Originally Posted by foreverwar

arcamalpha, I wasn't trying to twist your comment into an anti-troop statement - if it came out that way, it wasn't meant to. No one is trying to lecture you, they just have a different opinion to you (the joy of a democratic society).

The statements are only "hypocritical" if you believe that "acts of war" are in the same category as "state execution", and the UN disagrees with you.

Once again, you appear to be comparing the IRA actions (who set out deliberately to bomb civilians) with those of our troops (who when returning fire or attacking enemy strongpoints, accidently cause civilian casualties and deaths). And you also equate "state execution" with "acts of war", which if you were in the forces, is a very strange equation to make. I think you will find there is a huge difference in deliberately targeting civilians and "collateral damage" in a war crimes tribunal (though not unfortunately to those killed or injured).

Do you actually believe our troops would take part in "indiscriminate bombing"? I find this deeply offensive, having been in the RAF (Comms/SigInt), having being posted to Germany, Cyprus, NI, Masirah, HK, etc, and worked alongside 2 Para, 2nd Royal Anglians, IntCorp, Royal Signals, and others.

I was asking (imho) a valid question - if insurgents are firing from a building, and there are civilians are in that, or nearby, buildings, are you saying it is indiscriminate to attack that building? If so, what would you suggest - as you say, you have served in the forces, so surely you have some opinion on tactics? (what were your last three, btw?).

---------- Post added at 10:19 ---------- Previous post was at 10:14 ----------


As has been stated many times in this thread - best get our uniforms on, then, there are still a lot of dictators waiting to be removed; I wonder why this one was chosen?



Or perhaps just his opinion, which he is entitled to, but does not necessarily make him an expert.