starting this thread, which i hope will be short-lived, to keep the board up to date with latest reports gleaned from the net

I'm unconvinced as the North is much less dangerous than the areas where the US and British have been fighting. I don't want to get into comparative casualty figures as that is almost sick, but I would be astonished if you were to provide numbers showing German dead and wounded were more than a small fraction of our losses or the American's.
That is not to say Germany isn't fulfilling a supportive role, but perhaps we are getting into semantics here.

i knew where this one was leading - chuckle chuckle!
thank you peter ...... do you have a similar for libya, or is that still all a bit too fluid?


at least not semitics itlob!

I think the fact that Germany has a Lead Role as the Regional Commander (N) sort of disproves your assertion that Germany and other countries do not adopt a policy of military intervention, no matter how much you side-track to casualty figures.

No doubt in a years time or so, we'll end up with a peace keeping force in Libya, until then they will probably just keep knocking lumps out of each other. Difficult to know how much support MH actually has and would his abdication / removal result in peace?

Incidentally, I think you will also find that casualty figures are reasonably comparitive in the context of number of forces deployed... sadly

I carefully used the word "leading" and I have no intention of "side-tracking".

Number of troops, material, economic cost, casualties are all, in my humble opinion, reasonable metrics, although the latter is distasteful.

"Reasonably comparative". Do you have the figures?
Of course if a small number of troops experiences one major incident then the casualty rate becomes disproportionate but more proportionate to other countries.

itlob - you can't pick and choose which bits of statistic you want to use to bolster your assertion

cynic,
I don't understand.
I have suggested four metrics.
Without knowing the precise figures, I am reasonably sure that Germany which has a bigger economy that ours, contributes far less in manpower, fighting and supportive, material, economic cost etc.
In any case, we are getting away from the point which is that the prime movers in these interventions are USUALLY the US and the UK and, in my view, we do not need to sacrifice our blood and treasure in militarily supporting one side in an Arab civil war.

so we should support both sides like a world-class arms dealer lol!?

the prime movers in these interventions are USUALLY the US and the UK
the former maybe, except when it comes to telling israel, by way of the wallet, to stop further encroachment on the left bank .... as for uk, i rather suspect you are wide of the mark, and even if not, it would be pretty reprehensible if "we" just stood quietly aside like some bystander(s) watching someone being beaten up in the street

"stop further encroachment on the left bank "

I thought we were talking about Libya?
Was it not you who asked for this thread to be about Libya and you're talking about Israel !

As good as the IDF is, they aren't yet strong enough to take territory on the Left Bank.

Did I say we should sell arms? No point putting words into my mouth. You're degrading the discussion.

1) arms-dealing - your wording could have been read as such and hence my clearly signalled t-in-c retort

2) israel - merely a valid comment about us being a prime mover except when it comes to hitting israel's wallet - but yes, slightly off-topic

3) quietly watching - you do not comment!

Cynic,

More insight, you do have a very limited ability of comprehension.

Try reading my posts again and get help from somebody when doing so.

It may lead to more understanding.

As far as the Milibands' family history is concern, I have no objection to the communist influences of that period and can understand their positioning.

I think unlike you they have moved on and reviewed previous philosophies.

Although I often differ in some of their positioning, the arguments advanced by them appear thoughtful and not dependant on mantras to give themselves validity or misconception of their personal value.

Whether, they have the qualities of a future PMs, I am as yet uncertain, but consider that they would be better than the impoverished government we have at present.

Like many tories, I hope that Cameron is replaced as soon as feasible.

God help us, if the replacement is Ken Clarke, who seems to me, to be developing Alzheimer's disease.

Mind so does the rest of cabinet.

PS, Our Minister of Prisons should go back to selling fags. (or fagging.)

just as you could never vote for cameron, ditto me for milliband, even if he is jewish!

That was his mother's fault.

How about you?

may have been my father's, but i don't know who he was

Not surprised!

But, I would have thought you were a self made one!

(I thought Jewishness was based on mother's conviction.)

mine was never convicted let alone deported!
yes, you're right ..... to be truly jewish it is indeed matrilineal on the basis that the mother's i/d is usually more obvious

"I thought Jewishness was based on mother's conviction"

Convicted of being Jewish, huh?

fred's a rabid islamist or similar lol