Lieutenant-General Roméo Antonius Dallaire

[BruSan]

Whoa here! E.S. said nothing about Dallaire; I DID! He mentioned Rhwanda only.

Dallaire made much during the subsequent investigation of the events leading to the slaughter of the Belgians of his inability to "coax" ROE's from his masters along with reinforcements and his being turned down at evey turn.

You all may have missed my addtion of JMHO at the end of my post??? I think he sat on his hands and waffled in the face of a terrible situation where, had he taken matters into his own hands and ordered troops into the fray in suppoprt of the Belgians. Those Belgians need not have died. We'll obviously never know now because he simply ordered them to surrender and die.

Did he have any doubt that would be their ulitimate end? I certainly hope he thought there might be a possibility of negotiating their return to safety but the Belgian government are still not convinced he acted with any integrity.

P*ssing on E.S., when it was me that posted Dallaire's name might not be substantively accurate in this case, might it?

 

[Goober]

Whoa here! E.S. said nothing about Dallaire; I DID! He mentioned Rhwanda only.

Dallaire made much during the subsequent investigation of the events leading to the slaughter of the Belgians of his inability to "coax" ROE's from his masters along with reinforcements and his being turned down at evey turn.

You all may have missed my addtion of JMHO at the end of my post??? I think he sat on his hands and waffled in the face of a terrible situation where, had he taken matters into his own hands and ordered troops into the fray in suppoprt of the Belgians. Those Belgians need not have died. We'll obviously never know now because he simply ordered them to surrender and die.

Did he have any doubt that would be their ulitimate end? I certainly hope he thought there might be a possibility of negotiating their return to safety but the Belgian government are still not convinced he acted with any integrity.

P*ssing on E.S., when it was me that posted Dallaire's name might not be substantively accurate in this case, might it?

You are replying to EAO - A known and very dumb Troll.

 

[Cliffy]

War/No More Trouble | Playing for Change | Song Around The World - YouTube

 

[EagleSmack]

I said:
"ES and others intimated that this person isn't that different than Dallaire."

Which is CLEARLY a figment.

You said it because you NEEDED to stir up the troops...sort of forum propaganda.

Implying Dallaire sent the Belgians off to be slaughtered.

Dellaire DID send the Belgians in personally... and they were slaughtered to a man.

 

[earth_as_one]

I quoted ES accurately and he claims Dallaire sent the Belgian troops in to be slaughtered. I'd say he sent the Belgian troops in to protect the PM, rather than to be slaughtered.

Sending only 10 soldiers on that mission, turned out to be a mistake in hindsight, since they were outnumbered and outgunned. I doubt Dallaire would have ordered the Belgians to lay down their arms if he knew the consequences. Fighting to the death might have been preferable to their fate, but when Dallaire gave the order to surrender, those men were going to die, one way or the other. I believe Dallaire was trying to reduce the number of unnecessary deaths and never considered that the people he was dealing with, had no sense of compassion or would torture and kill unarmed men.

Lets suppose Dallaire did send 100 soldiers to the PM's house. that would have been 90 less soldiers deployed elsewhere. Likely that would have led to a senseless slaughter somewhere else or another group of UN peacekeepers being overwhelmed by sheer numbers.

The way I see it, Dallaire had no good options. IN hindsite, the best decision would have been to cut the PM loose and not attempt to save their life. IN hindsite the best decision probably would have been to consolidate his forces in one location and offer sanctuary to anyone who could get to that location.

I don't think its fair to say Dallaire was more than "operationally responsible" for the Belgian peacekeepers deaths. Dallaire's main problems were:

1) He had insufficient men and resources
2) Arms merchants in France, the UK and Israel were arming his attackers in violation of the arms embargo.

Anyway ES and Brusan made their comments regarding Dallaire, and I thought fellow Canadian Content Forum users should be aware of what they posted about Dallaire and debate them if they disagree. It appears that most people here agree with ES and Brusan and disagree with me regarding Dallaire, who I believe is a great Canadian, a role model and deserving of the Order of Canada. I disagree with pissing on Dallaire, but apparently I'm in the minority here.

Carry on.

 

[Goober]

I quoted ES accurately and he claims Dallaire sent the Belgian troops in to be slaughtered. I'd say he sent the Belgian troops in to protect the PM, rather than to be slaughtered.

Sending only 10 soldiers on that mission, turned out to be a mistake in hindsight, since they were outnumbered and outgunned. I doubt Dallaire would have ordered the Belgians to lay down their arms if he knew the consequences. Fighting to the death might have been preferable to their fate, but when Dallaire gave the order to surrender, those men were going to die, one way or the other. I believe Dallaire was trying to reduce the number of unnecessary deaths and never considered that the people he was dealing with, had no sense of compassion or would torture and kill unarmed men.

