How historically accurate is Dunkino?

File: dunk.jpg (114KB, 1148x629px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 1148x629px

>>3137775
Didnt watch it, but it probably leave out important facts (like the fact the French were protecting the evacuation the whole time) to focus on Brits getting a few bombs while they sit on the beach

Here's a short documentary that will tell you about the real Dunkirk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6C5P-AYGdY

Didn't watch it, but I'm going to take a wild guess that they literally made a film about the battle of Dunkirk without even mentioning French troops.

>>3137828
Well, they managed to make a game about WW1 without mentioning the French, so at this point...

>>3137795
>>3137828

It features French troops...

>>3137795
Watched it yesterday, it shows the French manning a defense against the Germans in the first five minutes and them not being allowed to evacuate (French colonial troops in 1940 France may not have been a thing I'm not sure) with the British till later on when they mention that the French are now evacuating with the Brits.
Not nearly what /pol/ hyped it up to be as Anglo propaganda, a solid film tbqh and the Germans don't really feature till right at the end, it's more just the British soldiers fear and random gunshots.

>>3137842
Yeah, but does it point out the fact they were the ones slowing down the Germans while Brits were sitting on the beach?

>>3137842
Are they all running away from the Nazis while crying and get saved by the heroic Brits?

>>3137847

yes

watch the fucking film

>>3137850
>>3137847
Right at the start the film makes it clear that French troops are the ones slowing the Nazis down.

>>3137795
The French are prominently in it

If you like older epic ww2 movies like The Battle of Britain, you'll like Dunkirk. If you are in anyway a ww2 guy and miss out on this kino in the theaters, you'll regret it when your contrarianism weres off and you watch it on Netflix in a couple of years

>>3137854
I aint givin money to Anglo propaganda

>>3137828
aaannndddd you're absolutely wrong

>>3137795
>>3137828
Pretty arrogant and presumptuous, wtach tthe movie before commenting about presumed inaccuraties

It's a good movie but it's been marred by retardation.

Whether it's bogshits being autistic about "muh anglo propaganda" or retards bickering about a lack of stronk womyn, it's been attacked for daring to glorify Britain.

All in all I guess it's up there among the more "accurate" historical movies, and it's one of the ones I'd certainly say managed to at least portray how the men acted and felt during it.

Movies portraying soldiers as average dudes are always my favourites, it's why I loved '71.

Watched it the other day.
How accurate was the civilian participation?
To me that was the main point of the movie.
You had the soldier on the beach, the pilot, and the civilians in their boat. Eventually all three meet up in the guy's boat and they go home, so what I took away was that the movie's biggest point was how civilians helped out.
If that parts historically accurate, then I think the movie did it fine because that seemed to be the main focus.

>>3137994
>civilian participation
5% evacuated on civilian boats and yachts. A small contribution, but still ballsy as fuck, so credit where due.

>>3137994
It happened but was less important than the film portrayed

>>3138004
I'm not arguing, because I don't know, but I thought the 'small ships' took more than that. Any sources?

Either way that is what makes the story of Dunkirk so appealing, imagine crossing the Channel in a little fishing boat as the Luftwaffe are dropping bombs to grab a few soldiers and bring them to safety.

>>3138004
>>3138011
Makes sense, I figured it didn't have the largest impact since there were so many soldiers and most boats that were depicted were pretty small.

As you said though, ballsy as hell and makes for a good story.

>>3138016

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Ships_of_Dunkirk

>>3137795
>Didn't watch it
You're in no position to talk then

>but it probably leave out important facts (like the fact the French were protecting the evacuation the whole time) to focus on Brits getting a few bombs while they sit on the beach
The French are depicted defending the town

>>3137828
Please stop talking out of your ass. French troops are in the movie.

>>3137844
>French colonial troops in 1940 France may not have been a thing I'm not sure
Yes they were a thing.

>>3138033
That doesn't back the claim of 5%, in fact it says the Belgian fishing fleet and boats from the Isle of Man Steam Company rescued more than 5% between them before you even start counting the other 'little ships'.

>>3138061
>French colonial troops in 1940 France may not have been a thing I'm not sure
>Yes they were a thing.
Sweet then I have no gripes with the film and it was very good.

>>3138067
Little boats were mostly used to ferry people out to the larger destroyers that couldn't come close to the beach. So it may be that only 5% came back on little boats, but that's not the whole story

>>3138249
Obviously it isn't the whole story. It was the 5% claim I queried.

>>3138067
Little boats were mostly used to ferry people out to the larger destroyers that couldn't come close to the beach. So it may be that only 5% came back on little boats, but that's not the whole story

>>3138454
Why are you repeating yourself? I find this annoying and unnecessary when I largely agreed with your initial point but queried a point of fact, which you then posted a citation which said you were wrong.

