Comments for Return of the IPB

Return of the IPB

Thu, 15 Jan 2009 11:07:41 -0600

[Gollum is back - the Armorer]Freight and people to move is few and far between, John’s busy doing ‘God’s Work’, and so enter the gangrel creature, stage left, even, that’s easily enticed---or intimidated--- to put together stuff for your reading pleasure. Stuff from out of the way, not of the Argghhh gestalt, or simply interesting for the week of 17 JAN.Would Dennis Ross Set the Stage for War with Iran?I always love these. “Proportionality” is always a slippery concept legally, and this Yglesias piece does rely on the ‘quantitative’ definition of proportionality.. I’m more of a Dershowitz kind of guy...

Comment from KCSteve on 2009-01-16

Fri, 16 Jan 2009 10:13:28 -0600

The way I see it the party responsible for the deaths of innocents in combat is the party who chose to mix themselves in with the innocents.

Unless the other party chose to eliminate an area just to make sure there weren't any bad people there.

In your example it's the enemy forces who chose to base themselves in the village who are to blame for deaths in the village, so long as the good guys avoid that B-52 strike.

Comment from ry on 2009-01-16

Fri, 16 Jan 2009 01:42:22 -0600

Rock throwing. THere's irony in the use of that wrt Israel/Palestine. THe first Intifada, which was quite successful, really was predominately kids throwing rocks(and hyped to no end). It's funny.

I just hate the fuzzy thinking about 'proportionality', Argent. ALl I get out of Yglesias is 'it's icky, so we hates it'. Well, fine. So do I. So does Unka Bill, SgtB, John................... NOBODY likes seeing innocents die. BUt what're you supposed to do? I always come down to the concrete example I was given: you've got a village you need to get through because it sits on a road net. In it the enemy has a couple of mortars holed up in a medical clinic and they're shelling you. YOu could go around, but that means whoever follows you is in danger, especially the logistics and MP folks. YOu could go in with your company of inf., and face 30% casualties to kill or displace 15 enemy fighters. YOu could use tank support, cutting down your casualties to 10%, but increasing the cost of innocent lives in the village(and reduce the threat and casualties to those coming behind you to near zero). YOu could call in tac air/arty. Further reducing your casualty aggregate, but increasing the innocent aggregate. What you can't do is level the entire place with a B-52 strike. All of those options MAY be proportionate depending on the conditions BEFORE you even lose a man or crate of goods or even time to the mortar teams. Depends on the necessity you're trying to deal with. Context matters.

I'm not going to chest thump about being a friend of Israel. I'm not, not really. Machs nicht fur mich. but the intellectual dishonesty astounds me. At the end, it's just wars we don't like we'll call disproportionate(because illegitimate no longer works) and those we like we'll cheer loudly---and it's still consistent cuase some just can't accept that sometimes war is a necessity because the other goob won't accept anything less than the whole pie.

I'm surprised you had that reaction to the Canucker-story. I didn't see it as slam of the UN so much as the myth people tell themselves. We aren't the bad type of military, we just help kids and stuff. We don't kill people and blow stuff up. That's not the reality out there. There be wolves. Sometimes you need hunters, and sometimes you need big brothers. Right now we need hunters so big brothers can go play football(soccer) with the kids. I'm glad someone up there in the Great White North, other than Damian that is, sees and understands that. I just don't see the connection to the UN as you do.

Sorry about the tdaxp stuff, Trias. It's very dependent upon having read/being read in certain ideas. Next time I'll do mountainrunner instead, and confuse you on people watching stuff instead. you like people watching, dontcha?

Dude, don't start that consciousness vs. reality stuff up in here, 'kay? I'm trying to belive over here.

Comment from Argent on 2009-01-16

Fri, 16 Jan 2009 00:15:22 -0600

We's hates them.

On Dennis Ross: Who knows, just not enough direct real information. Because the media talk about him is ultimately tied into negotiation practices. It's possible the whining about him actually means he's doing quite well.

Proportionality; It's a point. But you know the alternative of having rocks thrown at you doing nothing waiting to die isn't better. The implication Israel is overreacting is a weak assumption. And truly to exercise restraint with rock throwers one would need to be more confident others (particularly the police and the people in the building) would be assisting you to bring the rock throwers to justice. Not protecting them and encouraging them. Because Palestine/Israel is too narrow a view. The way the rest of the world (including us and the ME elements) behave are part of it.

Tdaxp: 5GW. Too much pre-information required. 'Seam' idea. Too fuffy imo. It makes all sorts of assumptions about how Iran might want to behave. I think it also overvalues geography.

Fair enough on the popular culture. It bores me to tears but it does influence and mirror public opinion.

Dkos: We all live in a fantasy world you know. I'm serious. I've very hard to be real. It's a bit smelly that Dkos are talking about fantasies after some of the things I've read in there. The first points are neither here nor there with me but on Jesus Joe the worshiped Plumber oh yes the ugly is going to show soon enough. He's probably an ok guy but the idea he's a broad expert on everything from economics to the war is foolish.

Cannuck: Don't get me started on the UN, our glorious symbol of hope for humanity.