coma

I'll remind you for the last time. No talk about specifics of troops, aircraft, or units operating in the area.

100% in agreement ! Take note >>>> "Loose lips sink ships"

Yes, don't want to unwittingly make someone's village a target.

I am sure that if Cambodia was smart. They would have a few diplomats as members of this site picking up all the raw intel all us guys are putting up here for them to read.

Artillery steady but less intense than yesterday. Quite wide spread and appears to stretch from the border at Ta Kwai all the way to the border directly south of Khok Takian. Any one in Khok Takian hearing explosions directly to your south?

Sounds like the Thais are testing the Cambodian defences [ probing ] along that part of the border . Who knows why ? This is normally a pre curser to a larger attack /assault. Or they maybe live fire recording targets on the Cambodian side. Hahaha.

egads. Agreement of sorts. I hope CdnCivic ducks lest he get hit by a flying pig.

Fainting works too.

LOL

An Alternative solution is to cut off all aid to Pakistan under the proviso that once the attacks and hostile interference in Afghanistan end, aid will resume. At the same time, deny all visas for Pakistanis seeking entry into the west. They can still be free to visit wonderful destinations like Russia and China where the locals will no doubt greet visible minorities and muslims in the warm friendly fashion that the Russians and Chinese are famous for. That should give the Pakistanis some incentive to behave.

And if a terror attack is launched from Pakistani soil with the tacit support of the Pakistani military or intelligence services, then a few Cruise missiles sent to the Presidential Palace and the military HQ in Lahore will provide some incentive to behave.

That is music to my ears. Now you are seeing what I am about. If Pakistan aint go the balls to go in there and clean it up, and Afghan is a loss. It is time to cordon off that part of the world and let them do what they like within thier borders. However,as you said, if any attacks on the West come from that region then they get paid back in spades. Cheaper, easier, less man power and less dangerous.

I think the cables not fakes, but real. If you wanna cast doubt on the content you have to ask: What does it say about the reliability of the information provided by US diplomats and their sources.

Who actually thinks that they - or anybody else - in the spying game always get everyhing right? Is anyone naive enough to think that this information is anything but a collection of informed guesses?

I have to agree. Military Intelligence is not an exact science. Therefore is not 100% reliable. In relation to wikileaks however I am of the belief that they get this raw material and investigate it also to make sure it is /and or close to correct before publishing it. I cannot think of anything published that didn't seem more than pausable.

" One should take the log out of ones own eye, before taking the splinter out of anothers " :jap:

Yes. You (as apparently self-appointed defender of Iran) ought to keep that in mind yourself.

But that's a rather weak defense. How about 'If its wrong, it's wrong no matter who does it? How about object to that which is objectionable and not try to defend it just because of the side you've chosen and your ideology (and/or all consuming dislike for the "other side")'.

Not as catchy I know. Guess those won't catch on.

But I personally prefer intellectual honesty and integrity (and real arguments) to empty rhetoric and evasion.

Pot this is kettle over and OUT!!!

Have you seen any F-16's do a mock attack run at 30,000 ft.

I must admit my eyes are not what they used to be. Minor details start to escape me when they are more then 50 feet away

It don't matter to me how high up they are. Nothing more scary than being in a conflict situation and you have a fast mover flying over head. Scary, scary.

Just watched the 7:30pm news, Channel 7. Their lead story -- the price of eggs ! Nothing about the situation just down the road. Looks like the media have been gagged which, in my opinion is wrong. If you live in the immediate area of the conflict, you need information like what to do and where to go if you are evacuating. The last thing you want to do is ' walk ' into a trouble spot.

My wife just asked me if what she heard was shelling -- it's now 8:50pm. Fortunately it's a thunder storm, but that just goes to show how tense the situation is here. If we could hear or see reports we might be more at ease.

Just as Afarang posted, we'll have to see what happens at 6am tomorrow........

Another 'Gunfire Breakfast' could be well on the cards.

" One should take the log out of ones own eye, before taking the splinter out of anothers " :jap:

You may like to read my original post again. I thought I was quite clear on my point that I was thinking at the strategic level. When has Iran been an agressor at a strategic level ? As the weapons that this story is about are stratigic weapons being used to act as a deterant to any pre emptive strikes by Israel or the US. That is ALL I was talking about. I could be less vague and general for you but I would probabley get a

Oh, I see. So you were OK responding to my question at first but now that your response has been hwld up to scrutiny and perahps looks less tenable, suddenly you aren't?

I confess, I honestly didn't see the bit about strategic weapons, and I apologize for that oversight -- nonetheless I don't see how you can ignore any of the things I've brought up and still examine whether or not Iran has ever been an aggressor. In fact, I think it's absurd to try. (And I'm rather certain you wouldn't accept that if someone were to do the same sort of thing in reference to Israeli or US actions, for example.)

