dangeresque

No clan EVER posts on other forums when it's not RSC Post, it's just respectable, most people take it as granted that "no RSC post" means no RSC post. We're not being sore losers, it was a fun war, I don't think anyone's sore over losing, just sore over your posting. And I don't think anyone in WG claimed to win the PKRI, you clearly outlasted us. Maybe they did, idk, they shouldn't have though.

E-rep ITT

I'll be there of course, KAH BAH GEE!!!!!!

I don't take a stance on abortion, both sides have to many good points -.-

how is becoming the african-american president of the united states not historical to you? Half black. -.- Sorry but that kinda annoys me for whatever reason >.<

It just annoy me when people call him black. Because he's bi-racial, he's just as white as he is black.

Yes they would. I highly doubt it. That's a humongous decision to do such a thing.

My guess is that he ordered this. My Reasons: ~ He said he would do this, so naturally... ~ Some high up military official wouldn't just all of a sudden start launching rockets into someone else's country without the presidents say so.

This is the exact reason why I'm anti-knife! -.- Anyways, this is really terrible, some people are so [bleep]ed up.

Gf TSL, GJ THE. @THE haters - Who Else are they going to war? The only other clans that would put up a good fight are like BK, Wg, and....well I can't event hink of any others.

WG has pledged it's full support for TT in this situation. We're not going to crash the fight today though, don't worry.

There will be a UN investigation. So, I thought they were preventing civilian casualties as much as possible? Guess which permanent member of the UN Security council will probably block that... Edit: just to point out, this is a crime of war, but don't expect Israel to be held accountable, because they never have been. Israel may have the right to put others on trial, but certainly no one has the right to put the Jewish people and the State of Israel on trial. Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, 25 March, 2001 quoted in BBC News Online. I do support Israel, but sometimes, some of their actions are a bit intense are hardhanded... An investigation to this would be useful for both sides of the story :| Exactly. And I doubt that they would have fired if they would have known that there were civilians inside. And If they did know, well then that's just bad and actions should be taken. But don't view this as Israel killing all these people, view it as the tank crew's fault, or the person who ordered the attacks fault, not Israel as a whole. They don't dummy bomb whole villages and you know that. They have precision bombs/missles that blow up individual targets, they don't just unleash the bombbay over villages.

There isn't enough space, as has been said time and time again in this thread Gaza is extremely densely populated. Also the militants live in Gaza they go back there after firing rockets as that is where there homes are(as is explained in the video that was posted by Magekillr) to expect them to stand and wave Israeli jets to fire upon them is a fantasy, that still doesn't mean they're using civilian shields. That is not to say I agree with attacks on Israeli civilians, it is just the truth of the matter. I looked on Google Earth before I posted that, there is space. Granted, there is not very much, but there is enough. Unless they built a city there after they took that satellite pic :-#.

-Only read first post- The Earth is heating up anyways on it's own, without human intervention. However, us humans are speeding it up a good bit, and I would like to delay the inevitable, or maybe put us back on track I should say. But what are we gonna do when another ice age comes along? :?

Barihawk. He's wise, an OoC Alumni (kbg!), awesome, and he makes us conservatives look good ;). <3

I'm an Eagles fan as well, but realisticly I'm going to have to say that it will be the Giants and Titans in the Superbowl with the Giants winning. But still, GO EAGLES!!! :thumbsup:

