Live Conflict Israel-Palestine War|Regional Escalations
- Thread starter Kartal1
- Start date
Ravager
Contributor
- Messages
- 1,095
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Finally ... At least we are on the same age here ...
Gary
Experienced member
- Messages
- 8,361
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
When it comes to the issue of Palestine, the issue is a big deal for either :
Both intersect each other but not always in support of each other. So when it comes to Palestine, they'll either be liberated under the banner of Arab nationalism or under the banner of Islam. I'm not expecting a South American Latino expedition to liberate that piece of land. This is an issue of those two I listed and it will stay that way until the very end times.
The secularist Arabs/Nasserists tried to liberate Palestine under the banner of Arab nationalism during the times of Gamal Abdel Nasser, after two failed attempts and after only less than 20 years of effort, the Arab nationalists conceded with the signing of the Camp David Accords,
therefore making the Islamists the only player unwilling to step aside and continue the struggle no matter how futile some people might think. Of course, wars are not for the faint-hearted and weak-spirited, but this is for another story.
Hamas is one of those Islamist groups and as you might already know, unlike the secular Fatah, they don't concede, in fact not only do they refuse to concede, they did what people think otherwise...they attacked.
Of course, the potential of Hamas alone is not enough to overturn the strategic situation, to liberate Palestine, there could only be one option, the military option. And the military options should not be exercised the same way the secular Arabs of the times of Gamal Abdel Nasser tried to do, that is to prepare for a single fight, October war style, and then hope for the best. If the failed Nasserists' attempts to liberate Palestine teach us anything is that, the conclusion of wars should never be dictated by one or two wins/defeats in battle, in contrast to the failure of the secular Arabs, wars executed by the communists in Viet Nam and China and Islamists in Afghanistan ended up in victory, even though they are tactically always defeated. Did they achieve those with superior weaponry and a more advanced academic society? Nope.
Von Clausewitz said that War is just politics by other means. It is not the means to the end, rather it's just the tool to achieve political goals. And what is the political goal here? None other than the complete eradication of Israel, from the river to the sea.
All politics is measured by two factors:
Wars as one form of politics are just mere tools to make sure that the "cost" outweighs the "benefit", the 'cost' itself could be anything, during the times of the classical age of wars, the cost is either the number of deaths a country suffered in the battlefield and as the dawn of air power came to be, the cost includes the number of industry destroyed by one party to another. But costs itself are constantly evolving and are not limited to material losses.
Let's say my earlier wish that the entire MENA countries surrounding Palestine were engulfed in war ? who do you think will be shit scared about things going on? The Arabs ? or the Israelis themselves?
Anyone who studied the way things work of the Middle East knows that these "Arab countries", monarchs and republics alike, served no other duty other than keeping the safety and security of israel, this is a well-established fact about the order of the Middle East, these countries function in general is to stop any attempt by the Muslims surrounding the Jews of Israel to revive the struggle to recapture Palestine which had been abandoned by secular Arabs that ruled the countries where Muslims reside. This is why the U.S. put so much hope and training in the Arabs Mukhabarat, to stem any potential opposition that might rose up, destroy the established order that U.S. designed at the signing of the Camp David accords. This is the reality that people like to either 1). Forgot, 2) pretends its not the case.
This is what explains why a demography of roughly 1.5 billion Muslims, 555 million Arabs aren't able to do anything of importance to harm the security of Israel, a country of less than 9 million. Those potentials are quashed at the start by the state apparatus of countries surrounding Israel. It certainly isn't a lack of motivation, but the lack of channeling of those motivations.
If you are an Israeli security officer, in charge of ensuring the security of Israel. Whenever you find any movements, that could potentially be a harm to Israel, you would likely call one of these guys in the Arab Mukhabarat.
Am I lying? Well how about you hear it straight from the dog's mouth himself? Here is Stuart Seldowitz, a former U.S. state dept official. Listen to what he said about the Mukhabarat (Arab intelligence service) and their relations to the evryday civilians.
This is also what The Times of Israel said in their editorial before they decided to pull it out of the internet.
So this is something that people need to understand, fail to understand this and you'd find yourself hitting the wrong target. Israel is more brittle than you might think.
But but but Gary, what are we going to do with the remaining Muslims who don't want to fight?
