FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to The Lounge

Thinking of...

Jump to newest
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

Our troops.. I hope parliament disallows any going to Syria.

Our Heroes..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I hope we don't start bombing. All the bombs dropped so far by France America etc have not wiped out Isis. If there is funds for that, then they are better spent repairing our NHS, and I'm terrified of my brother being deployed. Was awful while he was in afghan.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iamondjoeMan
over a year ago

Glastonbury

Wot?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iamondjoeMan
over a year ago

Glastonbury

A few points...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iamondjoeMan
over a year ago

Glastonbury

1/ Cameron isn't suggesting putting troops on the ground in Syria

2/ The UK already has an ongoing bombing campaign going on next door in Iraq

3/ Ironically air power alone cannot win a war - it needs boots on the ground to follow up

4/ Yes, the money would be much better spent on the NHS

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I'm sat watching it what a load of bollox!

Wish they would get on with the debate rather than go on about Cameron saying sorry when he clearly won't.

Rather than reading or watching mainstream news perhaps some should see the bigger picture,

We have been bombing Syria for weeks.

I don't understand the poor troops comments as every soldier knows in this day and age of they sign up or have in the last day 15 years know there is a high possibility they will be sent to war, and chances are killed or seriously hurt.

I am proud and quite open about my support of the forces, my friends that were killed etc this debate isn't about ground troops going in.

It's about the uk standing alone as a country away from nato and bombing for our own security.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire

the 'troops' by and large will if sent do their job to the best of their ability and professionalism..

its what they signed up for..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *accaMan
over a year ago

leicester


"I'm sat watching it what a load of bollox!

Wish they would get on with the debate rather than go on about Cameron saying sorry when he clearly won't.

Rather than reading or watching mainstream news perhaps some should see the bigger picture,

We have been bombing Syria for weeks.

I don't understand the poor troops comments as every soldier knows in this day and age of they sign up or have in the last day 15 years know there is a high possibility they will be sent to war, and chances are killed or seriously hurt.

I am proud and quite open about my support of the forces, my friends that were killed etc this debate isn't about ground troops going in.

It's about the uk standing alone as a country away from nato and bombing for our own security.

"

Really couldn't have put that any better myself..

The arguments against are crazy really. doing nothing isn't an option at all, this isn't just going to go away on its own, and will more than likely get a whole lot worse what ever happens unfortunately.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"1/ Cameron isn't suggesting putting troops on the ground in Syria

2/ The UK already has an ongoing bombing campaign going on next door in Iraq

3/ Ironically air power alone cannot win a war - it needs boots on the ground to follow up

4/ Yes, the money would be much better spent on the NHS"

Exactly, we start bombing, then they say we need boots on the ground...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"1/ Cameron isn't suggesting putting troops on the ground in Syria

2/ The UK already has an ongoing bombing campaign going on next door in Iraq

3/ Ironically air power alone cannot win a war - it needs boots on the ground to follow up

4/ Yes, the money would be much better spent on the NHS

Exactly, we start bombing, then they say we need boots on the ground... "

And?????.

Not like we haven't had boots on the ground before.

Maybe it's what we need to sort this problem out.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

I don't understand the poor troops comments as every soldier knows in this day and age of they sign up or have in the last day 15 years know there is a high possibility they will be sent to war, and chances are killed or seriously hurt.

I am proud and quite open about my support of the forces, my friends that were killed etc this debate isn't about ground troops going in.

"

I think we should send the grunts in. They always do far more than anything to resolve a situation.

As an ex grunt, I knew the risks. I knew what I signed up for. If it had gone wrong, well that was part of the deal. I did get some terrific holidays off the taxpayer so couldn't complain when they wanted me to work for my money. Risks and all.

But, there is always the perspective point of view. Someone mentioned being terrified for their brother. I think it's harder on those at home than those who go off to fight. Sitting not knowing what is happening must be hell.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Sending the troops in seems to have worked in Iraq and Afghanistan, let's do it

On balance, after thinking it through from all angles, musing all night etc etc....this is just (another) self-aggrandising attempt at justifying ourselves as a "great" nation.

At a time when we are slashing the pay of doctors and the training budgets for nurses, why are we even considering this? Patriotism and self-defence needn't be based on macho, whose got the hardest dick horseshit

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Daesh already have us in their sights. Allegedly our Security Services have thwarted 7 attacks in the UK. We need to attack Daesh forces in Syria, as we have been doing in Iraq (with no reports of civilian casualties).

We won't be bombing Syria - this paints a mental picture of blitz style tactics. We will be using Brimstone (an awesome bit of kit) to target Daesh convoys, Command Centres, training camps etc.

Daesh won't rest until they have destroyed us, and won't negotiate like the Provos did in N Ireland. We must destroy them financially, structurally, militarily and philosophically.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Daesh already have us in their sights. Allegedly our Security Services have thwarted 7 attacks in the UK. We need to attack Daesh forces in Syria, as we have been doing in Iraq (with no reports of civilian casualties).

We won't be bombing Syria - this paints a mental picture of blitz style tactics. We will be using Brimstone (an awesome bit of kit) to target Daesh convoys, Command Centres, training camps etc.

Daesh won't rest until they have destroyed us, and won't negotiate like the Provos did in N Ireland. We must destroy them financially, structurally, militarily and philosophically."

People think that's it's just random bombings of Syria and the bombs could kill innocent people I think that's the issue.

The brimstone doesn't work like that it's far more advanced and as you say an awesome bit of kit.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top