Jump to content

Jace, Extat

Members
  • Posts

    16,772
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Jace, Extat

  1. 59 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

    Damn Jace, and here I was starting to actually think that you were just messing with us, and that this was one of the most elaborate pranks the forum has ever seen. I'm kinda disappointed.

     

    Not a prank, but perhaps an overindulgence in defensive aggression. And I'll admit to using rhetoric I wouldn't normally deploy out of a desire to function as -from my perspective- a necessary antagonist to the one-sided perspective of Israel that we've had in these threads. 

    But as a very wise lurker may or may not have informed me, it's possible that I've let my passions get the better of me.

  2. 47 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

    Ironic, when you obviously believe Israel has the luxury of turning millions of people literally living on its doorstep into mortal enemies for the foreseeable future. Not to mention the fact that there are Palestinians living in Israel.
    But I suppose your vision of the future entails continued surveillance and oppression, combined with maintaining military strength, doesn't it? The alternative would be full-blown ethnic cleansing of course. Do you stilll oppose that at least, or does your "end justifies the means" philosophy allow for this as well?

     

    Well I didn't think it was pragmatism vs naivete until just now - 

    I mean, did you really think anything else was possible? Serious question, before I return serve on the rest of your post. What did you think was gonna happen? 

    Because my heart broke on the 7th. For Palestinians and Israelis both. I knew what was going to happen and I spent like five days trying to wrap my heart back together. I couldn't bear to watch the news any more than to see if there was any update on the hostages. 

    I view this all as a horrid inevitability, and have since the first bomb dropped. I'm salted to it now because I didn't expect anything else. 

    (Palestinians in Israel are Israeli, as far as I understand. Citizens of Israel.)

    47 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

     

    Do you, really? I thought you hated Trumpism, but you've already embraced most of its core principles.
    Behind the pretense of despair, you were hiding just how much you love these ideas all along. The resoluteness. The determination. The raw strength. "The first duty of a state is the security of its citizens." The courage to do and say what is right, even when half the board will hate your guts for it. The "not a single soldier should be sacrificed for political gain" line. The enemy "hiding behind international law."
    You love that shit, you really do. ROTFL, you're the real deal, and you can't even hide it anymore.

    Jace, baby, you just made my fucking day.

    :lmao:

    Yes! Yes! More! Gimme more, baby! :rofl:  This is the best shit I read in a year. 

    I've never denied being a Red in Blue clothing. It's in my name.  But I chose Blue. I didn't get raised into my beliefs in some idyllic chateau or braindead peer pressure incubator. I paid a lot to be a Democrat, and I don't think I'll join the Reds anytime soon at all thank you very much. :love:

    Man, I like you.

     

    Eta: I wrote "title" when I meant "name".

  3. 2 hours ago, straits said:

    They have not "embedded" themselves in an urban center. They grew up in the ghetto that it is. And all of their violence and resistance - organized or not - has adapted to the surroundings. There is no scenario where Israel will tolerate well-delineated army barracks and military areas without actually destroying them the moment they can be called a proper military institution. This outcome is entirely logical.

     

    Then maybe they should have spent the billions of U.N. dollars they took on something other than tunnels and rockets to facilitate the killing of Jews. 

    This outcome is entirely logical.

    23 minutes ago, Clueless Northman said:

    Just wondering: Weren't the US "freedom fighters", or "colonial rebels", depending on who you ask, actually embedded in the colonies' urban centers, the towns and the overall civilian population? As does, basically, every resistance movement, every guerrilla, including the numerous anti-Nazi resistances across Europe? Aren't right some Ukrainian troops more or less embedded across the major cities, be it Kiev or Mariupol during the siege? Isn't this quite a given, as long as armies don't go the old way and do typical field battles between standing armies, out in the open, far from urban centres?

    I don't think those organizations fired missiles out of hospitals, but you make a fair point.

    As far as it goes, though, it doesn't change the realities of fighting them out of Gaza.

  4. 2 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

    :bs:

    They got some back but not because they liberated them. The ones they did get back, they got back through negotiations.