Well, I see only opportunities going forward, talking about my earlier line about the Cost-Benefit ratio of politics, let's say in such wars, from the 550 million Arabs, a quarter or more refused to fight, they'd rather have a good life away from the horrors of bullets and shrapnels flying on top of your head. Where do you think would they go?
Would they escape to Africa?
Or to blue continent Europe?
My feeling is that they will go towards Europe, potentially creating a crisis in an already overburdened continent, which happens to be the main ally of Israel. People should not take lightly how big of a deal it is once it reaches that stage. Europe's white population fertility is in free fall, and the order that characterized the continent for the last centuries has been so severely degraded that few European cities could be mistaken as Kisnahasa in Africa. They said, import the third world, be the third world lol. Add that to the very high fertility of the Arabs and Africans which could soon overwhelm the demographic balance and you could end up with a European civil war. Another opportunity that we could potentially manipulate to end that way. Remember this is politics, and war is just politics and in war cheating is allowed. If we could turn the pacifist to create trouble in other countries then I see why not ?
So while the side effect of mass warfare in the Middle East towards Europe's stability is something to exploit, let's look at the main battlefield, the Middle East. Like my earlier post, the problem with Nasserists and their attempt to get rid of Israel is that they put all their eggs in one basket, they prepped up for Operation Ramadhan (October war) and when things didn't go their way, they opted for peace, thereby handing Israel the victory and most importantly the stability they craved.
In Viet Nam and Afghanistan the winner didn't achieve those goals by winning on the battlefield, rather they won where it matters the most, Capitol Hills. Both Vo Nguyen Giap and Mullah Omar won the war and imposed their political will on the land by making the Americans unable to continue to justify what they are doing. Did the VC and the Taliban won a single battle ? nope, did they capture any significant population centers? nope.
Instead of short wars, Arabs/Muslims should opt for a campaign, a campaign that has more longevity than traditional short wars that characterized European warfare since WW1. A campaign is a series of planned actions. It is a large-scale and long-durationed that incorporates a series of interrelated military operations or battles forming a distinct part of a larger conflict to achieve political goals. Military campaigns are designed to help alter the course of the war. They can include a single battle, but more often they comprise a number of battles over a protracted period of time or a considerable distance but within a single theatre of operations or delimited area.
Think about the Ho Chi Minh trail campaign by Vo Nguyen Giap, or the IED planting campaign by the Taliban. Those might seem menial, but the effect multiplies when combined with larger efforts in other military operations in alrger picture to achieve a pre-determined objective of political goals.
But again, the manpower needed to sustain this effort could only be unlocked by turning the Middle East upside down, Syria-style. In such scenario, the Arab allies of Israel would no longer be able to control who owns, and who fires the gun. Anyone could start creating their own military unit and organization and the best of them all will tower over the rest.
The only loser in such scenario is none other than Israel, because if it reaches that stage, the guys at Israeli Security Council could no longer send their 'man' to the capitals of Sunni Arabia and asked local rulers to send their Mukhabarat to quashed the movements. Form the many militants popping out, there's no guarantee that one or two will not train his barrel towards Tel Aviv.
And if indeed they entually turn their barrels towards Tel Aviv, then what ? does Israel tiny 9 million people could stop the tide ? Please note that Israel war economy only survive for two months before the IDF decide to demobilize their soldier to ease the burden on their economy. Flight getting out of Israel is increasing as people are fleeing a warzone that is still miles away from they are in the North. Israel, isn't built for durability. and that durability must be targeted, wars must be enflamed to the point that the Israelis themselves think that their attempt is futile. This is achievable.
Hamas attacks and the subsequent rage in the Muslim world with the inaction of their governments are putting this scenario closer than you might think.
And for Relic who dreamed that the Israeli nuked Cairo, please don't forget to add Paris, Rome, Cologne, Berlin to that list etc because the future Islamic cities would not be limited to Cairo, Baghdad, and Beirut.
to be continued...
- Arabs
- Muslims
Both intersect each other but not always in support of each other. So when it comes to Palestine, they'll either be liberated under the banner of Arab nationalism or under the banner of Islam. I'm not expecting a South American Latino expedition to liberate that piece of land. This is an issue of those two I listed and it will stay that way until the very end times.
