Jump to content
Bohemia Interactive Forums

Longinius

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    2156

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Posts posted by Longinius

  2. Posted

    Nah, thats not the problem. There is plenty of that going around. The only problem for an artist, is contacts. If they know the people managing the gallaries etc they can get very far with very little. If they dont have the contacts, they are basically screwed. Kinda like the rest of us I guess smile_o.gif

  4. Posted

    Artwork, even if offensive, should not be regulated or controlled. The whole purpose of art is to make people think, to encourage debate. And this art piece has succeeded more than most.

    The only problem here is that one person, the embassador, formed an opinion on a work of art and projected it as the only right opinion. Most people that saw the artwork however, did not see it the same way. This does not mean he is wrong, or that they are wrong, simply that they are looking at it from different perspectives. Trashing it however was way out of line. And him getting away with it is far worse.

    Not long ago two people vandalized an art exibit with pictures of dead animals in various arrangements. Had they been identitied, I am quite sure there would have been legal reprecusions. Same thing goes for the people who ripped down paintings in a Malmö museum a while back. They were all wrong, as so was the embassador. Not in having different opinions than most other visitors, but in how they chose to act based on those opinions. We are a democratic country, they could try and get popular opinion on their side to facilitate change.

  5. Posted

    It just goes to prove that as soon as you make any statement regarding the situation in Israel, you are an anti-semite.

    Because, Israelis clearly got upset about this womans picture. And they would get equally upset if it was Sharons picture. So in other words, never comment on Israeli matters because unless you are 100% with them, you are 100% against them, a nazi supporter and anti-semite.

    I think this is a great piece of art, much thanks to the embassadors actions. It succeded with what art is all about: getting people to think and discuss.

  6. Posted

    Well, if you define a camp as a spot of land enclosed by a fence or wall, then we are all ready there... Of course, Israel isnt gasing anyone. And I dont think they ever will. They are however effectively killing of any and all possibilities for work and companies to exist in the regions closed of by the wall.

  7. Posted

    Quote[/b] ]I know that the opposite is true. Sorry but you must be ingesting the lukshen they feed you in your local papers.

    The opposite isnt true. Increased attacks by Palestinians on Israelis lead to increased attacks by Israelis on Palestinians. More dead Palistinians, more walls, less freedom, leads to bigger hatred against Israelis.

    If Palestinians thought they actually had a chance at a normal life, I am convinced the amount of terror attacks would drop over time, because the people would have no incentive to fight as the extremists arguments would be mute.

  9. Posted

    Quote[/b] ]The more you're lax, the more they'll resort to strengthening their attacks. You're just offering them incentive.

    Yes, and the more you opress or strike at a people, the harder they fight back. Living in Israel, you should know this. Giving the enemy hope and a chance at a better life is the only way to stop them from striking back.

    Terrorists and geurilla fighters, no matter where in the world, lose as soon as they do not have the support of the population. And they lose the support as soon as the population feels safe and has hope. As long as the population lives in terror of their liberators / government the opposition will be able to work efficiently.

  10. Posted

    Quote[/b] ]n the courtroom, I would assume they would have a full voice transcript from the entire flight, as well as any documents on the flight's intended mission and/or targets.

    We don't have that, do we?

    My statement was in remark to Denoirs small ironic post about WMD's and acting on assumptions. So I wasnt refer to the apaches in that case.

  11. Posted

    Quote[/b] ]I apologize, as I know it kinda sucks having to trust someone's word without being able to follow up on it yourself, especially since a number of people might be less than honorable... All I can say is that I am a man of honor, and you can either take my word or leave it. Sorry!

    I dont know you. I dont know the pilot. I havent talked to the pilot. So yeah, that statement doesnt really mean much to me without some kind of validation. No offense meant.

  13. Posted

    "Official from the source... the video depicts an AH-64D Apache (hovering at about 900meters) engaging Iraqis who are emplacing an IED (Improvised Explosive Device, i.e. a mine) on a road to support an ambush. The Apache used Forward Looking Infrared and 30mm auto cannon to engage the targets. And THAT is exactly what happened, with as much detail as can be released."

    Do you have a link, or any other way to verify this statement? I'd just like to see the actual source myself.

  14. Posted

    Even if this is true and they were in fact placing a mine, which they very well might have been. The point is still that the pilots killed a wounded man and there by broke the Geneva Convention.

  15. Posted

    Quote[/b] ]"He also said they would have had intelligence about the identity of the men in the vehicles."