    They got them back by raining hell on the organization that took them. Then they got as many back as negotiations would allow. 

  5. 24 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

     

    The big difference is that the  Iraqi army saw the citizens of Mosul as their people. Israel, clearly, does not do the same with Palestinians. 

    Palestinians aren't Israel's people. I mean I could as well tell you water is wet. The Iraqi and coalition came as genuine liberators. 

    26 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

     

    But...Israel is already doing that. They could easily do more with conventional weapons if they so chose. So you're disagreeing with how Israel is already waging war and want them to drop more bombs more often? 

     

     

    Yeah, they already have determined which weapons they have to use that are appropriate to this conflict... I do not want Israel to change that for the sake of PR. If you have a weapon in the arsenal that is approved for use you use it. 

    29 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

     

    Israel is routinely using tanks in Gaza right now, dozens of them. They disagree with your military assessment. They also use armored bulldozers - again, in active combat. 

     

     

    Yes, as an infantry support vehicle in areas they've already hit with artillery and missile fire, at least as far as I've seen. I thought you were suggesting armored spearheads into the city in lieu of indirect fire methods, which is a no-go. 

    31 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

     

    So what? I'm quite serious - let's say they steal it. They can't sell it, they can't barter with it, they can't use it to control the populace given there are no active places to control anyone right now. What does it matter if they steal it? 

     

    It increases their fighting capacity. More supplies = more will to fight.

  6. 20 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

    Allegedly that's why they're doing it. And there are a whole lot of other ways to take care of tunnels, especially since they aren't going anywhere. 

    It took them 9 months to do that. 

    And there was absolutely no reason that Israel had to respond within hours in the way they did in Gaza. Once the border was secure and the Hamas troops were dealt with in Israel they had plenty of time to do almost anything they wanted to. The notion that it was this urgent threat seems incredibly weird to me. 

     

     

    Hostages. They got half of 'em back by their actions.

    16 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

    Well, Israel could have taken whatever amount of time to plan… something? Anything? Because it doesn’t seem like they have much of a plan, both short and long term, other than razing Gaza to the ground and kill as many as necessary to get to an undetermined number of terrorists. Alternatively, the US could have gone in w/o a plan and the result would have been significantly different.

    Are you sure? Because from where I’m standing it looks like they’re doing fuck all for the Israeli hostages. 

     

    Then you need to move your feet. Israel got as many back as possible as fast as possible. 

  7. 2 hours ago, Rippounet said:

    No. I've merely been pointing out (again and again) that treating everyone as an enemy combatant is a self-fulfilling prophecy, and that's how a situation deteriorates. It's not something I'm pulling out of my ass either, it's been a "classic" problem of Western militaries when they intervene abroad: if they're not suspicious of local civilians then they will lose people, but conversely if they treat all civilians as potential hostiles all the time, they will lack precious assistance and intel from locals, and at least some of their objectives will become almost impossible to achieve. There's a delicate balance to be found, which starts with having well-thought-out ROE as well as clear and regular communication with the local population (possibly including communication about the ROE). It's not about idealism, but about having some kind of long-term strategy without which the military become butchers, and thus progressively turns the entire population against them, which runs the risk of making the very rationale for the operation moot.

     

    All pretty true as far as it goes. When "nation-building" everything you said is important to consider. 

    But IDF is not in Gaza to liberate (ostensibly or otherwise) the Palestinians. 

    They aren't there to conquer the Palestinians either. 

    They're there to make war on Hamas. Defensive war- which is why none of what you've said applies right now. Just on a practical, tactical, level. It doesn't matter. And that's how I'm still viewing the conflict. 

    There just wasn't time. Hamas made sure of that. 

    2 hours ago, Rippounet said:


    Fucking heck, it's not like this hasn't happened in recent history, uh? You should know, I would think.

     

    You're not wrong, the way you frame the picture. But I think you're looking at it from a place of supreme advantage, and I don't think Israel has that luxury.

