Re: All things Middle East related
 

if we strip their countries sovereign immunity, does that mean families of civilians killed by US troops or the innocent people we've tortured can turn around and sue us?

because it seems like that's where that kind of precedent would lead. it's not just the saudis who think this might be a bad idea.

Re: All things Middle East related
 

[url=http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/04/middleeast/obama-clapper-isis-attack-u-s-soil/index.html]Clapper: ISIS can stage Europe-style attacks in U.S. - CNN.com[/url]

Well ISIS have already have "inspired" 3 attacks. Islamic Terrorists have already committed multiple lone wolf operations here and in Canada.

So now, the administration is admitting we are vulnerable to a direct isis attack. That's quite an admission, but really no surprise. Obama and his administration have left the country and the world in a much more unsafe place.

Re: All things Middle East related
 

... and Hilary will continue increasing the hazard.

Re: All things Middle East related
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;1143459]... and Hilary will continue increasing the hazard.[/quote]

well considering she was apart of the administration that put us in this position, its highly likely.

Remember, when she was given her first major job in her career as Secretary of State she had 2 major failures in a short time:

Bengahzi where she ignored requests to protect Americans, putting them in harms ways

And

Was negligent in the handling of highly classified information


If this was my organization or another major corporation, her fat ass would be on the streets effectively fired.

Good nuff for government work folks. This is her record in a major leadership position...a major clusterfuck

Re: All things Middle East related
 

you say obama, but you should be saying obama/bush, at the very least. isis is on the decline though, recruiting is down by over 80% over last year, and their money is drying up, leading to a lot of awol soldiers.

...
and hillary is an interventionist, so in all likelyhood, yes, she will meddle in places against good advice. better than trump, but she'll (probably) continue our 16 year tradition of terrible foreign policy decisions.

Re: All things Middle East related
 

[quote=That Guy;1143463]you say obama, but you should be saying obama/bush, at the very least. isis is on the decline though, recruiting is down by over 80% over last year, and their money is drying up, leading to a lot of awol soldiers.

...
and hillary is an interventionist, so in all likelyhood, yes, she will meddle in places against good advice. better than trump, but she'll (probably) continue our 16 year tradition of terrible foreign policy decisions.[/quote]For god's sake, its been almost eight years since Bush II was president. It's pathetic how much criticism of Obama, especially on his second term, is deflected by throwing Bush in the discussion. So when the next prez is elected, is Bush still gonna be held just as accountable?

Re: All things Middle East related
 

[quote=HailGreen28;1143579]For god's sake, its been almost eight years since Bush II was president. It's pathetic how much criticism of Obama, especially on his second term, is deflected by throwing Bush in the discussion. So when the next prez is elected, is Bush still gonna be held just as accountable?[/quote]

yes, he invaded a country under false pretenses and got 180k+ people killed, so he will always be accountable for that... that's how accountability works. if you think i'm deflecting blame from obama, you're really not paying attention.

Re: All things Middle East related
 

Yeah, Obama took a bad situation and made it much worse. Ashame he's leaving the country in a much worse position internationally since Jimmy Carter.

Re: All things Middle East related
 

[url]https://www.yahoo.com/news/saudi-defence-intercepts-ballistic-missile-fired-yemen-coalition-171416200.html[/url]

Ok, so just to clarify the situation.

Yemen is firing ballistic missiles at Saudi Arabia.
Russia, the US, Saudi Arabia, and Iran all have troops in harms way in Syria.
We have boarded Iranian vessels checking for weapons.
Iran has detained our sailors.
Europe has had multiple bomb attacks.


GOOD EFFING THING WE AREN'T AT WAR

Re: All things Middle East related
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1143613][url]https://www.yahoo.com/news/saudi-defence-intercepts-ballistic-missile-fired-yemen-coalition-171416200.html[/url]

Ok, so just to clarify the situation.

Yemen is firing ballistic missiles at Saudi Arabia.
Russia, the US, Saudi Arabia, and Iran all have troops in harms way in Syria.
We have boarded Iranian vessels checking for weapons.
Iran has detained our sailors.
Europe has had multiple bomb attacks.


GOOD EFFING THING WE AREN'T AT WAR[/quote]

well, we are at war though. the millitary is still issuing global war on terror service pins. obama stopped calling it that in 2013, but it never actually ended. we're 4 months away from 15 years of continuous war.