Anyway ES and Brusan made their comments regarding Dallaire, and I thought fellow Canadian Content Forum users should be aware of what they posted about Dallaire and debate them if they disagree. It appears that most people here agree with ES and Brusan and disagree with me regarding Dallaire, who I believe is a great Canadian, a role model and deserving of the Order of Canada. I disagree with pissing on Dallaire, but apparently I'm in the minority here.

Carry on.

Carry on is a term for those that know what it means - Your use of it is beyond amusing. This thread and the sole purpose was trolling.
You have had your head anded to you so many times you thought that this may be an opportunity to slam some posters.
You could not even put a range of links in the OP. Your claim that you wanted to hear Canadian's opinion on Dallaire is again Bogus shxt.

 

[earth_as_one]

Brusan and ES made some comments about Dallaire that I disagreed with. Carrying on the debate regarding Dallaire in the other thread would have been off topic.

You should pay closer attention to forum rules:
Please refrain from PERSONAL ATTACKS and keep this thread ON TOPIC!!

 

[Goober]

Brusan and ES made some comments about Dallaire that I disagreed with. Carrying on the debate regarding Dallaire in the other thread would have been off topic.

You should pay closer attention to forum rules:
Please refrain from PERSONAL ATTACKS and keep this thread ON TOPIC!!

This thread is all about trolling. Is calling the thread,the OP and yourself a Troll against the Rules?

 

[earth_as_one]

Please post the forum rule I broke by starting a new thread on a topic which was being debated off topic debate in another thread.

the correct procedure is to start a new thread. Also I quoted what people wrote on the other thread about Dallaire to get the debate going.

I'd say that based on the lack of disagreement with ES and BruSan's posts, that everyone here on this forum, except me and one or two other people, agrees with their comments about Dallaire.

 

[Goober]

Please post the forum rule I broke by starting a new thread on a topic which was being debated off topic debate in another thread.

the correct procedure is to start a new thread. Also I quoted what people wrote on the other thread about Dallaire to get the debate going.

I'd say that based on the lack of disagreement with ES and BruSan's posts, that everyone here on this forum, except me and one or two other people, agrees with their comments about Dallaire.

The OP was Trolling - Who are you trying to fool. Yourself. Well when a person believes their own lies they are an utter fool.

Pure and simple, really simple I might add Trolling. But am I surprised at how low you can go. You never seem to rise above my personal contempt for you.

I am well aware of how low you can go. Yet still manage to stay above ground, barely mind but above.

So if your point is Trolling, perhaps CC is not the place for you.

 

[earth_as_one]

The OP was Trolling - Who are you trying to fool. Yourself. Well when a person believes their own lies they are an utter fool.

Pure and simple, really simple I might add Trolling. But am I surprised at how low you can go. You never seem to rise above my personal contempt for you.

I am well aware of how low you can go. Yet still manage to stay above ground, barely mind but above.

So if your point is Trolling, perhaps CC is not the place for you.

You obviously don't know what trolling is.

A troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response and/or disrupt normal on-topic discussion.

I agree someone is trolling on this thread about Lt-Gen Dallaire. It would be the person going off topic to make personal attacks, not the person posting on topic.

So what is your on-topic opinion of Dallaire Goober, or is your point on this thread to troll?

 

[gerryh]

gotta be a bitch when you're pwnd by eao.

 

[Goober]

You obviously don't know what trolling is.

A troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response and/or disrupt normal on-topic discussion.

I agree someone is trolling on this thread about Lt-Gen Dallaire. It would be the person going off topic to make personal attacks, not the person posting on topic.

So what is your on-topic opinion of Dallaire Goober, or is your point on this thread to troll?

My point and others agree is that you posted this OP to Troll and attack - And even then you could not get the facts straight. Another poster has to inform you again that you did not have your story or facts straight. We all have that problem with you and facts, informing you time and again that facts are not your strong suit.
That and others parts of your so called character, morals etc are shown to be lacking to say the least.

So perk up Buckey, you have only one way to go and that is up. But I could be mistaken .I figured I best qualify that statement.

 

[EagleSmack]

Trolling and a failed attempt to try and get others to gang up on two posters. Now he's trying to shame other CanCon members for not coming to his aid. Sad really.

I quoted ES accurately and he claims Dallaire sent the Belgian troops in to be slaughtered. I'd say he sent the Belgian troops in to protect the PM, rather than to be slaughtered.

He sent them and they were slaughtered.

Sending only 10 soldiers on that mission, turned out to be a mistake in hindsight, since they were outnumbered and outgunned. I doubt Dallaire would have ordered the Belgians to lay down their arms if he knew the consequences. Fighting to the death might have been preferable to their fate, but when Dallaire gave the order to surrender, those men were going to die, one way or the other.

Dellaire sent them to the PMs house but Dellaire didn't give the order to lay down there arms. A Belgian Lt. Col. gave the final order to surrender and lay down their arms.

