Kibkom North Cyprus Forum

What a shock this morning with the Quds commanders death this will surely cause massive repercussions in the area.

I have no idea why this posted twice

Embassy staff already being taken out of Basra

Stocks in Turkey will suffer as investors get nervous. If war comes then having Iran on the border will most definitely destabilise this area and after the deliberate killing of one of the most powerful people in Iran will sure as hell result in serious repercussions .

Sure the first target will be where the drone was launched from

What goes around,comes around,end of story!

Just be glad you don't live in the south. RAF Akrotiri could well be a target ., and that's before the UK government joins in any action against the mad mullahs of Iran. As for a middle east wide war well Cyprus is definitely too near for my liking.

Steel helmets on!

I handed mine in when I got demobbed!!

trooper wrote:Just be glad you don't live in the south. RAF Akrotiri could well be a target ., and that's before the UK government joins in any action against the mad mullahs of Iran. As for a middle east wide war well Cyprus is definitely too near for my liking.

Steel helmets on!

I think head protection is now Kevlar-based.

tomsteel wrote:

trooper wrote:Just be glad you don't live in the south. RAF Akrotiri could well be a target ., and that's before the UK government joins in any action against the mad mullahs of Iran. As for a middle east wide war well Cyprus is definitely too near for my liking.

Steel helmets on!

I think head protection is now Kevlar-based.

I think the only protection we’d have Tom is to bend over, put your head as far as you can between your knees ..... and you know the rest from your NBC training!

I am not a great fan of Bojo, but I did find it reassuring to have a Prime Minister who , reportedly, when told of the event, summed it succinctly, expressed his views briefly and simply and echoed my own reaction - in one single word

Which was?

Was it this: "Given the leading role he has played in actions that have led to the deaths of thousands of innocent civilians and western personnel, we will not lament his death," Mr Johnson said." or maybe "It is clear, however, that all calls for retaliation or reprisals will simply lead to more violence in the region and they are in no-one's interest.". In fact the only "one word" response I would support in reply to the remarks made by the Prime Minister by the Shadow Justice secretary was this one: "Mr Johnson's response was "pathetic", adding that he should stand up to a US president "recklessly threatening to launch a war".

But why should he care, he is far away and won't want to take a chance he could lose his "Brilliant" deal with the USA would he? Don't worry, the FCO will send a gunboat once they can hire one - lol.

Deniz1 wrote:Which was?

Gosh?

The remarks quoted by Waddo came later. According to what I read his first reaction on being told was one word which I cant put on here (hence the locked mouth smilie) but as a clue it has four letters and starts with F.

Much more appropriate imho than tthe insincere waffle he and ohers came up with later

Then as it concerned his buddy Trump I can only assume that the word was - FINE! After all he won't want to upset his pal will he. - lol.

Not idea what the prime ministers first word or thought was when he heard the news about the Quds Commanders demise.

FWIW; bearing in mind that the Quds Commander has been responsible for many western deaths and ongoing planning to strike again, I thought the prime ministers reported statement was spot on. Basically it’s was “we won’t lament his passing but we urge restraint so as not to further escalate the situation”.

Seems a good, balanced response to me.

Wouldn't want to be accused of war mongering but bombing the Iranians back to the stone age has considerable appeal.

As the Iranians are committed to destroying Israel perhaps the Israelis should get their retaliation in first.

I’m not a huge fan of the US and loath Trump but looking at this from a nationalist point of view are our best interests served by standing with the most powerful military in the world whose navy controls the oceans of the world or Iran? Obviously there are many in the anyone but America camp but no one ever lost money in the long term backing the biggest dog in a fight.

I think we are a bit too close for comfort if there is a war. Trump and co are well insulated from harm unlike us.

PoshinDevon wrote:Not idea what the prime ministers first word or thought was when he heard the news about the Quds Commanders demise.

FWIW; bearing in mind that the Quds Commander has been responsible for many western deaths and ongoing planning to strike again, I thought the prime ministers reported statement was spot on. Basically it’s was “we won’t lament his passing but we urge restraint so as not to further escalate the situation”.

Seems a good, ba anced response to me.

Sounds like a load of drivel to me. Clever ., diplomatic drivel avoiding offence to anyone ( the man has the gift of the gab) but still drivel.

Deniz1 wrote:I think we are a bit too close for comfort if there is a war. Trump and co are well insulated from harm unlike us.

Hear hear!

PoshinDevon wrote:Not idea what the prime ministers first word or thought was when he heard the news about the Quds Commanders demise.

FWIW; bearing in mind that the Quds Commander has been responsible for many western deaths and ongoing planning to strike again, I thought the prime ministers reported statement was spot on. Basically it’s was “we won’t lament his passing but we urge restraint so as not to further escalate the situation”.

Seems a good, balanced response to me.

Completely with you PID

Now we start! 80 american troops killed by missiles fired from Iran. Trumps comment "All is well" but that was before the deaths were announced. Hard hats out folks.

The BBC reports that it is unclear as to if any casualty's among US Troops, whereas TASS reports 80 casualty's but does not say if they were civilians or troops as TASS is Russian I would prefer to believe the BBC

Latest from Daily Mail here https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... rikes.html but of course Tehran would say that

Early this morning BBC news reported 80 deaths.

Deniz1 wrote:Early this morning BBC news reported 80 deaths.

You trust the BBC? Leftist organisation, milking the common taxpayer via fees, which it wasted on inflated salaries for its hierarchy and 'stars.'

tomsteel wrote:

Deniz1 wrote:Early this morning BBC news reported 80 deaths.

You trust the BBC? Leftist organisation, milking the common taxpayer via fees, which it wasted on inflated salaries for its hierarchy and 'stars.'

Tomsteel - correct.

https://www.pscp.tv/w/cOYBOnR3LTExOTM5O ... RAhsd7JWLH

Trump addresses the nation

I dont trust anyone! BBC never reports anything going on in TRNC

Trooper,

A classic case of a non sequitur

"Wouldn't want to be accused of war mongering but bombing the Iranians back to the stone age has considerable appeal."

A non sequitur is a conclusion or reply that doesn't follow logically from the previous statement.

Cake and eat it springs to mind so which of your two statements is the one you really want, accused of warmongering or bombing? Coz if it's bombing back to the stone age then you are warmongering.