Re: All things Middle East related
 

[quote=That Guy;1143630]well, we are at war though. the millitary is still issuing global war on terror service pins. obama stopped calling it that in 2013, but it never actually ended. we're 4 months away from 15 years of continuous war.[/quote]

No we aren't "at war", if we were, we would have battalions on the ground, a clear strategic and tactical plan, and we would have alliances formed that prevent our enemies from hiding in plain sight. What we are is in the 2016 version of the early Vietnam quagmire, with "advisors" going into hostile territory, and special forces conducting pin prick raids.

If we were trying to win, we would take ground from the enemy and pacify the area and build bases to stabilize the region. We would work to create safe zones and expand those. AND most importantly, we would maintain those bases with the expressed intent of staying as long as it takes to end the regional threats. People call the 2nd war a failure, but the true failure was the turning away and leaving a vacuum for power to shift around in. MOST of that was due to the Democratic party's backing away from the initial all in that was expressed on all sides.

But we aren't at war, and we aren't trying to win, instead this Commander in Chief, and Republican congress have abrogated their Constitutional duties and put our military in the no win situation of trying to fight without fighting.

And for the record, if the politicians want to wash their hand and say this isn't the US's fight, I'm ok with that, and let's get our troops out of harms way. The world would probably be surprised by how self sufficient we really would be if the decision was made.

I'm also ok with a declaration of war, and a consolidated NATO/METO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization/Middle East Treaty Organization-to be created) Defense structure, IF having that declaration, and organizations, means that we are going to truly fight a coherent battle with the objective of being bringing a stable regional peace to a land that has never really known it. Europe hadn't known peace since Roman times, so it's possible to accomplish great things, but the cost should be acknowledged up front.

What aggravates me, and I personally am not ok with, is politicians using the ME to support falsehoods and platitudes, while military and civilian death tolls rise with the US population oblivious.

Re: All things Middle East related
 

wow, there is just soo much wrong with what you've said here.

first, i'm glad you feel like you're the sole arbiter of whether we are or are not at war, but you're wrong. 100% wrong. we are at war and have been since 2001, and that's just facts.

now, when you declare a war against an abstract like terrorism, it's not like declaring a war on a state actor. there's no actual victory condition, which is why it was and still is a bad idea.

2nd you're line of thinking is part of why we're still fooling around aimlessly in the middle east. we can take ground and kill people all day every day, if the population doesn't want us there interfering, it's just inviting more unrest. everything you're talking about has already been done in iraq and it hasn't solved shit. most of that was due to bush/rumsfeld/et al deciding to unemploy the entire iraqi military and every organization involved with running iraq's day to day.

the vacuum was self created and then filled with a very sectarian ex-pat leader that basically did everything he could to destabilize the country.

I agree that you should never start a war without very clear/concise objectives and a viable exit strategy. that's what happens when people without any military leadership or general knowledge thereof are put in charge though. they have a hammer and everything looks like a nail, but dropping US forces in a place doesn't magically make all the ethnic and political divisions on the ground go away. and a foreign military that's conducting night raids and walking around in body armor and carrying automatic rifles isn't the best instrument to use if you want to win hearts and minds.

Re: All things Middle East related
 

the bigger issue is that no one holds anyone accountable here (ie by voting) for terrible foreign policy decisions. it doesn't really affect most americans in a very concrete way, so i don't think a lot of politicians really spend enough time considering the long term effects of what they're doing (or they don't care, since it doesn't help their next election cycle).

Re: All things Middle East related
 

[quote=That Guy;1143675]wow, there is just soo much wrong with what you've said here.

first, i'm glad you feel like you're the sole arbiter of whether we are or are not at war, but you're wrong. 100% wrong. we are at war and have been since 2001, and that's just facts.

now, when you declare a war against an abstract like terrorism, it's not like declaring a war on a state actor. there's no actual victory condition, which is why it was and still is a bad idea.

2nd you're line of thinking is part of why we're still fooling around aimlessly in the middle east. we can take ground and kill people all day every day, if the population doesn't want us there interfering, it's just inviting more unrest. everything you're talking about has already been done in iraq and it hasn't solved shit. most of that was due to bush/rumsfeld/et al deciding to unemploy the entire iraqi military and every organization involved with running iraq's day to day.

the vacuum was self created and then filled with a very sectarian ex-pat leader that basically did everything he could to destabilize the country.