The secularist Arabs/Nasserists tried to liberate Palestine under the banner of Arab nationalism during the times of Gamal Abdel Nasser, after two failed attempts and after only less than 20 years of effort, the Arab nationalists conceded with the signing of the Camp David Accords,
therefore making the Islamists the only player unwilling to step aside and continue the struggle no matter how futile some people might think. Of course, wars are not for the faint-hearted and weak-spirited, but this is for another story.
Hamas is one of those Islamist groups and as you might already know, unlike the secular Fatah, they don't concede, in fact not only do they refuse to concede, they did what people think otherwise...they attacked.
Of course, the potential of Hamas alone is not enough to overturn the strategic situation, to liberate Palestine, there could only be one option, the military option. And the military options should not be exercised the same way the secular Arabs of the times of Gamal Abdel Nasser tried to do, that is to prepare for a single fight, October war style, and then hope for the best. If the failed Nasserists' attempts to liberate Palestine teach us anything is that, the conclusion of wars should never be dictated by one or two wins/defeats in battle, in contrast to the failure of the secular Arabs, wars executed by the communists in Viet Nam and China and Islamists in Afghanistan ended up in victory, even though they are tactically always defeated. Did they achieve those with superior weaponry and a more advanced academic society? Nope.
Von Clausewitz said that War is just politics by other means. It is not the means to the end, rather it's just the tool to achieve political goals. And what is the political goal here? None other than the complete eradication of Israel, from the river to the sea.
All politics is measured by two factors:
- The Cost
- The Benefit
Wars as one form of politics are just mere tools to make sure that the "cost" outweighs the "benefit", the 'cost' itself could be anything, during the times of the classical age of wars, the cost is either the number of deaths a country suffered in the battlefield and as the dawn of air power came to be, the cost includes the number of industry destroyed by one party to another. But costs itself are constantly evolving and are not limited to material losses.
Let's say my earlier wish that the entire MENA countries surrounding Palestine were engulfed in war ? who do you think will be shit scared about things going on? The Arabs ? or the Israelis themselves?
Anyone who studied the way things work of the Middle East knows that these "Arab countries", monarchs and republics alike, served no other duty other than keeping the safety and security of israel, this is a well-established fact about the order of the Middle East, these countries function in general is to stop any attempt by the Muslims surrounding the Jews of Israel to revive the struggle to recapture Palestine which had been abandoned by secular Arabs that ruled the countries where Muslims reside. This is why the U.S. put so much hope and training in the Arabs Mukhabarat, to stem any potential opposition that might rose up, destroy the established order that U.S. designed at the signing of the Camp David accords. This is the reality that people like to either 1). Forgot, 2) pretends its not the case.
This is what explains why a demography of roughly 1.5 billion Muslims, 555 million Arabs aren't able to do anything of importance to harm the security of Israel, a country of less than 9 million. Those potentials are quashed at the start by the state apparatus of countries surrounding Israel. It certainly isn't a lack of motivation, but the lack of channeling of those motivations.
If you are an Israeli security officer, in charge of ensuring the security of Israel. Whenever you find any movements, that could potentially be a harm to Israel, you would likely call one of these guys in the Arab Mukhabarat.
Am I lying? Well how about you hear it straight from the dog's mouth himself? Here is Stuart Seldowitz, a former U.S. state dept official. Listen to what he said about the Mukhabarat (Arab intelligence service) and their relations to the evryday civilians.
This is also what The Times of Israel said in their editorial before they decided to pull it out of the internet.
So this is something that people need to understand, fail to understand this and you'd find yourself hitting the wrong target. Israel is more brittle than you might think.
But but but Gary, what are we going to do with the remaining Muslims who don't want to fight?
Well, I see only opportunities going forward, talking about my earlier line about the Cost-Benefit ratio of politics, let's say in such wars, from the 550 million Arabs, a quarter or more refused to fight, they'd rather have a good life away from the horrors of bullets and shrapnels flying on top of your head. Where do you think would they go?
Would they escape to Africa?
Or to blue continent Europe?
