Terrorist Sympathiser

[realspiel]

Found out today I am a terrorist sympathiser, according to dave, anyone else?

[Twoist]

This fucking infuriates me. DC's assertions take us right back to GWB's 'if you're not with us you're against us' mantra from late 2001, but with a passive-aggressive slant which we uniquely do so fucking well in Britain. Pro-bombing politicians don't trust the public with the single ounce of intelligence needed to conclude that dropping munitions on Syria will do zero good to anyone.

IS (or whatever they're called this week) are not a typical enemy, they're absolutely fragmented and scattered to the four corners of the Middle East. To treat them as a 'traditional' centralized threat that can be bombed out of existence is absurd at best, apocalyptically and monumentally fucking stupid at worst.

So, yeah. Fuck that.

[Valotonin]

Found out today I am a terrorist sympathiser, according to dave, anyone else?

Aye. Seems that not wanting to to support the bombing and subsequent death and mutilation of men women and children (sorry 'collateral damage') makes you a sympathiser of people who want to kill and mutilate men women and children. Funny old world.

[FortonServices]

I may be a terrorist sympathizer, but at least I didn't fuck a dead pig in the mouth.

[jcnporter]

This fucking infuriates me. DC's assertions take us right back to GWB's 'if you're not with us you're against us' mantra from late 2001, but with a passive-aggressive slant which we uniquely do so fucking well in Britain. Pro-bombing politicians don't trust the public with the single ounce of intelligence needed to conclude that dropping munitions on Syria will do zero good to anyone.

IS (or whatever they're called this week) are not a typical enemy, they're absolutely fragmented and scattered to the four corners of the Middle East. To treat them as a 'traditional' centralized threat that can be bombed out of existence is absurd at best, apocalyptically and monumentally fucking stupid at worst.

So, yeah. Fuck that.

Pretty much exactly the things I was thinking.
The reductive and simplistic sloganeering that encapsulates all is bad in modern politics, shows the utter contempt they (and particularly Dave) have for us.
Contrast it with Corbyn's more considered approach, which is what we say we want from our politicians, yet remains deeply unpopular.
We get the leaders we deserve.
There is no vision of how the Syrian conflict will be resolved, just like when we went into Iraq and Afghanistan.
Once we realising that bombing isn't working, we aren't going to turn round and say 'OK, that was the wrong decision'.
Troops will be sent in, which is IS's wettest of wet dreams - the West vs Islam in the heart of their chosen 'caliphate'.
I wonder how that will turn out?

[arvy]

western world loves to talk shit, until they face a blade to the neck, that's a sad true, also maybe there's no bigger plan at all and both side (western, I mean by that, Russia, USA and etc.) vs. ISIL (whatever they are) are fighting for a control and world domination. Still should I be happy about, when someone dropping bombs on somenone's heads, for whatever fuckin reason,

should I give a single fuck about it??

let me live my fuckin life, or this is too big price these days, should I want someone's blood, my teen days of rage ar long go