I think it is about being an ally, showing unity - don't you? A sardonic response, whilst possibly appearing clever at parties, doesn't exactly say anything about your true feelings about the airstrikes.

I suppose a better response would be to ignore them and maybe they'll go away?

It does sound like, "the enemy of my friend is my enemy", the "friend of my enemy is my enemy" and the "enemy of my enemy is my friend"- except that all we seem to be choosing the lesser of evils over there.

I believe that obama's flaccid dealings in the area have allowed the re-proliferation of ISIS.

That's a really good summation, because the cause and effect over there is an extremely complex issue with no magic fix - bombs alone won't do it.

That may get him a lot of laughs, but it isn't even close to being accurate.
  Here is a link to an article that sums up the Middle East probably better than any I've read. You lot will like it because it is critical of America - written by an American - and it is a well thought-out treatise on the continual Middle East conflict.

>>I think it is about being an ally, showing unity - don't you?

Not really.

How are your Freedom Fries?

No, it really?

Bloody autocucumber.

Interesting - the papers over here are all blaming the Blair regime.

It was mainly a Cheney show, Blair was a bumlicker.

Probably about the same as the Liberty Cabbage.

How's the tea?

I guess that's the trouble, people still reading newspapers. Over here, if one has access to a computer and can find You Tube uploads, they can contribute to the newspapers, writing "stories".

I don't think the press in general knows their arse from a hole in the ground, but I do know they didn't like Blair. Of course, when attacks come, people aren't quick to say, "Hey! Quick! Call a journalist to protect me!"