Stubby Pecker Posted April 6, 2017 Report Share Posted April 6, 2017 So it's ok to let these cunts slaughter 250,000 with conventional weapons but get the sarin gas out and finally the fuckwits in power wake up. The pussies at the UN haven't given a fuck for 5 years so the Don is calling up the carriers. EU has asked the UN to "strongly condemn" the Syrian government that'll tell 'em! The Russians have been made to look like right cunts by Assad they might sort him out themselves Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Snatch Posted April 6, 2017 Report Share Posted April 6, 2017 America and their big mouths. Agent Orange anyone? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DingTheRioja Posted April 6, 2017 Report Share Posted April 6, 2017 If the yanks are off in there, make sure our lot get out first,they have a habit of hitting the wrong fucking target them yanks.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest nobgobbler Posted April 6, 2017 Report Share Posted April 6, 2017 1 hour ago, DingTheRioja said: If the yanks are off in there, make sure our lot get out first,they have a habit of hitting the wrong fucking target them yanks.. I reckon they use their own as target practice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Couldn't give a shit Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 I say show Assad how chemical weapons should really be used. Have the RAF saturation bomb the whole of Syria with our remaining stocks of VX nerve gas, Sarin and Tabun. Throw in an assortment of Anthrax, Botulinum and small pox followed a week later by low yield tactical nuclear strikes. You then have a win win situation in that Assad and ISIS are no more and the West has a wasteland as a buffer zone against the heathen savages of the middle east. Simples. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Manky Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 Punkies underpants? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stubby Pecker Posted April 7, 2017 Author Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 2 hours ago, Couldn't give a shit said: I say show Assad how chemical weapons should really be used. Have the RAF saturation bomb the whole of Syria with our remaining stocks of VX nerve gas, Sarin and Tabun. Throw in an assortment of Anthrax, Botulinum and small pox followed a week later by low yield tactical nuclear strikes. You then have a win win situation in that Assad and ISIS are no more and the West has a wasteland as a buffer zone against the heathen savages of the middle east. Simples. It's the only way to be sure. That's the difference between civilised folk like us and heathen, brutal cunts who put no value on human lives. We've got this shit in our arsenal and could fuck over any cunt we wanted to, but don't. They've got a shittiest poor mans WMDs and choose to use them, with perceived impunity, on children. It's all about power in Syria and those who've got it will have their throats cut when they loose it. Then it'll be the turn of the next lot of evil cunts to have a go. Well done Middle Eastern countries for looking after your own shop. Cunts 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Lady Penelope Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 Why give each ISIS "soldier" 72 Love Ewes .. they will think that they are in paradise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Snatch Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 Has it actually been proven yet that it was Assad or does the western world go by America's word as usual? Last I heard the UN council said there wasn't any facts. Let's also take look at the 70 million starving and homeless people in Yemen caused by American and Saudi Arabia bombing with weapons bought from the USA and UK. Oh,let's not look because that's ok,it's to do with us. I'm all for killing nasty cunts but double standards are just as bad. Muslim's want Sharia Law in Europe and who the fuck are they to push their way of life in us. They probably say same about is in their own countries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hokey Gingers Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 I`m pretty sure we`re all being played here by vested interests and fed a version of events propagated by the media. No proof and knee jerk bombing of a Syrian airfield. Seems ISIS have air support after all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Manky Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 Assad should be our friend. Syria was pretty secular until the ragheads started fucking about. He takes no shit off the fuckers. I, for one, like him. A straight and decent guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stubby Pecker Posted April 7, 2017 Author Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 15 minutes ago, Snatch said: Has it actually been proven yet that it was Assad or does the western world go by America's word as usual? Last I heard the UN council said there wasn't any facts. Let's also take look at the 70 million starving and homeless people in Yemen caused by American and Saudi Arabia bombing with weapons bought from the USA and UK. Oh,let's not look because that's ok,it's to do with us. I'm all for killing nasty cunts but double standards are just as bad. Muslim's want Sharia Law in Europe and who the fuck are they to push their way of life in us. They probably say same about is in their own countries. I agree, what Saudis are doing in Yemen is a war crime (double tap bombings to kill the medics and helpers for example) but I don't think 70 million cunts could ever sustain themselves in the sun baked mountainous shit pit. Surely a typo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Snatch Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 1 minute ago, Stubby Pecker said: I agree, what Saudis are doing in Yemen is a war crime (double tap bombings to kill the medics and helpers for example) but I don't think 70 million cunts could ever sustain themselves in the sun baked mountainous shit pit. Surely a typo A typo only by around 63 million. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Lady Penelope Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 22 minutes ago, Manky said: Assad should be our friend. Syria was pretty secular until the ragheads started fucking about. He takes no shit off the fuckers. I, for one, like him. A straight and decent guy TBH from the West's point of view Saddam and Gaddafi were reasonable along with Mubarak in Egypt of course back in the late 1970s we shit on the Shah of Iran as well and started this nightmare. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Lady Penelope Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 21 minutes ago, Snatch said: A typo only by around 63 million. Forgotten but Bojo Boris slated the Saudis for their "proxy war" in Yemen a few months back. https://sputniknews.com/europe/201612081048319968-britain-bojo-saudi-arabia/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Manky Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 9 minutes ago, Lady Penelope said: TBH from the West's point of view Saddam and Gaddafi were reasonable along with Mubarak in Egypt of course back in the late 1970s we shit on the Shah of Iran as well and started this nightmare. All the good, strong men gone now and the place is a shithole. A fine example of cause and effect. It makes sence to be careful what you wish for. Many of these countries would be a good holiday in bygone times. I would rather go to Middleborough now. Only just. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Snatch Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 1 hour ago, Lady Penelope said: Forgotten but Bojo Boris slated the Saudis for their "proxy war" in Yemen a few months back. https://sputniknews.com/europe/201612081048319968-britain-bojo-saudi-arabia/ Yes and he also said this. http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14724557.Boris_Johnson_defends_arms_sales_to_Saudi_Arabia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ollyboro Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 A Russian MP called Vyacheslav Nikonov (a record score in Scrabble, by the way) has described the US airstrike as "definitely an aggressive act". So that clears that up then. It was definitely an act of aggression. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cupid Stunt Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 I see that fucking arse-wipe Corbyn has now piped up and said that the US should not have attacked without UN backing. You stupid cunt, the war has been going on for six years and the UN have done fuck all about so far so I don't know why you think they are going to suddenly leap into action. It's actually the UN's fault it's got to this stage anyway. Fucking hell, If he had a second brain fitted wouldn't it feel lonely? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
camberwell gypsy Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 6 hours ago, Couldn't give a shit said: I say show Assad how chemical weapons should really be used. Have the RAF saturation bomb the whole of Syria with our remaining stocks of VX nerve gas, Sarin and Tabun. Throw in an assortment of Anthrax, Botulinum and small pox followed a week later by low yield tactical nuclear strikes. You then have a win win situation in that Assad and ISIS are no more and the West has a wasteland as a buffer zone against the heathen savages of the middle east. Simples. You ever thought about applying to go on Time Commanders? You and that Aryk Neusbacher or Wendy or whatever name he/she calls himself /herself, can compare dresses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Cuntman Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 7 hours ago, Couldn't give a shit said: I say show Assad how chemical weapons should really be used. Have the RAF saturation bomb the whole of Syria with our remaining stocks of VX nerve gas, Sarin and Tabun. Throw in an assortment of Anthrax, Botulinum and small pox followed a week later by low yield tactical nuclear strikes. You then have a win win situation in that Assad and ISIS are no more and the West has a wasteland as a buffer zone against the heathen savages of the middle east. Simples. Bloody hell, have you been channeling my thoughts. I just read that and thought I'd written it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gong Farmer Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 18 hours ago, Stubby Pecker said: So it's ok to let these cunts slaughter 250,000 with conventional weapons but get the sarin gas out and finally the fuckwits in power wake up. The pussies at the UN haven't given a fuck for 5 years so the Don is calling up the carriers. EU has asked the UN to "strongly condemn" the Syrian government that'll tell 'em! The Russians have been made to look like right cunts by Assad they might sort him out themselves You're missing the point and bigger picture regarding chemical weapons, The point is that all countries have conventional weapons for the use of, goes without saying. The bigger picture is that a line was drawn after WW1 as part of the Geneva Protocol that banned