is that it now game over no chance of POTUS

 

Rayguns out

5 minutes ago, bwfcfan5 said:

They aren't the only nation in that category. And generally I think the issue is less about what happened and more about the way it happened and the way the USA dealt with it. Poking and irritating Iran is one thing - playing a big game of chicken another entirely. Its in nobody's interests to destabilize the region further or kick off a conflict.

I don’t understand you at times. I never said other countries weren’t sanctioned also? And this is all the Fault of the US? 

why are you a) trying to defend a country that has been and still is a major risk to the world we live in b) trying to make this anyone’s fault but Iran to fit your strange rhetoric? 
 

at times I think you know what you speak sense and then you come out with a post like that

if the US says let’s sanction Iran I can assure you the rest of the powerful nations in the world don’t say ok no bother. It’s been done with very good reason. They are a credible threat. Which part of that don’t you get?
 

9 minutes ago, bwfcfan5 said:

They aren't the only nation in that category. And generally I think the issue is less about what happened and more about the way it happened and the way the USA dealt with it. Poking and irritating Iran is one thing - playing a big game of chicken another entirely. Its in nobody's interests to destabilize the region further or kick off a conflict.

So just allow your man to carry on ordering attacks on the US embassy, kill American nationals and do fuck all about it. 

6 minutes ago, royal white said:

Yet we had foreign secretaries that agreed with the Americans in the past when they was blatantly in the wrong, we had a little war for decades with the IRA, that the Americans didnt agree with, you’ll struggle  To get all allies agreeing, maybe that’s why he kept it quiet? 
 

as for Boris not supporting the move. 

“General Qassem Soleimani posed a threat to all our interests and was responsible for a pattern of disruptive, destabilising behaviour in the region.

"Given the leading role he has played in actions that have led to the deaths of thousands of innocent civilians and western personnel, we will not lament his death.“ 

He didn’t  appear much of a fan.

I think you might be confusing me with someone who liked this fella, do I fuck. My problem is with the strategy of the move (or the lack of one) 

Kim Jong-Un is another, complete cretin of the highest order, would I or the majority of the world miss him, No. would I support the US hitting him with a drone strike off their own back, No again. 

Of course Boris didn’t like Soleimani like the rest of us. However he hasn’t supported the US air strike has he? The US aren’t happy that he’s not come out in support of it either...

US secretary of state Mike Pompeo

“Frankly, the Europeans haven’t been as helpful as I wish that they could be. The Brits, the French, the Germans – all need to understand that what we did, what the Americans did, saved lives in Europe as well,” 

2 minutes ago, royal white said:

So just allow your man to carry on ordering attacks on the US embassy, kill American nationals and do fuck all about it. 

You might know more about it than me, I’m not that close to it. But where did it go wrong with the Iraqis who attacked the US embassy? 

It was only a year or so ago that they were fighting side by side with the U.K. and US against IS in Iraq 

I understand they attacked the embassy after a US air strike against them the week before, but apparently that was in retaliation to something else 

Where did it go wrong with these particular Iraqis in such a short space of time? 

1 minute ago, birch-chorley said:

I think you might be confusing me with someone who liked this fella, do I fuck. My problem is with the strategy of the move (or the lack of one) 

Kim Jong-Un is another, complete cretin of the highest order, would I or the majority of the world miss him, No. would I support the US hitting him with a drone strike off their own back, No again. 

Of course Boris didn’t like Soleimani like the rest of us. However he hasn’t supported the US air strike has he? The US aren’t happy that he’s not come out in support of it either...

US secretary of state Mike Pompeo

“Frankly, the Europeans haven’t been as helpful as I wish that they could be. The Brits, the French, the Germans – all need to understand that what we did, what the Americans did, saved lives in Europe as well,” 

No not at all.

I think it’s finding the right wording. With what Boris has said he seems to be Ok with your man being taken out. As in not showing support (I’m assuming by not getting the troops ready) that can only be seen as a good thing for us. If that makes sense? 

