[Stryke 9]

Falcon X: Will you take a long trip? Remember to bring Kevlar.


Bob: Possibly. Where are you imagining the things worth stealing are? Government always gets all the cool ****, and in a welfare state like Iraq where the government manages all the food and medicine for 60% of the people, that goes doubly so. There aren't any shops to loot.

And it's not like looting's ever really organized, either. If you had a few coordinated militias or individuals going from government center to government center shooting 'em up, I'd buy it, but mobs just don't work that way. You're in a crowd, it's an angry, scared crowd, you see something attractive in a shop window, smash, grab, repeat. Everyone else imitates. Soon it's time to call out the fire brigade, 'cos there's no stone left unburned.

[Falcon X]

If my nation called for it... I would.  But thankfully the US actually has a good VOLUNTEER military.

So will you eat crow?

[Stryke 9]

So you're ducking out. Nice. And, I might add, shows how much faith you have that the US is doing fine.


Never tried crow. I'd imagine it'd taste rather gamey. I certainly don't see why the crow-eating fetish.

[Kamikaze]

Originally posted by Deepblue
Why can't you accept what is happening. The people realize that were serious this time and are rising up against Saddams regime. Besides where do you get your information. I don't even think you are very well informed. You seem to be more like someone who just mindlessly forms oppinions based on hate or political stance.

Umm.... who're the people who pull biased, dumb information out of the American media (i.e. bull****)? Yes, you supporters (excluding people like CP I mean).

[Bobboau]

you know as looting goes what I've seen isn't eactly what I think of when I think riot, if you have wached any of it it's basicly a long line of people walking into a building (in an almost orderly fasion) grabing something of interest (hey look a frige, just what I'v always wanted) and walking out. now some of the seens of people burning pictures of Sadam and smashing monuments does look somewhat riot-like,
though I guess so do many jubulant celebrations, honestly most of what I've seen so far hasn't been much worse than our average peace riot,
I am not by any strech of the imagination implying that what is happening is organised, but it isn't complete chaos ether, they don't seem to be just cruseing for someone to beat the crap out of, for the most part it looks like there just reclaiming what is there's.
I am actualy quite suprized that we havn't seen any pictures of Ba'athist officals naled to the tops of tall buildings by there testicles yet. though I guess that's cause they all ran for there frik'n lives last night, probly a good idea,
personaly I hope the angry mob gets to them before they get to Syria

[Stryke 9]

Might also be because the mobs ain't so big, and they're rather confused (there've been attacks on the Army, too, but mostly scattered). All in all, it looks to me like a coty being invaded, but I dunno.

[Sandwich]

Originally posted by Stryke 9
Or, for that matter, anywhere in the general area of the Middle East. **** gonna get pretty hot.

Deal!

[aldo_14]

The struggle was never going to be to win the war, it was to be to win the peace. If the US (and UK, though we've seemingly got bugger all say in the political machinations behind this, as per bloody usual) doesn't bring a stable, free, democracy to Iraq (i.e. if it just leaves a puppet government, or worse still a single person in charge), then the stated aim of this whole war would have been betrayed.

Oh, and where did you come from, Pez?  Been ******* ages since I last saw you online....

[J.F.K.]

Thought I'd throw in a few responses to the war that have been going around an email thingy recently.

UN Petition for Peace
The US Congress has just authorized the President of
the US to go to
war against Iraq. Please consider this an urgent
request.
Stand for Peace.
Islam is not the Enemy.
War is NOT the Answer.
Today we are at a point of imbalance in the world and
are moving toward
what may be the beginning of a THIRD WORLD WAR.
If you are against this possibility, the UN is
gathering signatures in
an effort to avoid a tragic world event.
Please COPY (rather than Forward) this e-mail in a new
message, sign at
the end of the list, and send it to all the people
whom you know.
If you receive this list with more than 500 names
signed, please send a
copy of the message to:
[email protected]
[email protected]
Even if you decide not to sign, please consider
forwarding the petition
on instead of eliminating it.
1)... 253)...

