But … you talk like war crimes are a bad thing.

I was listening to the ten o’clock news with half an ear and I caught Jeremy Bowen saying something like if Israel can’t prove that bombing the bridges in Lebanon was justified “then it’s a war crime.”

I don’t get it, BBC. So what if it is. Why do you care?

Note, I’m not asking why you, the readers of this site, might care – or you, the BBC audience, or you the Lebanese or you the Israelis or you the Palestinians or you the world. You all might have many and different opinions on whether it’s a war crime in law, or whether it’s a war crime in the sight of God – but I’m not asking you.

I’m talking to you, the British Broadcasting Corporation. When Hamas and then Hizbollah attacked Israel you never troubled to tell us the legal status of the acts. When suicide bombers killed Israelis at pizza parlours and bar mitzvahs you never gave us any of this war crime schtick, although attacks targeted at non-combatants are the epitome of a war crime. “Terrorist” is a term with meaning in international law, yet when bombers murdered your own countrymen in London a year ago you were so anxious to avoid being judgemental that you had someone go through what your reporters had written in the heat and pity of the moment, carefully replacing the word “terrorist” with the word “bomber.”

(God, what a shameful job. While they were still scrubbing the blood off the streets and the rails, some hack was scrubbing out any suggestion that the killers might have been bad people. Was it a junior hack under orders or a senior hack doing his own dirty work? Or were you all sent slinking back to your desks each to expunge his own words? I’d really like to know, but whichever it was you were anxious to avoid any talk of “crimes” then.)

“Bomber” not “terrorist”: by your own account your only job is to describe projectiles hitting meat. So what’s up now, with your “war crimes” and your “Israel kills Lebanese civilians”? You don’t need these fancy legal concepts, as if it mattered to you whether they were civilians or not. By your own stated standards moral distinctions between killings are “a barrier rather than an aid to understanding.”

I just don’t get it.

Bookmark the permalink.

100 Responses to But … you talk like war crimes are a bad thing.

  1. amimissingsomething says:

    “If i can’t prove i’m innocent, then i’m guilty.”

    “If you bombers of civilians can’t prove you were justified, then you’re terrorists.”

    (only, of course, if i, and you, don’t belong to most favoured grouping?)

    well, some don’t do outrage, but they sure do do guilt…


  2. LocrianUSA says:

    Sounds like your BBC and our NYT would make perfect bedfellows.


  3. Bryan says:


    Your post takes me back to BBC 1 last week and the voice over (if that’s what it’s called) with the menacing footage of an approaching Israeli tank:

    Thursday morning
    Staring down the barrel of an Israeli gun

    That, together with Bowen’s war crime and the captured soldiers and, of course, the Israel kills Lebanese civilians headline is a pretty clear indication of how the BBC intends to cover these extraordinary events.

    Grimer and I bumped into the BBC in the corridor and tried to talk to talk some sense into it but it stuck its nose in the air and walked on:



    There’s just no getting through to it. The prejudices are too deep and too ingrained. The indoctrination has been too thorough.


  4. Anonymous says:

    I think it’s quite obvious why the beeb care.

    It’s because they want to use the words Israel and war-crimes in the same headline.

    In fact they’re probably wetting themselves at the prospect of doing so.


  5. ed says:

    Great post, Natalie.


  6. Big Mouth says:

    If this isn’t a case for getting rid of al-beeb, I give up!
    BBC News 24 yesterday reported that Israel started this war just to get 2 soldiers back, they then said that Hizbollah were firing rockets into Israel in response to Israel’s bombardment of Lebanon.

    They then reported the civilian deaths and casualties in Lebanon, saying that Israel’s actions are war crimes. They don’t bother to tell us about the 500 civilian casualties on the Israeli side.
    They don’t mention the relative silence from the moderate Arab world, and from the West. Both of these camps are quite happy for Israel to take the first steps in the war against radical Islam.


