Any of you CM fans pacifists?

[M. Bates]

If you look at a globe, you will see that it is divided by nationalistic lines. The more divided the planet is, the more wars there will be.

Communism is the only answer.

------------------

Rugged Defense England Team Website:

http://combatmission.portland.co.uk

For all our AARs

------------------

"I drive over farmyard animals in my farmyard tractor, then I laugh afterwards."--CavScout [comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.war-historical]

[Guy w/gun]

Ugh...not that again. I'm as left wing as anbody I know, and I think a modfied form of Socialism would be a good alternative to the free market. But PLEASE don't bring up communism here...I've found out it won't get you anywhere!

[StellarRat]

Originally posted by M. Bates:

If you look at a globe, you will see that it is divided by nationalistic lines. The more divided the planet is, the more wars there will be.

Communism is the only answer.

I think he's joking.

[Guy w/gun]

Oh and by the way Bates, I agree. Nationalism is barbaric, primative and causes too many wars .

[This message has been edited by Guy w/gun (edited 01-25-2001).]

[Banshee]

Originally posted by Guy w/gun:

Oh and by the way Bates, I agree. Nationalism is barbaric, primative and causes too many wars.

Yeah, but it keeps the french people where they belong!

------------------

Veni, vidi, panzerschrecki

[Guy w/gun]

I'm terrible at taking a joke sometimes !

[Slapdragon]

Originally posted by Guy w/gun:

I'm terrible at taking a joke sometimes !

Hey, Guy:

Mamma tomato, Daddy tomato, and Baby tomato are walking down the street. Baby falls behind, so Daddy rushes and back squashes him, yelling "ketchup".

(just trying to see how you will react)

[Dittohead]

Nope, count me out on this one, I don't live anywhere near the Pacific ocean.

Pacifist no need to pray for my forgiveness.

[Joshik]

OK… I often sit on the sidelines when the discussion changes from armor thickness to armchair philosophy. I’m usually content just to roll my eyes and ignore it all, but I can’t remain silent when this thread deteriorates into an anti-Israel diatribe. I feel compelled to address and respond to certain comments made by John Hough and Major Tom.

John wrote:

"I don't much care for Zionism. And I HATE how the state of Israel was formed and how it's acted since. "

Jews can (and certainly do) disagree on the nature of the State of Israel and its policies, but if Zionism is the political belief in the notion of a Jewish national homeland, there are very few Jews who would deny the right of Israel to exist. The only ones I am aware of are a small group of ultra-religious Chasidim, who believe that there cannot be a true Jewish State until the appearance of the Messiah. There is another tiny group of extreme leftist self-haters, in particular Noam Chomsky, who also don’t believe that the State of Israel is entitled to exist. Unless John is wearing a black fur hat and has peyes (earlocks), I’d place him in the second camp.

John continues:

"We're supposed to be a special people, an example for the nations. What good is it to have a Jewish state if we act just as poorly as the gentiles?"

This sounds like a compliment to Jews, but in fact is not. Modern nations should be held to the same standards of international behavior. This happens almost everywhere except for Israel.

Did you know that in 1982, Syrian President Hafez el Assad put down a rebellion in Syria by murdering 20,000 of his citizens, and wiping the town of Hama off the map? TWENTY THOUSAND. Most people don’t, but you can be sure that every time a Palestinian rock-thrower gets shot in the leg with a rubber-coated bullet, it will be all over the headlines.

Of course Israel can be criticized for specific policies concerning the latest Arab unrest, but let’s keep it in perspective with what’s going on in the rest of the world.

To hold Israel to a higher standard of behavior because it’s a Jewish nation, while overlooking similar behaviors in other countries, is not a compliment. It’s discrimination based on religion. And there’s another term for discrimination against Jews…

Major Tom also had some interesting comments, to which I must respond:

"What probably would have been the best situation for the world after WWII was for the European Jewish population to emigrate to North America."