By the way -- re post #19, you say this:

Like that one LOL

I wonder why? And if so, why no comment on post #21?

If you want to look at it that way then yes they are not angel but they are no more bolder than any other Super power, Israel, India etc etc. Nobody can deny it if you look at it from both perspectives/ Like I said earlier everybody is actively doing it. So why should the world look at Iran as an evil state ? When Israel kills more Palestinian civy's in a week that Iran would do to anybody in a year?

Without going into weather Iran is supporting terrorism or not, as this is about strategic weapons, where/ when have they been the natural aggreessor ? I think people have been misconcieved or even fool that Iran is an agressive country...

How can you avoid the question of whether or not Iran is supporting terrorism and still discuss whether they have been the "natural aggressor"? Indeed one might need to discuss whether they've done more than "support" it.

The way I and I am sure a large part of the greater world population have the view that what NATO is doing in Libya , supporting the uprising there, as being the same as Iran propping up Hezbollah and the like. Every country does it. Have been for a long time. Nobody can deny it. It just comes down to what country you do it for as to the title bestowed upon that person. If for say you did it in the name of Western Alliances then you are a rebel or a freedom fighter. If you are an Arab or a Muslim individual or identity or country or even poor old Julian Assange . They are given the title Terrorist.

So leaving aside the casual (and rather ugly) relativism and vague generalizations, you think that that sort of thing is NOT to be described as being an aggressor?

OK.

You may like to read my original post again. I thought I was quite clear on my point that I was thinking at the strategic level. When has Iran been an agressor at a strategic level ? As the weapons that this story is about are stratigic weapons being used to act as a deterant to any pre emptive strikes by Israel or the US. That is ALL I was talking about. I could be less vague and general for you but I would probabley get a

Without going into weather Iran is supporting terrorism or not, as this is about strategic weapons, where/ when have they been the natural aggreessor ? I think people have been misconcieved or even fool that Iran is an agressive country...

How can you avoid the question of whether or not Iran is supporting terrorism and still discuss whether they have been the "natural aggressor"? Indeed one might need to discuss whether they've done more than "support" it.

The way I and I am sure a large part of the greater world population have the view that what NATO is doing in Libya , supporting the uprising there, as being the same as Iran propping up Hezbollah and the like. Every country does it. Have been for a long time. Nobody can deny it. It just comes down to what country you do it for as to the title bestowed upon that person. If for say you did it in the name of Western Alliances then you are a rebel or a freedom fighter. If you are an Arab or a Muslim individual or identity or country or even poor old Julian Assange . They are given the title Terrorist.

Q. "when has Iran overtly attacked another nation ?"

A. 1979

Okay.

1979

Some students sized an embassy. No shots were fired, no-one was killed.

It was the embassy of a country which overtly participated in a coup that overthrow a democratically elected government and actively supported a dictator.

More examples?

Like that one LOL

Not to disagree with you coma, but these people do have a history of national and international refrain which trends more to offensive than defense.

Who? Israel, Iran or the US?

Please provide details of that 'history'.

So many questions plus a request for detailed history. You want to be burped after you ingest all this info? All three countries have proven offensive to each other at times as do some individual people.

I agree to some extent. However my view is, when has Iran overtly attacked another nation ? I know they fought a long hard defensive war againts Iraq in the 80's. But they didn't initiate it. Without going into weather Iran is supporting terrorism or not, as this is about strategic weapons, where/ when have they been the natural aggreessor ? I think people have been misconcieved or even fool that Iran is an agressive country by Mr Ahmadijed and his empty threat rhetoric.He wants the West scared and it is working.

Typical of Israeli foriegn policy on Palestinians.Disgraceful. Pictures speak a thousand words. I wonder if they will be compensated for the damage done ?

Well it is about time Pakistan launches a major operation on that entire region to put this thing to bed once and for all. What are they ? Pussies? More worried about the more passive Indians than going it head to head with Alqaeda and the Taliban which is running rife in that area of thier country. This is the REAL War on Terror.

It is a neccesary capability that almost all countries possess. Doesn't mean that Israel and the US no longer have the capability to kick Irans arse, militarily. However it does make things alot more dangerous for any identity that was thinking about ANY pre emptive strike on any Iranian facilities. Said 'identity' would have to keep in mind that Iran can also retaliate quickly. That been said I think it is more of a deterant as oppossed being a 'first strike' weapon.