  7. Charlie says:

    The Beeb’s response would be something like:

    War crimes can only be committed by armed forces. The masses ranks of ‘bombers’ aren’t really armed forces – they are freedom fighters/plumbers/rocket enthusiasts/oppressed minorities etc etc.. They can’t help their actions, which are pefectly understandble reactions to decades of persecution by Western ideaologies which….(Cont P. 94, the Polly Toynbee column.)


  8. Gerbil says:

    Finally the BBC, which -even according to its own internal report- is baised in favour of Israel, is starting to call a spade a spade. Bowen’s report was refreshing although I’m sure the language will be toned down pretty soon.

    The fact is, both sides commit acts that are in violation of international law and are, therefore, war crimes. The difference is that Israel’s crimes and the number of casualties it inflicts dwarf those of the Palestinians (Israel still loses more people on the roads per year than to terror attacks, for instance): the current figure for the last week or so running at about 6:1 if my memory serves me.

    Two plain truths worth bearing in mind. Firstly, the occupation is an ongoing, continuous attack on the Palestinian people -every minute of every hour of every day for the last 40 years. Therefore, it’s a logical contradiction to state that the Palestinians ever ‘start’ any of the exchanges -any more than one would blame the residents of the Warsaw ghetto for ‘starting’ a new round of attacks against their occupiers.

    Secondly, while Palestinian actions are frequently atrocities and while the Israelis who lose their lives are not one iota less valuable than the Palestinians who lose theirs, the crmes of the Israeli state should concern us more (by us I mean principally the US and UK). Israel’s crimes are in part our responsibility, since we bankroll and aid Israel (the US to the tune of billions per year). The US government should also hang its head in shame for exploiting Israel and keeping it in a permanent state of seige, in order that it functions better as a client state. That is why Israeli crimes should interest us more -because they are our crimes as well.


  9. Ed says:

    Here’s a parallel with the Warsaw Ghetto for gerbil – the Jews of the ghetto faced a vicious, murderous enemy intent on their destruction, just like modern-day Israel does with Hamas, Hezbollah and the unhinged leadership of Iran.


  10. archduke says:

    Mr Bowen & co. could do well to read through this webpage:


    click on each and every one Mr Bowen.


  11. archduke says:

    “Firstly, the occupation is an ongoing, continuous attack on the Palestinian people”

    18% of the Israeli population – i.e. those living within Israel proper – are actually Arab. are they coming under “continuous attack”?

    errr. no. why? because they arent harbouring terrorists.


  12. Bryan says:

    ….any more than one would blame the residents of the Warsaw ghetto for ‘starting’ a new round of attacks against their occupiers.

    Gerbil, the far left site is down the road, next to the Islamofascist one. If you see some robed idividuals going in, they aren’t lost – they’ve been invited to the Israel-bashing meeting. If you hurry, you’ll get there before it starts.


  13. eiland says:

    jeremy bowen has had it in for israel for years.
    the reason being that he saw his lebanese colleague killed by alleged israeli tank fire in south lebanon.
    he has not forgiven israel and never will.
    in view of this his appointment to head the bbc middle east desk is rather surprising.the bbc surely knows his views.


  14. archduke says:

    i’m still re-reading Natalies post in utter astonishment.

    its a “war crime” to hit a bridge, according to Mr Bowen.

    but Hizbollah lobbing rockets into civillian areas goes uncommented by Mr Bowen.

    So, its ok for Hizbollah to have a genocidal policy towards Israelis?

    I must sit down before my head explodes.


  15. Mark says:

    I wonder if the BBC are aware of the make-up of the 8 (Israeli) people – military or civilian, child or woman – who were killed by Hezbollah, according to the following report:


    Secondly, I wonder when (if) they do find out, they’ll be bothered to let us know….

    Oh, between starting this and previewing it, the figure has gone up to NINE, but still no word on if they’re civilians or not.


  16. dumbcisco says:

    Bridges being hit are not war crimes. Bowen is being ridiculous.

