What's all the fuss about?

[observer]

"Perhaps bomb them, BEFORE they bomb us" - is exactly right Kije. Terrorist cells are being identified and thwarted by international intelligence agencies, charged and convicted, and imprisoned (but difficult to deport!), but they only need to get through once. However, where cells are located abroad in hostile territory, the use of drones would appear the preferred method of disposal, thus keeping our ground troops out of harms way.

[algy]

I agree with Wolfie, We have to be better than them, are you advocating we go down to their level. Perhaps bomb them, before we bomb us.

Lt it's about time you fair play merchants came to your senses, this is not an ideal world, fanatiscism is extremely hard to put down and you cannot reason with these lunatics, we are dealing with people that shoot little girls for attending school and still bury their women up to their necks and them stone them to death. To answer your question, the both of you, No! i don't believe we should IED or suicide bomb them, however I do believe that we should use any technology at our disposal to eliminate as many of these fanatics that we can and if that results in us using unmannned drones, tanks or whatever, then so be it. Do you really think that these Religious zealots, militant islamist suuny muslims may be reasoned with, because if you do then you are much more simple than I thought you were, they do not want a peaceful solution to the problem, they wish to eradicate all westerners and will not be happy until they succeed.

It's fairly obvious to me that we should agree to disagree as I will never come round to your way of thinking and I'm sure that you two will never agree with me on this subject!!!.

[wolfie]

Algy I have never said that we shouldn't use technology, or that we shouldn't use drones. What I said was that we have political leaders both here and in the US that don't need an excuse to bomb other countries, Blair and Bush to name but two. When the US were bombing the hell out of Vietnam, the only outcry in the States was when bodies in bags were being flown back by the hundreds. My view is that the use of drones would be supported by politicians to reduce or even eliminate that ordeal in the hope that they would then get full support of the public.

Obviously, less deaths is something to be supported but not when it is then used as an excuse to start or prolong war.

 

BTW I accept any differences of opinion and would hope that I don't demean them by calling them twaddle.   

[Cleopatra]

I agree with Wolfie, We have to be better than them, are you advocating we go down to their level. Perhaps bomb them, before we bomb us.

 

I agree with Wolfie, We have to be better than them, are you advocating we go down to their level. Perhaps bomb them, before we bomb us.

I do sincerely hope you never bomb yourselves

[algy]

Wolfie, we are all entitled to our opinions (other than Robbo, who is also entitled to his opinion but in this instance doesn't seem to have one!) if you think what I said was 'twaddle' then that is your opinion, not a problem for me!.

[Lt Kije]

Never heard of friendly fire Cleo, The Americans are very good at it

[Davy51]

The ability of modern Western Societies to endure losses of military personel as in the trenches of WW1 or of civilian personel as in the mass bombings of WW2, was exhausted by the time the Yanks lost the Viet-Nam war in the living rooms of America. Whilst I oppose war in principle and certainly the deployment of our young lads and lassies to far flung hell holes to be killed and maimed; the use of conventional forces against terrorists and insurgents is imo a blunt weapon, and the pursuit of what are criminal cadres, requires an intelligence led international policing approach, with the surgical disposal of their command structures, and the use of technology for remote controlled weaponry or special forces for that purpose, seems a rather common sense approach imo. Yes, there's no such thing as clean and sanitized kills, when your dealing with explosive ordinance; this we know from the effect of terrorists bombs on our streets; and if drone attacks cause collateral damage, so be it, better them than lives being lost by our own nationals. Terrorism is the new game in Town, and is a activity perpetrated by criminals, so imo, all this nonsense about the Geneva Convention and rules of engagement, put about by flower power luvvies, is the kind of uninformed opinion that ties the hands of our service personel and makes us vunerable to these nutters.

 

 

Excellent post !

[algy]

I agree with your statement entirely, obs.

[Robbo]

Wolfie, we are all entitled to our opinions (other than Robbo, who is also entitled to his opinion but in this instance doesn't seem to have one!) if you think what I said was 'twaddle' then that is your opinion, not a problem for me!.

My opinion was that your reply to a perfectly good post was twaddle, It seems from your reply that you would prefer us to behave the same as terrorists. That's why I asked if you fancy being a suicide bomber.

