scary

He did say it ! Damn am I & Nemessis the only ones who saw it ?! Unless you speak Farsi you did not see it, you saw a translation, most likely a heavily edited version of MEMRI's already edited mis-translation. Maybe he wanted attention. You were correct the first time. Ahmadinejad did not deny the Jewish Holocaust, he said the Palestinians were not responsible for it. What you have quoted there is MEMRI's mis-translation, already edited, then edited further. Never take fractured sentence fragments at face value. The full, correctly translated passage (emphasis mine): He said there was a Holocaust.

Anyway, back to the Middle East. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has started a blog. Hopefully it will prove a more accurate source for his mildly amusing wing-nuttery than the MEMRI mis-translations.

The British are better trained. There is nothing to argue about in that, it is a fact. The US military is built around superior logistics and overwhelming the enemy. The British military is built around individual skills and dominating the enemy. Doctrine requires that the British emphasis is on training. Anyway, back on topic. I think what is needed is a more flexible formation system. Rather than each unit being laser-aligned they should choose the best possible position within an x-metre radius. The capability of being able to specify spacing would be very useful. To me, the most useful addition would be a 'hold formation' option whereby once units have been manually positioned it could be selected and as you move, the units move according to those manually defined positions - still using the x-metre radius principle, of course. On the fly custom formations, and much less likely to get you killed than lots of 'advance', 'stop' commands.

In preparation for any future conflicts the IDF are to issue all their personnel with one of these:

Wow, you've managed to find some nonsensical diatribe on the Internet. Who'd have believed it. Perhaps you could explain what 'dirt' you've uncovered, as the only discernible complaint there seems to be this: Yet, as they say themselves: As it is not 'an NGO committed to promoting the universal application of international law', how is its credibility as one undermined?

Is it possible to have a debate on the ME without someone trotting out the tired old 'destruction of Israel' mantra? Four years ago all the Arab nation leaders, including Hizballah and the PA, unanimously agreed to recognise Israel according to the 1967 borders - no calls for destruction among them. Israel rejected it because of the 'threat of terrorism'. Perhaps Israel should give the Sheba'a Farms to Syria to stop any possible tensions arising. Of course, that still wouldn't alter the fact that Israel has been holding Lebanese PoWs long after the war - which it shouldn't be doing and was Hizballah's primary concern. Plus there is Israel refusing to supply maps to the minefields they planted. Ignoring the Sheba'a Farms still leaves at least two reasons. It's interesting that you denounce Hizballah for capturing Israeli soldiers even though the IDF has been making similar incursions into Lebanon since the war ended as well as sonic boom flights in Lebanese air space. You do realise that Israel is losing, don't you? If Israel stopped bombing its neighbours back to the stone age perhaps those neighbours wouldn't consider Israel such a threat and, therefore, wouldn't find it necessary to build such defences. When Mossad go on their kidapping/arresting missions around the world do they wear uniforms or dress as civilians? Do you think it was wrong of SOE agents to disguise themselves as Germans in WW2? It's hardly a new or little used tactic: adapt and overcome. As for all this human shield crap: Hizballah's bases are primarily underground networks, not hospitals/schools/orphanages. Hizballah's preferred places to be launching from are not playgrounds/refugee camps/puppy rescue centres, but plantations, because whilst in them the UAVs that direct the arty/LGBs cannot see them. Even if this was true, which it isn't, how exactly does the economic ideologies of an organisation have any effect on the veracity of their claims. Following your logic, if someone in China was to say the sea is wet, they would be wrong. May I direct you here. I am yet to see this happen. Possibly not. But being informed is always preferential. Try again:

According to the system requirements on the wiki my laptop is fine on the processor and more than adequate on system RAM for playing ArmA, but only has 64MB on the graphics card. Now, I don't particularly want to spend 4 figures on a new machine for the sake of a few MB of video RAM so was wondering, is there any reasonably practicable way of upgrading a laptop's graphics card or even just its RAM? It would be so much easier if they were made with a graphics card slot like the HD's.