    The Israelis are seeking to cut off reinforcement routes from Syria – and to cut off the chances of the Israeli soldiers being taken to Syria or Iran.


  17. archduke says:

    googling around, i stumbled across this article from 2002, on why the Palestinians are winning the media war:


    worth reading – there’s a lot of stuff in there to chew over.

    john major is on Marr’s sunday show now.
    Mr Major’s links to the Carlyle Group (and their arms sales to Arab states) is of course , never mentioned.

    Bearing that in mind, its no wonder he has a go at Israel.

    paraphrasing; “even if they defeat Hizbollah, another one will rise in its place”

    oh right. So, Mr Major, would you have said that to Mr Churchill about the Nazis?


  18. archduke says:

    haifa – 8 killed (or maybe 9)

    sky news: rockets were iranian made.
    IDF reporting again that Iranian Revolutionary Guards are in Lebanon.


  19. archduke says:

    ynet news – hizbollah has long range missiles. iranian supplied.


  20. Rob says:

    I have been waiting for a drone from the extreme left to blame us (the West), and there it is above. Standard leftist fare, unremarkable in its guilt, self-loathing and illogic in equal measure.

    Anyway, back to the BBC. This article:


    is a good example of the general, all-pervasive bias. Not once do they mention that the casualties of the Hizbollah rocket attacks were civilian, yet in an article about rocket attacks on an Israeli city they manage to mention Lebanese civilian casualties twice. Still, no doubt they were “home-made rockets”, so the Israeli civilians aren’t properly dead, or something.

    As for not using the word “terrorist”, the BBC insists that they do not have a policy over this. Of course, it is just a complete coincidence that every report on their website dealing with terrorism happens to use the word ‘militant’, or even militant in inverted commas, and that reports of the 7/7 terrorist attacks were changed to remove the word ‘terrorist’. It is a quite deliberate policy and any organisation which cannot label the butchers of Beslan or the London terrorists as “terrorists” is a sick and immoral one.

    As for language being a “barrier to understanding” at the BBC, it is a decidedly one-way barrier. The BBC appeal for non-judgementalism only when their chosen causes are under attack. They are as judgemental as hell when the case suits them. “Non-judgementalism” is just another weapon the Left uses to shut down debate on any subject they wish.


  21. will says:

    BBC interviewers will not let most UK politicians (Lib Dems excepted) get out 2 sentences before interrupting – usually too hastily for my liking.

    However when Andrew Marx interviews veteran Palestinian negotiator Hanan Ashrawi he allows a lengthy emotional rant, which plays out time & allows no follow up question.

    But when Ashrawi claims that Israel is occupying Lebanese land, wouldn’t an interruption & clarification be desirable?


  22. Raddai Jacobs says:

    “I have been waiting for a drone from the extreme left to blame us (the West), and there it is above. Standard leftist fare, unremarkable in its guilt, self-loathing and illogic in equal measure.”

    Yeah, with crushing, point by point refutation like that, it’s a wonder why we bother. Of course, any criticism of the Israel state is based entirely on self-loathing and hatred of da Joos because there is no occupation, Israel is a tiny, defenseless little nuclear state so feeble and helpless that it could only defeat every NATO country with the exception of the US, and, as we know, the entire Arab world is one big death cult that has always wanted to extermninate the Jews.

    Did you know Hitler was an arab?

    And Robert Fisk, and John Pilger and everyone at the BBC. In fact, the vast bulk of the planet (at least where polls are taken): they all hate the jews, liked Hitler and hate themselves. That’s why they criticise Israel -it has to be because, clearly, Israel is ONLY DEFENDING ITSELF (repeat as necessary).

    You’re best sticking to the insults -the evidence certainly won’t help your arguments.


  23. PJF says:

    Israel kills Lebanese civilians

    Deadly Hezbollah attack on Haifa

    Just a slight difference in tone. Israel kills civilians; Hezbollah attacks town.