My feeling is that they will go towards Europe, potentially creating a crisis in an already overburdened continent, which happens to be the main ally of Israel. People should not take lightly how big of a deal it is once it reaches that stage. Europe's white population fertility is in free fall, and the order that characterized the continent for the last centuries has been so severely degraded that few European cities could be mistaken as Kisnahasa in Africa. They said, import the third world, be the third world lol. Add that to the very high fertility of the Arabs and Africans which could soon overwhelm the demographic balance and you could end up with a European civil war. Another opportunity that we could potentially manipulate to end that way. Remember this is politics, and war is just politics and in war cheating is allowed. If we could turn the pacifist to create trouble in other countries then I see why not ?
So while the side effect of mass warfare in the Middle East towards Europe's stability is something to exploit, let's look at the main battlefield, the Middle East. Like my earlier post, the problem with Nasserists and their attempt to get rid of Israel is that they put all their eggs in one basket, they prepped up for Operation Ramadhan (October war) and when things didn't go their way, they opted for peace, thereby handing Israel the victory and most importantly the stability they craved.
In Viet Nam and Afghanistan the winner didn't achieve those goals by winning on the battlefield, rather they won where it matters the most, Capitol Hills. Both Vo Nguyen Giap and Mullah Omar won the war and imposed their political will on the land by making the Americans unable to continue to justify what they are doing. Did the VC and the Taliban won a single battle ? nope, did they capture any significant population centers? nope.
Instead of short wars, Arabs/Muslims should opt for a campaign, a campaign that has more longevity than traditional short wars that characterized European warfare since WW1. A campaign is a series of planned actions. It is a large-scale and long-durationed that incorporates a series of interrelated military operations or battles forming a distinct part of a larger conflict to achieve political goals. Military campaigns are designed to help alter the course of the war. They can include a single battle, but more often they comprise a number of battles over a protracted period of time or a considerable distance but within a single theatre of operations or delimited area.
Think about the Ho Chi Minh trail campaign by Vo Nguyen Giap, or the IED planting campaign by the Taliban. Those might seem menial, but the effect multiplies when combined with larger efforts in other military operations in alrger picture to achieve a pre-determined objective of political goals.
But again, the manpower needed to sustain this effort could only be unlocked by turning the Middle East upside down, Syria-style. In such scenario, the Arab allies of Israel would no longer be able to control who owns, and who fires the gun. Anyone could start creating their own military unit and organization and the best of them all will tower over the rest.
The only loser in such scenario is none other than Israel, because if it reaches that stage, the guys at Israeli Security Council could no longer send their 'man' to the capitals of Sunni Arabia and asked local rulers to send their Mukhabarat to quashed the movements. Form the many militants popping out, there's no guarantee that one or two will not train his barrel towards Tel Aviv.
And if indeed they entually turn their barrels towards Tel Aviv, then what ? does Israel tiny 9 million people could stop the tide ? Please note that Israel war economy only survive for two months before the IDF decide to demobilize their soldier to ease the burden on their economy. Flight getting out of Israel is increasing as people are fleeing a warzone that is still miles away from they are in the North. Israel, isn't built for durability. and that durability must be targeted, wars must be enflamed to the point that the Israelis themselves think that their attempt is futile. This is achievable.
Hamas attacks and the subsequent rage in the Muslim world with the inaction of their governments are putting this scenario closer than you might think.
And for Relic who dreamed that the Israeli nuked Cairo, please don't forget to add Paris, Rome, Cologne, Berlin to that list etc because the future Islamic cities would not be limited to Cairo, Baghdad, and Beirut.
to be continued...
mehmed beg
Well-known member
- Messages
- 356
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Please spare me your childish nonsense, will you?
Contradiction between the first and second paragraph.
If , you are your so called cause is superior in Ukraine and you identify Israel as your cause, which you do, so why the disparity between 2 cases?
In one, you just have " moral superiority " in other which mirrors your cause ( as you have said in both cases " our cause or support " ) , you are saying that " let's better man win" ?
Why disparity? Than why your previous unsubstantiated propaganda for Israel?
What are you trying to say here?
I know that you are hardly literate , but can you realise at least what do you want?
What superiority or morals are you talking about? I cannot see even that you can define anything of that as it is relative to you.
Moral of , let's say Dutch?
What? Porno cafes in Amsterdam? Has that anything to do with " moral " or it is just a cause? Or " may better man win " is it moral that , the mighty is right?
Morals and the meaning of the words have their real meaning, you might think that those qualities are relative and you can make them as you go along. Really?