Saddam Hussein is a murderer and an ethnic cleanser. He has been responsible for the murder of thousands if not millions of Kurds and Shi'ite Muslims since he came to power. Do the people who signed this petition realise that?

Why didn't the US receive UN approval for the war in Iraq? It's because two permanent members of the Security Council swayed the UN. Who were these countries? Russia and France. Why did they not support the war? Is it due to altruism on their part? No. It is because both countries have lucrative oil contracts with Iraq.

So really, I can't see any problem with this war. It will remove a despot from power, liberate the Iraqi people (who, by the way, have shown amazing support for Coalition troops) and result in a drop in oil prices across the world. That's why I won't be adding my name to this petiiton and if anyone is going to, just have a look at the facts before you make up your mind.

Perhaps the saddest fact of this whole affair is that 253 people can
be persuaded to add their names to such a cause. Much as I hate to
admit it, Patrick's got a point. No-one's acting on altruistic
motives - not the US, not Britian, and certainly not France or
Russia.

In light of the recent declaration by the US that it's no longer very
important to them to kill Saddam Hussein, one wonders at the
incompetence displayed by the Americans. But the fact remains that
they will remove him from power, and though it's unclear they have
very much intention of insituting a truly democratic government, it
cannot be argued that Saddam's government is better for the Iraqi
people than a Western-friendly government. If for no other reasons,
humanitarian aid will have an easier time working, and UN sanctions
will be lifted.

I will take issue with the fact that the resolution was not put to
the UN due to the actions of France and Russia. Tony Blair had,
earlier that week, attempted to pave the way for receving "moral
approval", which of course, would have been better than no
approval. The fact that they pulled the vote altogether suggests that
they were not capable even of achieving this victory, and the
question must certainly be raised as to whether two countries on a
power trip to recapture the glory of the days when they still
mattered could have so much power over the smaller countries who are
dependant on the US for more than half their aid - or, in Pakistan's
case, to keep their government in power.

The past fortnight has shown that while some Iraqis have certainly
met US troops with support, many have held back, and Coalition forces
are now meeting unanticipated resistance from the people of Iraq. But
in defense of the other side of this debate, that fact is
understandable given the actions on George Bush Snr. on the
conclusion of the war in '91.

While there's certainly something to be said for national
sovereignty, high ideals have little place in a world dominated by
practicalities. At a time when everyone's shouting slogans they don't
believe in, perhaps it's an idea to look at the possible outcomes of
the war, before making a decision as to who's morally superior.

Your idealism is touching. But people will die no matter what. What's
sad is not that people can be persuaded to sign an anti-war document.
What's sad is that they can be persuaded to sign a document which
appeals to the idealism, rather than rationalism within them. It's
people with idealism that the peace movement is drawing into riots,
and its people with idealism that the US is able to persuade to join
their cause. What's sad is that you can think with great sympathy of
all the Iraqi people dying under American bombs, but think nothing of
those dying under the half-hearted measures the UN has tried to
insitute to look like it's doing something. What's sad is that you
can rule out war so absolutely as an answer to the world's problems
when a brief glance at history makes it clear that other,
"diplomatic" solutions will lead only to fueds that will
end up killing more people than the wars would have in the first
place. For examples, refer to the 3 wars fought over Kashmir,
 and the fueds that followed, the 6-day war and the subsequent riots
in Israel.

You want to talk about people dying? How many people were killed in
Nazi Germany because the Allies were reluctant to interfere with
Germany's internal affairs - or even to look into them? How many
people died in Sraba & Shatila because the Israeli army refused to
look into the activities of the Phalanges?

That's some strong language you're using there - "the altar of
political and economic expediency"? Unfortunately, it's been
said before. Numerous times, by people just as determined to win over
public opinion, and just as ready to use shouted slogans and George
Bush is. I've got news for you that you may not like - people die
anyway. Either they die because it's convenient for Bush, or they die
because it's convenient for Saddam Hussein.