10:13

no more artillery fire...

seems that they take a longer break

105mm not 205,, Charge 7 HE Nato Range 7miles(11.26km)

i doubt that they can fire nearly 4 hours without a break....with charge 7....the barrels would glow red after 1 hour

New 105mm/M913 RAP 14km They dont have this one Yet

source?

Knowing these two militarys they would run out of money to buy bombs before the barrels even got warm.

They are from Afganistan. Was reported in Australian media. Some were transfered from Christmas Island after the fires and riots there. These people have now relinquished any rights to stay in Australia. They came ilegaly trying to queue jump and then commit criminal acts whilst here. Should be towed back out to sea and sunk if they tried to re enter Australian waters. Australia has enough criminals and don't need to import boat loads of them.

Wasn't being a criminal once the ticket to get to Australia?

Btw. How do the Anglo-australians behave in Afghanistan?

I hear nothing but good things about Australian Defence Force personnel operating in Afghanistan.

Unfortunately the Australian government is a US proxy. Otherwise these troops would have left Afghanistan long ago.

You just had to find a way to bash the US.

This is your fight with your illegal immigrants. Why not leave us out of it.

Can you please tell me how this sentence above aplies to me. My fight ? My illegal immigrants?? How do you figure that ?

Whilst we are on this subject of this sentence " your fight " [being Australia's fight i assume] Vietnam was your fight [ your being the US i am assuming],Iraq x2 was your fight, Afghanistan was your fight. But who is always there backing up the US. The Aussies.

They are from Afganistan. Was reported in Australian media. Some were transfered from Christmas Island after the fires and riots there. These people have now relinquished any rights to stay in Australia. They came ilegaly trying to queue jump and then commit criminal acts whilst here. Should be towed back out to sea and sunk if they tried to re enter Australian waters. Australia has enough criminals and don't need to import boat loads of them.

Wasn't being a criminal once the ticket to get to Australia?

Btw. How do the Anglo-australians behave in Afghanistan?

I hear nothing but good things about Australian Defence Force personnel operating in Afghanistan.

Unfortunately the Australian government is a US proxy. Otherwise these troops would have left Afghanistan long ago.

Read the article closely. Do you see any mention of where the detainees come from? Are they Angry Americans? Silly Swedes? Saucy Spaniards? We'll never know, as political correctness and privacy laws discourage country of origin statements..

You hit the nail on the head. Watch the news on our country, it is illegal for the media to profile any 'alleged' criminal by race, that includes aborigines.

So basically what you get is a description of a (usual) 'male, 5ft 11in, short black hair, medium build. Helloooo, how about saying it like it is so that us public have a chance of identifying. Oh, sorry, unless the alleged criminal is white, then they can say he/she is caucasion.

Absolutely amazing it is. Drives Joe Public crazy.

Its a sane move. It protects also the white people.

Imagine someone would start to argue that the Anglo-australians, the white people, should go home where they came from.

Well why don't the entire world population pack up and move back to Africa where we ALL come from originally. Running around as a bunch of Apes.

With this sort of thing happen all the time. How about hurrying up double time with those subs. I could see how they could be of good use in these low scale contacts.

Or how about spending that sub money on training and better equiping your border patrol units so 6 men don't get knock at one time.

Lukeskywalker - post #2

Huh?

What are you talking about?

Easter Eggs are always bought!

See Tesco page. Unfortunately, don't seem to have come to Tesco in Thailand.

http://www.tesco.com...294965303&Nao=0

Seven pages of them.

How do you know the OP is talking about CANDIED (e.g. chocolate) Easter Eggs? When a person just says "Easter Eggs" I think most people picture the actual chicken eggs that are painted (which I've never seen sold as they are made at home).

If the OP was writing about egg shaped candy, then my apologies.

CLAFAFICATION : Sorry if I [OP] have mislead this thread. I was talking about Easter Eggs, which were I come from are usually made from chocolate.

Just came back from Rim Ping by the river and they had nothing other than a couple of hand size baskets with a hand full of small chocalate eggs. B150. I was kinda looking for something a bit more extravigant than that. So any info or sightings of Chocolate Easter Eggs would be appreciated. [Chiang Mai area only. I aint flying to BKK for them] Thanks guys. :jap:

What are you trying to do? Make a good impression on your gf?

That obvious huh??

Could someone actually bleed to death from a 5 inch head wound?

I'm aware someone could die, but actually bleed to death?

Very possible. A long time ago, I was reading about bullet wounds to the head and how many people don't die upon impact, but actually die from bleeding through the wound. Many people have survived severe trauma to the skull and brain. I know a few!

Gun shot wounds and blant force trauma are like comparing chalk and cheese.

That is what it is about in thier minds. In reality it will harm thier application because they now may get a criminal record for actions taken during the riot if police were to press charges. Instant NO ENTRY.