It's okay just to admit you were wrong rather than coming up with """arguments""" off the top of your head.

File: s.png (441KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

441KB, 1024x576px

>>3137775
god I hope it has a strong female and a tolken minority in it

>>3138061
There were no nigger units at dunkirk

>>3137830
I presume you're talking about Battlefield 1. The French army were added in the first expansion pack. The only reason they weren't in it from day one is because the US and UK are bigger markets.

>>3138727
Didn't add any campaign segments for them though

>>3138727
>The French army were added in the first expansion pack

Which is inacceptable, as the French were the most important nation on the Entente side

>>3137795
>>3137828
>Insulting a movie you haven't watched

Hello /tv/

>>3138750
BRAVO NOLAN

>>3138755
Thank you. I often come on /his/ to argue against people that unfairly misrepresent and criticise the films I have directed. It's nice to see that someone finally appreciates my efforts.

>>3138472
Literally the closest it comes is a woman standing on a boat like a human figurehead and some french african troops trying to evacuate with the british but being told they can't.

Oh, and a woman telling the men the way to the ship's hold.

>>3138787
Btw while you're here, can you explain us why does Cooper meet with his grandmother at the end of Interstellar?

File: ypres.png (94KB, 280x888px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 280x888px

>>3138731
>took the brunt of the invasion
>most of the biggest fight (marne,champagne,ypres,artois,verdun,soome) was on their soil
>100 years later you are put in the sideline and is equated with cowardice

>>3138818
>fighting on your own soil
>not a sign of failure and cowardice

File: king_george_V.jpg (76KB, 480x646px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 480x646px

>>3138836
you are an excellent troll i got very mad

>>3138836
I can't see how on the Earth you can relate it to cowardice
It can indeed mean failure, though in this case, it was more related to the fact the Germans were the ones who started the war by surprise, and kept advancing until the French could get their shit together and stop them at the First Marne

>>3138818
At least they died defending their homeland. Hundreds of thousands of British soldiers died in French mud they couldn't give one whit about.

>>3138876
They died for their "empire" (which still collapsed a couple of decade later regardless)

I thought it was a great film. As far as I know there were many little boats but they did a lot of ferrying from the beach to bigger ships. There were a few larger barges (basically party boats from before the war) that helped too. Also there were very very few people who drove their own boats, that was obviously included in the movie for the story

Also, lmao at the dumb frogs in this thread criticizing the movie without even seeing it, bravo Pierre, I will make sure I remember your country's greatest defeat with better clarity

>>3137875
then pirate it fag

>>3138482
Yes there were

>>3138959
>pirating movies when streaming exists

>>3138859
>suprise
Do you now know of the phoney war where for 8 months France advanced up to the Siegfried line and stopped and did nothing while Germany focused on Poland
There was no surprise German offensive France and England just sucked and couldn't man a defense after 8 months of waiting for an attack

>>3139009

>giving money to streaming services who pay to license "anglo propaganda"

when is summer over?

>>3139009
>not downloading a movie and keeping it forever more instead of letting some fat cunt in a movie studio's anti piracy divison take down the film

>>3138818
Not to mention the British only had a small roll in many of the battles they get nearly full credit for.

>>3138727
At least they featured the Austro-Hungarian Empire.

And it has a 5/5 Bretty Good musical score.

>>3139027
That's exactly why I havent watched it, even in streaming

>>3139037
>many
name some?

>>3139051
They even featured fucking Bedouins and Harlem noggers rather than the French
That's how bad Anglo hate frogs

>>3139058
First Marne, Ypres...etc

>>3139063
Don't forget the FUCKING I*ALIANS (Charges Isonzo) and T*RKS

>>3139058
Nearly every major battle on the Western front that featured British troops.

>>3139073
I'll give you Ypres, but really the only other battle that is in the public British consciousness is the Somme, because it was so incredibly destructive for us. Furthermore, Verdun is the significant French battle for us. I think most would struggle to name any other battles frankly.

>>3139063

>Anglo
>Swedish company

Hmmmm...

>>3139096
EA is an American company
It's not Dice (Swedes) that decided the entire game would revolve around Bongs
It's EA, Americans love believing all of history before WW2 is about their precious Brits

>>3139091
The Somme was also a significant French battle
Reminder that technically more French troops than British ones fought in that battle (there were roughly the same number of British Empire and French troops, but half British Empire forces were from the Commonwealth, while almost all French ones were from Mainland France)

>>3139142
Yes but in terms of direct combat the British were more involved, i'm sure you know the British suffered 200,000 more casualties than the French.

