Megrahi........ A Curious Case...............................

[Dougie]

Land belongs to people, not religions. Once one state was created you cant just go back and say, Sorry about that lads, we appear to have made a mistake and we would like to move in different people and start again. Its a false state that carries a chip on its shoulder, yet is protected by the USA because of the money it holds on wall street. On top of that it has, tests and uses weapons of mass destruction far more than Afghanistan or Iraq ever did. But hey, they are not muslims and they dont have lots of spare oil lying around, so **** it, carry on as you were.

Not according to the "Palestinians" it doesn't. It's always "Muslim "land, or "Holy Land given to us (Muslims) by Allah."

 

The Jews were there first....the Jewish people, and not the "Palestinians." You lot (the UK) created "Palestine," yet you don't get involved to try to fix this situation.

 

Good example of hwo the UK fnucks something up, and just leaves it to others to fix. And you lot complain about us.......

 

LOL, you appear to be more confused than scooby doo!!!! That is EXACTLY the point I was making in the first place????

 

[forza ton]

Of course I know about the innocents killed by US (and coalition) troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. Do you think I'm stupid? Wait, don't answer that....I'm American, so I must be. Silly me for even asking.

 

If the "insurgents," Taleban and AQ didn't hide and fight within the civilian population, and instead confront us in the open like men do, then there wouldn't be that many civilians killed. I also don't hear you saying ANYTHING about the "insurgents," Taleban and AQ blowing up innocents in markets and other places, thus killing THOUSANDS. Makes me wonder if you've turned to sympathizing with them.

 

You need to take your blinders off and see the world for what it really is......instead of the utopia that you want it to be.

just had a wee read over this thread cos i had got bored with it but come on trick! don't give us that "fighting like men" crap. it's not as if the u.s. and brits are fighting hand to hand with bayonets! more like sitting in helicopters firing off smart bombs!

[NewTon]

Of course I know about the innocents killed by US (and coalition) troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. Do you think I'm stupid? Wait, don't answer that....I'm American, so I must be. Silly me for even asking.

 

If the "insurgents," Taleban and AQ didn't hide and fight within the civilian population,

 

 

and instead confront us in the open like men do,

 

then there wouldn't be that many civilians killed. I also don't hear you saying ANYTHING about the "insurgents," Taleban and AQ blowing up innocents in markets and other places, thus killing THOUSANDS. Makes me wonder if you've turned to sympathizing with them.

 

You need to take your blinders off and see the world for what it really is......instead of the utopia that you want it to be.

 

 

Gidday Trick,

 

I have plenty of time for you, mate.

 

However, that comment is somewhat below the belt.

 

Are you saying that the Taleban and AQ are cowards because they choose to take on the technology of west as guerilla fighters ?

 

Would you rather that they fought like the Zulus or the cannon fodder on the western front in WWI ?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Ghost]

just had a wee read over this thread cos i had got bored with it but come on trick! don't give us that "fighting like men" crap. it's not as if the u.s. and brits are fighting hand to hand with bayonets! more like sitting in helicopters firing off smart bombs!

 

 

You's be surprised Forza

[Trick37]

just had a wee read over this thread cos i had got bored with it but come on trick! don't give us that "fighting like men" crap. it's not as if the u.s. and brits are fighting hand to hand with bayonets! more like sitting in helicopters firing off smart bombs!

You's be surprised Forza

 

The use of military equipment like helicopters and the like is part of conventional warfare. However, the Taleban don't have them as they lost what they had during the 2001 invasion. You'll remember that the Taleban fought the Northern Alliance, and they were winning, via a conventional war before 9/11 happened. everythign that they had (tanks helicopters, and the like) were destroyed when we invaded.

 

Now they cower and rarely fight conventionally. When they do, it's a hard fight (I'll give it to them), but they lose many times as many as we do. Nobody, regardless of the recruitment, can afford to lose that many for as long as this has being going on, and expect to win.

 

 

Gidday Trick,

 

I have plenty of time for you, mate.

 

However, that comment is somewhat below the belt.

 

Are you saying that the Taleban and AQ are cowards because they choose to take on the technology of west as guerilla fighters ?

 

Would you rather that they fought like the Zulus or the cannon fodder on the western front in WWI ?

 

 

I'd rather that they stop using suicide and car bombs to kill civilians, and stop using IEDs and the like. instead, fight us on the battlefield to the end. To the victor the spoils.

 

 

[cowshed_warrior]

The use of military equipment like helicopters and the like is part of conventional warfare. However, the Taleban don't have them as they lost what they had during the 2001 invasion. You'll remember that the Taleban fought the Northern Alliance, and they were winning, via a conventional war before 9/11 happened. everythign that they had (tanks helicopters, and the like) were destroyed when we invaded.