[algy]

My opinion was that your reply to a perfectly good post was twaddle, It seems from your reply that you would prefer us to behave the same as terrorists. That's why I asked if you fancy being a suicide bomber.

Don't be so infantile and act your age, I am guessing and so assume you are an adult!., the question you are asking me beggars belief, but just to satify your childish intelligence, if you had taken the trouble to read my reply to Lt and Wolfie, I made it quite clear I do not condone suicide bombing.

[Robbo]

 if you think what I said was 'twaddle' then that is your opinion, not a problem for me!.

Obviously it is, on both counts.

[wolfie]

This is what happens when people resort to insults.  

[Robbo]

This is what happens when people resort to insults.  

And you can shut up.

[algy]

This is what happens when people resort to insults.  

Not insults Wolfie, only my assessment of Robbo based on his asking the impertinent question as to whether I fancied being a suicide bomber which I found to be grossly insulting to me, anyway must get back to watching my movie, only nipped in to see if there was any response.

[Robbo]

What a load of twaddle

Don't be so infantile,

act your age,

I am guessing and so assume you are an adult!.

childish intelligence,

 

Not insults just my assessment of algy

[wolfie]

What was the thread about again.........

[algy]

What a load of twaddle

Don't be so infantile,

act your age,

I am guessing and so assume you are an adult!.

childish intelligence,

 

Not insults just my assessment of algy

Aw! come on old chum at least write your own script!

[Bazj]

Never heard of friendly fire Cleo, The Americans are very good at it

 

n an interview with a German Wehrmacht/Bundeswehr officer,on the subject of friendly fire the officer quoted the German artillery's joke as "At least we hit something important."

 

[Lt Kije]

Who said the Germans have got no sense of humour

[observer]

"friendly fire" is yet another example of why conventional forces should not be deployed in these theatres, once unleashed, even in this era of high tech command and control, it is extremely difficult to manage the battlefield and even more difficult to control outcomes - "the fog of war".  Much better to fight this war on terrorism by the use of our intelligence services, where plots can be eliminated prior to fruition.

[algy]

What was the thread about again.........

Your memory Wolfie!, what, are you like,

Obs posted the topic; What's All The Fuss About - Seems the UK are using drone aircraft in Afghanistan, which appears to have sparked a protest from luvvies outside RAF Waddington(?). IF they're finally taking out the insurgents with these un-manned aircraft, surely we'll see less of our troops getting killed or returning maimed?

Do you remember now, I would'nt worry it's just your age!.

[Evil Sid]

But they have been employing drone aircraft since the start. They have only recently moved their base form America to Britain. Although armed with weaponry the drones are only for surveillance use to spot problems on the ground and alert the troops there to it. Only as a last resort are the weaponry to be used. At least that is what was reported on BBC news.

 

The reason for the protest is that usual British one, It is not sporting to just bomb somebody. if you are going to kill them it should up close and personal so that they have a least a sporting chance of killing you too. "It's just not cricket to blow them up from a distance, get in close and poke em with something sharp, they don't like it up em you know"

[Cleopatra]

Them fuzzy wuzzies don't like it poked up em ya know Cpt Mainwaring.....! Ooops they are not fuzzy wuzzies are they?

[Davy51]

On the other hand Sid ,i  doubt the protesting luvvies would be the first people to form an orderly queue at the recruiting office in the event of conventional war breaking out .

[wolfie]

But they have been employing drone aircraft since the start. They have only recently moved their base form America to Britain. Although armed with weaponry the drones are only for surveillance use to spot problems on the ground and alert the troops there to it. Only as a last resort are the weaponry to be used. At least that is what was reported on BBC news.

 

The reason for the protest is that usual British one, It is not sporting to just bomb somebody. if you are going to kill them it should up close and personal so that they have a least a sporting chance of killing you too. "It's just not cricket to blow them up from a distance, get in close and poke em with something sharp, they don't like it up em you know"

Why have they moved from America?

If the BBC say they won't use weapons it must be true .......how naive.

 

A faceless person leaving a bomb that kills civilians in the middle of Bridge st is a terrorist act. (Shock and Horror)

A faceless person controlling a drone that kills civilians while he is sat in his office with a cup of tea and a biscuit is US Policy.

 

BTW Davy I served 2 years in the army, have you?