deaf andy Posted August 27, 2013 Share Posted August 27, 2013 If a Muslim had said this about Britain there would be shouts of terrorist. britain isn't trying to destroy itself though, is it? i've heard the futurists say that ww3 would be started in the middle east. let them nuke the crap out of each other. better that than the civilised world getting involved and then everywhere getting nuked. ---------- Post added 27-08-2013 at 16:58 ---------- Not the answer, we can't vapourize all the oil. (I'm not being sarcastic, we've no energy policy to speak of, and there are exactly 12 electric cars in the uk. We have a need for Middle East oil - not much, we get most of it from Norway - but enough for things to get expensive if we don't have it) britain's energy crisis will happen, with or without arab oil. ---------- Post added 27-08-2013 at 16:59 ---------- You forgot about the muslamicrayguns. ronald reagan in a bomb-hat. do i need to link to it again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncocker Posted August 27, 2013 Share Posted August 27, 2013 why is it okay to kill hundreds of thousands of people with conventional weapons but if you gas a few hundred its a reason for intervention:suspect: you have to ask the question of the result of the intervention. Would more people die if the rebels were armed and received military aid from missiles and perhaps airstrikes, or would more people die if the rebels were defeated? but look at the alternative. If the West gets involved,it may take months of intense fighting to topple Assad. During that time, many more Syrians will be forced to leave the country for their own safety, and many more will die. Al Qaeda groups that are known to be operating in Syria will be armed by the West, and will probably carry out ethnic cleansing, aka murdering people en masse. Once Assad is removed, the very same slaughter will take place as if Assad wins, only from different victors. And stability will be nowhere to be found, as rival groups start bombing each other for years to come. Letting Assad win is the least worst option for the people of Syria as a whole. But the reality is that both sides are bad, and we shouldn't be backing either of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deaf andy Posted August 27, 2013 Share Posted August 27, 2013 and we shouldn't be backing either of them. yes we should, with short range nuclear warheads. the middle east is 'gangrenous'. it's either amputation, or the gangrene spreads and the whole world dies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scozzie Posted August 27, 2013 Share Posted August 27, 2013 A friend of mind uploaded this letter from a newspaper onto his Facebook, I thought it was quite amusing, although it made my head hurt a little bit. "Iran is backing Assad. Gulf states are against Assad. Assad is against the Muslim Brotherhood. Muslim Brotherhood and Obama are against General Sisi. But Gulf states are pro-Sisi! Which means they are also against the Muslim Brotherhood. Iran is pro-Hammas, but Hammas is backing Muslim Brotherhood. Obama is backing Muslim Brotherhood, yet Hamas is against the USA! Gulf states are pro-USA. Turkey is with Gulf states against Assad; yet Turkey is pro-Muslim Brotherhood against General Sisi! General Sisi is being backed by the Gulf states! Welcome to the Middle East and have a nice day" --K N Al-Sabah, London EC4 -- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ridgeway84 Posted August 27, 2013 Share Posted August 27, 2013 A friend of mind uploaded this letter from a newspaper onto his Facebook, I thought it was quite amusing, although it made my head hurt a little bit. "Iran is backing Assad. Gulf states are against Assad. Assad is against the Muslim Brotherhood. Muslim Brotherhood and Obama are against General Sisi. But Gulf states are pro-Sisi! Which means they are also against the Muslim Brotherhood. Iran is pro-Hammas, but Hammas is backing Muslim Brotherhood. Obama is backing Muslim Brotherhood, yet Hamas is against the USA! Gulf states are pro-USA. Turkey is with Gulf states against Assad; yet Turkey is pro-Muslim Brotherhood against General Sisi! General Sisi is being backed by the Gulf states! Welcome to the Middle East and have a nice day" --K N Al-Sabah, London EC4 -- Sounds about right. They lost the Yom Kippur war because they all stitched each other up before a shot was fired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted August 27, 2013 Share Posted August 27, 2013 Tony Blair becomes 'Peace envoy to the Middle East,' and the whole place erupts. - Oh, the irony... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEDROCK Posted August 27, 2013 Share Posted August 27, 2013 Tony Blair becomes 'Peace envoy to the Middle East,' and the whole place erupts. - Oh, the irony... Tony Blair needs a nuke up his ass Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erebus Posted August 27, 2013 Share Posted August 27, 2013 So yet again, the lies flow, sod the evidence, as all chemicals have a footprint, so one knows what they are made of and how they were made. We want regime change, in Syria, like we did in Iraq, and Libya, so we can get the resources, and then my friends its a year or two when suddenly we have to bomb and maybe invade the jewel in the oil well, Iran. They are the next very, very evil bad people. So Saudi Arabia is waging a war against Iran via Syria, to weaken its grip on the area. We, that is the UK and USA which is known as NAto decided a long time ago which side they wanted to win. So the middle East along with Syria, Iran and Afghanistan will be full with the meanest, cruellest most repressive terrorists, who were all nurtured by the USA that initially created them, to fight on their behalf, the dreaded, most fearful, worst nation the Earth has ever known the USSR. Weren't they terrible, creating all those wars, which we and the USA had to fight. We won what, exactly, show me where peace exists? Where in Kosovo, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Mali, are the people better off than before the GODS decided to help them to democracy, or is the demolition of their country, and their previous social cohesion, and the accompanying humanitarian conditions we create a better solution? Did we vote for Cameron to jump at every opportunity into war? What about the UK, the unemployment, creeping poverty, the cuts, the run down services, the NHS and the rest? Vote for any party these days and they are not with the people, although the military industrial side of what is left of our manufacturing industry will be happy. Is this what bankrupt nations do to preserve what is left of their flagging power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted August 27, 2013 Share Posted August 27, 2013 So yet again, the lies flow, sod the evidence, as all chemicals have a footprint, so one knows what they are made of and how they were made. We want regime change, in Syria, like we did in Iraq, and Libya, so we can get the resources, and then my friends its a year or two when suddenly we have to bomb and maybe invade the jewel in the oil well, Iran. They are the next very, very evil bad people. So Saudi Arabia is waging a war against Iran via Syria, to weaken its grip on the area. We, that is the UK and USA which is known as NAto decided a long time ago which side they wanted to win. So the middle East along with Syria, Iran and Afghanistan will be full with the meanest, cruellest most repressive terrorists, who were all nurtured by the USA that initially created them, to fight on their behalf, the dreaded, most fearful, worst nation the Earth has ever known the USSR. Weren't they terrible, creating all those wars, which we and the USA had to fight. We won what, exactly, show me where peace exists? Where in Kosovo, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Mali, are the people better off than before the GODS decided to help them to democracy, or is the demolition of their country, and their previous social cohesion, and the accompanying humanitarian conditions we create a better solution? Did we vote for Cameron to jump at every opportunity into war? What about the UK, the unemployment, creeping poverty, the cuts, the run down services, the NHS and the rest? Vote for any party these days and they are not with the people, although the military industrial side of what is left of our manufacturing industry will be happy. Is this what bankrupt nations do to preserve what is left of their flagging power. What evidence have you seen from the chemical attacks? The UN got shot at so I don't know if they got any samples - did you get some? That's impressive. Do you Mali should have been left? What about Libya ? Do you deny civilians were being slaughtered in the thousands - should they be left to die in Syria? Kosovo seems to be doing ok - they aren't committing genocide anymore so that's a start. You know what I read about today? the ever increasing number of Chinese intelligence officers spreading lies and fear on social networks. I immediately thought of you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted August 27, 2013 Share Posted August 27, 2013 The countries were in turmoil long before being colonised by the west. ..and yet by the same token the middle eastern civilisations were far more advanced than the western ones for hundreds of years. ---------- Post added 27-08-2013 at 23:44 ---------- to be honest its ww4 I'm worried about ,cyborgs in burqa's, androids ,talibans with lasers , god help us:gag: You don't worry that Obama might have a trigger finger? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.