Well, besides the fact that it’s awfully condescending to decide what’s best for the endangered Jewish community in Europe, the Jews in fact WERE trying to emigrate to America, before, during, and after the war. Desperately. And the US, to its utter shame, would not have them. In 1938 or 1939, there was a shipload of Jewish children (800-900 of them, I believe) that tried to make it to the US. They were turned away, and were forced to return to Germany. All of the children were murdered. Even after the war, Jews were being murdered. There was an incident in Poland in 1946, where about 55 Jews in a small town were murdered in a pogrom. This is exactly why Zionism was conceived in the first place: there was the recognition that Jews would only be truly safe in their own country. (Sadly, even that is tough to accomplish!)

Tom continues:

"I don't believe in using a historical connection to a piece of territory not really in your control (based on population) as a basis for deeming it your rightfull land."

So you are agreeing that the Jews in fact have a historical connection to Israel. 4,000+ years. The territory is in Israeli control, and the Israelis have the majority of the population. So what are you saying? This line doesn’t make much sense.

Tom says:

"The (Israeli) smaller population controlls most of the wealth, even virtually all of the ability to move within the nation. Palestinains are always suspected of being a terrorist, they are definitely 2nd Class citizens."

I think you’re confusing Israeli Arabs with Palestinians. Israeli Arabs are Israeli citizens, although they don’t serve in the IDF. They move around the nation with complete freedom, as any Israeli. There are Israeli Arabs serving as mayors and in the government. They are not "Palestinians". Are they being treated completely fairly? Probably not. Are they being treated as "2nd class citizens"? Probably. But look what’s going on. Bombs going off on buses and in market squares will probably tend to make Israelis view anyone of Arab persuasion with a bit of suspicion. Does this sort of behavior occur in other countries? No, never. And try and catch a cab in Harlem.

Tom goes on:

"There has to be a limit to what Isreal can use the 1940's Jewish holocaust to get away with. "

Okay, this is flat out offensive. This is a line of reasoning used mainly by anti-semites. Tom, I’m sure you’re not an anti-semite, so I’ll assume you weren’t thinking perfectly clearly when you wrote this. This reminds me of a very sarcastic line I once heard: "The Germans will never forgive the Jews for Auschwitz".

Tom continues:

"I am fairly well versed in the goings on in Isreal, and most of what is called Isreal doesn't have a single Jewish person living there. "

Really now. Read this again. Do you really believe this?

I wish the topic of Israel would not come up in the CM chat room. Tom and John have spend an awful lot of energy and time focusing on Israel. Why are they so fixated and obsessed with Israel? Do I really have to waste my time responding to these nudniks? I could be busy playing QBs, and learning how to maneuver my Shermans.

Do you guys really want me to list all the reasons why a strong and healthy Israel is in the best interests of the United States and Europe? <sigh>

On a side note… the original topic of this thread was the notion of pacifism. My buddy served in the Israeli army, and he had an interesting debate with some gun fanatics at a party in Virginia. He said he couldn’t understand us Americans at all, with our notions concerning guns. He said he carried around an M-16, and knew how to field strip and work with Uzis, Galils, grenade launchers, pistols… everything. Blindfolded. He went on patrols in the West Bank and up on Golan. He asked: "Have you ever pointed a weapon at anyone, in defense? It’s the absolute worst feeling in the world! Believe me, if we were able to, just about every Israeli would throw away their guns. We hate them, and they are awful things." Pretty wild statement for an Israeli army veteran. Oh, and by the way, if you, as an Israeli soldier, fire your weapon for ANY REASON, you are considered under arrest and subject to court martial. Unless you can prove you were in absolute peril and on the brink of getting killed, you are in deep trouble. The media doesn’t really mention that point.

Enough with Israel. Can we please get back to Combat Mission?

-Joshik

[Sergei]

If there are two guys in a boxing ring and...

both stop boxing, neither gets bruises.

one stops boxing, he gets soon knocked out and the other one doesn't get a scratch.

both keep boxing, they both get beaten like hell.

