Raqqa captured

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Raqqa captured

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 5 of 16 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >

Stirlingsays 20 Oct 17 5.54pm
Originally posted by Kermit8 No, not 1945 Churchill, 1951 Churchill. Soviets hadn't developed viable nukes in 1945. I'm looking behind waving at you. Edited by Kermit8 (20 Oct 2017 5.40pm) What are you waffling about slow child. The time to attack the Soviets was directly after the war when they were over stretched and the US had the bomb and they didn't. Churchill supported this and Truman didn't. Britain dropping a nuclear bomb on Russia without US support is ridiculous and impractical. We didn't have enough of them and the Russian army would have been able to attack Europe....in a war we started without the US. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

20 Oct 17 5.54pm

Originally posted by Kermit8

No, not 1945 Churchill, 1951 Churchill. Soviets hadn't developed viable nukes in 1945.

I'm looking behind waving at you.

Edited by Kermit8 (20 Oct 2017 5.40pm)

What are you waffling about slow child.

The time to attack the Soviets was directly after the war when they were over stretched and the US had the bomb and they didn't. Churchill supported this and Truman didn't.

Britain dropping a nuclear bomb on Russia without US support is ridiculous and impractical. We didn't have enough of them and the Russian army would have been able to attack Europe....in a war we started without the US.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Kermit8 Hevon 20 Oct 17 6.47pm
Originally posted by Stirlingsays What are you waffling about slow child. The time to attack the Soviets was directly after the war when they were over stretched and the US had the bomb and they didn't. Churchill supported this and Truman didn't. Britain dropping a nuclear bomb on Russia without US support is ridiculous and impractical. We didn't have enough of them and the Russian army would have been able to attack Europe....in a war we started without the US. Yes, yes never mind all that. Back to the original point. Who was in power when Soviet nukes became viable against the west in the early 50s? Churchill and Truman. And who was in power when Nkorea's did? Ob..... Hold on... no it's not. It's Trump. Now. Just following your rickety train of thought. Big chest and massive boobs [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

Kermit8

Hevon 20 Oct 17 6.47pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

What are you waffling about slow child.

The time to attack the Soviets was directly after the war when they were over stretched and the US had the bomb and they didn't. Churchill supported this and Truman didn't.

Yes, yes never mind all that. Back to the original point. Who was in power when Soviet nukes became viable against the west in the early 50s? Churchill and Truman. And who was in power when Nkorea's did? Ob..... Hold on... no it's not. It's Trump. Now.

Just following your rickety train of thought.

Big chest and massive boobs

[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

Mr_Gristle In the land of Whelk Eaters 20 Oct 17 6.51pm
Originally posted by Stirlingsays North Korea is the country that is threatening my children. South Korea has to take care of itself. Edited by Stirlingsays (20 Oct 2017 5.49pm) Please explain how North Korea is threatening your children, presumably living in or near Wisbech? If they lived either in South Korea, Japan or any one of the various Pacific islands appropriated by the US, then I'd agree that they face a direct threat. My kids live near Cambridge. They are not under threat from North Korea. Well I think Simon's head is large; always involved in espionage. (Name that tune)
Alert a moderator to this post

Mr_Gristle

In the land of Whelk Eaters 20 Oct 17 6.51pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

North Korea is the country that is threatening my children. South Korea has to take care of itself.

Edited by Stirlingsays (20 Oct 2017 5.49pm)

Please explain how North Korea is threatening your children, presumably living in or near Wisbech?

If they lived either in South Korea, Japan or any one of the various Pacific islands appropriated by the US, then I'd agree that they face a direct threat.

My kids live near Cambridge. They are not under threat from North Korea.

Well I think Simon's head is large; always involved in espionage. (Name that tune)

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 20 Oct 17 6.53pm
Originally posted by Kermit8 Yes, yes never mind all that. Back to the original point. Who was in power when Soviet nukes became viable against the west in the early 50s? Churchill and Truman. And who was in power when Nkorea's did? Ob..... Hold on... no it's not. It's Trump. Now. Just following your rickety train of thought. Ah finally caught up then. So what do you think my 'rickety train of thought' is saying to do 'now'? I've been attributing blame for where we are now and why it's happened. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

20 Oct 17 6.53pm

Originally posted by Kermit8

Just following your rickety train of thought.

Ah finally caught up then.

So what do you think my 'rickety train of thought' is saying to do 'now'?

