Should India Join the Combined Task Force?

[Oracle]

Ray Sir, you got patience. Oh! Lord forgive them, coz' they have sinned
OTOH, it's a shame to see people with absolutely no freaking idea disrespect military professionals. They are to be dealt very strictly. MODS need to keep a watch, closely.

 

[Ray]

Oracle,

I am also a Mod with Mentor's powers.

It should show how liberal the forum is.

No, it is not only patience. It is an attempt to understand posters, as to how they can twist and twirl like fish on a hook!

Just go by the discussion.

The arrogance to say that the UN charter is subservient to his opinon!

In other words, the UN is nothing compared to what he expects the UN should do.

I only marvel at the arrogance of ignorance!

 

[JayATL]

I am reminded of this (in a contextual sense):


And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall. We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to.

ON no , you did not go and become all Hollywood on me. That's from that floundering , tail between its legs country. Check this- you sound like Palin. when she wants to deviate from a point she will yell" you don't like the military, you are not for our militray men and women" . You post reminds of that.

P.S My wife is a marine, Special intelligence- attached to several embassies.

 

[Ray]

I have nothing to add to a man who show lack of understanding of an English word 'contextual'.

You have exposed yourself and your 'vast' knowledge in ignorance in every field discussed!

You epitomise "Why waste time learning, when ignorance is instantaneous?

Thank you and Goodbye as far as this discussion is concerned.

I have no time to waste on one who feel that the UN Charters themselves are null and worthless compared to his ideas of how the UN functions.

I am sure you don't believe in the US Constitution since you have a better one in your mind that is still not recognised, even though you feel that that is what it should be!

 

[JayATL]

what is there is to be liberal about? the debate was settled many posts ago. you misunderstood my post and went off in tangent. None of things you equated to the UN were my point of contention. If I were you , I would have apologized to me many posts ago. You completely misread my post and then kept insisting that I said something you kept pushing.

I have no time to waste on one who feel that the UN Charters themselves are null and worthless compared to his ideas of how the UN functions.

I NEVER SAID THAT . Lol

 

[Ray]

what is there is to be liberal about? the debate was settled many posts ago. you misunderstood my post and went off in tangent. None of things you equated to the UN were my point of contention. If I were you , I would have apologized to me many posts ago. You completely misread my post and then kept insisting that I said something you kept pushing.



I NEVER SAID THAT . Lol

evidently you are clueless when it comes to UN deployments too and the one command structure there or for that matter guess who is in charge in Afghanistan when Indians are there?

UN mission has one country as head of command at a given time, yeah?. It can be under a nice blue flag, but a member country always heads up the command. we can put a lipstick on a pig , but its still a pig. CBT 150 deal can be under a pink flag similarly but for logistics purposes , one member country will have to be in command. UN missions are a form of a law enforcement deal ( hence peace keeping mandate) and not really militray missions.

this getting pointless... the UN does not have anything called a UN army. If multiple countries are involved in region under a UN peacekeeping force. There is always ( on a rotation basis if need be) one command structure. a OPERATIONAL command ( i.e. UN control) is different from a logistics command. The only command that US will have with the 150 is logistics driven. Incorrect on all UN missions are militray mission again. they make have militray players in the theater - that's because you cannot send FBI agents, CBI agents or local police from every country to patrol these missions. they are not trained in such ways...besides laws of countries don't allow them to have any jurisdiction as such. UN is not a body of local police departmental of the world.

Why supply logistics? because its vast oceans. logistics is not limited to MRE's , which in this case would be an non issue. intelligence gathered form one source needs to be parsed to others and 100 other similar information.

Lipstick on a Pig is a US colloquialism not Palin's that pre-dates her and the election cycle.. It was used, if you need to know, by Obama first in the primary, in the ast political election cycle . Palin is a moron- i agree .

