[bots]

Originally Posted by Nicky91

depends if britain goes for the Alliance with USA

we are already in an alliance with the USA, it's called NATO

[Cherry Christmas]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

we are already in an alliance with the USA, it's called NATO

[Twosugars]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

we are already in an alliance with the USA, it's called NATO

Dont be obtuse. Did germany or france rush to join Iraqi war?
Theres alliance and theres being up america' rectum.
We know what is Britain's preference

[Nicky91]

Originally Posted by Twosugars

Dont be obtuse. Did germany or france rush to join Iraqi war?
Theres alliance and theres being up america' rectum.
We know what is Britain's preference

nope, Germany/France aren't that closely involved in that Iraqi war


our dutch foreign minister btw had stated we are gonna pull out our boats in the area, out of caution and risk of being attacked now because of America's crimes

[bots]

if it escalates into a proper war with the USA against Iran then the NATO countries are duty bound to come to the assistance of the USA. That is the whole point about NATO. People really should be more aware of the world they live in

[Nicky91]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

if it escalates into a proper war with the USA against Iran then the NATO countries are duty bound to come to the assistance of the USA. That is the whole point about NATO. People really should be more aware of the world they live in

and then what, putting themselves into danger


and as for that last sentence, i am aware of what world we live in, also Trump is in the wrong here

like i earlier stated, you should Always try to negotiate at a neutral location first of all, and only kill a major military official as a last resort, and i mean Trump's ''negotiating'' with the both korea's was a by the media called success so what is the difference here then


since North Korea also was a same (or even worse) nuclear threat towards the US, and now also a threat possibly when Kim had stated they are working on new strategic weapons

[bots]

Originally Posted by Nicky91

and then what, putting themselves into danger


and as for that last sentence, i am aware of what world we live in, also Trump is in the wrong here

like i earlier stated, you should Always try to negotiate at a neutral location first of all, and only kill a major military official as a last resort, and i mean Trump's ''negotiating'' with the both korea's was a by the media called success so what is the difference here then


since North Korea also was a same (or even worse) nuclear threat towards the US, and now also a threat possibly when Kim had stated they are working on new strategic weapons

with respect Nicky, there is not a chance in hell that any western country is going to side with Iran over the USA in a war. Of course nobody wants a war. The USA and Iran don't want a war either, but these things happen. For years, Iran has committed terrorist atrocities against the west. They are becoming more and more active, something had to be done and taking out a terrorist general seems like a reasonable step to me.

[Nicky91]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

with respect Nicky, there is not a chance in hell that any western country is going to side with Iran over the USA in a war. Of course nobody wants a war. The USA and Iran don't want a war either, but these things happen. For years, Iran has committed terrorist atrocities against the west. They are becoming more and more active, something had to be done and taking out a terrorist general seems like a reasonable step to me.

Iran does not want a war, they now just want justice served to those who killed their general


also your statement of ''terrorist general'' makes no sense, since he in recent years fought against ISIL terrorists, extremists in smaller Iraqi cities