 

Now they cower and rarely fight conventionally. When they do, it's a hard fight (I'll give it to them), but they lose many times as many as we do. Nobody, regardless of the recruitment, can afford to lose that many for as long as this has being going on, and expect to win.

I'd rather that they stop using suicide and car bombs to kill civilians, and stop using IEDs and the like. instead, fight us on the battlefield to the end. To the victor the spoils.

 

how can they fight on the battle feilds when thall their conventional fighting equipment was destroyed, and I qoute 'when WE invaded'... they are fighting with the resources they have available, I like the way you yanks want to just take take take, whatever resources any one has, you seem to think you have the god given right to kill people for them... big ****ing finger to you and all your yank buddies, tell me tricky, how many times was america attacked by this so called al quida (spelling) before George Bush ordered the twin towers to be taken out ? how many times has america been attacked since George Bush left office ? terrorist's eh.. try taking out the terrorist that live in your own backyard first the ones in the suits, but no.. you just follow orders dont you, no matter what the consequences.. ss type indoctrination.. us military style.

[Guest David Edwards]

This thread, like a lot of others, is a bit like a Stephen King novel. It has an interesting beginning (in this case I would say that, wouldn't I), peters out in the middle, goes completely nuts towards the end and of course, is far too long.

[forza ton]

instead, fight us on the battlefield to the end. To the victor the spoils.

what the **** are you? one of the spartans?

 

when the afghans were fighting the russians they were noble mountain men guerillas and now they are sneaky s***ebags who won't play by the rules?

 

fair do's if it was a square go and each side had the same gear but they have to fight the way they do because of who they are up against. much as islamic fundamentalism is ridiculous to me they wan't to win every bit as much as you do and the usa would fight differently if they were up against superior technology.

 

anyway where was the sense of fair play when you atom bombed the japanese from 8 miles high? or commited atrocities in south east asia? no wonder you get a hard time on here trick - you really set yourself up for it at times.

 

 

[Ghost]

what the **** are you? one of the spartans?

 

when the afghans were fighting the russians they were noble mountain men guerillas and now they are sneaky s***ebags who won't play by the rules?

 

fair do's if it was a square go and each side had the same gear but they have to fight the way they do because of who they are up against. much as islamic fundamentalism is ridiculous to me they wan't to win every bit as much as you do and the usa would fight differently if they were up against superior technology.

 

anyway where was the sense of fair play when you atom bombed the japanese from 8 miles high? or commited atrocities in south east asia? no wonder you get a hard time on here trick - you really set yourself up for it at times.

 

 

Now there's an idea

[NewTon]

what the **** are you? one of the spartans?

 

when the afghans were fighting the russians they were noble mountain men guerillas and now they are sneaky s***ebags who won't play by the rules?

 

fair do's if it was a square go and each side had the same gear but they have to fight the way they do because of who they are up against. much as islamic fundamentalism is ridiculous to me they wan't to win every bit as much as you do and

 

the usa would fight differently if they were up against superior technology.

 

anyway where was the sense of fair play when you atom bombed the japanese from 8 miles high? or commited atrocities in south east asia? no wonder you get a hard time on here trick - you really set yourself up for it at times.

 

 

 

the usa would fight differently if they were up against superior technology.

 

 

Gidday forza,

 

As they did in the War of Independence and against the Japanese in the Phillipines in 1942.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Ghost]

the usa would fight differently if they were up against superior technology.

Gidday forza,

 

As they did in the War of Independence and against the Japanese in the Phillipines in 1942.

 

Conventional tactics, not insurgency.

 

I'm sure Trick will have a new video clip to see what folk are up against.

 

Not what the Armchair Generals may think on here.

 

I'm not saying i agree with Trick either.

[NewTon]

Conventional tactics, not insurgency.

 

I'm sure Trick will have a new video clip to see what folk are up against.

 

Not what the Armchair Generals may think on here.

 

I'm not saying i agree with Trick either.

 

 

 

Those who refused to surrender in the Phillipines in 1942 were hardly conventional.

 

http://www.history.army.mil/books/wwii/mac...r%20v1/ch10.htm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Ghost]

Newton i am referring to Afghanistan but i know what you are referring to.

[Morton4Me]

Am I the only one not surprised at this ?

 

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/07/05/docto...?iref=allsearch

[Tom_McB]

Am I the only one not surprised at this ?

 

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/07/05/docto...?iref=allsearch

 

Kenny the cnut MacAskill has much to answer for.

 

 

 

Take the rag away from your face, for now ain't the time for your tears.