On that basis, I would prefer turning the other cheek. But boxing happens for the audience, not the boxers themselves. If I had to box for something precious to me, I would only give up if the other did. Eg. if I knew the enemy army is having a great deal of deserters, I might decide to do the same. In the end I hope everyone deserts and there is no war.

In theory, really.

[StellarRat]

Originally posted by Joshik:

So you are agreeing that the Jews in fact have a historical connection to Israel. 4,000+ years. The territory is in Israeli control, and the Israelis have the majority of the population. So what are you saying? This line doesn’t make much sense.

I think he was trying to say that just because someone has an historical connection to a piece of land does not mean it's OK to take it away from the current owners.

By Joshik's reasoning it should be alright for a group of unhappy Italians to land in England and form a new county since they have an historical connection to England.

Also, the Israelis didn't have a majority of the population to start with. Obviously, when you toss somebody off their land you automatically achieve majority over that land.

Whether or not you agree with this reasoning it's pretty easy to see that this is going to cause serious problems with the newly displaced landholders. It was a foregone conclusion that the formation of Israel was going to cause massive conflict. Israel has been lucky so far that the Arabs are not more militarily adept and that the US has supported them.

[This message has been edited by StellarRat (edited 01-25-2001).]

[This message has been edited by StellarRat (edited 01-25-2001).]

[Chupacabra]

Originally posted by Joshik:

There is another tiny group of extreme leftist self-haters, in particular Noam Chomsky

Erm, I don't know much about the Arab-Israeli conflict, so I've been quite content to sit this one out, but (fortunately or not) I do know quite a bit about Chomsky. I don't agree with very much of what he says, but I question your characterization of him as a "self-hater." I'd be very curious to see the basis on which you make that statement.

------------------

Soy super bien soy super super bien soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super

[Guy w/gun]

Fee Fie Foe Fum! I smell a lock comming on!

[Maximus]

Well, I'm an American. And by Patton's own words, "All Americans love a fight." "Americans can't stand to lose, and will not ever lose a War!" Well, OK, maybe not that last thing.

But I know that even as bad as War is, you can't take away the technological advances that occur during War. For example, the US went from the (Pearl Harbor) class battleships to Iowa Class battleships in just 3 years. And then the Iowa Class Battleships lasted for the next 45 years before being decommissioned after The Gulf War.

And also War is a great way to decrease the unemployment rate. Some say that the US was itching to get into the War because they figured it would create a large amount of jobs, both civilian and military to help us pull out of the Depression.

And again, whether you like it or not, War is considered to be one of the primary population control devices. Hell, the way the population is expanding exponentially these days, it probably wouldn't hurt us to have another war sometime.

[Angus]

I don't if anyone's heard the saying that there won't be peace in the Middle East until extremist Palestinians realize Allah is not their general, and extremist Isrealis realize that God isn't their real estate agent. I think both sides have made mistakes.

I like the strategy involved with CM. I like reading about war, watching war movies, and playing wargames and combat simulations. Tanks, submarines, fighters and bombers are the coolest things, and yet I think war is abhorrent.

I consider myself a pacifist. I think that some wars needed to be fought (WW2) but that war is not inherently necessary.

I don't think the military is in itself necessary either. Look at what happened with the bomb. We built them to make us safe from the other side, while the other side felt the need to build just as many to make them safe from us. What results is the world becomes a much more dangerous place for everyone. A roughly similar logic played itself out leading to World War 1.

I think that nations need to stop acting only in their own interest and stop and think about what they're doing for a change. A little international socialism wouldn't hurt either. (I don't mean Soviet totalitarianism or revolutionary communism) M Bates might have been kidding, but look at how brutally exploited sweatshop workers are in the third world. Rampant free enterprise doesn't seem to be the answer.

Angus

[StellarRat]

Originally posted by Angus:

Rampant free enterprise doesn't seem to be the answer.

There seems to be a historical cycle concerning the "sweatshop" problem. If you look back at Western history many of the Western countries had sweatshops as a result of the industrial revolution. I believe this is a phase that the Third World countries will go through as their economies mature, but eventually they will be much better off. This does not mean I approve of sweatshops, but I certainly am not in favor of international socialism to solve the problem.

