World war 3 now imminent

[Eirikur]

For the 2nd time in six months Trump will bring us on the verge of WW3 but will back down again because Putin has the weewee tapes

[WTFH]

Zero. Next question...

Well, if you have no issue with the UK selling weapons to middle-eastern leaders to be used on civilians, and you see no issue in the civilians having no means of safety, then what is your reason for saying that attack Assad is the right thing to do?

Note, I am not saying Assad is a good man, I am trying to understand the logic of those who are supporting Trump’s desire to have a war.

[DimPrawn]

Daily Mail are obviously taking the prospect of WW3 VERY seriously, see top story:

UK Home | Daily Mail Online

Good to see the DM for the important journalistic benchmark it has become.

[OwlHoot]

Daily Mail are obviously taking the prospect of WW3 VERY seriously, see top story:

UK Home | Daily Mail Online

Good to see the DM for the important journalistic benchmark it has become.

You'll look a right Charlie if the top Daily Wail article changes in a few hours to "ICBMs launched from multiple sites in Siberia"

[Eirikur]

You'll look a right Charlie if the top Daily Wail article changes in a few hours to "ICBMs launched from multiple sites in Siberia"

If they have time to change that headline at all while London evaporates in a nuclear fireball

[OwlHoot]

If they have time to change that headline at all while London evaporates in a nuclear fireball

That's true - They're probably not nearly as fast as Wikipedia article editors.

By the time the fireball explodes, everyone in central London with a Wikipedia page will have had their time of death on the article neatly updated!

[DoctorStrangelove]

If they have time to change that headline at all while London evaporates in a nuclear fireball

It's being so cheerful that keeps me going.

[WTFH]

It's being so cheerful that keeps me going.

Two suns - great song off a great album. Always reminds me of The Quiet Earth (in a completely non-sequitur way)

[minestrone]

Well, if you have no issue with the UK selling weapons to middle-eastern leaders to be used on civilians, and you see no issue in the civilians having no means of safety, then what is your reason for saying that attack Assad is the right thing to do?

Note, I am not saying Assad is a good man, I am trying to understand the logic of those who are supporting Trump’s desire to have a war.

Eh, ok.

In case you hadn't noticed this war has been trundling along for 7 years. Half a million killed and millions displaced to the point it is politically destabilising central Europe. American troops have been operating there long before trump was president and we now have a situation where a 2 dictators get their troops to surround towns filled with civilians and indescriminently bomb the tulip out of them with a regular use of nerve agents.

Obama made a big deal that the use of chemical weapons was a red line and when Assad killed 1000 in a day with them he did nothing and worse asked the Russians to solve the problem. This is Obamas feck up so claiming that Trump is starting a war is deranged revisionist bulltulip of the highest order.

Trump may be slightly unhinged but I do believe he at least gets upset when he sees children being hosed down and given salbutamol after being gassed with nerve agent.

With one tweet all the Russian military boats left Syrians ports and there has been no more air strikes. Assad is in some bunker somewhere and for the first time in years he is clearly tulipting himself. What will happen now is that we will bomb the crap out of his country and there will be permanent cease fire.

Trump is going to end this war and I salute him for doing it.

[minestrone]