We're sending troops to Europe

[Swish]

If you could send some to Bradford, Birmingham and other jihadi hotspots that'd be swell <3

[Efwan]

OP: the apocalypse is upon us, go now! Get to your doomsday bunker and stay there until it's all clear or until you die, whichever comes first!










Idiot.

[derpcake]

Originally Posted by Swish [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If you could send some to Bradford, Birmingham and other jihadi hotspots that'd be swell <3

you say jihadi hotspot, i say moderate and integrated religious community

then again i'm belgian so you have to try rly hard to meet my standards

[maskedmelon]

Originally Posted by derpcake [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

then again i'm belgian so you have to try rly hard to meet my standards

Allahu Akbar

[Daywolf]

Originally Posted by Efwan [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

OP: the apocalypse is upon us, go now! Get to your doomsday bunker and stay there until it's all clear or until you die, whichever comes first!











Idiot.

Hmm? Oh yeah, war could never happen. Obviously no one would ever start a war for any reason at all. Just peace forever [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You're posting about the apocalypse. Which thread were you reading, because it aint this one. If you are gong to troll, you could at least troll on the topic.

Thread isn't even about actual war scenarios etc other than the visible buildup and global posturing as is plainly being seen here, with source links included.

I do like discussing actual scenarios though (though not in this forum), even from my old days of table top war gaming to my tactical war sims of today, have always had an interest in the topic, have studied quite a bit. But if I were to guess at it, if there were to be some war escalation from this point, it wouldn't be until next year at the earliest. I mean, the magnitude of the logistical scale of this is rather overwhelming. This is a huge amount of arms and personnel being moved. Even just Europe alone, if you read the article, it couldn't be completed within a six month window.

And for "apocalypse" that's just silly. You're still reading those 60's radicals inspired stories circulating. Modern tactics are about conquest, resources and farmlands, not cheesy annihilation talk to scare you out of clean and efficient nuclear power plants as they used it for. heh note our decaying and failing plants now, it was successful, sadly.

[Daywolf]

Originally Posted by Swish [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If you could send some to Bradford, Birmingham and other jihadi hotspots that'd be swell <3

That's what I'm wondering, actually. They haven't said where they are going to station them. No one knows if they are going to go to Eastern or to Western Europe. It'll say a lot when they do disclose it. The whole Kerry talking to Putin thing, the lengthy time there (was originally scheduled four days), that might suggest talks about Eastern Europe in light of the current planning stage for the deployment. Hard to say..

[sOurDieSel]

Originally Posted by derpcake [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

you say jihadi hotspot, i say moderate and integrated religious community

then again i'm a belgian cuck so you have to try rly hard to meet my standards

Belgian must be pushing Cultural Marxism pretty hard. Love the kebabs Goy..... because of..... DIEVERSITY! HILTER! You don't want to be Hitler Goy.... Remember the 6 trillion!

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Allahu Akbar

Aloha Snack'Bar

[AzzarTheGod]

Originally Posted by Daywolf [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You don't know what mechanized means? odd... and I mentioned "armor" as well, which often refers to tanks. I'd say tank battalions, but I don't think we have those any longer. It's all combined arms now, more like mechanized infantry battalions etc.

Iya don't think I mentioned Bush and nation building. Funny, but I never voted for the guy, though I did vote for H.

Anyway follow the money. It's probably more accurate to say Russia was doing arms trading showcasing. Just like as Mr. Castle mentioned, they made an arms deal with Iran.

In fact Iran was there, likely receiving battlefield hands-on training on how to use the new weapons they are receiving. This all made possible thanks to dems and reps working together! This is one of the reasons I liked Rand Paul so much, one of the few that stood up against the Iranian nuclear deal, which as a result of it's passage they are now able to be armed to the teeth.

Paul's points: “1) sanctions relief precedes evidence of compliance, 2) Iran is left with significant nuclear capacity, 3) it lifts the ban on selling advanced weapons to Iran.”

And as Mr. Castle mentioned, this will drive the Saudi's to arm as well, and everyone else. But I'm sure still again follow the money and we're already there to take care of that $illy $tuff.

It's undeniable though, our stance is changing to war ready. Not just preparedness, more than that, globally.

Woah cool your jets I didn't put words in your mouth. I was saying that generally people presume that nation-building is how war is waged because America has engaged in nation-building warfare since the 1940's.

Russia is not bound to any vanity or humanitarian agendas and this might be news to people. Their goal was not to build Syria up, rather just flip the bird to Obama and his redline for Assad.

"The Syrian people must decide Assad's fate." - Vladimir Putin

Cements my point even further. Russia "pulling" out has nothing to do with any global war agenda by the USA or USA pressure. Russia fucked Obama in the ass in Syria so to speak by destroying anti-Assad terrorist groups.

Obama wanted to install another terror government into a former peaceful Middle East nation (Egypt, Libya, Tangiers) but Putin said "no thank you sir, not near my country. Go play in your own backyard and create terrorist group governments there, were going to tip the balance back to neutral and give Assad a fair shake" so to speak.

Most posters on these forums are fed cow-shit sponsored and funded by the NDAA bill. That much is obvious. Assad is a moderate.

[Daywolf]

Originally Posted by AzzarTheGod [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Cements my point even further. Russia "pulling" out has nothing to do with any global war agenda by the USA or USA pressure. Russia fucked Obama in the ass in Syria so to speak by destroying anti-Assad terrorist groups.

It may seem like that on the surface right now with all what is being said for in part for propaganda interests, but the fact is Russia has had a long history with it's interest in Syria long before the recent events unfolded.

That's Russia's major port of the region, their primary footing in the middle-east, especially regarding logistics. They have been working with the Syrian government for a very long time, and their interests became endangered with the rise of the arab spring. Part of which I believe the 0bama administration supported for the purpose of detaching Russia further from the region. Russia had no choice but to respond, like a hook shoved into their mouth, or risk losing a valuable logistical asset. Disclaimer: I'm not saying it's right or wrong, but just that it is what it is.

Some have speculated, some time back, that Russia made a deal within the region, for support when needed, as a deal that would turn away a Muslim cultural invasion of Russia as seems to be happening in the West now. These are not simple alliances and disputes, there is a lot more happening here than just a pissing contest with an incompetent US president.