I agree that you should never start a war without very clear/concise objectives and a viable exit strategy. that's what happens when people without any military leadership or general knowledge thereof are put in charge though. they have a hammer and everything looks like a nail, but dropping US forces in a place doesn't magically make all the ethnic and political divisions on the ground go away. and a foreign military that's conducting night raids and walking around in body armor and carrying automatic rifles isn't the best instrument to use if you want to win hearts and minds.[/quote]

Show me a declaration of war enacted by the Congress and signed by the President. We can discuss the rest after that

edit. for the sake of adding thoughts:

We aren't at war, we are in a state of continual undeclared "war". The difference is huge in the political capital spent and gained by the use of imagery and fear tactics. You can declare war against non-state players, by declaring war against the non-state player AND any states that aid them.

You and I absolutely disagree on the cause of the vacuum, it was not self-created, it was created when Democrats who supported the initial war actions turned away from dealing with the cost of the war in human lives. We didn't win WW1 or WW2 by "winning the hearts and minds" we won it, by beating the opponents will to fight. You can do that even with the most die hard believers. The Japanese would have died to the last man for the Emperor at the start of WW2. Suicide bombers are no different than the Kamikaze's of that war. IED's were as prevalent in Germany at the end as they were in Iraq. War is hell, and to win it you have to go to hell and back. In Iraq the second time, we got to hell, then the politicians bailed because they couldn't stand the heat.

Winning the hearts and minds loses wars. Beating the opponent until they yield wins them. We didn't do that, and for the past 8 years the President and Congress have gotten away with overseeing a world where 10's of thousands of innocents die annually, and they posture and prance about as they smile and wave and send more US Soldiers to die in an unwinnable undeclared "war".

Re: All things Middle East related
 

[quote=That Guy;1143676]the bigger issue is that no one holds anyone accountable here (ie by voting) for terrible foreign policy decisions. it doesn't really affect most americans in a very concrete way, so i don't think a lot of politicians really spend enough time considering the long term effects of what they're doing (or they don't care, since it doesn't help their next election cycle).[/quote]

I agree with this, and that was the main part of the making the politicians declare their intentions.

Re: All things Middle East related
 

[url]https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-107publ40/html/PLAW-107publ40.htm[/url]

[url]https://www.congress.gov/bill/107th-congress/house-joint-resolution/114[/url]


you realize that if we drop troops into yemen/syria/etc to try and "beat them" jihadi recruitment skyrockets right? and i'm not saying we have to win hearts and minds just that at one point that was bush's "goal" and a foreign military isn't the best way to make that happen (especially with the torture problems etc).

after we "beat them" all the political factions that couldn't agree in the first place resurface, killing a bunch of people doesn't really change that. WWII is a bad example, germany and japan's populations weren't sectarian or tribal in nature and that was a very nationalist war, whereas this is mainly being perpetrated by stateless actors.

you also seemly weirdly adamant that all the world's problems are 100% caused by democrats. they don't control congress and they didn't start down this path. not saying their blameless by any means, but that fact that you need to mention it in every post just leads to the impression of bias.

Re: All things Middle East related
 

[quote=That Guy;1143692][url]https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-107publ40/html/PLAW-107publ40.htm[/url]

[url]https://www.congress.gov/bill/107th-congress/house-joint-resolution/114[/url]


you realize that if we drop troops into yemen/syria/etc to try and "beat them" jihadi recruitment skyrockets right? and i'm not saying we have to win hearts and minds just that at one point that was bush's "goal" and a foreign military isn't the best way to make that happen (especially with the torture problems etc).

after we "beat them" all the political factions that couldn't agree in the first place resurface, killing a bunch of people doesn't really change that. WWII is a bad example, germany and japan's populations weren't sectarian or tribal in nature and that was a very nationalist war, whereas this is mainly being perpetrated by stateless actors.

you also seemly weirdly adamant that all the world's problems are 100% caused by democrats. they don't control congress and they didn't start down this path. not saying their blameless by any means, but that fact that you need to mention it in every post just leads to the impression of bias.[/quote]
First, and you know this, neither of those links are the Constitutional Declaration of War as was made against Germany or Japan.[URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_war_by_the_United_States"]US Declaration of War History[/URL] In fact, they are the very definition of using the War powers of the US military, without taking the active and assertive case of a Declaration of War. In authorizoring war powers, without actually declaring war against specific states that are the specific bad actors, we allow Congress and the President to politicize and evade the facts of what War really is.

