Discussion
Grumfutock said:
AW111 said:
Grum, I am not going to quote your lengthy post, but I will point out that the person you posted about did take offense at what he thought you implied, which is why I remembered the exchange, and found it pretty quickly.
Regarding people following you around, if several of us are interested in the same subjects, we will likely read and comment on multiple threads.
And as I have said, I took great offense at some of the things said to me, not implied, but said. But again, apparently that is acceptable as I am a "odious and vile man" and mere "cannon fodder".Regarding people following you around, if several of us are interested in the same subjects, we will likely read and comment on multiple threads.
Of course we are, that isn't the issue. But when comments are taken from the Israeli thread to the Galloway one, with zero relevance, then that is trolling don't you agree?
But I will leave it at that as I have no interest in this childish and petty backbiting. Some on here are no better than little petulant children who want their own way and will be ignored. I have no time for suffers of the "little man" syndrome or keyboard warriors. I personally think there are some on here that are oxygen thieves and should seriously consider entering the Darwin Awards.
Others, that have a spine and a brain cell, I will happily reply to and continue the debate with.
Edited by Grumfutock on Sunday 31st August 13:01
I will have you know that till the last couple of pages, I never insulted you nor bothered you. You decided on your own accord to get involved with me and take a fight to me, it's as if you were marking your own territory with the proverbial pissing on all four corners in this thread stating you are the Alpha Male around here, and if anyone steps out of line you obviously invite them to suck you b***s or worst still insinuate they are 'kiddie-fiddlers'.
I remember your first intervention with me was not that articulate at all. It was a meme of the actor Mr T calling me a 'fool'. No intelligent reply at all, but guess what I ignored it just like I ignore most of the irrelevant stuff you say.
I just find it a bit rich, if not hypocritical, that you accuse others on here of being keyboard warriors, trolls, oxygen thieves, and little men when you are all those combined in one very potent mixture.
If psychological projection reduces your own hidden anxieties then I would suggest you seek help, act your age, and either keep your gob shut when two people are having a dispute/debate, or take it on the chin. Your call!
AW111 said:
Grum, not trying to pick a fight, but I genuinely don't see any cross-thread quoting of you between this and the Galloway thread.
That's a classic Grum. My last reply to him was relevant to the Galloway thread just like my replies to other posters. His inflated ego got the better of him, and he genuinely thought I was stalking him. Pathetic.AW111 said:
Grum, not trying to pick a fight, but I genuinely don't see any cross-thread quoting of you between this and the Galloway thread.
Well it is there, page 3 14:36. A minor point but that is how little boys work isn't it, the drip drip effect. I will ignore that particular idiot troll as I refuse to rise to his childish and petty games. Although again he cannot read what is written in front of him or chooses to only cherry pick bits out that suit him.
Edited by Grumfutock on Sunday 31st August 14:19
Now I vowed I wouldn't rise to your bait or respond to you but I am sorry I am not having that! You are just making up lies now.
So now I ask you to back up your lies. Produce proof of this meme I posted!
Time to put up or shut I would suggest!
allnighter said:
I will have you know that till the last couple of pages, I never insulted you nor bothered you.
I went back to page 234 and you were "bothering" me then. Hardly a "couple of pages" ago is it!allnighter said:
I remember your first intervention with me was not that articulate at all. It was a meme of the actor Mr T calling me a 'fool'. No intelligent reply at all, but guess what I ignored it just like I ignore most of the irrelevant stuff you say.
More lies! I have just scrolled through 100 pages and the only Mr T meme I can see is one on page 231, posted by burwoodman. Not by me! Not commented on by me! Not quoted using the meme by me!So now I ask you to back up your lies. Produce proof of this meme I posted!
Time to put up or shut I would suggest!
Some serious inadequacy issues going on here. Grumpy how many times have you said you'd be off/ignore a poster only to come back for the last word? And then accusing someone of trolling you and going through the thread yourself "trolling". Now you may see this as a "personal" post, but I'm saying it to make a point. You are totally inconsistent, apply one rule to you, one to another. That's your "debating" style too. You don't debate, you just like talking, having the last word and watching people react to you. You hate someone making a point which usurps any you make, so the debate plummets into personal insults.
Maybe you were constantly told what to do in the army, and now it's "payback" time. Surely it crosses your mind occasionally that if a few posters have commented about your slippery style, there might be something in it?
Only a suggestion, but if you have something constructive to say, say it. If not, stop being provocative just because it gives you some self satisfaction? That way we can debate the issue.