    And given the reality that the Lebanese civilians were killed inadvertently after being given a warning to leave, whereas the Israeli civilians were targeted as deliberately as is possible with indiscriminate rocket fire into a city – it’s an utterly shameful difference in tone.

    It would be fine if the BBC examined the Middle East conflict with a dispassionate, disinterested detachment akin to a documentary about red ants and black ants. But the evidence is clear that they have taken a side; they have adopted a dog in the fight.


  24. Gerbil001 says:

    Yep, Israel warn the Lebanese to leave and then, when they try, slaughters them anyway:


    Meanwhile, Lebanon pleads for help from the rest of the world, know that Israel’s master will make sure its client remains above the law.

    Just imagine trying to drive out an invader, knowing that no one else in the world can help you, because the hyperpower is protecting your oppressor. No wonder the Palestinians are desperate enough to use suicide bombing: the US makes sure they have no choice.


  25. dumbcisco says:

    “No wonder Palestinians are desparate enough to use suicide bombing “…..

    How come the leaders of Hamas never strap explosives on themselves, they use brainwashed young people instead ? Brainwashing of a fascist kind that starts in childhood, complete with Nazi salutes at parades, all underpinned by the warped religious notion of jihad.

    Gerbil – has it sunk into your head that Israel was not occupying Lebanon ? The evil people occupying south Lebanon are Hezbollah – following their eviction from Jordan.

    And Israel withdrew from Gaza too. But Hamas carried on firing hundreds of rockets into Israel from Gaza – hundreds of attempted murders.


  26. Biodegradable says:

    Biased-BBC must be having some effect if we’ve attracted our own pet troll – a gerbil no less!
    Pass me that hammer Nekama


  27. max says:

    I’m trying to keep all the examples of blatant BBC propaganda regarding this conflict in one post which will be updated, here:

    I think the BBC has crossed the line between bias and propaganda. I sent a letter to the Foreign Ministry suggesting that Israel needs to take action against them.

    Melanie Phillips writes that “The BBC reporting of Israel has become a weapon of war against the innocent. It should be raised in Parliament as a matter of urgency.”

    I think she’s right and people who think likewise might want to send feedback to the Israeli MFA here:
    Or e-mail here:


  28. Raddai Jacobs says:

    Well, what do you know? The world’s most famous self-hating Jew tells it like it is:

    “At the same time, it’s partly in Gaza, and sort of hidden in a way, but even more extreme in the West Bank, where Olmert announced his annexation program, what’s euphemistically called “convergence” and described here often as a “withdrawal,” but in fact it’s a formalization of the program of annexing the valuable lands, most of the resources, including water, of the West Bank and cantonizing the rest and imprisoning it, since he also announced that Israel would take over the Jordan Valley. Well, that proceeds without extreme violence or nothing much said about it.

    Gaza, itself, the latest phase, began on June 24. It was when Israel abducted two Gaza civilians, a doctor and his brother. We don’t know their names. You don’t know the names of victims. They were taken to Israel, presumably, and nobody knows their fate. The next day, something happened, which we do know about, a lot. Militants in Gaza, probably Islamic Jihad, abducted an Israeli soldier across the border. That’s Corporal Gilad Shalit. And that’s well known; the first abduction is not. Then followed the escalation of Israeli attacks on Gaza, which I don’t have to repeat. It’s reported on adequately.

    The next stage was Hezbollah’s abduction of two Israeli soldiers, they say on the border. Their official reason for this is that they are aiming for prisoner release. There are a few, nobody knows how many. Officially, there are three Lebanese prisoners in Israel. There’s allegedly a couple hundred people missing. Who knows where they are?

    But the real reason, I think it’s generally agreed by analysts, is that — I’ll read from the Financial Times, which happens to be right in front of me. “The timing and scale of its attack suggest it was partly intended to reduce the pressure on Palestinians by forcing Israel to fight on two fronts simultaneously.” David Hirst, who knows this area well, describes it, I think this morning, as a display of solidarity with suffering people, the clinching impulse.

