since you haven’t filled out your location.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_use_of_children – Just an example of some of the thousands of kids who fire guns every year…
Wonderful. In America that would be a great help to those loner kids, you know, the weird ones who don’t have many friends, who have been bullied for their choice in music or fashion, the ones who are…different. It might mean they get a few more when they go walkabout at school with their daddy’s armoury… — Oh yes the liberal talking point bs about how evil bullying is even though it is no worse now than it was in the past but liberals are quick to start passing laws that will, successfully of course, start forcing mankind to stop being what they are by nature and be what the government considers proper citizens — BRILLIANT!
Maybe the loner kids of today care less about those around them and themselves than their forebears did in the past, and the availability of firearms to them might be easier now than then.
Also…do you really believe that bullying only takes place one on one? Maybe you were the bully and have justified it so, but I was beaten up simply (they said) for being the new boy at school where there were six boys taken before the head teacher and excluded for a term, but others were certainly involved because the whole gang was there to hide the assault from view.
You appear to almost want people to shoot each other, the more the merrier it seems; I really do hope I’m wrong but your attitude positively stinks of it.
Wait until someone close to you gets shot by someone feeling they have nothing to lose by going out and spreading misery in a school, cinema, shopping mall, etc. Not nice, not pleasant.
In the past if confronted by a bully, parents, in the majority, simply told kids to stand up for them selves, but now the parents go whining how there overly protected little brat is special and must be coddled.
And schools just ignore bullying since they have to officially report it and that is not good for their reputations. In Britain, anyway.
So they get a surprise when kids turn up with murderous intent – it happens here too, you know, except we only have to worry about them turning up with knives and not guns.
Oddly there was a bit on this yesterday on NPR that this action by parents is causing children in schools to be depressed, and feel like failures, when they find out that they now must solve problems, far more important than being bullied, by them selves and there is no one there to coddle them.
You know, it deeply depends on the child’s ability to actually negotiate with his/her bully unless they take a more violent route; and if/when it wanders along that route they feel the need to take an equaliser in the shape of something that gets one over on the other party/s.
And would you really tell your own offspring to ‘man up’ when they know the bully never goes to school empty handed? I have seen the damage a craft knife can do, seen weapons made in prisons (sharpened toothbrush handles, razor blades stuck into toothbrush handles, and I’ve been told the blade from a pencil sharpener can be very usefully concealed…) and interviewed a schoolgirl who was stabbed several times by another girl with a screwdriver – in class – over some stupid fashion faux pas: I really don’t want to have to visit my own children in hospital or identify them in a mortuary just because they didn’t want to feel like a failure or I wouldn’t mollycoddle them.
(As a side note, if kids do get into a scuffle, in the past they were sent to the principle who called the parents and the parents dealt with each child.
Now it becomes a crime, police are called and every ones life is ruined except the wannabe lenninists running the school with their no discreation, no exception policy.
Of course this is why kids are expelled for pointing fingers like a gun, or having a trinket on a bracelet that resembles a gun.
That is bullying but it is legal because the school government is doing it.)
You got many Leninists in the land of the free? Or are you just casting aspersions because their politics appear to be to the left of yours?
I am sure you know a few gang signs – you seem that sort – and making that sort of sign in a music video would be frowned upon by ‘polite’ society, but please try and use your brain for once – how many school shootings have there been over the years, yet you call it bullying because the schools don’t want that sort of gesticulation or jewellery? Or is it because you are actually twelve and want to point a ‘gun’ finger at your most disliked teacher without getting into trouble, whilst wearing your Uzi ear rings and your Smith and Wesson sneaker decorations?
1984, only it came about a few years later than predicted.
Have you actually read 1984? Is America really that dystopian now?
It has been a couple of years since I was last there for any length of time, when it certainly wasn’t, and I know Europe isn’t either, so do you really know what you’re talking about?
You can’t talk that way about the American constitution. You just can’t.
Although despite them being so generous with the idea that every American can have a fire arm, they do display a little meanness when it comes to nuclear weapons – why are they not happy with the idea of Iran having them, for example? —-Oh yes the instant jump from firearms to nuclear weapons.