"I don't think Israel is really 'bombing' Lebanon, I think it's faulty construction that's causing these buildings to fall" Â Â I wonder if those people laughing also found 9/11 funny? I did like this comment though:

They'd better, but as they've just lost 3-0 to Wrexham  If the useless tossers hadn't cocked up the end of last season they'd have been playing Forest. Another? Does that mean I'm not unique?

Seeing as you are managing to post on here, I think it safe to assume that your house hasn't been blown to pieces by Katyusha rockets, you have a reliable electricity supply, a reliable internet connection, clean running water, plentiful food, working sewerage and access to medical services - it must be very stressful for you. Which of those would be the case if you lived in southern Lebanon or any part of the Palestinian territories? Which nationality is in the most danger? As a strong wind is more powerful than a Katyusha could you provide some statistics of how many houses have actually been blown to pieces by them? I bet you don't hear about it every day either. They are in someone else's country totally to the detriment of the residents of that country. Why shouldn't the residents of that country try to kill them? Let's go with your own statistic: 20,000 Israeli soldiers killed in the history of the country. 20,000 is nothing, get over it, stop feeling sorry for yourselves. Soldiers die, it's part of the job, if you're not willing to take that risk then don't be one. If you want to be a warrior develop some warrior spirit and accept the fact that it may kill you. The majority of the world's population is in more immediate danger than you. Stop feeling sorry for yourself. So you're saying that has never happened in, for example, Northern Ireland then? What about the million people in Lebanon without a shelter to sit in? Can we finally get the timeline of events resolved? Hezballah threatened to kidnap Israeli soldiers unless prisoners were released, maps of minefields were provided, etc. Israel ignored them. Hezballah kidnapped Israeli soldiers and said it would not release them until its demands were met. Israel bombed and shelled Lebanon. Hezballah threatened rocket attacks unless Israel stopped their attacks. Israel bombed some more. Hezballah started rocket attacks. Israel bombed some more. Hezballah threatened attacks further into Israel if Israel continued attacking Beirut. Israel has continued attacking Beirut. I wonder what is coming next. Now, could you show any point in that timeline where Israel was trying to stop terrorism? Could you even point to an event that actually constituted terrorism? Israel is not bombing to stop rocket attacks. There were no rocket attacks, nor any threat of them when Israel started bombing.

The Mariners. After coming back from 2-0 down to win 3-2 maybe it's a sign that they're not going to cock up the season like last year. But probably not. Anyway, hopefully I'll manage to get home to see them some time this year.

Do you really believe that? And what prisoners are you referring to? The ones that haven't been sentenced yet or the mass-murderers, like Samir Kuntar who's the main man they want. We could start with the ones that haven't been tried, or perhaps the ones that haven't been charged.

Nothing, in principle. However, what you have to realise is you live in a 60-year-old country. In such a short time Israel hasn't experienced enough to demand so many memorial days. A case in point is this: 20,000 is somewhere in the region of bugger all. Britain has lost three times that in one day. Israel seems to have pretensions of wanting to be a military nation: to do that Israelis must get over the fact that soldiers die. To be a military nation involves a high level of pragmatism and a heavy dose of stoicism. You don't see genuine military nations like Britain, France, Russia etc., that have lost millions upon millions in conflict, wallowing in self pity like Israel does. Do you not realise that multi-billion Å/$/Euro organisations like the BBC have more resources available to them than Mohammed al-Poorfarmer supporting his family of 43? Do you not realise that news crew vehicles generally have the word 'NEWS' painted on them in big letters, so are less likely to be targetted by the IDF, and if they are targetted - like the Fox reporters in Gaza a couple of weeks ago - are usually armoured? And do you not realise that most of the people left are the exceptionally vulnerable - who would have had difficulty leaving in the best of circumstances - such as the very young, the very old, the poor, the ill, the disabled, and the people that have stayed behind to look after them? Lebanon didn't 'let' Hizballah rule the southern border. Lebanon didn't have the power to remove them. In a few years it would have had that power, if Israel had assisted Lebanon it would have happened even sooner. Hizballah even said they would disarm themselves once they considered the Lebanese military powerful enough. Because of Israel's actions, now Lebanon doesn't have the power to remove a squatter. By the way, a revolution is a popular uprising against the state. a popular uprising against Hizballah would be what is known as a civil war, I don't think they wanted another one of those. Hermione? If Israel had released the prisoners it shouldn't be holding none of this would have happened.