    It’s a very — mind you — very irresponsible act. It subjects Lebanese to possible — certainly to plenty of terror and possible extreme disaster. Whether it can achieve any result, either in the secondary question of freeing prisoners or the primary question of some form of solidarity with the people of Gaza, I hope so, but I wouldn’t rank the probabilities very high….”



  29. Gerbil001 says:

    How come politicians never go fight their wars but instead send brainwashed kids to do it for them?

    same reason the world over, be it kids fight for Hamas, the IDF, the US army, the IRA, whatever… politicians fight wars with other peoples’ sons.


  30. Biodegradable says:

    Where Have You Gone, Yasser Arafat?
    NY Times columnist David Brooks explains why the current Hamas/Hezbollah violence marks a signficant change in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict:

    In all other crises, the Palestinians, thanks to Yasir Arafat’s strenuous efforts, owned their own cause, but now the clerics in Iran are taking control of the Palestinian cause and turning it into a weapon in a much larger struggle….

    The core issue is that just as Israel has been trying to pull back to more sensible borders, its enemies have gone completely berserk. Through some combination of fecklessness and passivity, the Arab world has ceded control of this vital flashpoint to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Bashar al-Assad. It has ceded its own destiny to people who do not believe in freedom, democracy, tolerance or any of the values civilized people hold dear.

    And what’s the world’s response? Israel is overreacting.

    Natalie, are the Gerbils and “Raddai Jacobs” coming from the same IPs? I’m not suggesting you ban them, just curious to know what dark recess of the internet they’ve crawled out of.


  31. Biodegradable says:

    How come politicians never go fight their wars but instead send brainwashed kids to do it for them?

    Difficult as it may be for your feeble mind to grasp in this case Israeli sons, daughters, fathers and mothers are fighting for the survival of their country. You’ll also find that just about every politician in Israel has also served in the military, perhaps with the exception of the Arab-Israeli MKs.


  32. Ralph says:

    ‘Jeremy Bowen saying something like if Israel can’t prove that bombing the bridges in Lebanon was justified “then it’s a war crime.”‘

    I wonder if Jeremy Bowen would like some to suggest that if he can’t prove he is not a child molester then he is one?

    More importantly as anyone with a vague knowledge of war knows you hit infrastructure to deny your enemy the ability to move around is Bowen either very ill informed or being biased?


  33. Biodegradable says:

    In reply to my own question, a glance at the stats shows that the Gerbil infestation comes from here:
    Optimistically, one might think that the increasing scale of Israeli crimes is making it hard for even the BBC to maintain its habitual bias.

    Excuse me while I piss myself laughing!

    Hey Gerbil, as a leftie you should read this, and possibly get back to where the left should be:
    Why the left should support Israel


  34. pounce says:

    I see AL Beeb is on the offensive on these boards this morning.

    Like Master, like sycophant.


  35. lurker in a burqua says:

    well done natalie.

    last nights bbc four news was also a jew bashing fest, i hope the jews remember those who aided thier attackers.


  36. Ralph says:

    How come politicians never go fight their wars but instead send brainwashed kids to do it for them?

    Perhaps because they’re politicans not soldier dear.


  37. archduke says:

    “as we know, the entire Arab world is one big death cult that has always wanted to extermninate the Jews.”


    walks like a Nazi, quacks like a Nazi….

    i would have thought we had learned the lesson of pre-WW2, when nobody took Hitler seriously.

    “Israel is a tiny, defenseless little nuclear state so feeble and helpless that it could only defeat every NATO country with the exception of the US,”

    if it really was helpless, you can be damn sure that we would have had holocaust part 2 by now.

    so you are saying, just because Israel has armed itself to the teeth to defend itself, then somehow we should kind of forget about virulent anti-semitism coming from the Islamofascists of Hizbollah, Iran and Hamas?


  38. dumbcisco says:


    As you say, the first actions in war are to aim for the 3 C’s – command, control and communications. Bridges, TV stations and the mobile networks that Hezbollah use are prime targets at present. Nothing about a war crime there.

    Bowen goes from bad to worse. The guy pretends expertise, but time after time he is either ignorant on facts or clearly biased. Far too often he fails to report facts – he just opinionises. With a bias towards the terrorist side.


  39. Biodegradable says:

    Yep, Israel warn the Lebanese to leave and then, when they try, slaughters them anyway:

    See my post about that incident:


  40. pounce says:

    ”Israel is a tiny, defenseless little nuclear state so feeble and helpless that it could only defeat every NATO country with the exception of the US,”

    Please don’t talk about a subject you know absolutely nothing about as if you do.
    The following countries are in NATO and on their own could overrun Israel;

    Granted the rest are all tiny little states whom would have a hard time taking out Israel. But why should they? The last I looked the only pre-emptive strike Israel has ever made on the natives in which she was in the wrong was in 1956. The rest have all been made in the name of defence of the realm.

    The fact that Arabs countries have never been able to replicate the military victories of the Ottomans and before that of the First Islamic expansion isn’t due to the fact that the IDF is armed to the teeth by America. It is because the Arab armies are designed to oppress their own rather than fight somebody on a symmetrical battlefield.
    Just because the Arabs have lost military , time, and time again doesn’t mean the IDF are invincible. It means the Arabs have all the gear and no idea.

    So please less of this tiny defenceless little nuclear state and stick to something to you actually can rabbit on about with confidence.


  41. pounce says:

    Al Beeb and how it defends its psychotic masters ‘The Taliban’ by blaming the victim for its crimes.

    Afghans investigate air strikes

    Afghanistan’s president has launched an inquiry into an air strike called in by UK forces in Nawzad, Helmand Province, after claims civilians were killed.

    Local people told the BBC a significant number of civilians died when at least three 227-kg (500-pound) bombs hit a market there on Wednesday.

    British forces say they have no evidence to support this.


    Al Beeb up to its old tricks of misinformation in which to make out the Taliban as the saviours of Afghanistan from the evil imperialistic United Kingdom.

    So they claim that a significant number of civilians died when the Brits bombed the market. Really Al Beeb? According to that earlier report (which can be substantiated by your video on the very same subject) you pointed out that a school was destroyed by bombs, that the school was used as a military strong point and then you showed lots of film clips of buildings which had been hit not a crowded market place.(How the hell a market place would have loads of people in it after a few hours of a bun fight is beyond me CAIR to explain AL Beeb)

    So Al Beeb you spread lies that innocent Muslims are dying at the hands of British troops somehow hoping I guess that some naïve person in the Uk will take matters into his own hands and do something nasty.(Thus making yet more news for you) That isn’t news reporting AL beeb it is propaganda for the enemy of humanity.


  42. Caped Crusader says:

    This is interesting, an Israeli ARAB, stating things exactly as they are from the BBC HYS forum and especially for all those leftist anti-Semites who hark on about Israel being an ‘apartheid’ state:

    To my Arab brothers elsewhere. My family lives in Haifa for dozens of years next to Jews. Not even once we felt a treat from the Jewish majority. I believe that if it was other way around, Jewish family living in Arab city, they would not last. The first time in our life we felt death treat was today, when our brothers sent the missile to Haifa. Our experience shows that Israelis have no intention of hurting us the Arabs, but they will never give up on some one who hurts them.

    Munir, Haifa


  43. archduke says:

    bbc HAS mentioned Hezbollah in a headline for the first time


    “Deadly Hezbollah attack on Haifa”

    i guess the constant criticism has finally got to them.


  44. Caped Crusader says:

    Lets face it, the same amount of Jews were kicked out of arab countries and made refugees as arabs were made homeless by the state of Israel. The difference is that because Jews care about their brothers, they didn’t leave the 1 million Jewish refugees to rot and quickly absorbed them into the fledgling Jewish state. In contrast the Arab states surrounding Israel have done nothing to help their arab ‘brothers’ prefering to use them as pawns and propaganda fodder. Its similar to the population swap of Hindus and Muslims in India/Pakistan when Pakistan was created. Leftists, driven by anti-Semitism, refuse to acknowledge this because it serves their ideologies and Jew hatred.


  45. Gerbil001 says:

    Hate to break this to you but, on 2003/04 figures, Israel is ranked 8th in the world in terms of troop numbers and third in the world by the more nuanced ‘combat power’ measure. In both cases, the only NATO country that beats it is, unsurprisingly, the US.


    In the region, Iran is the only serious contender and is years behind in sophistication. If you want to know more, get a copy of ‘World Military Balance 2006’ published in London by the Institute for Strategic Studies. If I recall, Jane’s Defence Weekly publishs an annual assessment as well.


  46. MisterMinit says:

    RE: What Jeremy Bowen actually said.

    I don’t think that Bowen’s comments were inapropriate at all. I’m sure that it was factually accurate, and it is relevant to what’s happening.

    I can see the point that you’re making about BBC not using the T-word, but bringing up the issue of war crimes.

    However, this “war crimes” incident was only a very small part of the BBC’s huge news output. Beleive it or not, the BBC do use the T-word – not so much on their website, but more on their TV output.

    Therefore, as long as they don’t push the “war crimes” stuff too much, I don’t think that there is any reason to complain.


  47. dave t says:


    If you want to comment kindly try and at least provide some semblence of expertise…..ever been a soldier have you?

    ‘combat power’ means bugger all if it only last for a wee while! Even your link says this!

    “The downsize of this is that mobilizing its armed forces also cripples the Israeli economy. Under these conditions, Israel must conduct a war that ends within a few months. After that, supplying the armed forces becomes difficult and actual combat power begins to decline. ” and:

    “For most nations with powerful armed forces, it’s mainly a matter of having the most formidable military force in the neighborhood.”

    I reckon (as does the NATO Military Committee whom I served with for two years) that the British/French have far superior combat power since we can and have been fighting various enemies WORLDWIDE not just down the road for decades now…..the Chinese also have problems of equipment and logisitics albeit they have manpower. India is actually more effective as they have surprise surprise adopted many of the Western ways of running their Armed Forces but made it locally effective by buying cheaper (Soviet) equipment or designing their own. They are gradually extending the reach of their influence throughout Asia and the Middle East.

    Another example: a few years back the Canadians were widely regarded as having the best Brigade level forces in Germany which whupped all the others in NATO year after year on exercise. Now thanks to the leftie Liberals the CAF are a shadow of their former selves.

    If Iran is years behind in sophiscation how come it begins to look as if it was THEIR chaps that manned and fired the Iranian built/Chinese designed anti ship missiles that took out the IDF’s newest corvette? They do have equipment problems and they have no spare parts hence why their C130s etc keep falling out of the sky as well as Soviet designed aircraft (for which amazingly the BBC blames the US!). The Republican Guard are well equipped and highly trained to the detriment of the rest of their Iranian Forces. But then, the RG tend to be used to suppress their own people and forment the Islamic Revolution in other peoples’ countries rather than straight forward combat. If you want to imply that Iran are not a credible force then you are wrong. They may be ineffective on a normal battlefield but in the shadow war of Islamic nutters versus the rest of the world (including their Muslim brothers who disagree with them) Iran are deadly.

    And THAT is why Israel needs to deal with them now since the EU won’t.


  48. MisterMinit says:

    pounce: “Al Beeb up to its old tricks of misinformation in which to make out the Taliban as the saviours of Afghanistan from the evil imperialistic United Kingdom.”

    This level of hyperbole does you no favours whatsoever.

    You can question the Beeb’s intentions for putting this so prominently on their website, especially as it is not a significant event in itself, i.e. setting up an inquiry; and a quick scan reveals that no other media organisation seems to be too bothered with it. But let’s keep the frothing at the mouth to a minimum shall we.