For the record, I blame the President and Congress equally in all my posts.

[quote]Beating the opponent until they yield wins them. We didn't do that, and for the past 8 years the President and Congress have gotten away with overseeing a world where 10's of thousands of innocents die annually, [/quote]
[quote]But we aren't at war, and we aren't trying to win, instead this Commander in Chief, and Republican congress have abrogated their Constitutional duties[/quote]

My point about the democrats is that they (many) went from actively supporting the initial involvement to blaming Bush and actively setting an agenda against the "at all costs" mindset that was spouted at the beginning of the 2003 campaign. You can see that as bias, I just see it as factual.

I absolutely see both parties as co-conspirators when it comes to using the undeclared war as political mush, and not treating it as seriously as I personally think it should be.

We will just disagree on the nature of WWII, but I will one more time point out that Japan's culture was as idiomatic and religiously fervent as any Islamic State actor, and Germany after the first WW had the same creation of factions that is in the Middle East now. Human nature isn't infinitely vast, and within realms of thoughts and behaviours, the Middle East is very similar to Europe between WWI and WW2, I would argue the similarities are striking if you take out the location based differences.

Re: All things Middle East related
 

when japan and germany were beaten, the nations were very homogeneous. germany had differing groups between ww1 and 2, but afterwards that, um, wasn't the case. you didn't have the shia/sunni/kurd/yazidi/etc divides, and you also didn't have 42 different tribes and organizations with 42 different agendas operating in the same regional space.

our military presence doesn't change that, and when we leave, barring some miracle, those divisions will become immediate flash points for continued problems. that's what happens when your country is given artificial borders.

Re: All things Middle East related
 

[quote=That Guy;1143726]when japan and germany were beaten, the nations were very homogeneous. germany had differing groups between ww1 and 2, but afterwards that, um, wasn't the case. you didn't have the shia/sunni/kurd/yazidi/etc divides, and you also didn't have 42 different tribes and organizations with 42 different agendas operating in the same regional space.

our military presence doesn't change that, [B]and when we leave,[/B] barring some miracle, those divisions will become immediate flash points for continued problems. that's what happens when your country is given artificial borders.[/quote]

I agree with everything you said, but the bolded point is the key. We shouldn't have left. We should have stayed and strengthened the coalition that we had fairly successfully unified around Jordan, Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iraq. If it was known that the US presence was there and not leaving then the Iraq government could have matured under our protection and we could have guided them to be more inclusive. Sure there would have been losses by IED's and I'm definitely not pie in the sky thinking that it would be an easy peace to win. but Instead we fled and left a vacuum. That vacuum has led us to where we are.

I do agree about artificial borders - to a degree. Ultimately, every border is artificial, and the only true way to bring about peaceful resolution is to create systems that respect and account for the localized differences. The US has been fortunate to be established in that principle and have enjoyed a pretty amazing run internally thanks to it. We have, by way of NATO, created a similar safe zone within the European continent, and it's my strong belief that a strong ME equivalent would be able to (over time) actually lead to regional peace. But the leadership of the US uses the ME for politics, not actual solutions. That statement is directed at both parties.

Re: All things Middle East related
 

well, we're still in iraq, just not an maximum levels, the problem is the iraqi security forces are heavily dominated by shia extremist, and that's part of why the sunni's hate us there so much and let isis move in fairly unopposed.

seriously, iraqi government troops march under the banners of iran's ayatollahs. we're paying/leveraging one extremist group against another. regardless of who wins, we still have a problem.

Re: All things Middle East related
 

Pres. Obama's $8.8million farewell to Libya
[URL="http://finance.yahoo.com/news/colossal-price-fly-pair-b-200123999.html"]http://finance.yahoo.com/news/colossal-price-fly-pair-b-200123999.html[/URL]

Just think Garcon/Djax/Baker all could combine for 6 of these trips.