I've been attributing blame for where we are now and why it's happened.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 20 Oct 17 6.56pm
Originally posted by Mr_Gristle Please explain how North Korea is threatening your children, presumably living in or near Wisbech? If they lived either in South Korea, Japan or any one of the various Pacific islands appropriated by the US, then I'd agree that they face a direct threat. My kids live near Cambridge. They are not under threat from North Korea. They are in about five years....which is what I said. NK can already reach into Europe. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

20 Oct 17 6.56pm

Originally posted by Mr_Gristle

Please explain how North Korea is threatening your children, presumably living in or near Wisbech?

If they lived either in South Korea, Japan or any one of the various Pacific islands appropriated by the US, then I'd agree that they face a direct threat.

My kids live near Cambridge. They are not under threat from North Korea.

They are in about five years....which is what I said.

NK can already reach into Europe.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Mr_Gristle In the land of Whelk Eaters 20 Oct 17 7.13pm
Originally posted by Stirlingsays They are in about five years....which is what I said. NK can already reach into Europe. OK. And in those 5 years, you truly think that they will have the capacity to mass-produce enough high-yield nuclear weapons and delivery systems to build up a target list long enough to hit everything they would REALLY want to hit and still get around to London, with a big enough warhead to create the level of devastation and fallout needed to impact northern Anglia? Do you think they'll put the crosshairs on Norwich, Peterbrough or directly on Wisbech? No. Right now and for the foreseeable future, the only countries with the means to hit the UK are the UK itself, France, Russia, China and the US. I don't know enough about the delivery capabilities of India, pakistan and Israel to comment but I think that they - like NK - would have more than enough local targets to deplete their nuclear stockpile. Russia and China aren't going with a first strike. Don't rely on the UK media for your diet of strategic studies. Well I think Simon's head is large; always involved in espionage. (Name that tune)
Alert a moderator to this post

Mr_Gristle

In the land of Whelk Eaters 20 Oct 17 7.13pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

They are in about five years....which is what I said.

NK can already reach into Europe.

OK. And in those 5 years, you truly think that they will have the capacity to mass-produce enough high-yield nuclear weapons and delivery systems to build up a target list long enough to hit everything they would REALLY want to hit and still get around to London, with a big enough warhead to create the level of devastation and fallout needed to impact northern Anglia? Do you think they'll put the crosshairs on Norwich, Peterbrough or directly on Wisbech?

No. Right now and for the foreseeable future, the only countries with the means to hit the UK are the UK itself, France, Russia, China and the US. I don't know enough about the delivery capabilities of India, pakistan and Israel to comment but I think that they - like NK - would have more than enough local targets to deplete their nuclear stockpile.

Russia and China aren't going with a first strike. Don't rely on the UK media for your diet of strategic studies.

Well I think Simon's head is large; always involved in espionage. (Name that tune)

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 20 Oct 17 7.28pm
Originally posted by Mr_Gristle OK. And in those 5 years, you truly think that they will have the capacity to mass-produce enough high-yield nuclear weapons and delivery systems to build up a target list long enough to hit everything they would REALLY want to hit and still get around to London, with a big enough warhead to create the level of devastation and fallout needed to impact northern Anglia? Do you think they'll put the crosshairs on Norwich, Peterbrough or directly on Wisbech? No. Right now and for the foreseeable future, the only countries with the means to hit the UK are the UK itself, France, Russia, China and the US. I don't know enough about the delivery capabilities of India, pakistan and Israel to comment but I think that they - like NK - would have more than enough local targets to deplete their nuclear stockpile. Russia and China aren't going with a first strike. Don't rely on the UK media for your diet of strategic studies. So that's what you offer me?.....North Korea as the rational actor. I should imagine that in five years they would have a reasonable build up to make such an attack..Far easier to hit Europe than an Island in the ocean....London isn't a big danger...that's over 100 miles from my kids, but there's a major RAF site about 40 miles away. A post covering all attack options would be huge. I'm happy you are happy for your kids to grow in within the new cold war scenario but I'm very critical of the decisions that led to this. You are free to think and defend whatever crap you like. By the way, what makes your 'strategic studies' any better mate? You don't know 'feck' about what Russia or China would do anymore than I do. All that exist are options. Edited by Stirlingsays (20 Oct 2017 7.31pm) 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

20 Oct 17 7.28pm

Originally posted by Mr_Gristle

Russia and China aren't going with a first strike. Don't rely on the UK media for your diet of strategic studies.