[This message has been edited by StellarRat (edited 01-25-2001).]

[StellarRat]

Originally posted by Maximus:

And again, whether you like it or not, War is considered to be one of the primary population control devices. Hell, the way the population is expanding exponentially these days, it probably wouldn't hurt us to have another war sometime.

I hope you're not serious about this, but if you are I'd like to point out that all the wars of the 20th century wouldn't make much of a dent in the world population. The Black Plague was far more effective. Are you in favor of that too? An all out nuclear war would be very effective too. Any takers?

[This message has been edited by StellarRat (edited 01-25-2001).]

[Forever Babra]

Originally posted by John Hough:

I won't. I don't want my house to be a war zone. I don't want my kids to always be scared of the guy tied up under the dining room table. I don't want them to have to be escorted by men with assault rifles on school field trips. And I really don't want them to be forced to join the military.

John,

I haven't read a single post after yours (yet), but I want to respond to that, as a friend.

I agree with the principle of what you say. What is most sad is that there was once peace (of a sort) between Arab and Jew in what is now known as the "Palestinian Authority".

In '67, after many years of patience, care, and attention to good-feeling, a genuine friendship had emerged between the peoples of Israel. Intercourse was open and unimpeded. Inter-marriages, while they might excite local gossip, were not uncommon. When the Six Day War started, thousands of these Arabs turned out to join the fight for Israel. When they were turned away from the army, rather than harbour (a justifiable) resentment, they instead took to the fields to aid the border Kibbutzim to bring in the harvest from under the Syrian guns. Can you imagine? The Syrian gunners must have been mystified to see Arab and Jew in the fields together -- in any event, the shelling and sniping ceased on many farms when Arabs from the neighbouring villages turned up to help out. It is my hope (however deluded) that that spirit of cooperation will rise again.

I have seen teenage boys escorting their younger classmates to school, an Uzi or Glilon slung at their shoulder. It is sad. I have seen these things. It was depressing enough that after my service I could console myself with the thought that "I've done my bit" and go home. It has been almost twenty years, and only now am I seeing my mistake.

But, in my time in Lebanon I grew to love that country, and I believe that, could they but solve their internal disputes, a friendship could arise.

On the question of Zion itself, however, history has decided that argument. It exists. It cannot be given back. We have seen what the protection and the promises of the west are worth. We cannot forget what happened. We cannot forget the hundreds of thousands who could not escape the storm because they were returned to Germany. We must have some measure of security. The cry of "never again" is not jingoistic -- it is a reality. I hope, and pray, that the current situation can be resolved. The current boundaries of the Palestinian Authority are the same boundaries laid down by international agreement in 1947. If our neighbours can use this autonomy to advance their condition rather than set up paramilitary bases, there is still hope.

I cannot say how things will go. I hope it will work out -- I fear it will not. If it does not, old and decrepit as I am, I am ready again to serve.

And to bring it back full circle, am I a pacifist? God, I hope so.

------------------

When it's my turn to march up to Glory,

I'm gonna have one HELL of a story...

The Face of Evil

[Bullethead]

People are predators. That's how we evolved and all "civilized" ideas like pacifism are no more than a very recent, thin coat of paint on a creature that is a raging beast to its very core. Put an avowed pacifist in a foxhole for a week or so, just long enough to scratch through this paint, and see what you end up with.

Given this is what we have to work with, there is only 1 thing you can definitely say about the future: there WILL be war. In this situation, it is the height of folly to be a pacifist. The only logical survival strategies center around being ready, willing, and very, very able to fight.

So I'm in no way a pacifist. OTOH, having seen the horrors of war 1st hand, I don't wish them even on my hated ex-wife. Nevertheless, because these horrors ARE inevitable, and because it is somewhat more horrific to lose than to win, I'll endure them again to keep from getting the short end of the stick. Violence, afterall and despite naive statements otherwise, settles EVERYTHING.

