| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
If all the powers united to crush The DAESH PIGS there may be a period of "hope for humanity".
Unfortunately, each power will have their own agenda and it's just as likely that the US/Europe will be up against Russia/China (with a small incident sparking it off).
Just for once, can't these egotistical leaders agree on air-strike/artillery slots:
e.g.
US strikes on a Monday
Russia strikes on a Tuesday
China strikes on a Wednesday
EU strikes on a Thursday
Arabic powers strike on a Saturday.
This of course would need to be alternated as to not provide certain terror groups with intel on which areas will be struck.
Unfortunately, our GREAT leaders are destined to squabble over everything.
e.g. Putin: No! We wanted the start of the week.
Obama: OK, but you can't fly over Raqqa and the rest of Northern Syria.
Xi: Ah, but we want to do that and would like the raw minerals and oil from the South.
etc etc.
ISIS are laughing because our leaders are childish c**ts.
Please don't tell me it's Ken Thorne?Originally Posted by Observer wrote on Mon, 16 November 2015 10:50
It would be if it was a state carry out these atrocities, but its not its some barbaric group of weirdos that hates the world, not a specific country.
^^^10 minutes of truth.^^^It would be if it was a state carry out these atrocities, but its not its some barbaric group of weirdos that hates the world, not a specific country.We know that, but who is sponsoring them and hence responsible for their actions?
at least they would have a decent shirtIt would be if it was a state carry out these atrocities, but its not its some barbaric group of weirdos that hates the world, not a specific country.We know that, but who is sponsoring them and hence responsible for their actions?
It would be if it was a state carry out these atrocities, but its not its some barbaric group of weirdos that hates the world, not a specific country.We know that, but who is sponsoring them and hence responsible for their actions?Please don't tell me it's Ken Thorne?
As mad as it seems, I think Iran would be on our side if it was a case of ISIS type nations versus the rest.Has it already started - or at least France bombing Syria; cut the red tape?
No,neither are we anywhere near it.
I presume you are in a position to tell us how the Syrian situation will be solved?Has it already started - or at least France bombing Syria; cut the red tape?
Weird coincidence.........It would be if it was a state carry out these atrocities, but its not its some barbaric group of weirdos that hates the world, not a specific country.We know that, but who is sponsoring them and hence responsible for their actions?Self funding as far as I can tell.
And your backing for that is?Has it already started - or at least France bombing Syria; cut the red tape?
If the situation cannot be solved politically, then it will be resolved militarily. Both sides have just bought themselves some time, but ultimately one of them will have to back down.Has it already started - or at least France bombing Syria; cut the red tape?No,neither are we anywhere near it.
I wasn't expecting you to like itIt would be if it was a state carry out these atrocities, but its not its some barbaric group of weirdos that hates the world, not a specific country.We know that, but who is sponsoring them and hence responsible for their actions?Self funding as far as I can tell.Ransoms, looting banks, extortion, theft etc etc
"Russian state TV" is the new "nothing to hide"It would be if it was a state carry out these atrocities, but its not its some barbaric group of weirdos that hates the world, not a specific country.We know that, but who is sponsoring them and hence responsible for their actions?Self funding as far as I can tell.Ransoms, looting banks, extortion, theft etc etcThey'll be into banking next
No l'm not,what I'm saying is that it won't lead to a world war.Has it already started - or at least France bombing Syria; cut the red tape?No,neither are we anywhere near it.
China has issues with its own muslim population particularly in Xinjiang province: http://uk.businessinsider.com/r-china-shows-unusual-pictures -of-its-fight-against-terror-2015-11?r=US&IR=THas it already started - or at least France bombing Syria; cut the red tape?People get - excuse the pun - shot down for saying WW3 is imminent. The truth is it's been on the cards since September 11, 2001. I'm sure even more knowledgeable people could predate it but for me that was the beginning.People talk about history repeating itself and learning from it, I don't quite go in for that but there are certainly trends. I don't believe in a god but there is certainly a higher force which follows a pattern and we have one here.
In that case you haven't got a clue how it will turn out.Has it already started - or at least France bombing Syria; cut the red tape?No,neither are we anywhere near it.I presume you are in a position to tell us how the Syrian situation will be solved?
I don't know why (call it a gut feeling) but I trust Russia's version of events and intelligence reports on this.
Russia is seemingly holding out an olive branch here. We would be foolish to turn it down.
Of all the leaders you want facing-off against ISIS, Putin must be "the one".
neither have you, but you keep banging on about a third world war being imminent,Has it already started - or at least France bombing Syria; cut the red tape?No,neither are we anywhere near it.I presume you are in a position to tell us how the Syrian situation will be solved?No l'm not,what I'm saying is that it won't lead to a world war.
And I have never used the word imminent, that is something you have made up. I have only talked about the prospects due to ongoing events. Remember when I first mentioned it, we were nowhere near the situation that now exists.Has it already started - or at least France bombing Syria; cut the red tape?No,neither are we anywhere near it.I presume you are in a position to tell us how the Syrian situation will be solved?No l'm not,what I'm saying is that it won't lead to a world war.In that case you haven't got a clue how it will turn out.
there may well be a military outcome, third world war, no, feel free to bookmarkHas it already started - or at least France bombing Syria; cut the red tape?No,neither are we anywhere near it.I presume you are in a position to tell us how the Syrian situation will be solved?No l'm not,what I'm saying is that it won't lead to a world war.In that case you haven't got a clue how it will turn out.neither have you, but you keep banging on about a third world war being imminent,
When the topic first came up, I casually mentioned how things had the potential to escalate given the number of interested players involved. At that stage it was basically Assad v the local insurgents. Now all the major external players have become active inside Syria. That is quite a change of position don't you think?Has it already started - or at least France bombing Syria; cut the red tape?No,neither are we anywhere near it.I presume you are in a position to tell us how the Syrian situation will be solved?No l'm not,what I'm saying is that it won't lead to a world war.In that case you haven't got a clue how it will turn out.neither have you, but you keep banging on about a third world war being imminent,As soon as Russia got involved, the US made it a priority to get themselves into the picture too. What makes you think there won't be a military outcome if they can't find a political solution?
Syrian civil war-no world war.Has it already started - or at least France bombing Syria; cut the red tape?No,neither are we anywhere near it.I presume you are in a position to tell us how the Syrian situation will be solved?No l'm not,what I'm saying is that it won't lead to a world war.
never come across anyone as paranoid as you appear to beHas it already started - or at least France bombing Syria; cut the red tape?No,neither are we anywhere near it.I presume you are in a position to tell us how the Syrian situation will be solved?No l'm not,what I'm saying is that it won't lead to a world war.In that case you haven't got a clue how it will turn out.neither have you, but you keep banging on about a third world war being imminent,As soon as Russia got involved, the US made it a priority to get themselves into the picture too. What makes you think there won't be a military outcome if they can't find a political solution?And I have never used the word imminent, that is something you have made up. I have only talked about the prospects due to ongoing events. Remember when I first mentioned it, we were nowhere near the situation that now exists.there may well be a military outcome, third world war, no, feel free to bookmark
The U.S. started bombing syria in September last year,in case you missed it.Has it already started - or at least France bombing Syria; cut the red tape?No,neither are we anywhere near it.I presume you are in a position to tell us how the Syrian situation will be solved?No l'm not,what I'm saying is that it won't lead to a world war.In that case you haven't got a clue how it will turn out.neither have you, but you keep banging on about a third world war being imminent,
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