United Nation forces comprising contingents of 29 countries were sent to Congo in 1960 to restore legitimate government, which had been overthrown through a coup d'etat. Pakistan provided logistic support during movement of troops to and from Congo and inland movement to the United Nation troops

1. I said " ( on a rotation basis if need be) . i.e if multi year project then one peace keeping 'member ' country can rotate out, thereby giving up command

2. Perhaps the wrong choice of a word by me , as in " operational command". Operational command vs. Logistics command and what I meant by in this specific case is that the UN can tell the member armies what the mission parameters are but can't tell them how to game plan it within those parameters. When I cited the UN as an example originally, I was reminding the poster that just like we don't give up our sovereignty on a UN deployment , specifically, when being under a logistic command of another country- then why look at the CFT 150 as a threat to sovereignty or lack of maintaining of one's independence ? example : United Nation forces comprising contingents of 29 countries were sent to Congo in 1960 to restore legitimate government, which had been overthrown through a coup d'etat. Pakistan provided logistic support during movement of troops to and from Congo and inland movement to the United Nation troops

UN mandate is :
Create a secure and stable environment while strengthening the State's
ability to provide security, with full respect for the rule of law and
human rights;
b) Facilitate the political process by promoting dialogue and reconciliation
and supporting the establishment of legitimate and effective
institutions of governance;
c) Provide a framework for ensuring that all United Nations and other
international
actors pursue their activities at the country-level in a
coherent and coordinated manner.

Again all this was the larger point- that being,you can be a part of CFT150 and allow US to have command in terms of logistics and it does not mean giving up sovereignty.


3. UN Military missions- although called militray missions- they are more of law enforcement or defensive mission, and perhaps we debating at the margins here. In my eyes- NON UN peacekeeping force have more of a militray role to it. eg kosovo

arghh- do you guys know the original point of contention? seems like the original point is missed and we are talking past each other.


FIRST
When I cited the UN as an example originally- I was reminding the poster that just like we don't give up our sovereignty on a UN deployment , specifically, when being under a logistic command of another country within UN missions ( similar to what will happen under CBT 150)- then why look at the CFT 150 as a threat to sovereignty or lack of maintaining of one's independence ?

THEN

Ray comes in and says that UN controls everything, omnipotent in UN missions , so saying in effect my UN example was faulty regarding anyone being under some other countries command within a UN mission.

THEN

I came back and gave examples of situations where even under UN missions , other member countries could be under the ' commanding body' of certain country over certain aspects of the mission - but of course it do not mean you lost your sovereignty .


and NOW

You guys are nitpicking the 'type' of command, while not getting that it still was a command over other countries.

aww gimme a break your military lordship. You don't have to be a jar head to have common sense. go in peace.. I summarized it perfectly. one flag / under UN flag was not even the point I made originally- it was UN as example of where, countries could have a collective effort , be at times under a commanding body of another country in certain aspects, and not have their sovereignty in question. so I guess you came in with your own set of ' military know how' comprehension. you win stud...

Now who wrote all that?

Compare that with the UN Charter.

 

[Ray]

what is there is to be liberal about? the debate was settled many posts ago. you misunderstood my post and went off in tangent. None of things you equated to the UN were my point of contention. If I were you , I would have apologized to me many posts ago. You completely misread my post and then kept insisting that I said something you kept pushing.



I NEVER SAID THAT . Lol

evidently you are clueless when it comes to UN deployments too and the one command structure there or for that matter guess who is in charge in Afghanistan when Indians are there?

UN mission has one country as head of command at a given time, yeah?. It can be under a nice blue flag, but a member country always heads up the command. we can put a lipstick on a pig , but its still a pig. CBT 150 deal can be under a pink flag similarly but for logistics purposes , one member country will have to be in command. UN missions are a form of a law enforcement deal ( hence peace keeping mandate) and not really militray missions.

this getting pointless... the UN does not have anything called a UN army. If multiple countries are involved in region under a UN peacekeeping force. There is always ( on a rotation basis if need be) one command structure. a OPERATIONAL command ( i.e. UN control) is different from a logistics command. The only command that US will have with the 150 is logistics driven. Incorrect on all UN missions are militray mission again. they make have militray players in the theater - that's because you cannot send FBI agents, CBI agents or local police from every country to patrol these missions. they are not trained in such ways...besides laws of countries don't allow them to have any jurisdiction as such. UN is not a body of local police departmental of the world.

Why supply logistics? because its vast oceans. logistics is not limited to MRE's , which in this case would be an non issue. intelligence gathered form one source needs to be parsed to others and 100 other similar information.

