Jump to content
Bohemia Interactive Forums

FSPilot

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    4030

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Posts posted by FSPilot

  1. Posted

    How about you stop flamebaiting, pal?  Perhaps you should try discussing what people here are posting instead of taking issue with what (you claim) they are not saying.

    I've made my views on terrorism clear plenty of times in this and other threads.  Go find them!

    Flamebaiting?  If you didn't have anything relevant to say you probably shouldn't of posted at all. icon_rolleyes.gif

    And no, no matter what you say they are, your views on terrorism are readilly apparent to me.  Frankly I don't even want to read what you've got to say on this subject.  As a matter of fact, I think I'll stop.

    FSPilot, I don't think you will find anyone on this forum who condones the actions of terrorists. So don't be surprised that people do not write lengthy posts about how despicable the terrorists are. It's pretty much self-explanatory!

    I'd agree that it is self-explanatory if I didn't think I'd find people on this forum who condone the actions of terrorists.

    Terrorists are desperate lunatics, and the insanity of their actions is apparent. However, when a civilised, democratic country decides decides to employ methods which they know will result in civilian casualties, THAT'S when one should raise one's eyebrow.

    What's the point of firing missiles at targets surrounded by civilians if

    a) it is not going to deter any other terrorists;

    b) it's going to damage Isreal's reputation?

    Such retaliations are simply counter-productive. Killing civilians, as unintentional as it may be, will only push more moderate palestinians into the arms of extremists.

    That's why I said I thought the blame was half and half.  Hizbullah shouldn't of started the fight, Israel shouldn't of finished it the way they did.  Besides, both of your points can be applied to Hizbullah just as readilly as they can the Israeli forces.  Half and half.

    And I certainly don't think these terrorists are desperate.  I'm sure they could, and have in the past, find all sorts of support from other nations who share their political objectives.

    Maybe it was a heat-of-the-moment decision, or an inexperienced commander, or just a bad call.  I just hope everybody can learn from what happened and that it won't happen again.  I think I'm done arguing this.  I've made my point and I think that most people (the ones that can produce any kind of argument anyway) agree with me.

  2. Posted

    Look the other way?  rofl.gif

    Perhaps it was you who were looking the other way when I posted this a bit earlier...

    I don't think you understand what I'm saying.  You're criticising Israel for accidentally killing/wounding civilians.  Yet when Hizbullah does it on purpose you don't criticise them at all.  Yeah, you mentioned it, and that's just about it.  You're looking the other way.  You didn't scold them for it, you didn't even mention that you disagreed with their policy of doing that.  All you did was mention that it happened.  That's what I call looking the other way.  On an internet forum criticising is just about all we can do about it, and you're not even willing to do that.

    So, is that your point, FSPilot?  Terrorism is bad?  Terrorists are bad?  Nobody around here has claimed otherwise and nobody is looking the other way.  But there's really not much use in repeating something we all seem to agree on over and over again when there's plenty of disagreement on other points.

    Yep, that's my point.  Terrorism is bad, as are terrorists.  And when they attack innocent civilians I think something should be done about it.  Since we're on an internet forum, there's not much we can do about it other than post how awful it is that people would do such a thing.  You, on the other hand, apparently think simply mentioning that it happened is enough.

    It seems to me that Avon even disagrees with her own Prime Minister about the need to apologise for civilian casualties.  So perhaps we should save most of our anti-terrorism arguments for when a representative of Hizbullah decides to start posting here and instead focus on convincing Avon to care about Palestinian civilian casualties as much as her Prime Minister does.

    We should probably just shut up about every topic on here until the people that we're talking about show up on the operation flashpoint offtopic forums, eh? rofl.gif

    How about this: you sit tight and wait for someone from Hizbullah to show up before you make another post on the subject.  I'll let you know if I see them. icon_rolleyes.gif

  3. Posted

    Ok, then if you are not comparing the actions of Hizbullah with Israel in the following post who are you comparing them with?