the use of chemical and biological weapons making them illegal so that they wouldn't become conventional weapons. Chemical and biological weapons are rarely used simply because there are reprisals for doing so. Even Hitler didn't break the law by using chemical and biological weapons with which he could have killed a lot more people during his Blitzkrieg of Great Britain. ironically Winston Churchill had no problem at all with the use chemical weapons when advocating their use against both the Kurds during the Iraqi revolt of 1920 and the Russian Bolsheviks but understood that his dissenters were too ''squeamish' to carry out an attack using chemical weapons. Churchill was calling for chemical weapons to be used on civilian populations where previously they'd only ever knowingly been used on the battle field. We could defend Churchill for calling for the use of chemical weapons as him being 'a man of his time', but saying that he was personally never subjected to chemical weaponry as were other men of his time let alone as a civilian so he was a bit of a cunt for even thinking about it to be quite frank. Allegedly the British did use chemical weapons against the Kurds during the 1920 Iraqi revolt, there is evidence but no proof.... I think that they probably did but you'll have to do your research to come to your own conclusion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Snatch Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 17 minutes ago, Gong Farmer said: You're missing the point and bigger picture regarding chemical weapons, The point is that all countries have conventional weapons for the use of, goes without saying. The bigger picture is that a line was drawn after WW1 as part of the Geneva Protocol that banned the use of chemical and biological weapons making them illegal so that they wouldn't become conventional weapons. Chemical and biological weapons are rarely used simply because there are reprisals for doing so. Even Hitler didn't break the law by using chemical and biological weapons with which he could have killed a lot more people during his Blitzkrieg of Great Britain. ironically Winston Churchill had no problem at all with the use chemical weapons when advocating their use against both the Kurds during the Iraqi revolt of 1920 and the Russian Bolsheviks but understood that his dissenters were too ''squeamish' to carry out an attack using chemical weapons. Churchill was calling for chemical weapons to be used on civilian populations where previously they'd only ever knowingly been used on the battle field. We could defend Churchill for calling for the use of chemical weapons as him being 'a man of his time', but saying that he was personally never subjected to chemical weaponry as were other men of his time let alone as a civilian so he was a bit of a cunt for even thinking about it to be quite frank. Allegedly the British did use chemical weapons against the Kurds during the 1920 Iraqi revolt, there is evidence but no proof.... I think that they probably did but you'll have to do your research to come to your own conclusion. So I take it agent orange and possibly Napalm didn't come under chemical weapons or did America exclude themselves? Seems the biggest breaker of the rules are done by the ones who set them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gong Farmer Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 6 hours ago, Snatch said: Has it actually been proven yet that it was Assad or does the western world go by America's word as usual? Last I heard the UN council said there wasn't any facts. Let's also take look at the 70 million starving and homeless people in Yemen caused by American and Saudi Arabia bombing with weapons bought from the USA and UK. Oh,let's not look because that's ok,it's to do with us. I'm all for killing nasty cunts but double standards are just as bad. Muslim's want Sharia Law in Europe and who the fuck are they to push their way of life in us. They probably say same about is in their own countries. This has got False Flag written all over it. You only have to look at what happens for middle eastern dictators at the hands of the US when they decide not to play ball, when they decide not to trade their oil for the petro dollar and insist on having their own central banks... they all end up dead. As for dealing arms with Saudi... The big selling point regarding the weapons that the US and the UK sell to the Saudis is that they actually save lives. That sounds bizarre but it's actually true in that the weapons themselves are far more accurate than the competitions' which means that they can be used with much more precision... hence saving lives. If you need to keep the catlateral damage at a minimum... buy British. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gong Farmer Posted April 7, 2017 Report Share Posted April 7, 2017 38 minutes ago, Snatch said: So I take it agent orange and possibly Napalm didn't come under chemical weapons or did America exclude themselves? Seems the biggest breaker of the rules are done by the ones who set them. Napalm is still in use but prohibited for use against civilians, so doesn't count. Agent Orange was only ever intended as a defoliant so not designed to harm people, it wasn't until after the Vietnam war that it become prevalent that it was a dangerous detrimental to humans and animal, so we could say that the US didn't officially know what they were unleashing... although they probably did. they probably experimented Agent Orange on GI's and chimps.... the cunts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.