So in the future, try not to engage into concepts that you really don't understands.
- Messages
- 1,833
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
I'm aware of your claims, and where your source is from. It was an article from "times of Israel", which I find not trustworthy. Several members of the forum do not take their sources from Israeli media, so I hope they do not fall for their propaganda. Morocco never tipped Israel during the 1967 war, and participated 6 years later in 1973 with the best, and ONLY infantry brigade we had available after our independence. Again be aware of foreign media channels trying to split the Muslim nation and our opinions.
mehmed beg
Well-known member
- Messages
- 356
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Al Jazira article, I read it years ago.
Basically both Jordan and Morocco. Basically the top floors of the hotel, where Arab meeting took place was were filled by the Israeli ear dropping equipment
- Messages
- 1,833
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Not seen that al Jazeera article, but it does not change the fact that the source comes from the mouth of the former head of Israeli military intelligence ( Shlomo Gazit). Not reliable my friend.
- Messages
- 1,833
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
I do not think the issue is about manpower or defense spending for the Muslim world. We need to remember to take our feelings to the side and reflect in a rational way. If we reflect a little we will see that the core of the issue falls within two main subjects. The willpower of the different states that pursue their own interest, and most importantly their defense industries. Turkey plays and will play a more important role here, and I hope it will use its power for the best interest of the region regardless of differences, and past issues with other states in the region. As you mentioned in the post, there is the Americans/West with Israel. How can we wage a war against our enemies with no defense sovereignty? Sacrificing yourself, and dying is easy! Protecting innocent women, the elderly, and kids while giving your enemy a hard time is a difficult task.
You are right, and their approach is not how we Muslims are supposed to conduct ourselves. We never learn from history, do we? For us Muslims, Allah has already given us the solution to our problems. In surah ar-raad allah swt says " Verily Allah does not change a people's condition unless they change their inner selves. ". How many times do we see Muslims attending demonstrations, begging the states of the Western world for support? We have an internal issue brother, but there is indeed a mix of hard power that our states possess, as well as issues within our societies. The solution starts and ends with the weapon my friend, and if we are in a situation of weakness there are other solutions such as supporting the Palestinians with political, and diplomatic pressure, as well as funding resources, and weapons under the table.
No keyboard warriors will fight my friend, the ones you see online are mostly cowards who only bark. I would not say that the Muslim world is a scam, but unfortunately, we were born in a time period of weakness in our history. We will get on our feet again very soon! In some cases, you find determination among Muslim laymen but again we come back to state affairs as I mentioned above.
- Messages
- 1,876
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Make no mistake about it, my position is sound, regardless of whether or not you agree with it.
It is my belief that Ukrainian values are better aligned with Western values and superior to Russian values, therefore, I'm supporting Ukraine. Furthermore, I detest Putin's strong man grip over his country and refusal to practice any form of democracy. Instead, he simply jails, poisons or threatens anyone that runs against him. Russia is also expansionist towards neighbours that share our Western values and that must be stopped at at all costs.
It is also my belief that Israel's democratic / Jewish values better align with the West than the Arab / Muslim values of the countries that surround them. Therefore, I side with Israel in terms of regional conflict, although I don't really have an axe to grind with Palestinians, who are largely a third party "tool" in a proxy war between the Muslims in the Middle East that refuse to accept a Jewish state, but won't fight their own battles, and Israel who has forged its existence (with the help of the West), by curb stomping their Arab / Muslim attackers every time they've tried to invade and destroy Israel.
That said, I believe that everyone should fight for what they believe in, therefore, I'm all for the West arming Israel to the teeth, Iran and company arming their respective combatants to the teeth and letting these two sides "have at it". They clearly want to fight each other. They both feel their side is in the right. They both feel well supported by their "friends". Let the bombs fall, the rockets get traded back and forth, and at the end of the day we'll see who wants a victory more. Then we can tip our cap to that victor.
mehmed beg
Well-known member
- Messages
- 356
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
What a drivel. Did you actually understand what I have written to you?
What values are you talking about? what exactly Ukrainian values are and what Russians are?
Please skip the spiel about democracy etc, I don't pay any attention about that , neither it has any meaningful points in that conflict .
These things are wars , what does it mean " may better man win" ?
Well , I am sure if the Palestinians have material advantage over Israel, you would sing to different tune.
