Page 1 of 3

World at War

PostPosted: 26 Jan 2013, 19:46
by KateLMead
To me it appears the World is at War... Syria, Israel, Iraq, (a nation all but destroyed) Afghanistan, Egypt, Libya, India,Iran to name but a few...Korea on the edge.. It is my opinion that B'liar that so called
Peace Envoy stimulated Middle East discontent when he illegally invaded Iraq, "all for oil" from which he is making a fortune selling the rights and contract to drill there to the highest bidder. Peace Envoy? the only thing the man creates is mayhem and abig fat bank account.

Re: World at War

PostPosted: 26 Jan 2013, 20:57
by Workingman
I don't think we are at war, yet, but it might not be long.

It will not be a conventional war when it comes, army versus army, it will be guerillas versus armies - hit, run, retreat. It will last decades and it will be a propaganda war. It will be those who abide by the rules against those who have no rules.

It does not have to be that way. The West could win it tomorrow by playing to the guerilla rules, but it will not do that - the propaganda war is almost already lost.

However, there is a hawkish philosophy in the West that goes like this: you flatten a church we will flatten 100 mosques, you kill ten of us we will kill 1000 of you. We will repay you a hundred times over and we will do it day after day, every day until YOU stop.

I do not think that would happen, but if push comes to shove it could.

Re: World at War

PostPosted: 26 Jan 2013, 21:19
by KateLMead
Workingman wrote:I don't think we are at war, yet, but it might not be long.



However, there is a hawkish philosophy in the West that goes like this: you flatten a church we will flatten 100 mosques, you kill ten of us we will kill 1000 of you. We will repay you a hundred times over and we will do it day after day, every day until YOU stop.

I do not think that would happen, but if push comes to shove it could.


I have always said kill one terrorist and you have 100 more volunteers.

The trouble is Frank our forces are tied with their hands behind their backs, wars are not clean, we read of the humiliation that our servicemen face if they are accused of maltreatment of prisoners justly or unjustly. As the old saying goes... "All is fair in Love and War"

Re: World at War

PostPosted: 26 Jan 2013, 21:46
by Suff
Kate wrote:I have always said kill one terrorist and you have 100 more volunteers.


Yep but if you kill 500,000 terrorists and 500,000 more potential terrorists you get......

Silence.

This is the whole point. It is our own rules which beget us terrorism.

I often find the whole situation ludicrous to the point of derision. Our own citizens lives are sacrosanct. So much so that we should allow them to cause all kinds of havoc and mayhem but can't be truly punished.

Except, of course, until they are killed by "terrorists". Then we can't do anything. We can't kill the terrorists and if we mete out the same punishment to the groups who carry out this kind of terror..... We're war criminals.

Personally, I believe that the day will come when the bodies in power decide that it is finally too risky to allow this to continue any more. That the benefits of constant war on the industrial pocket are outweighed by the risk of truly effective terrorism (say with nuclear material).

When that day comes the action is likely to be similar to this.

Day1. Medina. radioactive lake.
Day2. Ultimatum. Hand over all terrorists and cancel all activities or Mecca is next.....

What everyone forgets is that the powers in the world do actually have the ability to stop this once and for all. They just don't think the risk is worth it.

Some day they will. Then all bets are off.

Re: World at War

PostPosted: 26 Jan 2013, 21:54
by KateLMead
Frightening prospect Suff...

Re: World at War

PostPosted: 26 Jan 2013, 22:03
by Workingman
Suff wrote:
Kate wrote:When that day comes the action is likely to be similar to this.

Day1. Medina. radioactive lake.
Day2. Ultimatum. Hand over all terrorists and cancel all activities or Mecca is next.....

What everyone forgets is that the powers in the world do actually have the ability to stop this once and for all. They just don't think the risk is worth it.

Some day they will. Then all bets are off.

It is probably only military type minds who think like this.... that's why I do.

Masjid and the Kaaba in Mecca are the key.

Nawabi in Medina is the warning.

So is Al-Aqsa in Jerusalem.

The Blue Mosque in Istanbul is another, there are others.

The West could take them out any time it wanted, make no mistake.

It will not do so because peace is the key, we want to get on, but action is always possible and if we are pushed too far.....

Re: World at War

PostPosted: 26 Jan 2013, 23:28
by TheOstrich
Workingman wrote:.... but action is always possible and if we are pushed too far.....


And that is how it should be.

"Kaatar hunnu bhanda marnu ramro", the motto of the Royal Ghurka Rifles - "Better to die than be a coward".

Re: World at War

PostPosted: 27 Jan 2013, 17:52
by KateLMead
This country is living under threat, if Obama or Israel decides to go into Iran not only will the yanks suffer retaliation but so will we, it has been made clear in the event of an attack the guided missiles are ready at the off and are aimed at the UK...

Re: World at War

PostPosted: 27 Jan 2013, 21:43
by Workingman
Kate wrote:... it has been made clear in the event of an attack the guided missiles are ready at the off and are aimed at the UK...

An empty threat for the moment, the means to carry it out do not exist.

When the means exists, and if the threat is ever carried out, the payback will be enormous.

Re: World at War

PostPosted: 27 Jan 2013, 22:14
by Oojamaflip
I always have a store cupboard filled with tins, drinking water, candles, etc.