    2 hours ago, Rippounet said:


    So I know you want to present this as a case of naivete versus pragmatism, when it's really about short-term efficiency versus long-term objectives. I'm sure the Israeli choices make sense to you because they make life easier for the IDF in the short-run, but that's done at the expense of the very possibility of peaceful co-existence in the long-run. Or, in simpler terms, it fucks up the situation for the foreseeable future. So yes, further moderation was warranted, for anyone caring about the long-term. A handful of phone calls isn't enough to tell the people in Gaza that the IDF actually values their lives, this smells almost like a communication strategy for outside observers. More restraint and communication would have helped lay the groundwork for what happens once the IDF pulls out ; because that didn't happen, Israel can be said to be not just ruthless, but fucking stupid too. In simpler terms: it's trying to put out a fire by pouring tons of gasoline on it. That might work in the short-term, but it creates an explosive situation for the future. Of course, the alternatives weren't easy, but it should be clear by now what the current Israeli government's "long-term strategy" (if it can be called that) is: more of the same, that is, "a boot stamping on Palestinian faces — forever." You want to voice support for that? Fine, but have the decency of trying to understand what you're supporting here, because you're siding with an unsavory crowd that's only getting started.
     

    The situation is fucked up in the present. Hamas got by for years and years by hiding behind human shields and international law. They have to be destroyed and nobody else was going to do it. 

    I know exactly what I'm supporting. I've known what was gonna happen since Oct. 7th. I'll burn in hell before I sandbag an ally that's defending itself.

  8. 32 minutes ago, TheKitttenGuard said:

    Considering how Matt Patrice coach I do want nothing from Belichick and his coaching tree. It was successful 6 times, made it to SB 9 times, and most likely a dead coaching style due to being throughly dissected it has been in the past few years.

    What is dead can never die...

    Now excuse me, I gotta go fight Kal and the allies in Gen Chat.

  9. 57 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

    But that's not what we're talking about - we're talking about whether or not to use them. Nukes also do the same thing, but I'm pretty sure you're not saying that they should be used. 

     

    Nukes are a strategic asset. Gaza is a tactical quagmire. 

    IDF isn't dropping 2,000 pound bombs just because, they're using them to take out the tunnels and bunkers underneath buildings.

    1 hour ago, Kalbear said:

    <snip>

    I cite Mosul because it's a great example about how a modern military can mitigate civilian losses better than what Israel is currently doing. 

     

    And that's fair. But U.S.A. and allies had years to plan that out. Israel had hours.

     

    1 hour ago, Kalbear said:

     

    That's not what he suggested, at least not the equal footing. Again, his point was to value Palestinian lives, which you equated with Hamas. 

     

    When the forwarded position is that the IDF fight in ways that help Hamas, then I disagree with it. I didn't equate all Palestinians with Hamas, I pointed out the absurdity of fighting an enemy with less conventional weapons than you have available when in an active combat zone. 

    1 hour ago, Kalbear said:

     

    I don't think going from bombings to tanks is quite the downgrade you're making it out to be, 

     

    Tanks are no good in city fighting, besides the fact that they make such sweet sweet targets for RPGs it's too easy to break treads in those environments. Too many firing angles. And Israel needs its armor for Hezbollah.

    1 hour ago, Kalbear said:

    but also...yes? It is absolutely part of the deal to make this better for PR, because that's kind of a big deal! It's also kind of a big deal to stop killing as many civilians. We already know that Israel is downgrading their capabilities - we've heard repeatedly that if Israel wanted to kill everyone in Gaza they could. That would definitely be easier than what they're doing, so again - we're just haggling over how much less they're going to use. 

     

    See, I see it completely different. I would never sacrifice a single citizen for political gain. Soldiers are citizens. Israel's first duty, as a state, is to do everything possible to preserve the life and wellbeing of its citizens. Including when sending them into combat. It's what marks the difference between western and non-western militaries. We care what happens to our people.