In the other thread you said something along the lines that the move saved the PM from certain death. You didn't even know she was killed. Why send troops there to defend someones life when they have no means or orders to actually defend life?


See how little you know about the topic?

I believe Dallaire was trying to reduce the number of unnecessary deaths and never considered that the people he was dealing with, had no sense of compassion or would torture and kill unarmed men.

Lets suppose Dallaire did send 100 soldiers to the PM's house. that would have been 90 less soldiers deployed elsewhere. Likely that would have led to a senseless slaughter somewhere else or another group of UN peacekeepers being overwhelmed by sheer numbers.

He had thousands at his command. Belgian and Canadian troops are far better trained than the Rwandan Army.

The way I see it, Dallaire had no good options. IN hindsite, the best decision would have been to cut the PM loose and not attempt to save their life. IN hindsite the best decision probably would have been to consolidate his forces in one location and offer sanctuary to anyone who could get to that location.

How about giving the order to fight and defend themselves?

Anyway ES and Brusan made their comments regarding Dallaire, and I thought fellow Canadian Content Forum users should be aware of what they posted about Dallaire and debate them if they disagree. It appears that most people here agree with ES and Brusan and disagree with me regarding Dallaire, who I believe is a great Canadian, a role model and deserving of the Order of Canada. I disagree with pissing on Dallaire, but apparently I'm in the minority here.

Carry on.

Here you are trying to get others to come to your aid after getting owned.

 

[gerryh]

dellaire, just another murdering warmonger made into a hero by todays blood thirsty society's.


General Romeo Dallaire

 

[Goober]

dellaire, just another murdering warmonger made into a hero by todays blood thirsty society's.


General Romeo Dallaire

And what type of Pacifist are you Gerry - I can understand being against Wars - Not a problem with me.

But you have on a regular basis threatened physical violence on other posters.

So what type of violence is suitable to you. War is out - But beating someone to shxt is OK - As you are the judge of when to inflict that violence -that makes it right in your mind. Really Gerry.

Or are those threats of beating the tar out of someone just frustration talking or is it the real deal.

What is the standard of violence that you find acceptable.

What is it Gerry. Really, what is it?

 

[gerryh]

41 million dead because of war just in the 20th century alone.

http://www.cissm.umd.edu/papers/files/deathswarsconflictsjune52006.pdf

 

[Goober]

41 million dead because of war just in the 20th century alone.

http://www.cissm.umd.edu/papers/files/deathswarsconflictsjune52006.pdf

Avoiding the hard questions Bucky - Seems you are not on that so called moral high ground anymore. Or are you?

 

[lone wolf]

41 million dead because of war

How many in traffic accidents? Cancer? Heart or stroke? Old age? Nobody gets out of here alive....

 

[earth_as_one]

Trolling and a failed attempt to try and get others to gang up on two posters. Now he's trying to shame other CanCon members for not coming to his aid. Sad really.



He sent them and they were slaughtered.



Dellaire sent them to the PMs house but Dellaire didn't give the order to lay down there arms. A Belgian Lt. Col. gave the final order to surrender and lay down their arms.

In the other thread you said something along the lines that the move saved the PM from certain death. You didn't even know she was killed. Why send troops there to defend someones life when they have no means or orders to actually defend life?

See how little you know about the topic?

He had thousands at his command. Belgian and Canadian troops are far better trained than the Rwandan Army.

How about giving the order to fight and defend themselves?

Here you are trying to get others to come to your aid after getting owned.

You guys made those statements, which were off topic in the other thread. (technically those off topic posts in the other thread were trolling) I wanted more people involved in that debate about Dallaire that Brusan started, and I didn't want to take the other thread off topic. I never told anyone what to post. I only stated that I disagreed with your opinion, but I never told anyone to flame you guys. Its up to anyone reading your posts to decide if they agreed or disagreed with what you wrote..

What I said was "if he (Dallaire) didn't sent the Belgium peacekeepers the PM would have been killed for certain." that's a true statement. No protection for the PM = death for the PM. I was aware the PM was killed anyway along with the Belgian peacekeepers, but that outcome wasn't certain when Dallaire ordered the Belgian peacekeepers to escort the PM to a safe area.

I suspect that Dallaire did not expect that the Belgian peacekeepers woukld have been tortured and executed if they surrendered. Instead he was probably expecting to have to pay a ransom or make some concession.

Tell you what ES, put yourself in Dallaire's shoes. 10 Belgian keepers vs a large mob of about a 1000 people armed with rifles and machetes. You think an order to fight to the death in violation of your standing orders not to initiate a firefight was warranted.... You are going to tell me that without the benefit of hindsight and given the same standing orders as Dallaire, you'd have violated your orders and told the Belgian soldiers to fight to the death???