------------------

-Bullethead

In wine there is wisdom, in beer there is strength, in water there is bacteria.

[Old Crow]

Originally posted by StellarRat:

I hope you're not serious about this, but if you are I'd like to point out that all the wars of the 20th century wouldn't make much of a dent in the world population. The Black Plague was far more effective. Are you in favor of that too? An all out nuclear war would be very effective too. Any takers?

Yeah, I'll take that one.

We're all pretty comfortable kickin' back in our heated homes and apartments, watching a zillion channels on the tube, eatin' cheezy poofs, and toddlin' off to the back room to bone the wife or play CM at our whim, but wait...... the world population will increase by another billion in the next 15 years. How long before we're adding a billion a year? Not long. Where are these population increases occuring? Mostly in the third world countries. What usually happens when there is an overwhelming population of have-nots? Civil unrest which spills over into neighboring countries.

Natural resources come into play here too not to mention just plain old freakin' elbow room. IMO world population and the resources it requires will be a major cause of a lot more unrest on this planet.

There are alternatives to playing nuclear or biological roulette with those countries squankin' out the most babies. It's a proven fact that nations with the highest education levels have seen birth rates level out or decline. Maybe a concerted effort to raise the education levels in countries with high birthrates will stem the tide.

[This message has been edited by StellarRat (edited 01-25-2001).]

[John Hough]

Joshik, that's precisely the sort of politics of victimization I so dislike. Tom and I raise some concerns about the morality of Israel's policies in regard to the Palestinians and the Arab world, and we're immediately branded an 'extreme leftist self-hater' and an anti-semite.

If we're not for you, we must be against you, right? And if we're against you, we're doing it out of irrational hate, because that's what the Jews are here for, right? To be hated by the rest of the world?

This is a paranoid ideology. You shouldn't have to use fear to argue your case if it can stand on its own merits. And you don't have to be afraid any more. The only anti-semites these days are fringe groups, recognized as such by mainstream society, and those we've given valid grievances against us. Unless, of course, your definition of 'anti-semite' is someone who disagrees with your politics, in which case you can find all the anti-semites you want to.

Elijah, You aren't serious, are you? Please tell me you aren't serious. "So the Palesinians were on the wrong side of the ouch-stick, tough luck." How about, "So the Jews were on the wrong side of the Nazis' ouch-stick, tough luck"? Please tell me 'tough luck' isn't your idea of morality.

-John

------------------

so you can stay cool behind your window

and choose the view you want to see

but as long as there's others held captive

do not consider yourself free

-EMBRACE, "DO NOT CONSIDER YOURSELF FREE"

[John Hough]

Babra, I'm not naive enough to belive things can be undone, and at this point, it's no more right to disposess the Israelis living there. But along with remembering the hundreds of thousands returned to Germany, we should also remember those (I'd put in #s of thousands, if I had the numbers handy driven from their ancestral homes in Palestine, and that they, and their children, have legitimate grievances against the state of Israel. And it would perhaps be a good idea to not overlook that the World Zionist Organization worked directly against efforts to get the west to accept Jewis immigrants, which they saw as competing with the zionist cause.

At this point though, all we can do is hope against hope for peace and reconciliation...

-John

------------------

so you can stay cool behind your window

and choose the view you want to see

but as long as there's others held captive

do not consider yourself free

-EMBRACE, "DO NOT CONSIDER YOURSELF FREE"

[I/O Error]

Israel is definitely a useful ally, but I don't think anybody could DENY that they've screwed "us" (USA) several times.

1.) Strafing run on our Intel ship during the 1973 Yom Kippur War, several Americans dead. The "Liberty", was it? (I'm probably forgetting the right name, correct me as necessary)

2.) Pollack case. If you don't know it, read up, it's pretty bad. Regardless of his cause, he IS a traitor to the United States.

