04-21-2002, 09:31 PM
damn it, how many times to I have to say BOTH sides are wrong in this conflict. Or do you just pay attention to the parts you don't like?
First, the point I was disagreeing with was this one:
The use of large yield explosives is not possible in the occupied territories without massive civilian casualties. It was possible in both Afghanistan & the Gulf War. In Afghanistan, AGAIN, we did not target population centers. In the Gulf War only smart bombs were used on high priority targets like anti-aircraft guns, radar stations, and military communications.
And yes, civilians got killed in both conflicts. But we did everything possible to minimize those numbers. I still haven't seen a count on civilian dead in Afghanistan. And almost all the civilian deaths in the Gulf were due to failures of the smart-bomb guidance systems.
And we used no heavy bombing in either Haiti or Panama. In fact, Panama was the first major use of Special Operations forces instead of bombing to take out major installation, airports, and ships.
And we can also talk about the British in the Falkland Islands where they only used strategic bombing on specific sights because the civilians were on their side!
The point is bullshit.
And I agree with AM. Church officials have been in contact with the clergy inside the Church of the Nativity. They are staying by choice. And the lack of food and medical aid is due to a blockade by the IDF in an attempt to starve out the Palestinian militants. Classic siege strategy.
And Kid, you don't care becasue your a typical self-centered prick who doesn't care about anything that doesn't have an immediate and tangible effect on your life. If you don't care, you should have no problem going to read something else.
First, the point I was disagreeing with was this one:
Quote:"Why not contrast this to the huge damage (in comparison) wrought by the
powerful bombs dropped by planes - an option Israel did not use in Jenin,
but which American and Europeans used in every war including Afghanistan,
to avoid risking their soldiers in such operations. No other army in the
world would have acted as the IDF.
The use of large yield explosives is not possible in the occupied territories without massive civilian casualties. It was possible in both Afghanistan & the Gulf War. In Afghanistan, AGAIN, we did not target population centers. In the Gulf War only smart bombs were used on high priority targets like anti-aircraft guns, radar stations, and military communications.
And yes, civilians got killed in both conflicts. But we did everything possible to minimize those numbers. I still haven't seen a count on civilian dead in Afghanistan. And almost all the civilian deaths in the Gulf were due to failures of the smart-bomb guidance systems.
And we used no heavy bombing in either Haiti or Panama. In fact, Panama was the first major use of Special Operations forces instead of bombing to take out major installation, airports, and ships.
And we can also talk about the British in the Falkland Islands where they only used strategic bombing on specific sights because the civilians were on their side!
The point is bullshit.
And I agree with AM. Church officials have been in contact with the clergy inside the Church of the Nativity. They are staying by choice. And the lack of food and medical aid is due to a blockade by the IDF in an attempt to starve out the Palestinian militants. Classic siege strategy.
And Kid, you don't care becasue your a typical self-centered prick who doesn't care about anything that doesn't have an immediate and tangible effect on your life. If you don't care, you should have no problem going to read something else.
![[Image: gargoyle.jpg]](http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Dentsigs/files/gargoyle.jpg)