give us missiles quicker!

darkcrow · July 2006

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5207066.stm

well this all bodes well for the potential of the end of the campaign to destroy lebenon

rebornFixer · July 2006

As I said yesterday, precision-guided bombs will probably kill far fewer civilians that what has been used up until this point.

darkcrow · July 2006

reborncareerist wrote:

As I said yesterday, precision-guided bombs will probably kill far fewer civilians that what has been used up until this point.

i would like to see an arms imbargo on israel. well in fact i would love to see the end to the arms trade all together.

is your argument that the americans should give them the precision missles to keep "collateral damage" to a minimum? what they should be doing is stop shipping weapons to them.

rebornFixer · July 2006

darkcrow wrote:

i would like to see an arms imbargo on israel. well in fact i would love to see the end to the arms trade all together.

is your argument that the americans should give them the precision missles to keep "collateral damage" to a minimum? what they should be doing is stop shipping weapons to them.

Yes, actually, assuming that they ARE going to ship weapons to Israel at all. Part of me agrees with your idea of an arms embargo, although it would be feasible only if Israel's enemies also stopped acquiring weaponry from foreign sources.
Israel actually makes a lot of its own weaponry these days, as do the Middle Eastern nations who arm Hezbollah and other groups.

Eva7 · July 2006

thank you, not too many here seems to get the importance of such "deal"...

Here's the original article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/22/world/middleeast/22military.html?_r=1&ex=1153713600&en=78691f5524ed9816&ei=5087%0A&oref=slogin

I will add that there are reports out here that such weapons, which includes the terrible Gbu-28s which have made slaughters of civilians in Iraq, are being delivered from the US base of Camp Derby in Italy. This is pretty ironic to me, since our government claims to be so much "worried" and "upset" for the lebanon civilian casualties, and is organizing the peace conference which will take place on wednesday in Rome....
About the weapons deal between US and Israel, we have to note that it is actually a "donation", since Israel, according the the deal, can use the 25% of the US aid funds for military purposes.

PaperPlates · July 2006

Take away their missles and guns, and they'll go back to stoning each other. These people aren't killing each other just because they have the weaponry to do so. Guns don't kill people, fundamentalist nutjobs do.

darkcrow · July 2006

PaperPlates wrote:

Take away their missles and guns, and they'll go back to stoning each other. These people aren't killing each other just because they have the weaponry to do so. Guns don't kill people, fundamentalist nutjobs do.

maybe stoning would be better? they would have to get close to each other, which would mean no more indiscriminate bombing in civilian areas

PaperPlates · July 2006

You're right. It would mean indiscriminate stoning of civilians. You don't take away the ability to kill/defend yourself. You either take away the motive, or you let nature take its course.

Puck78 · July 2006

darkcrow wrote:

i would like to see an arms imbargo on israel. well in fact i would love to see the end to the arms trade all together.

ehmmm, the UN conference against arms trade was about two weeks ago and failed miserably (Notice that when I posted about the failiture of the conference, a lot of the people here were really happy)

darkcrow · July 2006

Puck78 wrote:

ehmmm, the UN conference against arms trade was about two weeks ago and failed miserably (Notice that when I posted about the failiture of the conference, a lot of the people here were really happy)

there is too much money in the arms trade... of course it will fail. countires will not put at risk jobs/companies that operate on their soil.

El_Kabong · July 2006

darkcrow wrote:

there is too much money in the arms trade... of course it will fail. countires will not put at risk jobs/companies that operate on their soil.

of course...not sure what it's at now but when clinton was president we armed more than 50% of the 3rd world. fuck, us and israel helped arm iran! we make money arming them, then we make more money having to bomb them and rebuild their countries. we gotta keep the cylce and threats going

darkcrow · July 2006

El_Kabong wrote:

of course...not sure what it's at now but when clinton was president we armed more than 50% of the 3rd world. fuck, us and israel helped arm iran! we make money arming them, then we make more money having to bomb them and rebuild their countries. we gotta keep the cylce and threats going

apparently during clinton's reign, the americans provided more arms than the whole world put together.

Eva7 · July 2006

darkcrow wrote:

there is too much money in the arms trade... of course it will fail. countires will not put at risk jobs/companies that operate on their soil.

Well, jobs/company are not really the first concern of our governments, the problem is an entire world economy sustained by the war machine. Yours is a realistic statement, but is this an acceptable reality? The problem, to me, is how we, the people, accept this state of things, how we can look at the mirror knowing that we're nothing than a piece of a war machine, and that what we produce with our work, and what we consume is going to feed a killer beast. On the other side, though, the only fact that there was a conference against arms trade should suggest that more steps can be made in the future. And the first thing that a man/woman of peace should do is thinking that your statement one day won't reflect the only possible reality.

Puck78 · July 2006

talking about consumption of arms: Israel just declared that for every lebanese bomb dropped on haifa, israel will bomb ten (10) ten floor buildings of beirut.
I can't find a source in english for this, just in italian.

darkcrow · July 2006

Eva7 wrote:

Well, jobs/company are not really the first concern of our governments, the problem is an entire world economy sustained by the war machine. Yours is a realistic statement, but is this an acceptable reality? The problem, to me, is how we, the people, accept this state of things, how we can look at the mirror knowing that we're nothing than a piece of a war machine, and that what we produce with our work, and what we consume is going to feed a killer beast. On the other side, though, the only fact that there was a conference against arms trade should suggest that more steps can be made in the future. And the first thing that a man/woman of peace should do is thinking that your statement one day won't reflect the only possible reality.

steps are being made. in my country (britian) hundreds of thousands, if not millions are calling for the end to britains nuclear weapons. our system, call trident, will be obsolete in like 30 years time or something. our govt are giving parliment the vote of if we should buy/upgrade to a new nuclear deterrent. many of our MP's are calling for an end to a nuclear britian....

Eva7 · July 2006

darkcrow wrote:

steps are being made. in my country (britian) hundreds of thousands, if not millions are calling for the end to britains nuclear weapons. our system, call trident, will be obsolete in like 30 years time or something. our govt are giving parliment the vote of if we should buy/upgrade to a new nuclear deterrent. many of our MP's are calling for an end to a nuclear britian....

Britain lately is giving us some surpirses, like I have heard about those conservatives who are blaming the past privatizations.... with the strong alliance between US and UK, I doubt there will be a nuclear ban in UK, but I hope your people will fight for this. never say never.

Eva7 · July 2006

Puck78 wrote:

talking about consumption of arms: Israel just declared that for every lebanese bomb dropped on haifa, israel will bomb ten (10) ten floor buildings of beirut.
I can't find a source in english for this, just in italian.

The REBUILDING of Lebanon is one main point that none is talking about yet. Beirut was, until just 10 days ago, an important site of american banks, and a central international business city in the middle east. I think that the rebuilding of Beirut will be a main point after the crisis. Can you imagine the millions dollars spent in the last decades after the war, and the flow of dollars for a new rebuilding? It seems that the REBUILDING machine in the middle east needs to be constantly fed.....

Puck78 · July 2006

Eva7 wrote:

Britain lately is giving us some surpirses, like I have heard about those conservatives who are blaming the past privatizations....

nono, david cameron is just a poser for the cameras, believe me. he's a populist, he didn't already talk about things like immigration, etc...
anyway, i don't see all that opposition to the trident here, just the "usual suspects" are fighting against it: CND, etc...

give us missiles quicker!

Comments