    1 hour ago, Kalbear said:

     

    Does it degrade Israel capabilities that much to allow for more humanitarian aid, or to drop fewer bombs than in Mosul? Really, dawg? 

     

    It bolsters Hamas. They'll steal it. 

     

    1 hour ago, Kalbear said:

     

    My take is that Israel isn't doing this to preserve lives (obviously not Palestinian ones, but also not Israeli ones) or to preserve combat strength; they're doing this because it's faster, and also because they largely don't have any other plan. 

    I've already stated my opposition to the bolded

    As for the italicized:

    I agree completely. But what did von Moltke (the elder) say about how to make war more humane? 

    Spoiler

    "Make it short."

     

  10. 34 minutes ago, TheKitttenGuard said:

    Well as an Eagle fan back end year a fucking disaster. I am in the fire one camp right now. I am with Hurts, and think he was playing I injured, and I think his reaction down the strentch was not the best.

    Goodbye Kelse :bawl: Love you man, Hall of Fame bound.

    We blew the division, and it was ugly bad.

    Cowboys being the first 2 seed to lose to a 7th. Well, if it we won the division I think we would of been the one to do so. Which makes it all that more awesome!:rofl:

    Fire him and hire Belichick, I say. 

    Can you imagine what BB and Josh McDaniels could do with that roster!!??!!

  11. 23 minutes ago, Conflicting Thought said:

      What you seem to know doesnt matter, cuz in reality you dont care. Neither jace or chatywin. Just admit that you think all those crimes against humanity are justified in your views, it will be easier for all of us when we discuss this things.

    I think that the enemy has deliberately embedded itself in an urban center in such a way that defeating them makes civilian casualties inevitable. They did this on purpose, they did this with stolen international aid money, and dared Israel to do what it takes to beat them. And its horrible. Fucking horrible. 

    What it's not is a genocide or a crime against humanity. 

    It's a war.

  12. 1 hour ago, Kalbear said:

    Huh. I thought it was to win a war without wiping out the civilians there. 

     

     

    No. I'm sorry, but no. Air power and missiles and mortars and heavy guns exist to degrade the fighting capacity of the enemy. No other purpose for them exists. 

    1 hour ago, Kalbear said:

     

    Ya know, like all modern militaries have done to various degrees of success for the last 30 years. Including things like the Iraqi army when taking Mosul. 

     

    Didn't the Iraqi president say that 40,000 people died in Mosul? And there were a million people driven out of the city. The problem in Gaza is that the civilians have no place to go that Hamas cannot embed themselves in.

    1 hour ago, Kalbear said:

     

    As the joke goes, we're just haggling over the ROE. It's clear that militaries can and do change ROE to spare civilian lives, and as @Ran points out most militaries other than Denmark have a far more stringent viewpoint on what is acceptable to bomb...

    Yeah, of course they do. Israel has their rules of engagement and I'm sure most of their soldiers do their best to abide by them. What I am shocked by is Ripp's suggestion that Israel do more to cap their offensive abilities and, presumably, meet Hamas on some kind of equal footing. 

    That's a "no" from me, Dawg. You have asymmetrical capabilities for a reason - to preserve combat strength and save lives. Opting against using them to fight Hamas at a similar capacity is tantamount to murdering your own soldiers for the sake of public relations. 

     

    1 hour ago, Rippounet said:

    That's funny because not only do Western militaries routinely pretend to do just that, but even the IDF is still pretending to do this kind of thing.

    Are you saying we really shouldn't trust anything the IDF is saying about "moderating its rules of engagement" to prevent unnecessary casualties?

    As I said to Kal, my concern was you advocating for further moderation. That's my bad, I should have been more careful in my response.

    1 hour ago, Rippounet said:

     

    That's crazy, I recall dozens of movies and TV shows in which the US military was doing just that! 

     

     

    Yeah, and they're all bloodbaths. I mean, have you seen Black Hawk Down? 

    1 hour ago, Rippounet said:

    Are you saying that this is ridiculous and that, in the future, the US should use its military to not put its soldiers at risk?

     

     

    ... Yes. 

