a mist of VX at a moderate altitude over an Israeli city might as well be.
I'd say it'd be even worse than a nuclear bomb. Weaponized VX can, if the wind direction is right, can theoretically "cleanse" a small country of any advanced life forms without those pesky side effects such as irradiation preventing a later conquest. Sure, nukes are great bunker busters and their symbolic effect is not to be understated - but if you want to go for true mass destruction, nerve gas is much more effective.
[...] political correctness [...] not followed in Europe
You haven't been to Europe recently, have you? There may be quite a few things that aren't so great about the US, but it still is one of the few western countries that actually has free speech (and no silly hate speech laws restricting it) and has better things to spend money on than gendering the stickers in subway trains asking you to give your seat to mothers with small children (oh, apologies: *fathers* with small children) or handing out government prices to people who waste their time in a similar fashion.
A Clockwork Orange (and similar works of fiction) differ from the aforementioned rape simulation in that it's point is a completely different one. The point of Clockwork Orange is of a sociological (or political, if you wish so) nature; the point of a pedophile tentacle rape comic is to satisfy the sick desires of those who get a hard-on over it.
Also, your post got modded troll because certain people here are idiots >.> .
But these are mentally ill, and even if they can somehow control their illness, I still find it rather dangerous or, at least, irresponsible to reward them for living out their illness. A cure would certainly be better - but the first step in curing someone's mind is by making them realize the wrongness of their believes. Curing a disease is much better than suppressing it, for both it's sufferer and his fellow humans.
Everybody views porn or has viewed porn before, so nobody can condemn you for it without being a hypocrite themselves.
Perhaps, but there's a little difference between being attracted to a hot woman having consensual sex and being attracted to pre-legal kids getting raped, isn't there?
When you're playing competitively, the moment you have a significant skill imbalance the fun disappears.
Not necessarily. In fact, in many online games, I quite enjoy playing against "the pros" every once in a while. Sure, I may get blown to pieces, but by carefully watching how my enemy manages to outskill me, I learn, and that's easily one of the most important aspects of competitive gaming.
In any case, both cities are off limits to non-Muslims, so it's not like any innocent people would be killed.
I'm not exactly someone with a positive conception of Islam, but to say all Muslims are guilty of the acts committed by a few is as much as a fallacy as calling all Christians responsible for the acts of the Branch Davidians, the Lord's Resistance Army or various Irish terrorist groups.
Perhaps it's because the US isn't bent on bent on eliminating every kind of internal resistance? You know, US operatives might be employing morally questionable methods every now and then, and there may be accounts of US soldiers breaking the law - but their intent is still to fight terrorism, not to smash peaceful, democratic dissent.
A better solution, given that they did have ground assets in the area at the time (as evidenced by the arrival of a group of IFVs shortly after the engagement) would have been to let the ground forces intercept the van. They have the option of stopping it without killing the people inside.
Remember though, this incident occurred 3 years ago - back then, intercepting the van might not have been possible without seriously endangering the lives of allied troops or civilian. I generally agree with you, but if trying to deal with it peacefully places more lives at risk than those of the presumed insurgents, finishing the job might be a better idea.
And remote drone stuff is basically video games turned real - you are not in the shit so it doesn't affect you *nearly* as much.
On the other hand, UAVs also have their benefits. You know you won't die if your drone gets shot down, so you can take a risk and identify your targets instead of engaging everything that looks hostile just to make sure they won't engage you first.
Then they were wrong - but then again, what can you expect from conscript training.
The types of.50 BMG fired by anti-materiel rifles tend to be outlawed by the St. Petersburg Declaration, which restricts the use of incendiary and explosive ammunition below a certain size against human targets. Your country might have signed it, but the US hasn't, so for them, it's perfectly legal to use their M82s against human targets.
And there was no excuse for blowing away the minivan trying to carry off the wounded survivor.
Yes, there was. "Better safe than sorry" - once recovered, the guy would likely have been fighting US troops once again. This isn't a regular war where professional soldiers are fighting each other; this is a group of terrorists and insurgents targeting lawful combatants as well as civilians with everything they've got, at every opportunity.
