webdiplomacy.net

Octavious wrote: ↑

Fri Jan 12, 2024 8:13 pm

Jamiet99uk wrote: ↑

Fri Jan 12, 2024 10:16 am

Octavious wrote: ↑

Fri Jan 12, 2024 4:46 am

Fritz has his own conversation with God that clearly suits him very well. There's nothing that I have said that is remotely critical of the way Fritz chooses to go about things. Christianity is very catholic, in the true sense of the word

Part of the problem we've been having, however, is that Fritz very clearly does not see it that way. It appears his view is that there is a very specific interpretation of God and the Bible that is exactly right, and everyone else is wrong.

And this is a problem for what reason?

For me, Fritz' views are the reason I'm engaging in these theological conversations at all.

If I had only encountered you and Crazy Anglican on here then I wouldn't have had much to disagree about.

Jamiet99uk wrote: ↑

Fri Jan 12, 2024 10:19 am

Octavious wrote: ↑

Fri Jan 12, 2024 5:11 am

Ahh... It appears we're attacking Yemen

That took longer than I anticipated

Oh wow a conversation which actually has to do with the original purpose of the thread, great.

The situation in Yemen is a tragedy in which Saudi Arabia and Iran, who are effectively carrying out a proxy war on Yemen's territory, deserve a great deal of the blame.

Having said that, the behaviour of the Houthi militia in attacking international shipping was always likely to result in a response of this nature.

There have been a number of quite serious attacks on Iran in recent weeks. Frankly I feel that we're pushing our luck somewhat.

Octavious wrote: ↑

Fri Jan 12, 2024 8:15 pm

Jamiet99uk wrote: ↑

Fri Jan 12, 2024 10:19 am

Octavious wrote: ↑

Fri Jan 12, 2024 5:11 am

Ahh... It appears we're attacking Yemen

That took longer than I anticipated

Oh wow a conversation which actually has to do with the original purpose of the thread, great.

The situation in Yemen is a tragedy in which Saudi Arabia and Iran, who are effectively carrying out a proxy war on Yemen's territory, deserve a great deal of the blame.

Having said that, the behaviour of the Houthi militia in attacking international shipping was always likely to result in a response of this nature.

There have been a number of quite serious attacks on Iran in recent weeks. Frankly I feel that we're pushing our luck somewhat.

Do you mean the terrorist attacks inside Iran by Islamic State a couple of weeks ago? Or something else?

Octavious wrote: ↑

Fri Jan 12, 2024 8:15 pm

Jamiet99uk wrote: ↑

Fri Jan 12, 2024 10:19 am

Octavious wrote: ↑

Fri Jan 12, 2024 5:11 am

Ahh... It appears we're attacking Yemen

That took longer than I anticipated

Oh wow a conversation which actually has to do with the original purpose of the thread, great.

The situation in Yemen is a tragedy in which Saudi Arabia and Iran, who are effectively carrying out a proxy war on Yemen's territory, deserve a great deal of the blame.

Having said that, the behaviour of the Houthi militia in attacking international shipping was always likely to result in a response of this nature.

There have been a number of quite serious attacks on Iran in recent weeks. Frankly I feel that we're pushing our luck somewhat.

Iran feels like one of those "in my lifetime" problems.

They have an economy 10x that of Iraq's and would fight an invasion much more competently. They're supported fully by nuclear-armed Russia. They produce a significant share of the global oil supply and, even though they're oil is already sanctioned by the west, global oil prices would absolutely rocket if Iranian supply came off the market.

At the same time, I don't know how we can live with a nuclear armed theocracy. If this problem is allowed to fester it could be disaaterous for nuclear proliferation. Even if NATO/G7 governments refuse to ever engage in a proactive middle eastern conflict again, they could probably be dragged into what may start as a regional conflict.

Jamiet99uk wrote: ↑

Fri Jan 12, 2024 8:20 pm

Do you mean the terrorist attacks inside Iran by Islamic State a couple of weeks ago? Or something else?

No, although you could make a strong argument that Iran focusing its intelligence agencies on threats from the West and Israel left it more vulnerable than usual to its other enemies.

Iran has experienced several missile attacks, assassinations, and cyber attacks over the last month or so which are not widely reported, but get mentions in sources like the Spectator and local news agencies. We are about as close to war as you can get without being at war.

Oh, and here comes Shapps with his famous tact and diplomacy. Patience is running out, apparently.

Octavious wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 13, 2024 7:40 am

Jamiet99uk wrote: ↑

Fri Jan 12, 2024 8:20 pm

Do you mean the terrorist attacks inside Iran by Islamic State a couple of weeks ago? Or something else?

Iran has experienced several missile attacks, assassinations, and cyber attacks over the last month or so which are not widely reported, but get mentions in sources like the Spectator and local news agencies. We are about as close to war as you can get without being at war.

From whom (other than the terrorists I mentioned) ?

Who has fired the missiles you mention?

You are right this has not been widely reported.

