Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The only ones taking a pounding are civilians. Though that's hardly surprising, Israel has always had a penchant for slaughtering woman and children.
I'm not defending Hamas, but both sides are wrong in this altercation....and Israel's response to a few antiquated rockets is totally disproportionate.
There are plenty of Muslims who condemn terrorism and terrorist. Problem here is that no one bothers to look and when they do, CNN, FOX and like outlets almost never air stories on it. Then again, most people in this country do not want Muslims to condemn terrorism, one more excuse to kill some brown skinned people who read a different book, not to mention the current biggest reason for selling weapons and weapons systems by arms manufactures. Who are the worlds largest arms manufactures, some of them wouldn't by any chance be parent companies of the same media outlets that almost never air Muslim condemnation of terrorism would it?
If I took more time than just typing in "Muslims condemn terrorism" into a google search, I suspect I would probably find plenty, but I would hate to rain on a hate fest. Far more money to be made killing people than there is living with them.
If we had truly wanted to wipe-out the Viet Cong - we would have invaded the north... not merely bombed it...
We did however, bomb the North and Cambodia. On top of that the Viet Cong was largely based out of the South. US indeed try to wipe out the Viet Cong, if we did not try why were we in Vietnam in the first place if not to wipe out the Viet Cong who were the primary communist fighters in the south. Additionally the Soviets most certianly did try to wipe out the Afghan Mujahidin. My central point is that you cannot simply 'wipe out' a militant NGO like you can defeat a nation state. It is not possible to do with conventional warfare so that kind of objective is unfeasable.
We did however, bomb the North and Cambodia. On top of that the Viet Cong was largely based out of the South. US indeed try to wipe out the Viet Cong, if we did not try why were we in Vietnam in the first place if not to wipe out the Viet Cong who were the primary communist fighters in the south. Additionally the Soviets most certianly did try to wipe out the Afghan Mujahidin. My central point is that you cannot simply 'wipe out' a militant NGO like you can defeat a nation state. It is not possible to do with conventional warfare so that kind of objective is unfeasable.
I agree it is virtually impossible to wipe out a guerilla war or terrorist unit to the last man - certainly it is impossible with conventional weapons...
But I do not agree that we tried to wipe out the Viet Cong... We went into Vietnam to prevent the South being overrun by the North... not to wipe out the Viet Cong or the North Vietnamese army.
The Viet Cong were supplied from the north - which in turn was largely supplied by the USSR. If we really wanted to wipe them out - we would have at the very least physically secured all supply routes into the South by holding territory in the North. We also would have captured certain industrial areas in the north, or reduced them to cinders - regardless whether Soviet 'advisors' were in harm's way..
If we had truly wanted to wipe-out the Viet Cong - we would have invaded the north... not merely bombed it...
Are you old enough to have been alive and understanding of events back then? There were discussion of invading the North and the consensus was that the casualties would have been enormous on our side even if successful and that was much in doubt. Look at the hits we took defending the South.
I do think they honestly did try to wipe out the Viet Cong, however, they overestimated the ablity of airpower to disrupt supply lines. Also wiping out the Viet Cong was a secondary to not having a nuclear war at the time. In the grand scheme of things yes Israel could wipe out Hamas by using several of their nuclear weapons on Gaza, however; I think there are certain tiers to objectives and just because one objective is sacrificed to another doesn't mean it was not attempted
I do think they honestly did try to wipe out the Viet Cong, however, they overestimated the ablity of airpower to disrupt supply lines. Also wiping out the Viet Cong was a secondary to not having a nuclear war at the time. In the grand scheme of things yes Israel could wipe out Hamas by using several of their nuclear weapons on Gaza, however; I think there are certain tiers to objectives and just because one objective is sacrificed to another doesn't mean it was not attempted
I do think they honestly did try to wipe out the Viet Cong, however, they overestimated the ablity of airpower to disrupt supply lines. Also wiping out the Viet Cong was a secondary to not having a nuclear war at the time. In the grand scheme of things yes Israel could wipe out Hamas by using several of their nuclear weapons on Gaza, however; I think there are certain tiers to objectives and just because one objective is sacrificed to another doesn't mean it was not attempted
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
