It's called a WAR. It didn't start yesterday and all of us are on the front lines. Zuck it! I mean FACE IT!
Exactly the point I was making
It's called a WAR. It didn't start yesterday and all of us are on the front lines. Zuck it! I mean FACE IT!
Ⓩ-Ⓐ-Ⓜ-Ⓞ-Ⓡ-Ⓐ;7176220 said:Excuse me? Snivelling like a spoilt child? Stiff upper lip? Rally behind our armed forces?
Sorry, I should be rejoicing that our politicians have voted in favour of actions that will no doubt result in thousands of innocent lives lost in Syria, and most likely an attack in the UK as well.
Exactly the point I was making
Ⓩ-Ⓐ-Ⓜ-Ⓞ-Ⓡ-Ⓐ;7176245 said:Right, so being more fearful of an attack equates to me "wishing for an attack". Some of NSCs finest logic there.
Ⓩ-Ⓐ-Ⓜ-Ⓞ-Ⓡ-Ⓐ;7176220 said:Excuse me? Snivelling like a spoilt child? Stiff upper lip? Rally behind our armed forces?
Sorry, I should be rejoicing that our politicians have voted in favour of actions that will no doubt result in thousands of innocent lives lost in Syria, and most likely an attack in the UK as well.
Why such low opinion of the RAF? Personally I have every confidence in them continuing to do what they have been doing in Iraq.
Is your thousands of deaths estimate by RAF hands an official one?
I read claims this morning the numbers would be millions,however the same Stopthewar fearmonger also claimed we had declared War on Syria and would be indiscriminately bombing the whole country,so clearly a knob
Some people need to step away from the keyboard and calm down.
what's the differenceⓏ-Ⓐ-Ⓜ-Ⓞ-Ⓡ-Ⓐ;7176207 said:i don't believe we've had an attack from isis or an affiliate, have we?
Of course no one would say they were wishing for an attack, but I've read plenty of people seemingly blaming David Cameron et al, in advance, for anything that may now happen. Typically these people seem to be left-leaning and, as such, are not the biggest fans of David Cameron anyway. As such it comes across as wanting something else to hit the current government with.
The way you write on this subject fits that pattern.
Slightly, you might never look for your shoe that gets lost.
Don't like Cameron but his presentation yesterday was statesmanlike (but not as good as Hilary Benn's).
That said, his remarks to his own that a vote for 'no' was indicative of terrorist sympathy, was crass beyond belief.
It may surprise you (maybe not - you know me well enough) that I have been considering the value of dropping the big one on them. Given that innocent casualties are inevitable with conventional bombing, and indeed moreso if we go in with ground troops (itself inevitable in my opinion), what's the point of pussyfooting about? I have a feeling that the threat of complete extermination may be the only thing that might focus their minds. Still.... what a horrible prospect. That said, it was the only thing that worked against the Japanese, another bunch who (at the time) glorified in suicide for purposes of war. Before I get flamed, I said 'considering' not advocating.
My feelings about the agreed bombing are that the argument we shouldn't because it makes us a target is evidently false (we already are a target). Yet it won't do any good all the while any of them are left standing. So land war is unavoidable. Doing nothing and letting the 'caliphate' flourish is unacceptable. That's why I have been considering what amounts to genocide. What a nightmare state the world has slipped into
Don't like Cameron but his presentation yesterday was statesmanlike (but not as good as Hilary Benn's).
That said, his remarks to his own that a vote for 'no' was indicative of terrorist sympathy, was crass beyond belief.
It may surprise you (maybe not - you know me well enough) that I have been considering the value of dropping the big one on them. Given that innocent casualties are inevitable with conventional bombing, and indeed moreso if we go in with ground troops (itself inevitable in my opinion), what's the point of pussyfooting about? I have a feeling that the threat of complete extermination may be the only thing that might focus their minds. Still.... what a horrible prospect. That said, it was the only thing that worked against the Japanese, another bunch who (at the time) glorified in suicide for purposes of war. Before I get flamed, I said 'considering' not advocating.
My feelings about the agreed bombing are that the argument we shouldn't because it makes us a target is evidently false (we already are a target). Yet it won't do any good all the while any of them are left standing. So land war is unavoidable. Doing nothing and letting the 'caliphate' flourish is unacceptable. That's why I have been considering what amounts to genocide. What a nightmare state the world has slipped into
What a sad little loser you are. A democratic vote was undertaken by HM Government and HM Opposition parties and a decision was reached It is now time to rally behind our armed forces and wish them, and others, as speedy a conclusion to this conflict as is possible.
Instead you ask people to best guess when the first casualties will happen within the UK! What next, raffle tickets to decide which county gets it first? Start offering odds on the numbers involved. Grow up FFS, learn what a stiff upper lip is and stop snivelling like a spoilt child.
Totally uncalled for. And before you start having a go at me check post #3.
What are you really so angry about? It can't be a bloke on an internet forum, surely?
we've just been lucky in that they have been foiled..
...
I certainly don't believe that this increased military engagement makes us any more likely to be the target of terrorist attacks - that is already highly likely.
What are you really so angry about? It can't be a bloke on an internet forum, surely?