It was hard enough to find in the first place, and now searching for Iran now brings up countless stories about Yemen and threats being sent back and forth. The assassination of Mousavi was pretty well covered, though. That should be easy enough to find

Ah, here's a report on one of the cyber attacks

https://time.com/6548680/iran-hacker-gas-station-cyberattack-israel/

Octavious wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 13, 2024 1:18 pm

It was hard enough to find in the first place, and now searching for Iran now brings up countless stories about Yemen and threats being sent back and forth. The assassination of Mousavi was pretty well covered, though. That should be easy enough to find

Ah yes well that was Israel, although it took place in Syria (another country decimated by imperialist outside intervention).

To ensure this thread's full return to its original topics, my replies about morality and religion from this thread will be on the "what is morality" thread, with the quotes being replied to snipped to that thread.

BBC verifies reports of Israeli murder of Palestinian civilians:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-68006126

I mean... it seems rather simple... some Israeli soldiers saw someone hurling grenades at them, sent an aircraft in that direction, and the aircraft struck the wrong target. A tragedy, sure, but not indication of purposeful civilian massacre.

Most recent attacks in Iran are from Pakistan, the Iranians allegedly fired missiles into Pakistan to kill militants and Pakistan retaliated. Both sides may actually dislike the militants in question. But just in case this slipped below the radar.

It's rather concerning, but I suspect that the wider peace will hold at least for now. Unless I'm missing something there's not a huge amount to gain for either side from a major conflict, and an awful lot to lose. If there is a strong motivation there that I've missed (rare earth deposits or oil reserves near the border, say) life becomes more problematic.

It is interesting to note that both sides supposedly targeted militants/terrorists with their attacks and both insisted that it was largely women and children who were killed by the enemy strikes. This seems to be something of a theme in the region. Perhaps, like cobblers in the UK traditionally also cut keys and sell trophies, Islamic terrorists have a sideline in running kindergartens and hosting meetings of the Woman's Institute.

This one is starting to hit the headlines now.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-68014882

Octavious wrote: ↑

Thu Jan 18, 2024 2:01 pm

It is interesting to note that both sides supposedly targeted militants/terrorists with their attacks and both insisted that it was largely women and children who were killed by the enemy strikes. This seems to be something of a theme in the region. Perhaps, like cobblers in the UK traditionally also cut keys and sell trophies, Islamic terrorists have a sideline in running kindergartens and hosting meetings of the Woman's Institute.

Surely they would love to run kindergartens to start the indoctrination early.

Octavious wrote: ↑

Thu Jan 18, 2024 2:01 pm

.

It is interesting to note that both sides supposedly targeted militants/terrorists with their attacks and both insisted that it was largely women and children who were killed by the enemy strikes. This seems to be something of a theme in the region. Perhaps, like cobblers in the UK traditionally also cut keys and sell trophies, Islamic terrorists have a sideline in running kindergartens and hosting meetings of the Woman's Institute.

That seems the least likely conclusion.

Rather violence is bad and military attacks tend to have civilian casualties, which can easily b'é soin into "women and children" because people don't live completely gender segregated live, or have children raise themselves...

So whenever you have civilian casualties (which is what, 99%* of the time with inaccurate attacks - even if you hit the non-civilian target aswell) it is easy to soin as "innocent lives".

* If you can get a more accurate figure than this, please show your workings.

orathaic wrote: ↑

Fri Jan 19, 2024 6:30 pm

Octavious wrote: ↑

Thu Jan 18, 2024 2:01 pm

.

It is interesting to note that both sides supposedly targeted militants/terrorists with their attacks and both insisted that it was largely women and children who were killed by the enemy strikes. This seems to be something of a theme in the region. Perhaps, like cobblers in the UK traditionally also cut keys and sell trophies, Islamic terrorists have a sideline in running kindergartens and hosting meetings of the Woman's Institute.

That seems the least likely conclusion.

Rather violence is bad and military attacks tend to have civilian casualties, which can easily b'é soin into "women and children" because people don't live completely gender segregated live, or have children raise themselves...

So whenever you have civilian casualties (which is what, 99%* of the time with inaccurate attacks - even if you hit the non-civilian target aswell) it is easy to soin as "innocent lives".

* If you can get a more accurate figure than this, please show your workings.

I think Oct was waxing humorous here, but yeah, you make a good point.

Perhaps, I note I had a number of typos, just to say, whether it is a "oh we can twist this to suit a poor women and children narrative" or "they missed the 'legitimate' military targets, so we are decrying this attack on civilians (but will only mention the women and children anyway, because sympathy)" is a spectrum which I would not like to be in charge of determining...

I suspect a lot of it is in the marketing. There's nothing that says a murderous terrorist bastard can't be a woman. As far as children go, it depends very much on where you draw the line regarding adulthood. The British army counts a little under 2000 16 and 17 year old in its ranks. A strike on a British army base that kills nothing but soldiers could be described by some to have resulted in the deaths of women and children. It's all about the marketing