OK, that still leaves open why and how Kofi is towing the line.Quote:
Originally posted by Mick_2002
I was being sarcastic. Towing the line, means to go 'along' with something no matter what your opinions are.
Printable View
OK, that still leaves open why and how Kofi is towing the line.Quote:
Originally posted by Mick_2002
I was being sarcastic. Towing the line, means to go 'along' with something no matter what your opinions are.
Excuse us, but we are not native english speaking people. It's difficult for us to be efficient in sarcasm when speaking english, and often even more difficult for us to understand when you are sarcastic or serious.Quote:
Originally posted by Mick_2002
I was being sarcastic. Towing the line, means to go 'along' with something no matter what your opinions are.
Even when you agree you disagree!Quote:
Originally posted by Simon666
What do you mean with not a big deal? Politically, it would be one big mess, people around the world would be furious on the countries doing these things. But technically, it would not be a big deal for the world, yes
Nobody likes having their words thrown back at them, but you should really take your own advice here. Those missiles could be Iraqi, Iranian, or Coalition forces. All three groups have motives. All three groups have means. Don't rule them out, don't single one out.Quote:
Originally posted by Simon666
If the Iranians could have launched it themselves, they would know and if there was such a chance, certainly not put themselves in the focus as they think they might be next on target. Think strategical Mick, as you taught me.
Use emoticons! :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally posted by Elrond
Excuse us, but we are not native english speaking people. It's difficult for us to be efficient in sarcasm when speaking english, and often even more difficult for us to understand when you are sarcastic or serious.
I know but I am sarcastic by nature I can't help it. It's why I use alot of :) :) :)Quote:
Originally posted by Elrond
Excuse us, but we are not native english speaking people. It's difficult for us to be efficient in sarcasm when speaking english, and often even more difficult for us to understand when you are sarcastic or serious.
He isn't and he is to some extent. I respect people that stick to what they feel strongly about. Whether they are right or wrong. Persons that shift their views based on the current situation, well remind me of greasy politicians. Kofi hasn't towed the line in the sense about the war.Quote:
Originally posted by Simon666
OK, that still leaves open why and how Kofi is towing the line.
This was why I said my comments were sarcastic.
There is a big difference between political and technical feasibility. The war could be easily won by bombarding Bagdad with carpet bombardments, cluster bombs, MOAB's, napalm strikes etc. without major technical consequences. But the political consequences of this would be enormous.Quote:
Originally posted by solarflare
Even when you agree you disagree!
I don't rule them out, I said it is (very) unlikely they are Iraqi or Iranian. Iraq due to the shear limited number fired by them (seems like less than 10) and Iran due to the political and military consequences if it would turn out NOT to be an American/British missile.Quote:
Originally posted by solarflare
Nobody likes having their words thrown back at them, but you should really take your own advice here. Those missiles could be Iraqi, Iranian, or Coalition forces. All three groups have motives. All three groups have means. Don't rule them out, don't single one out.
But the members of the Iraqi regime know they're falling, wouldn't they take this opportunity over any other to shoot off a missile at their greatest Middle Eastern enemy, the Iranians? And as for Iran, they could have done it to stage it to look like either the US or Iraq did it, for sympathy. But it is also likely that it was an American shot.Quote:
Originally posted by Simon666
it is (very) unlikely they are Iraqi or Iranian. Iraq due to the shear limited number fired by them (seems like less than 10) and Iran due to the political and military consequences if it would turn out NOT to be an American/British missile.
No, they would, if they could launch a missle towards Israel. Iran, kuwait, Saudi Arabia, would be a secondary target. And remember I said if they 'could'...right now, I think the US has a good control over western Iraq. Pac3's are a nice addition. I did my part so to speak, glad to see progress in that area.Quote:
Originally posted by solarflare
But the members of the Iraqi regime know they're falling, wouldn't they take this opportunity over any other to shoot off a missile at their greatest Middle Eastern enemy, the Iranians? And as for Iran, they could have done it to stage it to look like either the US or Iraq did it, for sympathy. But it is also likely that it was an American shot.