    Key word being "would" not "did".

    Quote[/b] ]And let them get away to kill again some other day?

    If they are not fighting back, yeah. Or atleast confirm the fact that they were indeed enemies.

    Quote[/b] ]I think the same of jumping to conclusions with no guarantee of knowing all the facts.

    Atleast my actions dont end up killing people who might be innocent.

  16. Posted

    Never been to war. Never fired a weapon in anger. However...

    The situation is as follows. We have apache helicopters looking at a target, quite a distance away. Target consists of a tractor on a field, currently equiped for farm work, an open truck and a pickup. Three unarmed people, one of which has carried / carries a tube shape object. No CONFIRMED weapons visible.

    First off... Arent soldiers supposed to confirm their targets? If the apache pilots were under fire, I'd understand if they were rather safe than sorry. But they had plenty of time to react if one of those guys went for a weapon. Long enough to blast the guy to bits, thats for sure.

    Secondly. Didnt the thought ever enter their minds that this could actually be farmers? Tractor... field... farm equipment. Ring a bell?

    Third. The guy is wounded, then executed. This IS against the Geneva Convention and cannot be denied.

    Fourth. They could have taken out the vehicles without specifically targeting the people. That would have destroyed any weapons and forced the people into cover. If the people then tried to produce weapons, they would still have the option to blast them to bits.

    Defending actions like these are sad, but not totally unexpected.

  18. Posted

    Quote[/b] ]Palestinians are cannon fodder to their own terrorists, who work out from residential areas, cowering behind those very same civilians.

    What, you expect them to build special houses away from the rest of civilisation, with signs on them indicating a palestinian militant lives there? Naturally they operate among civilians, as their targets usually are found in civilian areas. And they live themselves in civilian areas, posing as civilians, because otherwise they'd be whiped out in no time.

    Clearly they stand no chance what so ever against the IDF in open conflict. So they use geurilla tactics. Not very strange.

  19. Posted

    Quote[/b] ]No argument about that. As a religious, observant Jew, I have no problems with Bush's particular words, even though I don't necessarily agree with them.

    That might be because Bush is standing on your side of the fence, so to speak.

  20. Posted

    Quote[/b] ]Whoa your understanding of religion has come crashing down ... every new religion that was sent down was because the old one got void , by human editting and corruption in it. Every new religion over wrote the previous one. They dont contradict each other they compliment each others existence.

    In other words youve probably got this whole wrong.

    I might have misunderstood you, but there are plenty of religions that have contradicted each other. Basically anything from just one god to multiple, from glorifying violence to preaching peace and understanding.

  22. Posted

    Quote[/b] ]Yeah, I'm sure someone in the first Bush administration told him to invade

    In a way, yes. It was his own initiative of course. But he asked a member of TBA what their stance would be on a Kuwaiti invasion. The answer was that they wouldn't intervene. He took this as an OK by the US, and went ahead with his plans.

    So while they didnt tell him to do it, they didnt try to stop him either. Quite the contrary.

  23. Posted

    Quote[/b] ]Lying on television to the people is not a crime punishable by law. Had Bush lied under oath then there would be clear grounds for impeachement.

    It has nothing to do with substance, but only with form.

    Yes, I know this. I know he lied under oath and I know that its wrong. But I am talking about using common sense (something not done often enough). The lie he told had nothing to do with his presidency. But yeah, for sure, it was a good excuse for the Spanish Inquisition ;)

  24. Posted

    Two more iraqi police officers killed by American troops recently. I doubt they will have problems finding more police officers soon. Many of their own people want to see them dead, and American soldiers are seeing it done. Must suck big time.

    Was a documentary on TV yesterday about Iraqi police. They are supposed to take over police matters soon and most police stations do not have cars. No police stations have radios. Few police have access to weapons (we discussed this all ready though). Police stations have been bombed and burnt out. As a police officer, you are a hot target to the resistance and at risk from being shot by your allies.

    If I was Iraqi, I wouldnt even consider becoming a police officer during those circumstances.

  25. Posted

    Yeah, my point still stands though. He lied under oath about a matter that had nothing to do with his abilities as president. Had he lied about his job, his decisions or his policies then I would see what the fuss is about. But a guy lieing about having a mistress... well, I think that is quite common and in the world of politics extremely irrelevant.

    But hey, if you rather have a president that lies to start a war than one that lies to try and protect his private life, and his families, thats fine by me. Your call.

×