You are looking at 2 conflicts with the same prism but different " conclusions" . In Russia, you have " ideas, values and reasons " but in Palestine it is Hegelian outcome?! Which one is which?
- Messages
- 1,876
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
The "better man" in a war (unlike a street fight) is the one who winds up victorious. Often that's because of some of the following.
1. The superior industrial base to support the war.
2. The collective burning desire of the populous to win the conflict at any costs.
3. The technological edge. Although this one doesn't always matter.
4. Military and economic support from Allies and partners.
5. The better trained and prepared military or combatants.
There are others, but you get the point. What's truly sad is that you can't seem to understand that the world is divided into "teams" right now. Those teams are generally broken down into two groups.
Group #1: Those who have decided to play the game of geopolitics by an established set of rules and norms.
Group #2: Those who have decided the play the game of geopolitics by an alternate set of rules and norms.
Group #3: Those who are still deciding whose side they are on because it's inconvenient for them to fully commit to one side or the other. In some instances they are individually powerful enough that they don't have to choose a side (at least not right now).
Therefore, on one side you have the likes of Russia, Belarus, North Korea, Iran, Lebanon, Palestine, etc, etc... Who receive some level of support from countries that are part of the undecided group, namely China, India, Indonesia, Turkey, South Africa, Brazil, Saudi Arabia, etc.
On the other side of the conflict you have the NATO countries, Japan, Israel, South Korea, Taiwan Ukraine, Australia, New Zealand, etc, etc... Who receive some level of support from countries that are part of the undecided group, namely Turkey, India, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, UAE, etc.
I can't fathom why people want to keep breaking this down into some philosophical debate. This is purely geopolitics at play. Israel is on team "West". Palestine is on team "Other". Team "West" is arming Israel to help them win this conflict. Team "Other" is arming the likes of HAMAS, Hezbollah and the Houthis to help them win this conflict on Palestine's behalf. Team "Undecided" are participating in ways that serve their own domestic / strategic interests.
The stage is set... Let them fight if they want to fight. But most importantly, whoever loses needs to take their loss like a man and move the hell on.
mehmed beg
Well-known member
- Messages
- 356
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
I have told you before, don't analyse any war to me , I was in one. Don't talk about teams , you think that I don't know what's around me ?
The only thing I I am asking you here , and this is the 3rd time.
Just say in the regards of Ukrainian Russian war , may better man win , just as you are saying in regards of Palestine. That's all , just a bit of constancy.
To inform you, I met , both Russans and Ukrainians in the Bosnian war and I can tell, at that time, they has the same values. What changed?
The only thing I I am asking you here , and this is the 3rd time.
Just say in the regards of Ukrainian Russian war , may better man win , just as you are saying in regards of Palestine. That's all , just a bit of constancy.
To inform you, I met , both Russans and Ukrainians in the Bosnian war and I can tell, at that time, they has the same values. What changed?
Scott Summers
Contributor
- Messages
- 648
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
@Relic
In which war did Israel fought their battles alone?
Answer: only in 2006 against Hezbollah and they lost.
Even now they got 250 cargoplanes and 40 ships with militairy material from the US and they got support on the ground from US and British troops.
The rest of your text is like always drogreasons and rubbish without argument or context. Come with facts soldierboy.
The day you screamed here "mAy ThE bEsT wİn In ThE IsRAELi PaLeStIniaN cOnFliCt" was the day you lost every credibility.
In which war did Israel fought their battles alone?
Answer: only in 2006 against Hezbollah and they lost.
Even now they got 250 cargoplanes and 40 ships with militairy material from the US and they got support on the ground from US and British troops.
The rest of your text is like always drogreasons and rubbish without argument or context. Come with facts soldierboy.
The day you screamed here "mAy ThE bEsT wİn In ThE IsRAELi PaLeStIniaN cOnFliCt" was the day you lost every credibility.
- Messages
- 5,291
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Scott Summers
Contributor
- Messages
- 648
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Houthis or Hezbollah are waiting for the Super Bowl at 11 februari and will take revenge.
mehmed beg
Well-known member
- Messages
- 356
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Us had plenty of time , over the years to deal with that kind of issue.
Good old Iranians, you can always count when things get tough to do a runner.
It is not for nothing that they are called Rafida .