5 minutes ago, royal white said:

So just allow your man to carry on ordering attacks on the US embassy, kill American nationals and do fuck all about it. 

It’s just so bizarre. The accusations are trump can do anything and yet his supporters will support him. I’m not one by the way 

yet what that post from fanny shows is his haters have the opinion that no matter what is the crime or issue if trump reacts it’s sort of ok what’s happened and the focus is solely on the reaction And trumps a cunt. It’s the strangest thing I’ve ever seen . 
 

 

3 minutes ago, Escobarp said:

I don’t understand you at times. I never said other countries weren’t sanctioned also? And this is all the Fault of the US? 

why are you a) trying to defend a country that has been and still is a major risk to the world we live in b) trying to make this anyone’s fault but Iran to fit your strange rhetoric? 
 

at times I think you know what you speak sense and then you come out with a post like that

if the US says let’s sanction Iran I can assure you the rest of the powerful nations in the world don’t say ok no bother. It’s been done with very good reason. They are a credible threat. Which part of that don’t you get?
 

They see the US and the West as a threat to the world. Its all about perspectives. And you seem to read far too much into what I posted. Nowhere was that a "defence" of Iran. Nobody is saying that the bloke wasn't a threat - the issue as someone else has pointed out is that simply killing him - and especially the messaging - will create a new threat in his place - and incite further violence or at least the potential for it, destabilise and already fragile region and all for what end - creating a new "dangerous man" in Iran - who we need to target. 

Its why every other country is talking de-escalation on both sides. Because there is no good to come from further escalating tensions. 

I particularly like how the vice president tried to say Soleimani helped the 911 attackers travel to Afghanistan. I mean that is grade A bullshit and shows a complete lack of knowledge of anything at all concerning the ME.

As for the drone strike, did he deserve it? Of course! Was it probably the best move? Maybe not, but the bluster on fucking twitter is very unhelpful the massive orange dildo.

1 minute ago, birch-chorley said:

You might know more about it than me, I’m not that close to it. But where did it go wrong with the Iraqis who attacked the US embassy? 

It was only a year or so ago that they were fighting side by side with the U.K. and US against IS in Iraq 

I understand they attacked the embassy after a US air strike against them the week before, but apparently that was in retaliation to something else 

Where did it go wrong with these particular Iraqis in such a short space of time? 

If I told you what I thought was happening I would be lying! It’s a complete mess. The Sunnis and Shias will always be at it with each other. With that Sunnis side with ISIS, Shia with Iran. the goverment is made up of Mainly Shia politicians yet it’s Shias that have been demonstrating against them over the last few months. Americans/the west are the good guys one minute and bad the next. It’s a complete fuck up 

13 minutes ago, Escobarp said:

b) trying to make this anyone’s fault but Iran to fit your strange rhetoric? 

 

Is it Iran’s fault? I was of the understanding that it was a certain Iraqi militia who attacked the US embassy in Baghdad following a US Air Strike against them 

Yes Iran supported this Iraqi militia, in exactly the same way we supported the same militia in the battle against Islamic State. We were allies with this lot just like Iran are 

A resurgent IS should be the main concern in the ME and Iran are the biggest opponents of IS 

Places like Saudi and Qatar have supported IS for years yet we don’t target their generals for obvious reasons. 

The whole area is a complete fuck up, it needs de escalation rather than escalation 
 

 

1 minute ago, birch-chorley said:

Is it Iran’s fault? I was of the understanding that it was a certain Iraqi militia who attacked the US embassy in Baghdad following a US Air Strike against them 

Yes Iran supported this Iraqi militia, in exactly the same way we supported the same militia in the battle against Islamic State. We were allies with this lot just like Iran are 

A resurgent IS should be the main concern in the ME and Iran are the biggest opponents of IS 

Places like Saudi and Qatar have supported IS for years yet we don’t target their generals for obvious reasons. 