A too commonly spouted analogy that is ludicrous except to those who cannot address the topic in a reasonable manner .
It used to be that America armed the world, well, that part of the world that agreed with it.
It seemed to me that with a constitution that agrees that all should be able to bear arms but then disagree with other nations who want a similar position for the ‘defence’ of their nationals. Not that I agree with Iran and nuclear weapons… Not that I agree with the scary concept that all should be able to obtain guns and bullets at the drop of a hat without some sort of test for mental health and a really good reason, etc. But that is by the bye.
The statement about our Constitution is a most common one by persons who live with a government, that if it says crap, the populace will drop their pants and squat.
That makes them very good citizens I guess but it is still rather sad.
What on earth are you talking about?
My bit about the constitution was an actual quote from a former colleague of mine, an American, whose wife accidentally shot their new and very expensive LCD (or something) huge screen TV with their home defence gun: she forced him to get rid of the weapon immediately and I commented that it seemed like a good idea, at which point he rattled on about the constitution – whereas I was simply rooting for the TV! Incidentally, at about the same time he and I had the discussion about nuclear weapons (above) although then I think it was about Iraq, not Iran. And he didn’t want to agree with me but, grudgingly, he eventually did see my point.
…the Bren was very accurate and the spread of shot stayed close together…
I’m guessing here that, maybe, what they didn’t want was how ever many bullets a second all going into the same spot as the first. That would sound quite uneconomic – if the first bullet kills the target then the following twenty-odd going into and closely around that wound are just overkill…
snafuBloody hell SNAFU.
I didn’t see you there.
Always tried my best not to catch the eye of those in the box – I never got offered money not to mention them, more usually empty threats of violence when they found out that they might get publicity.
snafuWell, you could always go by the results of an IQ test; that should cut the possible ownership pool down considerably.
snafuWith reports of another hostage sadly meeting his fate at the hands of IS and almost daily pronouncements from deluded British women out in Syria its time there was any pretence this threat is going away !
And, I ask again, how do you propose to do that?
Its time that NATO views this as incredibly serious and let the A-10’s -Apaches and Tornados loose to hunt at will !
Are you saying we should have boots on the ground? You want aircraft there, but how would they be directed (we all know how successful air strikes are, such a shame the locals in Afghanistan, for example, ruefully believe different) unless there are people on the ground – which both Britain and the US have seemingly ruled out.
And let us look at the big picture: what happens when (if?) IS is eventually obliterated – do we leave it for the Iraqi government to make the big decisions until the next bunch of fundamentalists walk in? Do we let the Iraqi military have the keys to the toy box again – I mean, they have shown us that they are not totally sold on the idea that they need to stand and fight for their country, although one way or another they have happily supplied IS with weapons and ammunition. But the US and Britain had withdrawn all (or near enough all) troops before IS walked in and the public has no interest in maintaining a presence in Iraq nor loosing troops at the rate of one or two a week (if we are lucky), so what happens?
Iraq’s neighbours aren’t interested; maybe Iran, undoubtedly with their own agenda, but who else? The Kurds are doing a magnificent job, but they will want something at the end of it – a homeland that some of the neighbours will fight tooth and nail against. BUT Iraq’s neighbours need to be involved, they need to make a decision about where their own best interests lay, because IS doesn’t need to halt at Iraq’s borders.
Is it really a NATO thing? Might it not be a UN thing? Shouldn’t we go by the book this time and not go play Rambo in someone else’s country by our collective selves, bullying others into either being with us or against us?
snafuTens of Thousands of children learn to fire and fire firearms in this country every year.
Which country is this country – Sudan? Somalia?
Just because it is happening doesn’t make it right.
PS:A rapidly growing number of schools are beginning to offer some shooting sports as part of the the schools sport program.
Wonderful. In America that would be a great help to those loner kids, you know, the weird ones who don’t have many friends, who have been bullied for their choice in music or fashion, the ones who are…different. It might mean they get a few more when they go walkabout at school with their daddy’s armoury…
You would think so but I find it amazing that such a great country still clings on to a 200 year old law that was referring to early revolvers and muskets!