That, is [cabbage]. As we've said before, Israel are avoiding Civillian casualties as much as possible, but it's impossible in a space like Gaza, but more to the point, would Hamas in thier mindset avoid civillian casualties if they had the firepower? The answer would be no, primarily because they want "Wipe the zionist entity from the face of the earth" No they're not. If an area is that densely populated, you do NOT air-raid them. It's true mate, neither government cares for their own citizens and wants to use the situation for political power. Look at the poll numbers... Sending in a full out ground force would cause just as much civilian damage. A war from the air is the best way to go about it. The smart bombs they have nowadays are amazingly accurate, the problem is that when they hit the building there is often some passersby standing near it. Unfortunate yes, but if Israel launched a full out ground campaign things would be far, far more messy should Hamas decide to retaliate. I think that Isreal should open roads out of Gaza (not ones leading into Israel), but put heavy checkpoints there to make sure the wrong things and wrong people aren't getting through, although they are bound to I'm sure but for the greater good of the people they should do it. Maybe they should even have a couple week cease fire or something to shuttle the civilians out of Gaza...to where I have no clue to be honest. But anyways once the civilians are out the Israeli's can have at it with Hamas and whoever else. Don't leave until the job's done, just don't let civilians get in the way of the job. And I know that Israel is doing what it can to get civilians out while trying to win a war. No matter what any of you say about "Israel targetting civilians", they aren't, nobody in war ever does and it is completely absurd and stupid to say that they are. And to those who say that Hamas aren't using civilians as shields, they are. There is enough open space, (that granted is farmland that I'm sure is owned by someone, but that could probably easily be acquired) to build a few military instillation that are away from civilians. Yes the cities are close, but they're not in the cities. Obviously it's unavoidable to have military instillations in cities but still, there is enough space to build out of them. And they are using this tactic because basically, it is all they have. Think, they don't even have near the capability to take on Israel full on in a war, so they use the civilians as shields so that the Israeli's will be hesitant to bomb, and for the fact that alot of people in the west will be against it, as well as Muslims across the world. To be honest it's a cowardly, and despiteful tactic, but a damn smart one. edit: And saying that Israel shouldn't have attacked because it will only make Hamas stronger isn't a reason to let Hamas keep bombarding them with missles. Hamas needed to be stopped, they can do the whole political thing and what-not, and I have no problem what-so-ever with them having a military wing, I mean everyone needs a military. However them launching missles completely nixes their right to exist in my mind. Hamas may, and probably will grow stronger politically however, but militarily I highly doubt it (as long as this conflict is going on that is).

Woop we won! :thumbsup: GJ to CR though, you guys did great I wish I could've attended.

Gratz SA, looked fun.

Gratz RSD, expected.

Israel was justified to take some course of action, but definately not like this.

No, for pretty much all of the reasons stated before. I would really like to see true, 100% socialism & Communism implemented in a country with more than 13 people so people could actually see how bad it really works.

Gratz BK :thumbup:

You argue that you want to prevent deaths. So by what you're going by, why not take away knives, drugs, and cars too? Do I need to bring up the statistics about how many people die from those compared to guns? Guns are designed with the3 sole intent to kill, cars are designed for transport, knives are a practical tool for cutting things (like your food) and drugs are designed either to a)cure disease b)alleviate pain or c)to bring pleasure via their abuse. There is a massive difference, comparing them is a strawman argument. edit - we really need a strawman smilie... [/hide] Just because something is designed with the intent to kill doesn't mean that everyone actually uses them to kill (excluding hunting). A nuclear bomb could be used as the world's most extravagant paperweight but that doesn't negate the fact that it is a nuclear bomb. You have no point here, guns are designed to kill that is their function regardless of what people do with them. But you can't use Nukes recreatinally in anyway, but however there are hundreds of thousands, probably millions of people the do in the US alone. And yes they were designed to kill, so what? Do most people use them to kill? No.

You argue that you want to prevent deaths. So by what you're going by, why not take away knives, drugs, and cars too? Do I need to bring up the statistics about how many people die from those compared to guns? Guns are designed with the3 sole intent to kill, cars are designed for transport, knives are a practical tool for cutting things (like your food) and drugs are designed either to a)cure disease b)alleviate pain or c)to bring pleasure via their abuse. There is a massive difference, comparing them is a strawman argument. edit - we really need a strawman smilie... Just because something is designed with the intent to kill doesn't mean that everyone actually uses them to kill (excluding hunting).