There are also maximum calibers on guns allowed to fire on human targets, above which the gun is classified supposed to be fired at vehicles and equipment.
Wrong.
The controversy over certain types of anti-materiel rounds occurs due to the fact that some of them contain explosive and incendiary components, which are outlawed under the St. Petersburg Declaration (which deals with explosive and incendiary ammunition - and which the US did not sign). It's perfectly legit to fire ammunition of any size at human targets.
30mm rounds are perfectly legit to use against human targets. So are.50 BMG and other types of anti-materiel ammunition. The Geneva Convention (which, by the way, only is in effect in conflicts in which both parties have signed it - and the insurgents certainly haven't) does not outlaw using disproportionate force, and neither does it limit the size of bullets.
Strangely though, I don't see anything wrong with the video (and yes, I've watched it).
The video shows a group of clearly armed men (don't just look at the people with the arrows pointing at them) apparently being accompanied by two guys carrying unidentified black objects (which later turned out to be cameras). One of them was setting up an RPG launcher. The soldiers did exactly what they were supposed to do - they engaged the insurgents. It may be a tragedy that the two journalists got killed, but remember, they weren't held hostage - they were voluntarily accompanying insurgents, and that they got shot was solely their fault. War's a dirty business, there's nothing you can do against that.
I agree though that the treatment of both Reuters and the Wikileaks editor wasn't right - they should have taken responsibility for the two dead journalists and approved the FIA request. It's not like national security's on the line, here.
Perhaps because Iraq was ruled by a genocidal dictator, because there are loads of terrorist groups operating from within both countries, and securing the future of Israel is not only politically, but also morally right?
Slashdot Mirror
a mist of VX at a moderate altitude over an Israeli city might as well be.
I'd say it'd be even worse than a nuclear bomb. Weaponized VX can, if the wind direction is right, can theoretically "cleanse" a small country of any advanced life forms without those pesky side effects such as irradiation preventing a later conquest. Sure, nukes are great bunker busters and their symbolic effect is not to be understated - but if you want to go for true mass destruction, nerve gas is much more effective.
You should stop worrying about other peoples plights so much, you'll live longer.
I hope you are aware that it were the people who *did* care are also the ones responsible for your right to actually spout that garbage of yours.
[...] political correctness [...] not followed in Europe
You haven't been to Europe recently, have you? There may be quite a few things that aren't so great about the US, but it still is one of the few western countries that actually has free speech (and no silly hate speech laws restricting it) and has better things to spend money on than gendering the stickers in subway trains asking you to give your seat to mothers with small children (oh, apologies: *fathers* with small children) or handing out government prices to people who waste their time in a similar fashion.
A Clockwork Orange (and similar works of fiction) differ from the aforementioned rape simulation in that it's point is a completely different one. The point of Clockwork Orange is of a sociological (or political, if you wish so) nature; the point of a pedophile tentacle rape comic is to satisfy the sick desires of those who get a hard-on over it.
Also, your post got modded troll because certain people here are idiots >.> .
But these are mentally ill, and even if they can somehow control their illness, I still find it rather dangerous or, at least, irresponsible to reward them for living out their illness. A cure would certainly be better - but the first step in curing someone's mind is by making them realize the wrongness of their believes. Curing a disease is much better than suppressing it, for both it's sufferer and his fellow humans.
Well - your country's ruling party is called Fianna Fail for a reason :P .
Everybody views porn or has viewed porn before, so nobody can condemn you for it without being a hypocrite themselves.
Perhaps, but there's a little difference between being attracted to a hot woman having consensual sex and being attracted to pre-legal kids getting raped, isn't there?
I love how certain readers of Slashdot keep substituting -1 Troll for "-1 Strongly Dislike And Wish To Censor".
Call of Jury: Modern Lawfare :P
If spam can be "easily remedied with technology" then why hasn't it been eradicated already?
Because there still are quite a lot of people out there using less-than-well protected E-Mail services/software?
When you're playing competitively, the moment you have a significant skill imbalance the fun disappears.