The whole area is a complete fuck up, it needs de escalation rather than escalation 
 

 

I was taking about the wider sanctions against them as well as their current and historic actions birch 

These Shia groups were attacking Isis, a mutual enemy. The population of Iraq has always been majority Shia, hence Iran's desire for influence.

As the link from Miami explains, at the point of fighting Isis, there was a bit of a window, where western nations thought relations with Iran could be improved. However tentative.

Bush soon kiboshed that.

There is little reason for trusting them though.

Hands up if you think attacks on American embassies will now decrease.

2 minutes ago, Spider said:

Hands up if you think attacks on American embassies will now decrease.

5 hours ago, bwfcfan5 said:

They see the US and the West as a threat to the world. Its all about perspectives. And you seem to read far too much into what I posted. Nowhere was that a "defence" of Iran. Nobody is saying that the bloke wasn't a threat - the issue as someone else has pointed out is that simply killing him - and especially the messaging - will create a new threat in his place - and incite further violence or at least the potential for it, destabilise and already fragile region and all for what end - creating a new "dangerous man" in Iran - who we need to target. 

Its why every other country is talking de-escalation on both sides. Because there is no good to come from further escalating tensions. 

They see the US and West as a threat to the world ?

Hmmm, ........what do you base that on ?

You really need to study history.

42 minutes ago, miamiwhite said:

They see the US and West as a threat to the world ?

Hmmm, ........what do you base that on ?

You really need to study history.

Cause we're all cunts. Multicultural, democratic, economically sound, with justice systems largely respected.

Therefore wankers of the highest calibre.

23 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Cause we're all cunts. Multicultural, democratic, economically sound, with justice systems largely respected.

Therefore wankers of the highest calibre.

Not to mention our religion doesn't want to kill all infidels and non believers.......strange that isn't it mate ?  🤔🎏

Looking at history, the US and Iran weren't too bad as allies, especially when the Shah was there.

Iran benefited greatly from the US in terms of oil revenues,  nuclear knowledge etc.

I wonder what stopped that ? Couldn't be a certain revolution in 1979 could it ?

Showing my age here, but age usually brings knowledge ......

2 minutes ago, miamiwhite said:

Not to mention our religion doesn't want to kill all infidels and non believers.......strange that isn't it mate ?  🤔🎏

Looking at history, the US and Iran weren't too bad as allies, especially when the Shah was there.

Iran benefited greatly from the US in terms of oil revenues,  nuclear knowledge etc.

I wonder what stopped that ? Couldn't be a certain revolution in 1979 could it ?

Showing my age here, but age usually brings knowledge ......

Fuck me mate you must be well young 😁

7 minutes ago, Rudy’s Message said:

Fuck me mate you must be well young 😁

Looks are deceiving........you cheeky scamp 😉

33 minutes ago, miamiwhite said:

Showing my age here, but age usually brings knowledge ......

Or senility 😁

1 minute ago, kent_white said:

Or senility 😁

I used to know what that meant, but I've forgotten now.

19 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

I used to know what that meant, but I've forgotten now.

Me too.....some wet fart called me that earlier, when I find the soppy left winger I'll duff him up with my Zimmer 

22 minutes ago, kent_white said:

Or senility 😁

I don't mind the insults matey......it just shows you gents can't argue with what I said re the threats to the world 😘

33 minutes ago, miamiwhite said:

I don't mind the insults matey......it just shows you gents can't argue with what I said re the threats to the world 😘

I don't understand which bit I'm supposed to be arguing with? 

The bit where you think all Muslims want to kill all non Muslims? Because I was having dinner with Asif in the staff kitchen today and he had loads of opportunities to knife me in the neck while I was making my butty

3 minutes ago, kent_white said:

I don't understand which bit I'm supposed to be arguing with? 

The bit where you think all Muslims want to kill all non Muslims? Because I was having dinner with Asif in the staff kitchen today and he had loads of opportunities to knife me in the neck while I was making my butty

 

Was it bacon?