So that's what you offer me?.....North Korea as the rational actor.

I should imagine that in five years they would have a reasonable build up to make such an attack..Far easier to hit Europe than an Island in the ocean....London isn't a big danger...that's over 100 miles from my kids, but there's a major RAF site about 40 miles away. A post covering all attack options would be huge.

I'm happy you are happy for your kids to grow in within the new cold war scenario but I'm very critical of the decisions that led to this. You are free to think and defend whatever crap you like.

By the way, what makes your 'strategic studies' any better mate? You don't know 'feck' about what Russia or China would do anymore than I do. All that exist are options.

Edited by Stirlingsays (20 Oct 2017 7.31pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Kermit8 Hevon 20 Oct 17 7.57pm
ok if anyone is concerned about North Korean nukes hitting the Home Counties then I suggest you have a long holiday, relax and try to work out when it was exactly you became paranoid and lost the plot. Big chest and massive boobs [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

Kermit8

Hevon 20 Oct 17 7.57pm

ok if anyone is concerned about North Korean nukes hitting the Home Counties then I suggest you have a long holiday, relax and try to work out when it was exactly you became paranoid and lost the plot.

Big chest and massive boobs

[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

Penge Eagle Beckenham 20 Oct 17 7.57pm
Originally posted by Ray in Houston Trump campaigned on having a plan to defeat ISIS within 30 days. After taking office, he did nothing about ISIS for at least 30 days, then announced that he'd asked the Generals to give him a plan to defeat ISIS. This they did; it was the same plan they'd been pursuing under the Obama administration, because it was a good plan that was already working. The liberation of Raqqa and Mosul are the results of this plan. Credit goes to the Generals who devised it and the men and women in uniform who executed it. Especially them. If Trump gets credit for "getting out of the way" then so does Obama because he did exactly the same thing. It's quite well known that Obama micro-managed the military! You hate Trump so much that you refuse to give him credit for anything. You cannot say for sure that with Obama at the helm, it would have got the same result. But this victory has happened on Trump's watch. Under Obama, Washington was making the decisions for the commanders on the field. This centralised decision making slowed operations down. Three of Obama's defence secretaries complained about his meddling. These are all facts. Edited by Penge Eagle (20 Oct 2017 7.59pm)
Alert a moderator to this post \| Board Moderator

Penge Eagle

Beckenham 20 Oct 17 7.57pm

Originally posted by Ray in Houston

Trump campaigned on having a plan to defeat ISIS within 30 days. After taking office, he did nothing about ISIS for at least 30 days, then announced that he'd asked the Generals to give him a plan to defeat ISIS. This they did; it was the same plan they'd been pursuing under the Obama administration, because it was a good plan that was already working.

The liberation of Raqqa and Mosul are the results of this plan. Credit goes to the Generals who devised it and the men and women in uniform who executed it. Especially them. If Trump gets credit for "getting out of the way" then so does Obama because he did exactly the same thing.

It's quite well known that Obama micro-managed the military!

You hate Trump so much that you refuse to give him credit for anything. You cannot say for sure that with Obama at the helm, it would have got the same result. But this victory has happened on Trump's watch.

Under Obama, Washington was making the decisions for the commanders on the field. This centralised decision making slowed operations down. Three of Obama's defence secretaries complained about his meddling. These are all facts.

Edited by Penge Eagle (20 Oct 2017 7.59pm)

Alert a moderator to this post | Board Moderator

Mr_Gristle In the land of Whelk Eaters 20 Oct 17 8.15pm
Originally posted by Stirlingsays So that's what you offer me?.....North Korea as the rational actor. I should imagine that in five years they would have a reasonable build up to make such an attack..Far easier to hit Europe than an Island in the ocean....London isn't a big danger...that's over 100 miles from my kids, but there's a major RAF site about 40 miles away. A post covering all attack options would be huge. I'm happy you are happy for your kids to grow in within the new cold war scenario but I'm very critical of the decisions that led to this. You are free to think and defend whatever crap you like. By the way, what makes your 'strategic studies' any better mate? You don't know 'feck' about what Russia or China would do anymore than I do. All that exist are options. Edited by Stirlingsays (20 Oct 2017 7.31pm) I think your strategic studies "level" is clearly evident in your recent posts. You'll easily find as much credible insight as you like about NATO's First Strike doctrine. If you think China's "war machine" is anywhere near comparable to that of the US and Russia (at the moment, I'll grant you) and strong enough to support any thoughts of a First Strike, you're clueless. Yeah, the picture with the Red Bear is more ambiguous, but the window for a conventional invasion of Europe from the East closed many years ago. They have s***loads of natural resources already and have the US air force based within striking distance from land bases the in the west, east and the south (Iraq, Israel). They've been set up on the strategic defensive for years, which is why they obsess about SAMs, interceptor and front line air superiority aircraft. (S-400, Mig-31 and the latest SU fighter variants). Facts > opinions. Your words to Kermit were "keep up, slow child". Right back at you. Edited by Mr_Gristle (20 Oct 2017 8.16pm) Well I think Simon's head is large; always involved in espionage. (Name that tune)
Alert a moderator to this post