3.) That recent case with the Reserve Lieutenant Colonel who "converted to Judaism, suddenly met a nice Jewish girl, and then decided to try to run to Israel with 3 duffel bags of Intelligence Operations manuals"

C'mon. We all know that chick was Mossad, and they attempted a CLASSIC case of distraction-and-subversion-via-nookie. (We're pretty bad at that, but the KGB and the Mossad have historically been VERY good with using female agents.)

It's annoying to see an ally do that to us, ya know? I'm just glad we managed to put pressure on him fast enough to get him back. State Department managed to "convince" the Israelis to search for the guy and return him unmolested and without "interviewing" him or siezing his belongings.

4.) Theft of US Nuclear Weapon secrets. *News Flash* Israel and South Africa are both Nuclear powers, Israel possesses several nuclear weapons right now...

(South Africa had money, Israel provided stolen American intelligence and research, it was a good deal for both of them.)

5.) Theft of various tidbits over the years, from F-15E Strike Eagle Technical Manuals to Missile Guidance diagrams. I mean, the Mossad is GOOOOOOD. No question.

Now, I have to admit, it's really annoying to have your friend steal stuff from you. Not to say Israel isn't valuable, but... maybe some fair play?

(I'm not even mentioning the current land problems, I absolutely refuse to get sucked into that cesspool of flame-war-age by taking one side or the other. I'm just talking past history, wishing we would stop getting tooled on by our ally.)

Side Note: Avi Ben Jakob. Gotta be impressed with a guy who stuck C-4 in a Hezbollah terrorist's cellphone, then called him, said, "Hello, this is Avi Ben Jakob" Then Jakob hit the * key, sending a signal via the cellular carrier wave to detonate the phone in the bastard's hand.

I hear they're STILL scraping pieces of that mofo off the wall!!! LOL...

------------------

Honor, Duty, Courage.

Valhalla awaits you, honorable warrior...

------------------------

"If you find yourself alone, riding through green fields with the sun on your face, do not be troubled, for you are in Elysium, and YOU ARE ALREADY DEAD!"

[Holman]

Hmmm. The old saw that "humans are predators" just doesn't hold water. For one thing, most of the evolutionary evidence points to the fact that human animals developed social groupings and culture (not to mention intelligence itself) by exploiting tendencies to cooperation over tendencies to competition. If hamsters could work together the way our primate ancestors did, they'd probably be on Mars by now.

More to the point, however, is the fact that the main part of being human is having consciousness and a conscience; that is, having an awareness of consequences and a sense of right and wrong. To say that "war is inevitable, so just accept any and all outbreaks of it" is to abdicate morality entirely. The very facts of human society and culture show that, most of the time, we've been much better than that.

[mensch]

Originally posted by Sergei:

If there are two guys in a boxing ring and...

both stop boxing, neither gets bruises.

one stops boxing, he gets soon knocked out and the other one doesn't get a scratch.

both keep boxing, they both get beaten like hell.

.

how the hell does one get hurt making boxes?? this is silly. Everyone knows you just get paper cuts.. or really dry hands handling all that paper.

btw.. boxing is a useless form of fighting, JKD, WT or Choi Lee Fut.. now I would put Dollars to Diamonds the boxer looses, of course unless he has a gun..then that's another ballpark, but it can't be a ball park because were talking about Fighting styles and not Baseball. Come to think of it Baseball is damn violent! Anyone ask the ball if it wants to get hit by a Bat!.. jeez they use fuzzy little Bats to hit balls with how evil! I mean all they want to do is eat bugs fly around have sex and then sleep during the day (which I would enjoy, except for the bug eating part)… buuuttnoooo some guy says Hey I can hit that ball with this bat 300m! no consideration at all.

well that's my warped interpretation of this small blue planet we call Alz-arath-Kuk-Nuggets!.. oh wait.. feck.. I mean earth.. Ignore that last sentence.

I'm a pacifist, and if you don't agree with me, I'll knock the snoodle out of you to prove that I am.

---------

www.derkessel.com Home of „Die Sturmgruppe“; Scenario Design Group for Combat Mission.