namvet
Gold Member
time for us to go. I think a muslim blood bath is on the way
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
True.time for us to go. I think a muslim blood bath is on the way
What are you forgetting?True.time for us to go. I think a muslim blood bath is on the way
This way, they'll be wwwaaaayyy too busy having fun killing each other, to bother with us or the rest of the world.
Odd...
They've been out from under the European colonial thumb for less than a lifetime, and they're already back to slitting each others' throats again...
It's their cobbled-together so-called 'warrior religion' that makes 'em crazy like that...
The Brits were right, years ago, to call them 'children' and 'incompetents'...
Ahhhhhh, for the good old days of the British Empire...![]()
Keeping all those idiots in check...
What are you forgetting?True.time for us to go. I think a muslim blood bath is on the way
This way, they'll be wwwaaaayyy too busy having fun killing each other, to bother with us or the rest of the world.
Odd...
They've been out from under the European colonial thumb for less than a lifetime, and they're already back to slitting each others' throats again...
It's their cobbled-together so-called 'warrior religion' that makes 'em crazy like that...
The Brits were right, years ago, to call them 'children' and 'incompetents'...
Ahhhhhh, for the good old days of the British Empire...![]()
Keeping all those idiots in check...
"Besides arguing that Iraq was not the top strategic priority in the war on terrorism or in the Middle East, critics of the war also suggested that it could potentially destabilize the surrounding region.
"Prominent among such critics was Brent Scowcroft, who served as National Security Advisor to George H. W. Bush.
"In a 15 August 2002 Wall Street Journal editorial entitled 'Don't attack Saddam', Scowcroft wrote that, 'Possibly the most dire consequences would be the effect in the region... there would be an explosion of outrage against us... the results could well destabilize Arab regimes', and, 'could even swell the ranks of the terrorists.'"[23
2003 invasion of Iraq - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
There's not much doubt about the Religion of War, is there?At least it gets the hostility out in the open.
Much better that way, than pussy-footing around for years, before a big explosion.
One of the few accurate observations ever to come out of Shrub's mouth was: "Heck, they don't like us anyway."
This puts it on the table for all to see, and to deal with.
Just as well, in the long run, probably.
Makes it a lot harder for the fifth columnists to try to sell the idea that it's a Religion of Peace.
Maybe by design if you believe those who claim the borders for the New Middle East require fragmenting the current borders of Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran. FWIW, I suspect serious blow-back will reach the US and Europe within a generation.What are you forgetting?True.
This way, they'll be wwwaaaayyy too busy having fun killing each other, to bother with us or the rest of the world.
Odd...
They've been out from under the European colonial thumb for less than a lifetime, and they're already back to slitting each others' throats again...
It's their cobbled-together so-called 'warrior religion' that makes 'em crazy like that...
The Brits were right, years ago, to call them 'children' and 'incompetents'...
Ahhhhhh, for the good old days of the British Empire...![]()
Keeping all those idiots in check...
"Besides arguing that Iraq was not the top strategic priority in the war on terrorism or in the Middle East, critics of the war also suggested that it could potentially destabilize the surrounding region.
"Prominent among such critics was Brent Scowcroft, who served as National Security Advisor to George H. W. Bush.
"In a 15 August 2002 Wall Street Journal editorial entitled 'Don't attack Saddam', Scowcroft wrote that, 'Possibly the most dire consequences would be the effect in the region... there would be an explosion of outrage against us... the results could well destabilize Arab regimes', and, 'could even swell the ranks of the terrorists.'"[23
2003 invasion of Iraq - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Yes, removing Saddam by invasion gave the extremists their biggest gift since the Crusades.
Maybe by design if you believe those who claim the borders for the New Middle East require fragmenting the current borders of Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran. FWIW, I suspect serious blow-back will reach the US and Europe within a generation.What are you forgetting?
"Besides arguing that Iraq was not the top strategic priority in the war on terrorism or in the Middle East, critics of the war also suggested that it could potentially destabilize the surrounding region.
"Prominent among such critics was Brent Scowcroft, who served as National Security Advisor to George H. W. Bush.
"In a 15 August 2002 Wall Street Journal editorial entitled 'Don't attack Saddam', Scowcroft wrote that, 'Possibly the most dire consequences would be the effect in the region... there would be an explosion of outrage against us... the results could well destabilize Arab regimes', and, 'could even swell the ranks of the terrorists.'"[23
2003 invasion of Iraq - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Yes, removing Saddam by invasion gave the extremists their biggest gift since the Crusades.
The Kurds have been deprived on a homeland for far too long.Maybe by design if you believe those who claim the borders for the New Middle East require fragmenting the current borders of Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran. FWIW, I suspect serious blow-back will reach the US and Europe within a generation.Yes, removing Saddam by invasion gave the extremists their biggest gift since the Crusades.
Most, not all, but most, Kurds place their culture above religion, and they are fighting ISIS.