22 Aug 2016 13:39:16
What your mistaking is individual errors for policy. If you'd like me to explain how it works I'll be happy to go into some detail. If you'd prefer me not to spoil your fantasy I'll leave it.
muscatred’s profile
muscatred
Published posts and replies
22 Aug 2016 12:35:05
Mate, I'm ex-forces, everything is based on rules of engagement.
Read discussionMate, I'm ex-forces, everything is based on rules of engagement.
22 Aug 2016 09:25:00
Rian, was that aimed at me or just a general rant about Israelis?
Read discussionRian, was that aimed at me or just a general rant about Israelis?
21 Aug 2016 12:06:14
Tried to find the original source this was taken from because I think the author has got the wrong end of the stick. The weapons are user operated, I think where he's gone wrong is that currently a senior officer has to give permission to fire whilst on the future it will be the operators decision (which would be based on rules of engagement) . There's nothing in the article (other than the authors own words) to suggest the weapons will be automatic.
Read discussionTried to find the original source this was taken from because I think the author has got the wrong end of the stick. The weapons are user operated, I think where he's gone wrong is that currently a senior officer has to give permission to fire whilst on the future it will be the operators decision (which would be based on rules of engagement) . There's nothing in the article (other than the authors own words) to suggest the weapons will be automatic.
10 Aug 2016 13:12:48
By a long margin, the US has over 300,000 troops based abroad. Their largest presence is in Europe, SE Asia and the middle east.
Read discussionBy a long margin, the US has over 300,000 troops based abroad. Their largest presence is in Europe, SE Asia and the middle east.
10 Aug 2016 09:42:12
Two hours is a touch optimistic. Britain has some troops on high readiness, I can't remember the exact notice to move but it's something like a company of infantry (100 soldiers) on 48 hours and a Battalion (600 soldiers) on 5 days. Britain has its own strategic lift capability to get them to any friendly airfield in as long as it takes to fly there along with light vehicles and short term supplies. Our global coverage is a lot less than it used to be though, I think we have deployable soldiers in the UK, Germany, Cyprus and Brunei now.
After that then it's a bit more tailor made, the more complex the formation the longer it takes to deploy. We were in no great rush but in our last major emergency deployment, the 1st gulf war, the coalition took 5 months to prepare, Britain deployed around 50,000 soldiers for that conflict.
Read discussionTwo hours is a touch optimistic. Britain has some troops on high readiness, I can't remember the exact notice to move but it's something like a company of infantry (100 soldiers) on 48 hours and a Battalion (600 soldiers) on 5 days. Britain has its own strategic lift capability to get them to any friendly airfield in as long as it takes to fly there along with light vehicles and short term supplies. Our global coverage is a lot less than it used to be though, I think we have deployable soldiers in the UK, Germany, Cyprus and Brunei now.
After that then it's a bit more tailor made, the more complex the formation the longer it takes to deploy. We were in no great rush but in our last major emergency deployment, the 1st gulf war, the coalition took 5 months to prepare, Britain deployed around 50,000 soldiers for that conflict.
09 Aug 2016 14:56:34
I'm not Kim but I know a little about this subject. Ignoring the simple answer (it's America) the question of 'who has the best military' needs refinement. Some countries have a very specialised military that's brilliant at what it wants it to do (Israel for example) but could never conduct a large scale operation against another established power.
To me the mark of a good military is the ability to independently plan, conduct, support and maintain a large scale foreign deployment. Arguably the only nations in the world that can do that are the US, Britain, France and Russia. China may be the 5th but whether they have the expertise and support network isn't clear.
Fighting is actually the easy bit, it's all the boring stuff around that that makes war hard.
Read discussionI'm not Kim but I know a little about this subject. Ignoring the simple answer (it's America) the question of 'who has the best military' needs refinement. Some countries have a very specialised military that's brilliant at what it wants it to do (Israel for example) but could never conduct a large scale operation against another established power.
To me the mark of a good military is the ability to independently plan, conduct, support and maintain a large scale foreign deployment. Arguably the only nations in the world that can do that are the US, Britain, France and Russia. China may be the 5th but whether they have the expertise and support network isn't clear.
Fighting is actually the easy bit, it's all the boring stuff around that that makes war hard.
21 Jul 2016 16:37:00
Melbourne, liked that a lot. Ramadan is one of the 5 pillars, another is charity. Muslims, in general, donate a lot to charity, it's another one of the positive things about Islam that no one here really talks about.
Kim, I'd never pretend the Muslim world was perfect, they're yet to have a sexual awakening and don't really understand what behaviour is appropriate or not. Hopefully, as their own culture liberalises, the sort of treatment you received will lessen.
Read discussionMelbourne, liked that a lot. Ramadan is one of the 5 pillars, another is charity. Muslims, in general, donate a lot to charity, it's another one of the positive things about Islam that no one here really talks about.
Kim, I'd never pretend the Muslim world was perfect, they're yet to have a sexual awakening and don't really understand what behaviour is appropriate or not. Hopefully, as their own culture liberalises, the sort of treatment you received will lessen.
21 Jul 2016 13:21:36
A number of reasons, I've spent a lot of time in the Middle East, my parents and brother have lived in Oman for almost 30 years. I never settled there but I think it's a wonderful place with some of the friendliest people I've had the pleasure to know, I go back as often as I can.