    Picking a fight?  Maybe I should say what I already said one more time.  Want it in bigger letters?  This isn't even important, I can't believe I'm arguing with you about this.

    I wasn't comparing them with anybody, never said I was.  I was saying what they did was irresponsible and morally wrong.  It was, no matter who you compare it to.

    Why?  Because I compare Israel with other civilised nations and will "throw a fit" no matter which civilised nation accidentally kills/injures civilians over and over and over and over again.

    So why do you look the other way when Hizbullah intentionally targets civilians?  You obviously find it as offensive as most normal people do when there are civilian casualties in an armed conflict, at least when certain countrys do it anyway.  Double standard maybe?

  4. Posted

    Does Hizbullah apologize for intentionally blowing up a cafe full of civilians?  They do it so much they must of been fed up with apologizing for it a long time ago.

    Why don't some people care when Hizbullah targets civilians, but they throw a fit when Israel accidentally kills/injures civilians while trying to attack Hizbullah?

  5. Posted

    I had hoped my smiley would tell everyone that I was joking.  I'm not worried about 13 year old mustard gas shells being fired from a cannon.  And yeah, I'm pretty sure if you put a grenade on top of an artillery shell it probably wouldn't set it off. icon_rolleyes.gif

    I bet they could take the chemicals out of the shells though.  And then I bet they could put them in a bomb and set it off or hell, even a "water" balloon and throw it out of a light airplane.  That would be more than enough to cause mass panic and hysteria in the US.  Might not kill very many people, but they got our alert level up to red again.

    My point is, 13 year old mustard gas shells are useless to an army trying to use them on another army (or anybody for that matter).  But give them to a terrorist and you can be pretty sure they'll come up with some use for them.  It might not be a full scale chemical war, but I'm sure they could attack us with it in one way or another.

  6. Posted

    I understand what you're saying, but it's never a good idea to compare the actions of a terrorist organisation like Hizbullah with those of a nation like Israel.  On this occasion Hizbullah had been attacking an IDF patrol in S. Lebanon, but on any other day they might have been dropping rockets and mortars on civilian populations in N. Israel.  Regardless of who started the whole conflict historically, nobody can blame Israel for retaliating against terrorists.

    However, blaming Hizbullah for having to retaliate is entirely different than blaming Hizbullah for how you retaliate.  Otherwise, Israel could simply nuke all of S. Lebenon and blame it on Hizbullah.

    I wasn't trying to compare them, just trying to judge them equally.  Kind of hard to do when they're playing by different rules though.  Hizbullah wants to be treated like they're an army in a war, they're really just a band of terrorists with lots of explosives and kids to strap them to.

    But I agree, the Israeli forces could definately of waited for another, safer, opportunity to strike, or maybe done something less dangerous.

    On the other hand, it's certainly not my place to judge the combat actions of a seasoned force like the Israelis.  Both are partially at fault in the end.  It was an unfortunate incident and hopefully the Israelis will learn from it.  Unfortunately Hizbullah (wasn't is hezbollah a while ago?) will probably see how much flak the Israelis will get for this and try to instigate a repeat incident.

  8. Posted

    Exactly.  Whether it's actually deadly or not, I think people will still be worried when the hear the term "mustard gas" or "sarin" in the first place.

    Most people probably think it's more deadly now that it's been sitting around for 13+ years.  After all, mustard goes bad if you leave it out for too long, wouldn't mustard gas go even worse?  smile_o.gif

    Besides, just because it's old now, does that mean that evildoers can't use it to make an improvised dirty bomb?  Or maybe even "renew" it?  Just asking, I don't really know.  IIRC, the ammunition that they're talking about is the kind fired from artillery pieces.  Are terrorists going to smuggle artillery pieces through customs?  Or could they put a grenade inside a bunch of the stuff, wrap it up, and put it in times square?

  9. Posted

    Quote[/b] ]We'll just have to wait and see what it turns out to be I guess.

    Where is the news in this ?

    It was known that those "weapons" were still there.