You can’t talk that way about the American constitution. You just can’t.
Although despite them being so generous with the idea that every American can have a fire arm, they do display a little meanness when it comes to nuclear weapons – why are they not happy with the idea of Iran having them, for example?;o)
snafuI think you’ll find it went a little something like this…
Question:- How do you plead ?
Answer :- …
Barrister (rolls up left trouser leg to the knee revealing a single red sock with garter, puts right hand behind head with forearm horizontal but gently rotating his arm in a circular motion, anticlockwise, before winking with both eyes, one after the other, beginning with his left one): Milud, my client pleads guilty.
Judge (peers myopically through glasses at barrister; recognition slowly creeps in): Ah yes, mmm, I see. Well, I believe this fine, upstanding member of the community has shown that he deeply regrets his poor judgement in doing… (consults notes)…mmm, one hundred and ninety seven miles an hour through the village on market day, narrowly missing the local primary school children on a field trip and managing to jump the canal whilst reading a newspaper and conversing on his mobile telephone device. But since he has been shown to be an honest, mmm, and law abiding member of society I feel it is only right, not just right but also sensible to free this man into the loving arms of his wife, his two mistress’s and his bank manager; there would be no purpose served by depriving him of his driving licence since he would loose his job, mmm, and thereby not be able to give recompense to his law team. Case dismissed!
Barrister: My lord!
Judge: Oh alright. Ban him for twenty eight days…
snafuGood question…..who is the threat level for? Why make it so public?
Is is normal to let your enemies know that you ‘know’? Is it deterrence? Surely you don’t need a public announcement to let your own security services know the threat level has increased?
Or is it something more sinister; is it to control the way your own population feels about the threat? Of course, if there is a genuine threat at all.
EXACTLY!
Nothing new.
A few years back an moderator here said something basically wishing Maggie Thatcher ill.
There is, I suspect, a world of difference between wishing ill of somebody, actually inflicting injury on somebody, and effectively congratulating someone for administering a beating.
Yes, you can do two of the above on a forum without having to actually meet anybody, which I guess makes it alright, but when the strong arm of the forum – yes, a moderator – makes such comments isn’t that a little…off?
That said he probably did it when he wasn’t being a moderator…;o)
I know these comment are made “in jest” but such comments basically condone lawlessness, and basically make us no better that those we oppose.
“It’s shocking that ISIS kills a hostage…”but in the next breath..”It’s okay to beat up someone I disagree with”. I’m not sure adding a smiley face lessens the intent.
Maybe they include the smiley to show they’d enjoy carrying out the beating?
Surely they teach logic (or just comic irony) in schools?
Ah, but even if they did today it wouldn’t make any difference to us on this forum now – I doubt anybody here has been involved in the learning side of education in many a year…
snafuThe only point that can forwarded, is that the instructor broke rules of safety and paid the price for ignoring safety.
One safety rule ignored – were there others?
Had the instructor not been standing there to take the bullet, was the range’s design such that it could have travelled into any spectators behind her and to her left?
snafuThey didn’t, they had their own schemes
Understood it is not an RAF thing, but at least one of the Skua’s that sank the Konigsberg in Bergen was in a green/brown scheme, training and support squadrons used former front line aircraft with green/brown upper surfaces (Rocs, Sharks, Nimrods and Ospreys) in the very early part of the war. There was a range of colour schemes and markings used at first, then it was tidied up approximately mid 1941; ok, there were large numbers of new aircraft being built to specifications that would involve a single, standardised scheme (ignoring A and B schemes, I am talking whether the tail was camo’d or painted the same as the underside, where the line between the upper camo and the undersurface met, that sort of thing) and, of course, the fact that if intercepting aircraft found something flying that they didn’t recognise and looked strangely colour-schemed they might be inclined to shoot it down. So it would be in the Fleet Air Arm’s interest to adopt something not so distant from that used by the RAF – the usual two greys scheme (dark slate and extra dark sea) appearing to the unknowing as green and grey anyway – so the national and squadron markings needed to be recognisably similar and the timing looks like it would have been influenced by what the RAF were doing.
snafuGuess the above don’t know…
Sign In