Re: All things Middle East related
 

So the last 3 days of Pres. Obama's presidency included the following actions:

B2 Bombing of Libya [URL="http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/01/19/b-2-bombers-strike-isis-in-libya.html"]FoxNews[/URL]
B52 Bombing in Syria [URL="http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/20/politics/us-strike-syria-al-qaeda/"]CNN[/URL]
$221 Million given to Palestinian Authority. [URL="https://www.apnews.com/b8446cbf5b504b1abaf49eb0d646367b"]APNews[/URL] - find it interesting that CNN has this nowhere on their site as of right now - I searched Palestine and Palestinian, looked at the World section, and nothing. Not surprisingly Fox News does have the link.

I know we have made bombings routine over there without much public announcement, so I have to wonder why these two bombings were highlighted in the press, and the payment to the Palestinian Authority wasn't. [/Tinfoil]

The payment had been approved, then placed on hold by Congress. - from the story his last Phone and Pen action
[QUOTE]Congress had initially approved the Palestinian funding in budget years 2015 and 2016, but at least two GOP lawmakers — Ed Royce of California, the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and Kay Granger of Texas, who sits on the House Appropriations Committee — had placed holds on it over moves the Palestinian Authority had taken to seek membership in international organizations. Congressional holds are generally respected by the executive branch but are not legally binding after funds have been allocated.[/QUOTE]

Re: All things Middle East related
 

Yet again...this time children, mostly young girls at a concert.

Re: All things Middle East related
 

Good thing Trump called them losers, that will learn em

Re: All things Middle East related
 

[quote=MTK;1170590]Good thing Trump called them losers, that will learn em[/quote]

Really?
Teenage girls were massacred and you use it as a tag line to go after Trump?
:confused?:

Re: All things Middle East related
 

[QUOTE=Alvin Walton;1170591]Really?

Teenage girls were massacred and you use it as a tag line to go after Trump?

:confused?:[/QUOTE]


oh give me a break

Re: All things Middle East related
 

Its just a sickening act. Intentionally targeting young girls to maim and kill.

Re: All things Middle East related
 

[quote=Chico23231;1170593]Its just a sickening act. Intentionally targeting young girls to maim and kill.[/quote]

Yup. I don't understand why security isn't beefed up everywhere for any type of mass gathering, shit FedEx won't even let you bring an umbrella in, and you gotta have your bag searched and pass the wand test to get in. Yet over there they aren't even checking bags? Feel bad for those families that were exposed to that shit last night.

Also, AW, I agree with Matty. Calling them evil losers is a weak ass response by the leader of the free world, he used harsher language to defend his Muslim ban.

Re: All things Middle East related
 

what about when Obama called ISIS the "JV Squad" while laughing?

ISIS has become the most dangerous, well organized, well funded, media savyy, the best operational and strategically organized Terrorist organization in the history of the world. They have committed acts of terrorism on every major continent and have participated in genocide.

Id really like to get Obama, Hillary, John Kerry and Susan Rice together in a room to find out how they were able to look the other way and refused to act when given the choice. Its shocking to me.

I wonder why the media turned a blind eye?

Re: All things Middle East related
 

[quote=Chico23231;1170598]what about when Obama called ISIS the "JV Squad" while laughing?

ISIS has become the most dangerous, well organized, well funded, media savyy, the best operational and strategically organized Terrorist organization in the history of the world. They have committed acts of terrorism on every major continent and have participated in genocide.

Id really like to get Obama, Hillary, John Kerry and Susan Rice together in a room to find out how they were able to look the other way and refused to act when given the choice. Its shocking to me.

I wonder why the media turned a blind eye?[/quote]

Yeah, that was clearly a fuck up on Obama's part, clearly they underestimated ISIS at the start and now they're paying the price for it. But it's not like they didn't have other issues to worry about, remember that whole "dig the country out of the recession" thing that was a large issue at the time?

Re: All things Middle East related
 

Trump isnt a politician and he wasnt hired because he was one.
So he isnt going to speak like one.
And he can call them milk toast poo poo heads for all I care as long as he finds a way to kill them.
At least hes not dismissing them like the last guy did.

Re: All things Middle East related
 

[quote=mooby;1170601]Yeah, that was clearly a fuck up on Obama's part, clearly they underestimated ISIS at the start and now they're paying the price for it. But it's not like they didn't have other issues to worry about, remember that whole "dig the country out of the recession" thing that was a large issue at the time?[/quote]

Weak. So too much going on to protect the country and allies from the terrorist group that is re-writing the book on global jihad?