Mr_Gristle

In the land of Whelk Eaters 20 Oct 17 8.15pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

So that's what you offer me?.....North Korea as the rational actor.

I'm happy you are happy for your kids to grow in within the new cold war scenario but I'm very critical of the decisions that led to this. You are free to think and defend whatever crap you like.

By the way, what makes your 'strategic studies' any better mate? You don't know 'feck' about what Russia or China would do anymore than I do. All that exist are options.

Edited by Stirlingsays (20 Oct 2017 7.31pm)

I think your strategic studies "level" is clearly evident in your recent posts.

You'll easily find as much credible insight as you like about NATO's First Strike doctrine. If you think China's "war machine" is anywhere near comparable to that of the US and Russia (at the moment, I'll grant you) and strong enough to support any thoughts of a First Strike, you're clueless.

Yeah, the picture with the Red Bear is more ambiguous, but the window for a conventional invasion of Europe from the East closed many years ago. They have s***loads of natural resources already and have the US air force based within striking distance from land bases the in the west, east and the south (Iraq, Israel). They've been set up on the strategic defensive for years, which is why they obsess about SAMs, interceptor and front line air superiority aircraft. (S-400, Mig-31 and the latest SU fighter variants). Facts > opinions.

Your words to Kermit were "keep up, slow child". Right back at you.

Edited by Mr_Gristle (20 Oct 2017 8.16pm)

Well I think Simon's head is large; always involved in espionage. (Name that tune)

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 20 Oct 17 8.25pm
Originally posted by Mr_Gristle I think your strategic studies "level" is clearly evident in your recent posts. You'll easily find as much credible insight as you like about NATO's First Strike doctrine. If you think China's "war machine" is anywhere near comparable to that of the US and Russia (at the moment, I'll grant you) and strong enough to support any thoughts of a First Strike, you're clueless. Yeah, the picture with the Red Bear is more ambiguous, but the window for a conventional invasion of Europe from the East closed many years ago. They have s***loads of natural resources already and have the US air force based within striking distance from land bases the in the west, east and the south (Iraq, Israel). They've been set up on the strategic defensive for years, which is why they obsess about SAMs, interceptor and front line air superiority aircraft. (S-400, Mig-31 and the latest SU fighter variants). Facts > opinions. Your words to Kermit were "keep up, slow child". Right back at you. Nice strawman reply to an argument I didn't make. As for you thinking you can refer to intelligence. You just make me laugh....Does 'Mr_Gristle' also refer to what's between your ears or legs? Whatever it is, the name accounts for the impression. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

20 Oct 17 8.25pm

Originally posted by Mr_Gristle

I think your strategic studies "level" is clearly evident in your recent posts.

Your words to Kermit were "keep up, slow child". Right back at you.

Nice strawman reply to an argument I didn't make.

As for you thinking you can refer to intelligence. You just make me laugh....Does 'Mr_Gristle' also refer to what's between your ears or legs? Whatever it is, the name accounts for the impression.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 20 Oct 17 8.30pm
Originally posted by Kermit8 ok if anyone is concerned about North Korean nukes hitting the Home Counties then I suggest you have a long holiday, relax and try to work out when it was exactly you became paranoid and lost the plot. ? Facts don't lie. It becomes an option within a few years. The warhead is already developed it's only the delivery system that needs improvement. Edited by Stirlingsays (20 Oct 2017 8.31pm) 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

20 Oct 17 8.30pm

Originally posted by Kermit8

Facts don't lie.

It becomes an option within a few years. The warhead is already developed it's only the delivery system that needs improvement.

Edited by Stirlingsays (20 Oct 2017 8.31pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 5 of 16 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Raqqa captured

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors