Grumbler Wrote:"Hi Grumbler,
Please try to avoid political discussions on this board (since it is a gaming forum), because some people might get offended.
cheers,
Pyros"
I try too, It's just that EVERYTHING is political
I somewhat agree with Grummy on this one. It's extremely difficult to divide what's political and what is not - especially in contemporary issues like this. Playing wargames pretty much every time gets someone offended. Think of a Russian soldier that fought in Stalingrad. What would he think of guys massacring Soviet soldiers playing with the Germans? Maybe he would just laugh in disbelief and comment on how "realistic" this thing is. But there's a real chance he'd get very upset. So playing wargames, especially battles that are related to real ones, is playing with fire in many ways.
Everything is political, we do politics in grocery store as well as playing PBEM games. Everything we do has something to do with power and on how we interact with other people. And that's politics. Playing these games is a political statement - some say it's immoral. We (may) don't think so as we may have different view on what's moral. And what's moral and immoral is in the core of politics.
I'm very much for keeping this discussion board as "unpolitical" as it's practical. I'd keep party-politics etc. out of this as well as every kind of nationalistic statements. This topic may have something to do with the latter.
The issue is the contemporary situation in Lebanon. Grumbler is thinking of generating some kind of battles in which the UN forces from various countries would with alongside with the Hizbollah or Israel or Iran or Syria or whoever. What I wanted to say was that it's very unlikely that such fighting would happen in real life. Thus generating the battles wouldn't be realistic (could be interesting and fun though!). This view is, of course, very political. It also reflects how difficult it's to separate politics from wargaming. Wargaming on contemporary crises is playing with dynamite! But also very interesting:smoke:.
Is this issue too political for these boards? This is something that I leave for the moderators to decide. They have the power to choose and I obey their decision as it's part of the deal here.
Grumbler Wrote:After re-reading my post several times the only thing that jumped out at me was the UN comment. That comment was a response to another poster's comment.
Yes, I think so too. Saying that the Israelis would have the right to kill the UN peacekeepers in situation you described is pretty harsh. Especially after the Israelis already killed four UN observers with PRECISION bomb to a bunker that had been there for 20 years and whose occupants were in constant radio connection with the Israelis saying that they're being shelled. It doesn't matter what were the nationalities of the peacekeepers. The important thing is that it happened and it shouldn't have:(.
And this is closely linked at the initial topic. If the two fighting sides don't respect the UN and international rules, there may be chance that there really will be some fighting between the UN peacekeepers and the two armies thus making Grumblers scenario more realistic.
Like I said, very difficult to get rid of politics in this one:conf:
So let's be careful in what we say and respect the wishes of the moderators,
Cheers
,
And peace:whis:,
Jukka
Archived Forums
Help
Calendar
Member List
Search
I wouldn't mine learning Swedish if I could get the Bikini Team to give me my lessons
){kind=link}