    The airforce and combined arms soften targets (blows them up) then infantry takes the ground. Rinse, repeat.

  13. 7 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

    Jace, boobalah, are you saying that all Palestinians are Hamas? Because Ripp isn't talking about Israel valuing Israeli lives over Hamas lives, he's talking about Palestinians and how Israel views those lives. 

    Kal, dollface, he's talking about Israel moderating its rules of engagement at point of contact in order to spare Palestinian lives... That's... nuts. It's just nuts. The entire point of things like air superiority and indirect fire is to avoid putting your infantry into situations like fighting block-to-block or house-to-house.

  14. 39 minutes ago, sologdin said:

     

    the hypothesis for falsification is therefore whether acting like a regular candidate cools the fervor of magaphiliac expression. my suspicion is that the magaphiliac arises from abject lumpenization and has adopted facile identity politics on the way out. say what you want about the tenets of magaphilia, at least it's an ethos?

    Well, I think you're right. Folks feel there's been a hollowing-out of opportunities to get high paying jobs or own a house, especially for those without college degrees.  

    I know you'll say this is a consequence of capitalism - I only say that it's real, this feeling.

     

  15. So I watched his victory speech. 

    We're in trouble. The motherfucker looks good. Y'know, for him. And when his opponent is, well... 

    Also, he's gotten better at this. He opened up by calling for unity between Democrats and Republicans, talking up his opponents instead of tearing them down. It's a little like watching a snake sing a birthday song, but I'll be goddamned if he ain't being GRACIOUS in triumph. 

    I had to go smoke a cigarette.

    At one point he was having a discussion with his dead mother-in-law and... it went over better than you'd think. He's somehow managed to maintain his manic energy but learned how to stick to talking points and prescribed attitudes. Real fucking problem!

    He didn't shriek or shake or scream. His cadence was steady. Calm, except for when he wanted to get a little excited. 

    I hadn't heard him speak in so long, it's actually disturbing.

    Of course he's still spouting lies. He doesn't want unity, we all know that. But his bit about election interference was actually pretty short.

    He stated that he's gonna get Putin and Zelensky in a room and end that war = he's gonna stop aid and lean on Ukraine hard.

    Says Israel would not have been attacked if he was still president, blamed Iran = Full backing of Israel

    He's got his boogeyman in Iran. Call backs to his travel ban. 

    He invited a guy dressed like a wall up on stage and, again, it's all in purpose of a hideous design but... I mean, can you imagine Joe Biden picking someone out of the crowd to join him on stage? No Democrat has that kind of stage presence, and Trump just does.

    God, I'd hoped he'd be a dribbling moron by now but he's grown as a political advertiser, not diminished. 

    FUCK!!!

  16. Ran, I'm seeing a realpolitik side of you I didn't know existed... :wub:

    Meanwhile, 

    58 minutes ago, mormont said:

    There is a strain of thought among some on the left, disappointingly, that Trump as an isolationist would be less willing to foot the bill for Israeli bombing of Gaza. I think that's naive myself: if Trump thinks it's giving Democrats a problem, he'll go right on paying.

    Paying the bill or not, though, he'll be enthusiastically encouraging and praising Netanyahu and certainly not allowing the UN or anyone else to intervene. 

    I agree with this completely. Here's what's gonna happen:

    Eventually Trump is gonna realize he can call the left antisemitic, his base will love having a new cudgel, and Biden will be punished for standing with an ally by his own base. 

    Trump'll additionally start calling Ukraine a lost cause and a black hole of aid money. 

    So it should surprise no one that current trends hold the rest of the year. No new aid to Ukraine, support for Israel.

  17. 3 minutes ago, Spockydog said:

    The actual, overt Slavery Industry is run mainly the US Prison Industrial Complex. 

    Ahhhhhhhh... ...

    ... hhhhh... 

    2 minutes ago, Spockydog said:

    No. I'm talking mainly about their overlords. 

    ... ... hhh-whaaaaaaa?

×
×
  • Create New...