Jump to content

The War in Syria - ISIS et al


Chinahand

Recommended Posts

 

Turkey didn't machine gun the pilots

you know this for absolute certain?

These pilots were allegedly shot by the Turkmen, a band allied to the Syrian rebels who regard the Russians as enemy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

 

 

Turkey didn't machine gun the pilots

you know this for absolute certain?
These pilots were allegedly shot by the Turkmen, a band allied to the Syrian rebels who regard the Russians as enemy.
You bomb them they shoot at you. Simples. You'd think Putin would understand that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Turkey didn't machine gun the pilots, Turkey is not in EU, but Russia is pissed off with Turkey.

OMF maintains his usual hit rate.

Turkey is on the fast track for inclusion into the EU and the EU will certainly not want to see that knocked off course. The events today are a real line in the sand. As for not machine gunning the pilots. Well the fact that they did is the official BBC, Sky, CNN, view of the situation. It's up to Turkey to refute that. From where I'm sitting they are fucked and should consider coming out of their bunkers in about a years time. After Putin has shat over the whole military infrastructure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Turkey didn't machine gun the pilots

you know this for absolute certain?
These pilots were allegedly shot by the Turkmen, a band allied to the Syrian rebels who regard the Russians as enemy.
You bomb them they shoot at you. Simples. You'd think Putin would understand that.

 

one may also think you would understand that too when it relates to the west bombing syria chinahand not so simples then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

According to 2011 data, the chances of you being attacked by a terrorist are roughly 1 in 20 million. Compared to the likelihood of you drowning in a bathtub (1 in 800,000), losing your life in a car crash (1 in 19,000), dying in a building fire (1 in 99,000), or being struck by lightning (1 in 5,500,000).

 

You wouldn't think there would be a problem until you listen to the scaremongering media and the traumatised posters on social media.

 

What possible benefit would there be in psychologically traumatizing the sheep of imminent terrorist attack could there be? Are they perhaps looking for a swing in public opinion.

 

 

I have twice in my life come close to terrorist attack.

 

Firstly, the office I worked in had its windows blown in by a bomb placed by PIRA in June 1992.

 

Secondly, I was at Kings Cross at the time of the 7/7 terrorist attacks on London. I was evacuated from a Northern Line Train in a tunnel, joining the walking wounded from the Piccadilly Line train at the first landing in Kings Cross underground station, and making my way out with blackened, distraught and bleeding people.

 

My experience is not unusual for someone living and working in a large city, I think. Your thesis that the terrorist threat is some sort of invention designed to scare and control is balony, like most of what you post here.

 

 

The fact you are still here means the chances of you being killed is still 1 in 20 million for a reason.

 

 

 

Ah, that's OK then. No need to worry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guzzi/chinahand: why is the USA spending money that would wipe out many European countries national debt on the "war on terror", when the U.S. citizen is 55 times more likely to be killed by a loving policeman than a terrorist. I can tell you exactly why if anyone is interested.

 

You lot here are really missing the big picture, you are all reading and believing the wrong stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guzzi/chinahand: why is the USA spending money that would wipe out many European countries national debt on the "war on terror", when the U.S. citizen is 55 times more likely to be killed by a loving policeman than a terrorist. I can tell you exactly why if anyone is interested.

You lot here are really missing the big picture, you are all reading and believing the wrong stuff.

It's because many terrorist groups have incontrovertible proof that the earth is flat and the US is frantically seeking to suppress that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guzzi/chinahand: why is the USA spending money that would wipe out many European countries national debt on the "war on terror", when the U.S. citizen is 55 times more likely to be killed by a loving policeman than a terrorist. I can tell you exactly why if anyone is interested.

 

You lot here are really missing the big picture, you are all reading and believing the wrong stuff.

 

 

Indeed, knowing what to believe is a valuable skill when there is so much stuff to read. I also like your new approach of asking if anyone is interested.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its fair to say Gerry fucked himself up a bit on the flat earth thread. So easy now for people to dismiss anything and everything he says subsequently as a result of that. I certainly don't agree with him word for word but he is a little bit closer to the truth on this than some..

PK .. Up to 20% police cuts on the way, presumably to help pay for weapons systems not to combat Isis but play games with Russia in a few years .. What do you reckon about it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can tell you exactly why if anyone is interested.

If it involves Jesuits, Masons, blaming the Jews, or some super-secret knowledge you found out via youtube, David Icke and his ilk, then frankly I'm not interested.

 

But just in case it doesn't, go on give it your best shot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

According to 2011 data, the chances of you being attacked by a terrorist are roughly 1 in 20 million. Compared to the likelihood of you drowning in a bathtub (1 in 800,000), losing your life in a car crash (1 in 19,000), dying in a building fire (1 in 99,000), or being struck by lightning (1 in 5,500,000).

 

You wouldn't think there would be a problem until you listen to the scaremongering media and the traumatised posters on social media.

 

What possible benefit would there be in psychologically traumatizing the sheep of imminent terrorist attack could there be? Are they perhaps looking for a swing in public opinion.

 

 

I have twice in my life come close to terrorist attack.

 

Firstly, the office I worked in had its windows blown in by a bomb placed by PIRA in June 1992.

 

Secondly, I was at Kings Cross at the time of the 7/7 terrorist attacks on London. I was evacuated from a Northern Line Train in a tunnel, joining the walking wounded from the Piccadilly Line train at the first landing in Kings Cross underground station, and making my way out with blackened, distraught and bleeding people.

 

My experience is not unusual for someone living and working in a large city, I think. Your thesis that the terrorist threat is some sort of invention designed to scare and control is balony, like most of what you post here.

 

 

The fact you are still here means the chances of you being killed is still 1 in 20 million for a reason.

 

 

 

Ah, that's OK then. No need to worry.

 

 

Exactly right. Let's keep things in perspective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...