Garavnoss wrote:In my defence, I would like to point out that NOWHERE have I indicated that I endorse the actions of IS.
OK great! We are off to a good start here.
So you do not endorse the actions of IS and perhaps you find IS abhorrent. Most normal people would. Therefore, you should support the coalition (60 countries) who are trying to end them. The only critical thing in my mind, is the fact that there are no boots on the ground to end it quickly.
Garavnoss wrote:I merely uphold my right to recognize "Courage" where I see it. I believe that ANY smaller force which is prepared to defy a larger one MUST have "Courage" in order to operate their defiance.
There is no courage here. They are hiding behind their human shields (civilians) because they know that air strikes do not occur so freely in those areas. Yes, no effort is spared to avoid human casualties.
Garavnoss wrote:I would also like to point out that I do not HATE either America or Israel (or any other nation), nor have I ever written such.
Good! You might need to balance your arguments by offering some credit where it is due in America's case. Only then will you be more effective whenever you're being critical about some US Policies. There is plenty to be critical about, it just depends on how you go about it.
Garavnoss wrote:If YOU (in concert with your insulting friend) wish to suppose otherwise, that is also your common right but, it does not necessarily mean that you are correct in your assumptions/opinions/conclusions etc, rather it would be an indication of your inadequacy to accept that others may see things a little differently to yourselves.
I do not agree with his posts, especially when they become insulting. I also don't have many allies on this forum. I do not participate here in concert with others. I have my own unique style and my own opinions and I try to be very fair.
You however seem to be provoking him into some outburst and that makes you just as guilty as he is when he levels his insults. Of course, your position in some of your posts could encourage similar responses from many, so I question your motives.
Garavnoss wrote:I imagined you to be a person with something of a military background, I was always taught to regard ANY enemy with a degree of respect for a simple reason..... they may win !, in which case, the shame of having to concede to a "Coward" (or other disparaged opponent) would be a greater shame than defeat by an honourable one.. Therefore, always respect your enemy.
Yes but you are confusing the issue.
You respect any enemy because they can kill you and they can do that very easily. And I have never in my live been brave enough to want to invite death upon myself or my mates so you do everything in your power to avoid any mishaps.
So yes, you do what you do always being very cautious of any enemy, and acting in a fashion which does not under estimate their ability. It just takes one bullet to die.
But I do not respect their courage, actions or ideology. Two separate things here. I respect however the courage of Australian Soldiers for example, even though they are less prepared to offer their life. Of course there are instances where Australian Soldiers were resigned to their impending death and took it upon themselves to go out with a bang and to go down fighting to the last man. I offered the Battle of Long Tan as such an example - 108 diggers Vs 6000 VC. Now that is what I call courage. Kobani is another example of something very similar.
Courage is not fighting against defenceless civilians, or punching and beating up a woman. That is cowardly.