I've also spent time in Iraq and Afghan, I've visited various other Muslim countries and what I see is not reflective of religious dogma but of that particular society and the political/ economic problems it faces. Then I come home and I see the media report things from a very simplistic viewpoint and I see that viewpoint hoovered up by certain people, I personally find it very frustrating.
Trying to counter what I feel is ignorance is important to me. Not only does it make me feel better but I truly believe that hate and ignorance, from both sides, is what drives conflict. I know there is no reason why Muslims and Westerners can't peacefully live together and I want to live in a world where that is the case.
Read discussionA number of reasons, I've spent a lot of time in the Middle East, my parents and brother have lived in Oman for almost 30 years. I never settled there but I think it's a wonderful place with some of the friendliest people I've had the pleasure to know, I go back as often as I can.
I've also spent time in Iraq and Afghan, I've visited various other Muslim countries and what I see is not reflective of religious dogma but of that particular society and the political/ economic problems it faces. Then I come home and I see the media report things from a very simplistic viewpoint and I see that viewpoint hoovered up by certain people, I personally find it very frustrating.
Trying to counter what I feel is ignorance is important to me. Not only does it make me feel better but I truly believe that hate and ignorance, from both sides, is what drives conflict. I know there is no reason why Muslims and Westerners can't peacefully live together and I want to live in a world where that is the case.
21 Jul 2016 11:26:22
Cheers Ed1, it's a subject close to my heart.
Read discussionCheers Ed1, it's a subject close to my heart.
21 Jul 2016 10:33:52
This is very much my wheelhouse so I thought I'd share my two cents. There is a wide misunderstanding between Islamic culture and National Culture. Islamic Culture doesn't really exist, if you travel through the Muslim world you'll find vastly different societies, the only thing that really links them is the 5 Pillars of Islam which don't go a long way to dictating how you should live your life.
What you do have is some very socially conservative countries where Islam is the state religion such as the one's you mention like Saudi Arabia (although Iran is far less socially conservative than you may think) . In these countries Islam is the excuse for how they treat people as opposed to the reason for it. It is true that the Koran has some passages that seem to promote anti-women or anti-gay teachings but this is largely an issue of interpretation as opposed to what the Koran thematically teaches. As a comparison if a Christian wanted to subjugate women there are plenty of passages in the Bible he could find to legitimise his views.
There are many reasons why Islam has a negative reputation amongst certain people. Part of it is because there's a lot of bad stuff happening in Muslim countries right now that dominates the headlines, it's partly because we currently live in an environment that promotes extreme views, it's partly because the media makes more money talking about 'Muslim issues' than it does 'issues', it's partly because some people find it easier to label an entire religion as one thing rather than consider the hugely complex organism that is made of of 1.6 Billion people world wide.
As for whether Conservative Islamic practices such as Sharia Law could ever become significant in British Society I just don't see it it being a threat. For that to happen would take constitutional change in this country which could only be forced through by an Islam dominated society (not going to happen, Atheism will dominate Britain from this point forward) and even if it did we'd have to be a fundamentalist Islamic society (British Muslims, as a group, are being liberalised not radicalised) . The threat of Islam 'taking over' is a fairy tale designed to scare people, nothing more.
Read discussionThis is very much my wheelhouse so I thought I'd share my two cents. There is a wide misunderstanding between Islamic culture and National Culture. Islamic Culture doesn't really exist, if you travel through the Muslim world you'll find vastly different societies, the only thing that really links them is the 5 Pillars of Islam which don't go a long way to dictating how you should live your life.
What you do have is some very socially conservative countries where Islam is the state religion such as the one's you mention like Saudi Arabia (although Iran is far less socially conservative than you may think) . In these countries Islam is the excuse for how they treat people as opposed to the reason for it. It is true that the Koran has some passages that seem to promote anti-women or anti-gay teachings but this is largely an issue of interpretation as opposed to what the Koran thematically teaches. As a comparison if a Christian wanted to subjugate women there are plenty of passages in the Bible he could find to legitimise his views.
There are many reasons why Islam has a negative reputation amongst certain people. Part of it is because there's a lot of bad stuff happening in Muslim countries right now that dominates the headlines, it's partly because we currently live in an environment that promotes extreme views, it's partly because the media makes more money talking about 'Muslim issues' than it does 'issues', it's partly because some people find it easier to label an entire religion as one thing rather than consider the hugely complex organism that is made of of 1.6 Billion people world wide.
As for whether Conservative Islamic practices such as Sharia Law could ever become significant in British Society I just don't see it it being a threat. For that to happen would take constitutional change in this country which could only be forced through by an Islam dominated society (not going to happen, Atheism will dominate Britain from this point forward) and even if it did we'd have to be a fundamentalist Islamic society (British Muslims, as a group, are being liberalised not radicalised) . The threat of Islam 'taking over' is a fairy tale designed to scare people, nothing more.
14 Jun 2016 11:46:42
Ed33, I'm going to regret wading in on this as this isn't a page for me (I peruse the site out of curiosity) but your last statement seriously undermines you. You can't go looking for evidence to attempt to link something to your narrative, you compromise your integrity by doing that. By all means investigate an event but do it without agenda.
Read discussionEd33, I'm going to regret wading in on this as this isn't a page for me (I peruse the site out of curiosity) but your last statement seriously undermines you. You can't go looking for evidence to attempt to link something to your narrative, you compromise your integrity by doing that. By all means investigate an event but do it without agenda.