Come'on man.

Re: All things Middle East related
 

[quote=mooby;1170596]Yup. I don't understand why security isn't beefed up everywhere for any type of mass gathering, shit FedEx won't even let you bring an umbrella in, and you gotta have your bag searched and pass the wand test to get in. [B]Yet over there they aren't even checking bags? [/B]Feel bad for those families that were exposed to that shit last night.

Also, AW, I agree with Matty. Calling them evil losers is a weak ass response by the leader of the free world, he used harsher language to defend his Muslim ban.[/quote]

Ignorant and retarded comment, if you don't know what you are talking about please STFU!

Re: All things Middle East related
 

From what I read the blast took place outside of the security zone but was in the building.
My local arena for example has a large foyer area with concessions, ticket sales and an assembly area that is a public area. You dont need tickets at this point so you dont go thru any security. I assume that it was similar to Manchester.
Its going to get to the point where will will have to rope off the whole city block to stop these kind of bombings.

Re: All things Middle East related
 

[quote=Chico23231;1170603]Weak. So too much going on to protect the country and allies from the terrorist group that is re-writing the book on global jihad?

Come'on man.[/quote]

I was more referring to 2008-2010ish, when ISIS was still a relatively unknown thing, and the shitshow that was our economy was priority A. IIRC the comments about ISIS being a JV squad were made after that but I already said that's a fuckup on Obama's part, so I'm not sure what more you are looking for.

And can we please not act like being president of the most powerful country on Earth is not a full time job and then some? Idc who is President, Trump or Obama, there is a reason Obama's days were planned down to the minute. Trump seems more like a "I'm gonna wing it" kinda guy but point is, it's not like Obama was relaxing and some staffer was like "hey maybe you should check out this whole ISIS thing" and he was like, "ehhh I'll get to it when I get to it."

Re: All things Middle East related
 

[quote=davy;1170604]Ignorant and retarded comment, if you don't know what you are talking about please STFU![/quote]

Fuck off. Clearly I don't know much about the layout of this particular building, so rather than being an asshole why don't you enlighten me?

Yes, I just read the article that said there is a train station connected to the building that can't be secured and that's where it happened so whatever. The article also mentioned that bags were being checked at the concert, but again, there is an unsecured train station in the building where it is impossible to maintain a constant security presence. The beauty of the internet is that as new details get released, you are able to get an idea of the bigger picture.

I assume if you're a local to the area, you knew all that already and just decided to be an asshole anyways. Forgive me for not knowing the exact circumstances of the situation, dick.

Re: All things Middle East related
 

[quote=Alvin Walton;1170602]Trump isnt a politician and he wasnt hired because he was one.
So he isnt going to speak like one.
And he can call them milk toast poo poo heads for all I care as long as he finds a way to kill them.
At least hes not dismissing them like the last guy did.[/quote]


This is BS and you know it.

Re: All things Middle East related
 

[quote=Alvin Walton;1170605]From what I read the blast took place outside of the security zone but was in the building.
My local arena for example has a large foyer area with concessions, ticket sales and an assembly area that is a public area. You dont need tickets at this point so you dont go thru any security. I assume that it was similar to Manchester.
[B]Its going to get to the point where will will have to rope off the whole city block to stop these kind of bombings[/B].[/quote]

I'm not sure there's any solution that doesn't invade people's privacy. I doubt anyone that uses the train station likes the idea of their bags being checked during major public events. Just a shit situation all around.

Re: All things Middle East related
 

[quote=Alvin Walton;1170602]Trump isnt a politician and he wasnt hired because he was one.
So he isnt going to speak like one.
And he can call them milk toast poo poo heads for all I care as long as he finds a way to kill them.
[B]At least hes not dismissing them like the last guy did[/B].[/quote]

If you're going to make outlandish statements at least back them up. Sources please.

Re: All things Middle East related
 

[quote=davy;1170604]Ignorant and retarded comment, if you don't know what you are talking about please STFU![/quote]


I realize you might be upset with the situation being it happen in Manchester but this is a website where people discuss and disagree on all sorts of things .Calm down and discuss.