Lipstick on a Pig is a US colloquialism not Palin's that pre-dates her and the election cycle.. It was used, if you need to know, by Obama first in the primary, in the ast political election cycle . Palin is a moron- i agree .

United Nation forces comprising contingents of 29 countries were sent to Congo in 1960 to restore legitimate government, which had been overthrown through a coup d'etat. Pakistan provided logistic support during movement of troops to and from Congo and inland movement to the United Nation troops

1. I said " ( on a rotation basis if need be) . i.e if multi year project then one peace keeping 'member ' country can rotate out, thereby giving up command

2. Perhaps the wrong choice of a word by me , as in " operational command". Operational command vs. Logistics command and what I meant by in this specific case is that the UN can tell the member armies what the mission parameters are but can't tell them how to game plan it within those parameters. When I cited the UN as an example originally, I was reminding the poster that just like we don't give up our sovereignty on a UN deployment , specifically, when being under a logistic command of another country- then why look at the CFT 150 as a threat to sovereignty or lack of maintaining of one's independence ? example : United Nation forces comprising contingents of 29 countries were sent to Congo in 1960 to restore legitimate government, which had been overthrown through a coup d'etat. Pakistan provided logistic support during movement of troops to and from Congo and inland movement to the United Nation troops

UN mandate is :
Create a secure and stable environment while strengthening the State's
ability to provide security, with full respect for the rule of law and
human rights;
b) Facilitate the political process by promoting dialogue and reconciliation
and supporting the establishment of legitimate and effective
institutions of governance;
c) Provide a framework for ensuring that all United Nations and other
international
actors pursue their activities at the country-level in a
coherent and coordinated manner.

Again all this was the larger point- that being,you can be a part of CFT150 and allow US to have command in terms of logistics and it does not mean giving up sovereignty.


3. UN Military missions- although called militray missions- they are more of law enforcement or defensive mission, and perhaps we debating at the margins here. In my eyes- NON UN peacekeeping force have more of a militray role to it. eg kosovo

arghh- do you guys know the original point of contention? seems like the original point is missed and we are talking past each other.


FIRST
When I cited the UN as an example originally- I was reminding the poster that just like we don't give up our sovereignty on a UN deployment , specifically, when being under a logistic command of another country within UN missions ( similar to what will happen under CBT 150)- then why look at the CFT 150 as a threat to sovereignty or lack of maintaining of one's independence ?

THEN

Ray comes in and says that UN controls everything, omnipotent in UN missions , so saying in effect my UN example was faulty regarding anyone being under some other countries command within a UN mission.

THEN

I came back and gave examples of situations where even under UN missions , other member countries could be under the ' commanding body' of certain country over certain aspects of the mission - but of course it do not mean you lost your sovereignty .


and NOW

You guys are nitpicking the 'type' of command, while not getting that it still was a command over other countries.

aww gimme a break your military lordship. You don't have to be a jar head to have common sense. go in peace.. I summarized it perfectly. one flag / under UN flag was not even the point I made originally- it was UN as example of where, countries could have a collective effort , be at times under a commanding body of another country in certain aspects, and not have their sovereignty in question. so I guess you came in with your own set of ' military know how' comprehension. you win stud...

Now who wrote all that?

Compare that with the UN Charter.

 

[Ray]

what is there is to be liberal about? the debate was settled many posts ago.

You might have another guess coming in case you get too obtuse.

Don't look at a gift horse in the teeth and then demand that it should be of gold!

Saw the deletion of posts even before I could say let them be?

Don't push your luck.

 

[Rage]

JayATL,

you should understand that Ray was a serving Brig. in the Indian Army.

We have a long length of rope here on this forum on discussions. But Brig. Ray is a veteran who's had a long, distinguished career. So some basic, minimal respect is at least warranted.

My two cents ROTFL

 

[JayATL]

JayATL,

you should understand that Ray was a serving Brig. in the Indian Army.

We have a long length of rope here on this forum on discussions. But Brig. Ray is a veteran who's had a long, distinguished career. So some basic, minimal respect is at least warranted.

My two cents ROTFL

I have utmost and highest respect for his militray service and have said that before. But he keeps attributing something to me that I have not said. I have repeatedly tried to clarify it and all he does is comes back with insults.

 

[Ray]

It is worth checking who has been insulting.