Not necessarily. In fact, in many online games, I quite enjoy playing against "the pros" every once in a while. Sure, I may get blown to pieces, but by carefully watching how my enemy manages to outskill me, I learn, and that's easily one of the most important aspects of competitive gaming.
Are you, by any chance, European?
In any case, both cities are off limits to non-Muslims, so it's not like any innocent people would be killed.
I'm not exactly someone with a positive conception of Islam, but to say all Muslims are guilty of the acts committed by a few is as much as a fallacy as calling all Christians responsible for the acts of the Branch Davidians, the Lord's Resistance Army or various Irish terrorist groups.
Perhaps it's because the US isn't bent on bent on eliminating every kind of internal resistance? You know, US operatives might be employing morally questionable methods every now and then, and there may be accounts of US soldiers breaking the law - but their intent is still to fight terrorism, not to smash peaceful, democratic dissent.
A better solution, given that they did have ground assets in the area at the time (as evidenced by the arrival of a group of IFVs shortly after the engagement) would have been to let the ground forces intercept the van. They have the option of stopping it without killing the people inside.
Remember though, this incident occurred 3 years ago - back then, intercepting the van might not have been possible without seriously endangering the lives of allied troops or civilian. I generally agree with you, but if trying to deal with it peacefully places more lives at risk than those of the presumed insurgents, finishing the job might be a better idea.
And remote drone stuff is basically video games turned real - you are not in the shit so it doesn't affect you *nearly* as much.
On the other hand, UAVs also have their benefits. You know you won't die if your drone gets shot down, so you can take a risk and identify your targets instead of engaging everything that looks hostile just to make sure they won't engage you first.
Then they were wrong - but then again, what can you expect from conscript training.
.50 BMG fired by anti-materiel rifles tend to be outlawed by the St. Petersburg Declaration, which restricts the use of incendiary and explosive ammunition below a certain size against human targets. Your country might have signed it, but the US hasn't, so for them, it's perfectly legal to use their M82s against human targets.
The types of
And there was no excuse for blowing away the minivan trying to carry off the wounded survivor.
Yes, there was. "Better safe than sorry" - once recovered, the guy would likely have been fighting US troops once again. This isn't a regular war where professional soldiers are fighting each other; this is a group of terrorists and insurgents targeting lawful combatants as well as civilians with everything they've got, at every opportunity.
There are also maximum calibers on guns allowed to fire on human targets, above which the gun is classified supposed to be fired at vehicles and equipment.
Wrong.
The controversy over certain types of anti-materiel rounds occurs due to the fact that some of them contain explosive and incendiary components, which are outlawed under the St. Petersburg Declaration (which deals with explosive and incendiary ammunition - and which the US did not sign). It's perfectly legit to fire ammunition of any size at human targets.
[Citation please]?
.50 BMG and other types of anti-materiel ammunition. The Geneva Convention (which, by the way, only is in effect in conflicts in which both parties have signed it - and the insurgents certainly haven't) does not outlaw using disproportionate force, and neither does it limit the size of bullets.
30mm rounds are perfectly legit to use against human targets. So are
Strangely though, I don't see anything wrong with the video (and yes, I've watched it).
The video shows a group of clearly armed men (don't just look at the people with the arrows pointing at them) apparently being accompanied by two guys carrying unidentified black objects (which later turned out to be cameras). One of them was setting up an RPG launcher. The soldiers did exactly what they were supposed to do - they engaged the insurgents. It may be a tragedy that the two journalists got killed, but remember, they weren't held hostage - they were voluntarily accompanying insurgents, and that they got shot was solely their fault. War's a dirty business, there's nothing you can do against that.
I agree though that the treatment of both Reuters and the Wikileaks editor wasn't right - they should have taken responsibility for the two dead journalists and approved the FIA request. It's not like national security's on the line, here.
Perhaps because Iraq was ruled by a genocidal dictator, because there are loads of terrorist groups operating from within both countries, and securing the future of Israel is not only politically, but also morally right?
*points at UAVs*
At the moment it isn't heading in the nice star trek direction.
You do know that Star Trek is portraying a brainwashed communist society, do you?
I find it a bit disturbing that you are ranking Schwarzenegger among the likes of Hitler and Fritzl.