Most Arabs hate the Americans anyway. So they've got one of two
choices - pacify them, or keep them down. And I'm sorry if that's a
little too cynical for you, but the truth is, the second option's
just easier and more effective. But if the US - or the UN - can hold
their own in post-war Iraq, the relative stability of the government
in Iraq will actually make it easier to handle Palestine. There are
too many states in that region hostile to the West handle - some have
to eliminated. So we can wage war on Iraq now, or leave Lebanon to
dissolve into Civil War again, and Palestine as it is, and - well,
you know the story.

Just an afterthought, the fact that Iraq has an army doesn't mean
Iraqis are opposed to the Coalition forces. After all, Australia has
an army in Iraq, and there are at least 253 people who are anti-war.

[01010]

Originally posted by Kamikaze


Umm.... who're the people who pull biased, dumb information out of the American media (i.e. bull****)? Yes, you supporters (excluding people like CP I mean).

Coming from someone that quoted the ****ing Dail Mail which is the most biased piece of **** tabloid i've ever had the misfortune of reading, that's pretty rich.

[Pez]

Originally posted by aldo_14

Oh, and where did you come from, Pez?  Been ******* ages since I last saw you online....

Well, as always real life catches you up. I've basically been busy with university and i've gotten a new apartment, i've been going to more awaymatches (including a nice trip to Ireland) to support my team etc etc. I haven't lost interest in Freespace but I don't play it as frequantly as I used to, it's still my favorite game though.

Btw does anyone have the link to Descent-Freespace.com that let you use the better/higher resolution textures?

[Stryke 9]

Sandwich: Offer applicable to Falcon X only. I just really wanted to see if he even swallowed his own bull****, and since he clearly doesn't I think he can be safely ignored for the duration of this thread, and any that follow it.

Besides, you're in the IDF. You get to see what's goin' on already.

[Razor]

Originally posted by Bobboau
we just shot a hotel filled with jornalists...
great

It really surprises me that NATO hit so many of it's "friendly" targets. I believe that about 1000+ people died this way. Wow talk about "inteligent" weapons.

[Stryke 9]

I take it you haven't heard the joke about the US wars in the Middle East really being an excuse to take out the Canadian Army so we can invade...

[Shrike]

Originally posted by Razor
It really surprises me that NATO hit so many of it's "friendly" targets. I believe that about 1000+ people died this way. Wow talk about "inteligent" weapons.

Yes, as opposed to gassing people or using area bombing.  Those are far less likely to cause collateral damage.  

[Sandwich]

Originally posted by Razor


It really surprises me that NATO hit so many of it's "friendly" targets. I believe that about 1000+ people died this way. Wow talk about "inteligent" weapons.

Has nothing to do, really. Most of those incidents are from incorrectly targetting friendly forces, not from a precision weapon missing.

[Stryke 9]

Shrike: Technically, we were carpet-bombing Baghdad. And I'm not sure whether or not we used the MOAB (not really of interest to me), but if we did, that sure would qualify as an "area" bomb no matter what definition you use.

[Falcon X]

Originally posted by Stryke 9
Shrike: Technically, we were carpet-bombing Baghdad. And I'm not sure whether or not we used the MOAB (not really of interest to me), but if we did, that sure would qualify as an "area" bomb no matter what definition you use.

Wrong.  Over 80% of the munitions were guided.  Carpet bombing involves leveling a city.  We were extremely targeted.

[Bobboau]

Remember, the CIA was gutted and neutered by the end of the Clinton administration, the same CIA that mis-targeted hospitals and embassies is the same group that was abso-****ing-lutly clueless about an attack that killed nearly 3000 of our people,
hits on civilian targets are treated the same as if they were hits on our side,
fortunately things seem to be straitening up as I don't think there was a single bomb drooped on something we thought was something else, this is likely because we have had 10,000 special ops guys in there for the last few months, as opposed to relying solely on the nutless CIA

[Stryke 9]

It doesn't matter how precise the bomb is, if you use ten thousand of them in rapid succession on everything nearby its target the effect is exactly the same. So we nailed optic guidance systems to the end of a bomb so that it would hit the right building in an entire block of buildings we intended to destroy. It's just expensive carpet-bombing then.


And they're blowing up all those cool sensors just for no reason... why not just send them to me???