    If you call ammo, dug in and leaking their content into soil weapons. I name it toxic waste and the UN reported those degraded ammo way back.

    What's the news in that statement?  Not much.

    But this is news to me.  And it looks like it's news to a lot of the media and a lot of other people too. At least that's what they're acting like anyway.

  10. Posted

    So we should praise TBA for having willingly sacrified its reputation for Freedom, Democraty and Truth, thus allowing France to hide the fact that we took this opportunity to get rid for free (even earning money instead of spending some) of our WW1 chemical weapons to Irak, as we sold them, just before OIF, Roland SAM Missiles.

    Fran%E7ais03.gif

    Wait... world war one happend in 1993?

    I'm sure TBA had a reason to not announce this as soon as it was declassified. We'll just have to wait and see what it turns out to be I guess.

  11. Posted

    Quote[/b] ]I just don't understand why Bush hasn't made a huge deal out of this.

    A big deal out of what?It`s an emberassing discovery even by TBAs standard.

    Put this pathetic finds into the context of a 45 minutes threat and campaign to aquire nuclear capability claims.

    Right now the best thing Bush can do is make no mention,no deal out of WMDs.

    You're probably right.  I just figured that the words "mustard gas" and "sarin" are more than enough to convince the general public to support the war, or vote republican.  Being a Bush supporter I hate to say it but... maybe he hasn't read the report yet. wow_o.gif

    And maybe he is planning to use it eventually.  It's just now getting media attention.  Unless it has before, and I just hadn't heard of it.  Wouldn't surprise me one bit. icon_rolleyes.gif

  14. Posted

    Found this on fazed a few weeks back. On tools new CD there's two tracks that go together (Viginti Tres and wings for marie), and an ambience track later on in the album that doesn't seem to be related to anything (10,000 days).  Somebody looked a little closer and found out that if you play Viginti Tres and Wings for Marie back-to-back, with 10,000 days in the background, you get another song.

    It's really nothing big, since Viginti Tres and Wings for Marie go together anway, and 10,000 days is mostly ambience in the first place.  But they do synch up really nicely, I like how it sounds.

    Anyway here's the link to a better explanation.  And to the actual song.

    edit - Oh, and no quips about me being a tool fan, I don't think I've pissed anybody off since I've been back... yet confused_o.gif

  15. Posted

    That's some really great stuff you've got there supah.

    Got a website for that or something? You should definately look into doing that professionally. I've seen some high-quality stuff like that on sale for hundreds of dollars.

  16. Posted

    Anybody seen this?

    Apparently our guys have been finding WMDs over in Iraq since '03.  It's just that these weapons aren't what TBA said they had before the war was started.

    I just don't understand why Bush hasn't made a huge deal out of this.  Granted, these aren't the WMDs that we thought they had.  It certainly isn't an active WMD program, and still doesn't justify the invasion (at least not by the argument they were using).  But it's still something.

    The report has been declassified since April, but for some reason they haven't published it until now.

  17. Posted

    So Hizbullah fires on Israeli forces.  Israeli forces fire back at Hizbullah who happens to be hiding with a bunch of civilians.  Some of the civilians are killed, and everybody's blaming Israel for this?

    Kind of hard to tell who's to blame, not that it's really important anyway.  That's a very reprehensible act on Hizbullah's part.  But it's also very irresponsible on Israel's part.  I guess the blame could be divided between both of them.  Israel should of just gotten back at Hizbullah some other day, and Hizbullah definately shouldn't of gone hiding with a bunch of civilians.

    Sort of half and half if you ask me.

  22. Posted

    That's a bit narrow minded. With this type of weapon, you could easily lay siege to the entire city and starve every human within it to death. Not to mention the thousand and one ways a dictator can use it to crush demonstrations without having to resort to methods that will only weaken his position.

    You're being a bit narrow minded, too.

    You think you couldn't do the same thing with bullets? Bullets are just easier to come by and easier to use.

    And if the USA can barely afford this, what makes you think some 3rd world dictator is going to be able to?

×