Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.
Hamas takes control of Gaza Strip, Palestinian government dissolved
CNN Link Fighters from the Hamas party claimed full control of Palestinian Authority security agencies in Gaza late Thursday. Its leader rejected an emergency decree from President Mahmoud Abbas dissolving the Hamas-led Palestinian unity government.
[Tarkin]The regional governors now have direct control over their territories. Fear will keep the local systems in line.[/Tarkin]
Comments
At no point has the Roadmap for Peace been in any way effective. Even the ceasefire was a short-lived "fix" that was ultimately tossed aside by the religious zealots. Do you honestly think that Bush's foreign policy has changed the situation? Clinton's Middle East peace plan failed. Bush I's did, too. Reagan's failed; Carter's failed; Ford's failed; Nixon's failed, and so on, back to 1952. The problem is that these groups want mutually exclusive goals, and each believe they have god on their side.
I'm not being pro-Bush here. I'm just trying to point out that when barbaric, uneducated, brainwashed fanatics argue over land, there isn't going to be a peaceful solution. For fucks sake, this kind of shit has been going on in the Middle East for several thousand years.
(You know, sarcasm aside, this would probably be a good step forward if only the UN acted as the body it SHOULD be instead of as the body it IS).
UN Peacekeeper Rules of Engagement have always bothered me. They would be much more effective if, when called into a warzone, they engaged any and all agressors at all opportunity regardless of who was fighting whom. Put down anyone, no matter who they are, the moment they raise arms against anyone. Install themselves with overwhelming force and make it clear that they will not leave until the specific peace goals set forth at their deployment are met. The DMZs in Hitler no Fukkatsu/Bionic Commando come to mind. ^_~
If the UN acted sparingly, but acted with great force when it did in fact act, perhaps at least some local disputes would be settled internally if only to prevent them from coming in and demilitarizing the entire area.
Of course, what do I know. I'm sure the UN strategy of sending in small, poorly supported forces with orders not to even load their weapons, only after a situation has entirely broken down and only to then pull them out the moment shots are fired or politicos are offended is a much better idea... I mean, it's worked so well in the past. Why mess with success?
The UN operates from under the "I hope they like us" system. The UN should have a special military force of Huns that they can send in to quell an area with no rules of engagement other than, "Don't return to base with unspent ammo."
UN forces can kick ass, to speak in the vernacular. The operative word is "can." They're just often constrained by excessively restrictive rules of engagement.
Hey, we should make a third force for CounterStrike: UN Peacekeepers. They all start with AWMs, M4 Carbines, FN FiveSeven pistols, full armour, and no bullets. They only get one radio signal: "Team, fall back!" Instead of defusing the bomb, they can inform the UN that a bomb is about to go off and wait for further instruction. If they find a hostage, they must wait with him until reinforcements arrive, but leave the room if any terrorists appear. Any player who picks up a weapon with ammunition in it and fires is immediately kicked from the server.
I think the Peackeeper system is similar to the old feudal system of either paying tribute in money (to pay soldiers) or soldiers.
Scott and company rush into a military situation. Gunfire breaks out over the hill.
Commander of squad: "Ok team, we've been instructed to wait here until we get further orders"
Scott sees enemy forces coming over hill towards his team about 400 yards away but it doesn't look like they can see the UN forces.
Scott: "Uh sir, there's the enemy shouldn't we be loading our guns or something?"
Commander: "No private we are to do as instructed"
Scott: "But we haven't heard anything back yet..."
Commander: "Orders are orders, don't load private!"
Enemy forces look like they have spotted UN forces and approach causiously
Scott: "Sir?"
Commander: "Stand down private"
Scott: "Got damn" and starts loading rifle.
Commander: "Private, your orders are to stand down!"
Scott: "Fuck you"
Commander promptly knocks Scott out with a hand gun butt to the face.
Someone else in the company: "Pwned"
I would love to see a UN Peacekeeping operation suddenly given the authorization to engage and quell any and all combatants within the zone of operation with extreme prejudice. A great hammer wielded to crush opposition, to bring down fiery retribution and judgment upon those that would resist a UN mandate.
I agree with Rym that such a force should be used sparingly, if only to impress upon those that require UN intervention the depths of their folly. That as the very last resort, when no less terrible option shall suffice, when at last all reason and logic have failed to bring about a peace, the UN Peacekeepers must be deployed to end the conflict.
The military might of the UN must be overwhelming in its effectiveness, shock and awe in all of its pure glory. Wave after wave of blue-helmeted Peacekeepers, supported by battalions of white tanks and helicopter gunships, sweeping across the land as an unstoppable wave of peace and order. An army of the nations of the world shall descend upon them, a force which strikes as a rod of iron amongst clay pots.
'Course these were no ordinary mercenaries, it was a planet full of them! They also had a museum for all those races they had "helped" over the years... All those races were now extinct, wonder how that happened?
Maybe the UN should be like that.
Cause some trouble? Here come the blue helmets to kill you and everyone in a ten mile radius. Problem solved. Collateral damage? Meh, it'll keep the next guy in line...
One possibility that I can see to counteract such abuse is the intelligence agencies of the UN member-states trying to find reasons to not send in the Peacekeepers, such as evidence that the violence is being manipulated by one nation to have the nation in conflict be invaded. After all, since the member states are the ones eventually footing the bill for this military intervention, they'd rather avoid it if they can. The other possibility would be the UN making its fact-finding missions dig a little deeper, ask questions a little harder, and do it all quite a bit faster.
The figures are according to the monthly summary of contributions posted by the United Nations.
The 314 Americans serving with the UN are already serving under a unified commander anyway. What does it matter if there are more? And if the Pakistanis are willing to volunteer their men, then why can't we?
Maybe you could clarify exactly what is your issue.