They're British, not American. It was a demonstration/training video showing the importance of recce. It was definitely not a jolly

There may just possibly be some progress here. Settlers being killed isn't a good thing and you are allowed to care if you wish. However, as long as there are settlers there will be terrorism directed against Israel, no amount of death and destruction that the IDF can rain down will change that. The reason that they blow up people in coffee shops, buses and nightclubs is because that is something you - and the rest of israel - do care about: it gets your attention. The IRA had the same motives when they turned their attention away from attacks in Northern Ireland to attacks on the mainland. The only way to stop the attacks and for Israel to gain some acceptance in the Middle East is to pull the settlers out and to start some dialogue with your neighbours. Throwing the full weight of the IDF at every little irritant is bloody and pointless, and does nothing for Israel. I honestly do not think that your attitude is your own fault, I blame the Israeli schools, and to some extent Israeli society. I've seen lessons taught in Israeli schools and they are just so maudlin, obsessing with the Holocaust and terrorism. Yom Hazikaron and Yom Hashoah Vehagevurah do the same. Israelis spend their whole lives being told they're victims so it stands to reason that is what they will think. You will only stop being a victim when you stop thinking of yourself as one. Learn about the Holocaust but don't dwell on it and instead of those depressing public holidays - they're almost all about death - have a simple Parade and 2 minute silence once a year for remembrance of all war and terror dead and have some more positive days instead.

The IDF opened fire first when they dropped ordnance and fired arty on them. Those civilians are in their own country, the IDF are not. Settlers - a misnomer if ever their was one - are strolling around someone else's country while armed. Then you cry "Palestinians are killing Israelis for no reason !! BOOO ! Palestinians are terrorists !@$!@ " So Israeli civilians are armed then. Not very strict ones though. It? And again in places that are not Israel. I don't believe you, because they don't.

A WW1 mod then.

Using blogs as evidence again, I see. Perhaps you could explain how by using LGF as a source for his rhetoric he managed a more accurate version of events than, say, the UN? Perhaps you should follow your own advice: if you had, you may have realised that your blogger is a lying about being Lebanese. An Arab would not refer to Arabs in passive second person. Analysing his blog suggests he is American, a liar, quite dim, and contrary to his own opinion, as witty and amusing as a cactus enema. Now, repeat after me: "A blog is not evidence." White vans are sold all over the world, as is black paint and flags. UN vehicles can be stolen. Israel is a member of the UN, if the UN is "helping terrorist" then, as a member, so is Israel. Try to use the word 'fact' only in reference to facts, not your malformed conspiracy theories. You must be getting muddled. Requiring facts and evidence is how correct conclusions are reached, it is not arrogance. Disregarding evidence, as you - and Israel - are doing, is part of the attitude of "I don't want to listen". What you want to do is irrelevant, conflicts are ended by what is needed to be done. If it were down to what people want to do, all conflicts would be ended by me spending extensive naked moments with Victoria Coren. "Excuse me, Mr Hizbullah. Would you mind ever so much firing your rockets from that piece of open ground under IDF surveillance." Could I interest you in a ticket to the real world? Is it them saying it that makes you sick, or Israel doing it? Because they live in a dangerous place, as recent events have shown, there is no law against it and, just like Israel, they are allowed to defend themselves. There are even civilian versions of AKs. I really hope you are taught the basics of the Geneva Conventions when you join the IDF. Not only is it OK, it is the law. You have much to learn before you have to face Israel's real enemy.

No they didn't. Â This article is very misleading. Â What they did was a classic infantry assault. Â Yes they happened to have their bayonets attached, but the actual fighting was done with rifles and grenades. Â That is not what I think of when I hear of a "bayonet charge". Yes they did, although it wasn't actually the Argylls that performed the bayonet charge but the PWRR. They followed the standard British military practice of using bayonets to finish clearing a trench. This is very true. The psychological effect is one of the reasons the British have such high regard for bayonet use. I think it would be difficult to incorporate realistically that effect in the game though. In one battle in the Falklands a quarter of Argentinian killed were on the end of a bayonet. Usual British practice is to fix bayonets when within grenade throwing range, many Americans that have trained with British troops have adopted the same or similar practice.