Maybe you were constantly told what to do in the army, and now it's "payback" time. Surely it crosses your mind occasionally that if a few posters have commented about your slippery style, there might be something in it?
Only a suggestion, but if you have something constructive to say, say it. If not, stop being provocative just because it gives you some self satisfaction? That way we can debate the issue.
Israel estimates cost of Gaza conflict at £1.5bn | World | The Guardian - http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/31/gaza-...
The heart bleeds
The heart bleeds
QuantumTokoloshi said:
Grumfutock said:
I would point out that part of the deal between Egypt and Israel is that they can only have very limited troops in the Sinai and that is monitored by a Multinational force of observers. So in the context of a buffer it is still very valid as no surprise attack can come from there.
Agreed, but internal "settlement buffers" are pointless and provide no strategic benefit at all, besides providing propaganda material for Hamas.That whole peace deal thing can work rather well, when both sides actually want it.
Let's be honest about the reason for the Settlements. It's not for any military strategic purpose. It's to create a "Greater Israel"... "from the Nile to the Euphrates" as some Zionists hope. Netanyahu supports this, Likud supports this, the Zionists want this. But it can't be done straight away, so it has to be done gradually, little by little.
Countdown said:
"Buffers" is a smokescreen in my opinion. If Egypt ever decided to attack Israel it could have troops at the Israeli border in less than an hour. Jordan could have them there immediately, Syria in the same length of time. When you combine this with the fact that Israel is colonising the WB (in other words filling up the so-called "buffer" I'm not sure where the buffer is supposed to be.
Let's be honest about the reason for the Settlements. It's not for any military strategic purpose. It's to create a "Greater Israel"... "from the Nile to the Euphrates" as some Zionists hope. Netanyahu supports this, Likud supports this, the Zionists want this. But it can't be done straight away, so it has to be done gradually, little by little.
However Egypt, Syria and Jordan would not be able to mass the troops for that without being seen by Israel and the necessary actions taken. Very, very unlikely that any of them could manage a Yom Kippur surprise attack again. So once that is accepted they would be able to trade space for time. Concentrating force and defeating each opposition in order.Let's be honest about the reason for the Settlements. It's not for any military strategic purpose. It's to create a "Greater Israel"... "from the Nile to the Euphrates" as some Zionists hope. Netanyahu supports this, Likud supports this, the Zionists want this. But it can't be done straight away, so it has to be done gradually, little by little.
And yes the settlements are about a greater Israel. However I am damn sure that they would rather lose a few settlements on the Golan Heights than Tel Aviv.
Grumfutock said:
However Egypt, Syria and Jordan would not be able to mass the troops for that without being seen by Israel and the necessary actions taken. Very, very unlikely that any of them could manage a Yom Kippur surprise attack again. So once that is accepted they would be able to trade space for time. Concentrating force and defeating each opposition in order.
And yes the settlements are about a greater Israel. However I am damn sure that they would rather lose a few settlements on the Golan Heights than Tel Aviv.
So that's a REASON for the settlements, but what RiGHTS does Israel have to build them? I worry about my neighbours, can I take over a part of their gardens as buffer zones, just in case?And yes the settlements are about a greater Israel. However I am damn sure that they would rather lose a few settlements on the Golan Heights than Tel Aviv.
Grumfutock said:
However Egypt, Syria and Jordan would not be able to mass the troops for that without being seen by Israel and the necessary actions taken. Very, very unlikely that any of them could manage a Yom Kippur surprise attack again. So once that is accepted they would be able to trade space for time. Concentrating force and defeating each opposition in order.
And yes the settlements are about a greater Israel. However I am damn sure that they would rather lose a few settlements on the Golan Heights than Tel Aviv.
Your post contradicts itself. If the Egyptions et al couldn't muster a surprise attack why is there the need for a buffer zone. It also ignores the fact that buffer zones are irrelevant in the modern day given the mobility of troops.And yes the settlements are about a greater Israel. However I am damn sure that they would rather lose a few settlements on the Golan Heights than Tel Aviv.
Countdown said:
Your post contradicts itself. If the Egyptions et al couldn't muster a surprise attack why is there the need for a buffer zone. It also ignores the fact that buffer zones are irrelevant in the modern day given the mobility of troops.
Not really as you said, they gave back the Sinai. And troops are more mobile these days but that doesn't now and never will rule out the need for buffer zones. All armies still rely heavily on wheeled transport and of road, that isn't that mobile. The armies we are talking about here and the terrain involved, more so.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff