Oligo

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (scout @ April 12 2002,05:34)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">it'll actually hurt EU position in the area because it wont be accepted as a mediator in this conflict (by israel), u dont want to know what ppl here are thinking about europians, escpecially about the French and the scandinavians. and all the arson and the attacks of jews in europe doesnt help either.<span id='postcolor'> What did the scandinavians ever do to you? I totally missed it if we ever did anything to anybody. Anyway, no wonder there are clashes in France, since they have an enormous arab population. I guess they don't like you slaying their brethren. And I'd say most of the attacks on jews in europe were done by pissed off arabs or some moronic neo-nazis. Neither of those represent the average citizen of europe.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Albert Schweizer @ April 12 2002,02:24)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Hope you can read at least the numbers. I think Israel is a strong nation, but an escalation and introduction of the other surrounding arabic states would be desasterous!<span id='postcolor'> Numbers are cool, but the Israeli material is far superior to the arab material. Especially the Israeli air force is top of the line. That means they can attain air superiority and we all know what happens then. You only need to look at the Gulf War.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Longinius @ April 11 2002,17:54)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">SWAT forces are called in to eliminate lethal threats. They are called in when the situation has allready escalated above the norm. Therefor it is very likely that any move the target makes is to be considered hostile. The target has been given warnings and time to surrender. After the SWAT gets into action its all about the take down. Its a different scenario than regular law enforcement.<span id='postcolor'> The SWAT protocol in U.S. says about the use of deadly force: "If a suspect is pointing a gun at an officer or a hostage/civilian in a threatening manner, deadly force is allowed. Not before. Holding a gun alone is not sufficient for the use of lethal force." So this is the police way. Now it's different if say SAS is on a counterterrorist mission. They put bullets to the center of mass on sight of a suspect with a gun. But that is a military operation.

"Well, that and the fact that the handler better not be anywhere close by. Most K9 handlers (military or police) will fuck you up if you go after their dog. There is a very strong bond between the two. I remember a couple of years ago we had a small drunken riot in my hometown. Me and some friends were just about to enter the frey when we saw two K9 patrols pull up. They immidiatly released their dogs and sent them straight into the brawling crowd. Most dispersed. One guy proceeded to engage the dogs. I think he managed to kick one of them a couple of times before about five cops jumped his ass and dragged him away. I think he stumbled and fell a couple of times before finally entering his cell..." Well, the question was purely academic, you know. Anyway, you'd better kick the dogs arse, before it bites your balls off, even if the dog handler gives you some extra heat as a result. I'd trade some bruises for the intactness of my johnson anyday.

Oh, come on, you have it easy. One Euro is about 6 FIM. Suddenly all the goddamn prices seem like an incredible bargain to me. But in reality, all those bastards rounded the prices UPWARDS so that they fit the Euro standard nicely. Even beer is now more expensive, goddamn...

Yeah, well, the only defence against dogs is to stay calm and when the critter comes close enough, you kick and beat the shit out of them. Dogs have frail bones and a kick with a boot can easily snap a couple of rib bones. Dogs that get beaten never assault people again (dogs get scared easily). The problem is, though, when people feel teeth biting somewhere, their reflex is to try to pull out and retreat, instead of counterstriking with fists and feet. So the key is enormous self-discipline. Hard to attain.

"Working sights" The high MOI of paintball guns make these useless, whereas a good airsoft gun nicely hits where you're aiming.

Airsoft guns compared to paintball guns have: -Full automatic fire -Realistic clips as opposed to a moronic container -Working sights -Smaller grouping of rounds -Better range thanks to the Hop Up system -Better penetration of bushes and such -No air bottle -Combatibility with real firearm accessories Paintball sucks. Airsoft O\/\/|\|z U @||...

"funny....... most of would give it away without second thought." Sigh, maybe you should then.

Ahh, but the best part in airsoft guns is that the 6mm plastic projectile doesn't penetrate skin! That's why you can don your airsoft assault rifle and skirmish with your friends. I must say that after trying paintball and airsoft skirmish, I wouldn't touch those paintball guns with a thirty foot pole.

15 of your friends are dead for a patch of land. At least all your blood is buying land to bury the dead in. "For a hill, men would kill..."

Funnily enough, the Geneva convention (you know that meaningless piece of paper) lists the care of the civilian population in occupied areas as one of the responsibilities of the occupying power. It even says: "The wounded and sick, as well as the infirm, and expectant mothers, shall be the object of particular protection and respect." I think that if Israelis classify the palestinian ambulances as combat vehicles, they should care for the palestinian sick and wounded with their own machinery of medicine.

"She is not the only case, there are more like her. Innocent people sentenced to death by Israel without a trial, without any chance of appeal. " The standard response of IDF, U.S. or any other country in a 'war on terror' is: "If you're going to make an omelet, you got to break some eggs." Or then you can just label her 'collateral damage'.

"Makes you wonder if israel is letting some of these suicide bombers in so the US won't get piss at them." I wonder what kind of border arrangements they have in there. Apparently some palestinians manage to slip through. Also, how can any arab-looking fellow walk around anywhere in Israel proper without getting arrested by the police?

"Do you know how hard it is to get people in US military these days ? They give free college,extra money for joining,and other stuff.But they still haven't had the draft since vietnam war.Maybe you should go tell your so-called leaders to stop the draft and just maybe offer more money." Do you honestly think that Saddam Hussein only had volunteers in his army during Gulf War? Yeah, right, of course he had. Or could it be that most of them were men with families, forced to join the military? "8 people killed in israel while riding in a bus..." It seems that Israel has missed some of the terrorist they are hunting.