The weapons being used are putting an increasing distance between one side and the other, it would be very different if they were seeing the damage caused. Do you think an infantry section would open fire on a group of civilians because there may or may not be a terrorist amongst them? What soldier on this planet would shoot a six-year-old to get to the man behind them? If the IDF had to look the people in the eye before shooting them it would be a completely different ball-game. The IRA has carried out attacks in Germany, ETA in France and the many Pakistani groups, often supported by the government, 1000's of attacks in India. The 'but they're terrorists' argument is wearing thin. Hizbullah may well be a terrorist organisation, but their actions in this war have been military, not terrorist. They've used the same tactics any state military would use. They didn't bomb a bus, or a shopping centre, they attacked and captured IDF personnel: a military operation against a military target. Perhaps they are trying to become more 'legitimate' and Israel is helping them. This is not WW2. The civilians in WW2 were just as much a part of the war as the service personnel on the front-line. They built the ships, tanks and guns; grew the food; manned the AA equipment; staffed the listening and intelligence posts. There were no real civilians in WW2 nations. Could you show were this is the stated aim of Hizbullah? Whilst looking for that, consider the fact that the most active terrorist organisation in the world is FARC, and they are secular. British, not English. And both sides were equally unpleasant. And there were no Geneva conventions. And it's irrelevent to Northern Irish terrorism as Northern Ireland didn't exist then and the terrorism didn't start until 1969. You may as well compare the aggressive practices of the Vikings.

We still use bayonets and probably always will. They have their uses, current ones are cheap and nasty but you wouldn't want to be on the pointy end.

To be fair to the Israelis their media just doesn't show the results of the attacks in Lebanon in the same way the rest of the world's media - except, perhaps, in the US - does, while they concentrate on the results of Hizbullah attacks. They also have a propaganda heavy, populist government: someone could say they like bacon sandwiches and Olmert will present it as them wanting to destroy Israel. Add to that the uncritical, unwavering US support and it creates a strong victim mentality that is difficult to overcome. Also, I don't think IDF conscription has a positive effect on either public opinion or IDF competence. If the EU got its act together it would be more than powerful enough to stand up to the US, but that would probably need people to stop reading the Sun/Bild etc. and for Blair to be beaten into submission with his own ego. But back to the war at the other end of the country: what looks like an interesting documentary on Channel 4 in the UK tomorrow at 20:00 BST 'Judah And Mohammad'. A review:

There are 458,410 people in the British military, as loveable as I am, I'm not friends with all of them. But enough about me, let's talk about you, honey. 1. Who said it was ok? I think the point of the video was to show that it was not ok. 2. They'll get over it. 3. Many people have also seen the videos of the IDF shooting at teenagers merely throwing stones. 4. The difference is that the actions of those soldiers are not British military policy while the questionable actions of Israeli soldiers are often IDF policy. Anyway, Back to Israel/Palestine. I read an interesting idea from a Middle East ambassador whose name escapes me. He suggested that as the conflict is essentially over land a two-state solution will never be reached and any one-state solution would always have an internal struggle. Instead, there could be a dual-state whereby the countries aren't defined by land borders, rather both share the same land but the citizens choose to which nation they belong, which legal/economic/governmental system etc. applies to them. An intriguing solution, I think. The Unionist/Republican thing is all to do with religion. The Republicans want to live in a Catholic country, while the Unionists want to live in a Protestant country. The conflict is roughly 70% about religion, 20% tribal - 'I live here, therefore I'm a staunch Republican/Loyalist', and 10% about power. Now that is funny. Absurd, but funny.

Would those civilians fighting Hizbullah be the same civilians being assaulted by the IDF? The rest of the world has found that the IDF, by bombing transport infrastructure, is preventing civilians from leaving villages in southern Lebanon. But at least they dropped leaflets telling people to leave on the roads they've already destroyed.

Yeah, what has the UN ever done for Israel... apart from creating it? ...and the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system, and public health. What has the UN ever done for Israel?