"Well i guess that their problem.Maybe they should try and fix that problem,as in vietnam war draft.The problem was fix,and probably draft will never be use again unless something big happen." THIS is your solution to the problem? Oh yes, it's ingenious. Why haven't the leaders of these nations implemented it allready? Why oh why? At this point I have to tell myself: "Oh come on Don Quixote, quit fighting them windmills."

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Red Oct @ April 10 2002,01:23)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> Â <span id='postcolor'> Well somebody seems to be jumping with joy, when people die. "Who cares if we dropping bombs on soldiers,sure there is mistakes..." Maybe you should care if you drop bombs on soldiers. Did you know that not all soldiers in this world have volunteered for the army they are serving in? Newsflash: Some of them were forced to join.

"You may have started a flame war.Plus it's not funny when you kill civilians.But very creation.Did you get a hard on when you seen the planes hit the towers ?" Sigh. I don't do flame wars. I was just satirizing the last post by Red Oct, which was glorifying the bombing of people. I admit I used heavy sarcasm, but that's just the way I am. You obviously feel for the people who died in the WTC incident. Now if you only felt like that for EVERY human being killed around the world regardless of where it happens, you'd get my respect for having skills in empathy.

I just got tired of watching all those 'nuke the Afganistan' pictures posted so frequently in here. It seems that adolecent yanks are jerking off to pictures of bombs nowadays, not naked women.

[sARCASM MODE ON] Gross weight = 312.000 Lbs. Explosive jet fuel = 23980 gal. Unit price for a terrorist hijacker = Cost of airline tickets The look on their faces, when this monster slams into their skyscraper..... Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â -PRICELESS- [sARCASM MODE OFF] Two can play this game. Â Stop posting this U.S. bravado crap.

"Believe me oligo when i tell you an airliner is a hell of allot weaker then a modern fighters. There are account of AIM-7 Sparrows cutting mig-21's in half merely by hitting it. And a MiG is one of the sturdiest aircraft around. A AMRAAM can and in most instances will cut an airliner in half. Fighters are built to do hard turns and to take damage. Airliners can turn at 5 G's aerodynamicaly but the plane structure disintegrates at 3,5 G's It will not survive a hit by a AAM." I was saying that a lot of different outcomes are possible if an airliner meets an AAM and I am still saying that. AIM-7 with it's warhead of 40kg of high explosive rips MIG-21s apart only if the fragmentation propelled by the proximity blast causes enough loss of aerodynamics in the rather small plane. So the blast doesn't blow the plane in half, but the loss of aerodynamics. If an AMRAAM (20kg of HE) or a Sidewinder (9kg of HE) hits an airliner (meaning blows up near an airliner due to proximity fusing), the situation is as follows: A frag effect far away from the fuselage can destroy an engine or rip out a wing. This would cause the plane to plummet nose first to the ground. If the frag effect is close to the cabin, it may cause enough loss of aerodynamics to initiate a total shredding. Thus, different things can happen. Besides, I doubt they would fire AMRAAMS at airliners inside the borders of U.S, because firing BVR shots is not too accurate. So in a surgical shootdown situation the pilot would probably have to use Sidewinders or even the cannon. Since Sidewinders have really small warheads, there is less chance of a catastrophic loss of aerodynamics.

"innoculate everyone? have you ever been to the ER before under normal circumstances? it takes you hours just to get in! can you imagine how much of an unorganized frenzy innoculating the entire population would be? then again they could do it to downtown London for supporting the U.S..." They did this sort of mass inoculation in Finland once in my lifetime. It wasn't an emergency or anything, but for some reason they decided to inoculate everyone fast. It took about a week and our whole 5 million was inoculated. Pretty efficient, eh? You're forgetting that inoculating one person takes about five seconds and you can do it on the street if you have to. Any nurse, paramedic or drug addict can give the shot. Thus comparing it to an ER situation is not viable. "And after that was a lot of talk about the availability of vaccine. In this documentary at the start of the outbreak the UK or US did not have enough vaccine to help everybody, but over time enoguh was created" You should read the papers. After the anthrax scare in the U.S., they got enough vaccine for everybody. Of course Finland has had it all along.

"I think biological weapons could be a very real threat. For example, what if someone were to go around and infect a couple of people in a major city with small pox? These people would travel all around spreading it. And we would be totally unprepared for that, what with thinking smallpox was totally annihilated." I'm happy to tell you that even U.S. has enough vaccine to inoculate their population (minus maybe some homeless 2nd class citizens) against smallpox. So as soon as some cases of smallpox are detected somewhere (it doesn't kill you in 1 day you know), mass inoculations start. In the end, you have a few hundred casualties max. It's still a lot easier to plow a plane into WTC or shoot up your friends in school. "I think its all dependent on the kind of biological weapon you are using. I'm sure it is very possible to enginner some kind of super virus that spreads like wildfire and is lethal." Being a genetic engineer myself, I have followed the field pretty closely. And I can assure you that engineering any effects of that much complexity are still beyond the reach of our current knowledge. Hell, you need only to look at the recent natural cases of outbreaks. Even the murderous hemorrhagic fevers (ebola) have managed to cause only minor casualties. "Bio weapons are dangerous.Someone can put something in city water system,or some other high traffic area.Soo it will spread quick that it's uncontrolable.That means alot of people die.It probably took us a nuclear blast to learn us how bad nukes are." You'd better put chem weapons to water systems, that would cause more casualties. Like I told you, 'bio blasts' have happened and the effects were insignificant.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (foxer @ April 09 2002,14:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I don't see usa putting mines all over the world,like in farm land and other stuff.The problem with mines are not western problem,but 3rd world country problem,or if a country is having trouble with rebels.<span id='postcolor'> Did you know that U.S. has fucked their exercise areas in Panama so throughoutly with unexploded munitions and mines that the natives are a little restless. They don't think it is cool that you have turned those areas into mini-Afganistans. So yes you do put mines all over the world.