>>3139124
>Being so butthurt about nigel you have to shitpost about burgers as a proxy
kekked and checked

>>3139370
Maybe, but the French inflicted heavier casualties to the Germans than the British, and while losing less troops

>>3138482
Typical white behavior:
> Before the battle
Let's all go fight as one unified nation!
> During the battle
You negroes hold the line - we'll be back with reinforcements
> After the battle
Safe again at home. Wait, am I forgetting something?
> History books
Black troops? What black troops?

No wonder you call us stupid. We keep falling for this bullshit.

>>3138731

It's by EA. They charge a shit ton for the expansion pack and it's usually suppose to be the best content of the game anyways.

>>3137795
>Didnt watch it, but
Stopped reading there tbqh

>>3139142

>half

source

>>3139018
you're mixing up your world wars, dumdum

what is a good book about Dunkirk?

>>3139806
Give at least 3 examples of this happening, and prove that their being left was racially motivated.

I'll wait.

>>3139051
barely, the uniforms and VAs were german copy paste. There was less effort put into the austrians than the US noggers

>>3137868
It is very important that this movie is seen in a movie theater

>>3140889
pls respond

File: IMG_15029c.jpg (41KB, 364x402px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 364x402px

>>3141085
This honestly, to get the full effect. I saw it yesterday and found it to be a very well made and realistic portrayal of triumph from tragedy, cowardice and courage, selfishness and sacrifice, the worst and best in humanity when against the ropes. Watching it I couldn't find anything that would be considered inaccurate, it wasn't glorifying the British or denigrating the French, it was simply telling the story of defeated men trying to escape death or capture from a seemingly unstoppable foe, and the lengths they and others went to make it happen.

I do wonder though if Nolan putting Tom Hardy in a mask again was at least partly influenced by Bane-posting, I mean he was literally crashing planes with no survivors.

>>3138482
The Brits are niggers of Europe.

>>3140082
>tbqh
stopped reading right there

>>3137775
It ends with Tom Hardy crashing a plane and getting caught was part of his plan.

File: churchill.jpg (112KB, 634x818px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 634x818px

>>3137775

Everything before that was boring desu.I was expecting Dunkirk to be about a fighting retreat of french and british to the beach followed by the evacuation.

But the ending was aesthetic as fuck.

>spitfire runs out of fuel
>shoots down down a kraut plane
>lands on the beach against the backdrop of a sunset
>pilot lights his plane on fire and watches it burn
>the pilot looks at the seawall and sees krauts emerging from the horizon
>fug...

File: 1491062613847.jpg (108KB, 499x488px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 499x488px

>>3141426
>>3141085
especially on 70mm
dunkirk won't have half the impact when viewed on some shitty little chinkphone with tinny speakers or some basic bitch asus monitor
>those gunshot sounds
>that TIK TIK TIK TIK TIK TIK TIK TIK

File: 92cf7452dc27085fa6805a23d3f47994.jpg (8KB, 222x210px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 222x210px

>>3137795
>but it probably leave out important facts (like the fact the French were protecting the evacuation the whole time)
The beginning of the movie shows the French holding positions in the streets while sarcastically saying Bon Voyage to the Brit he's supposed to die to protect.

WHAT

IS

A

GOOD

BOOK

ABOUT

DUNKIRK

>>3141742
Dunkirk by Prof. Kirk Dunn.

Saw it yesterday, movie was great. I really hope this will kickstart a new era of world war 1 & 2 movies or series focusing on the European theatre. Battle for Britain, El Alamein, maybe even the Russian front. So sick of 90% of the genre being about the holocaust or American battles.

>>3137795
>like the fact the French were protecting the evacuation the whole time

They don't

>>3141426
>I do wonder though if Nolan putting Tom Hardy in a mask again was at least partly influenced by Bane-posting, I mean he was literally crashing planes with no survivor

I think this had more to do with Tom being able to convey emotions while wearing a mask more so than any meme reason.

SPOILER ALERT!!!
because that scene where hes running low on fuel but he also sees that german bomber going in for the kill on that ship, you can see him debating his choice of saving himself or the ship just by his eyes

>>3141085

this. Its quiet when it needs to be and loud as fuck when it needs to be. It doesnt make the mistake of always being loud because war

File: Anna Speckhart 2.png (699KB, 645x649px) Image search: [Google]

699KB, 645x649px

>>3137828
I always enjoy WWII films about the British, because the ungrateful French always bitch and moan.
It's all well and good moaning about the British 'deserting' and 'running away', but let's turn it around for a second... why is there so little said by the French about the Vichy regime? Why is nothing said about the millions of French alive today who fought for, or are descended from people who fought for, Nazi beliefs and ideology?

>>3143162
>I always enjoy WWII films about the British, because the ungrateful French always bitch and moan.

I've never seen the French whine about WW2 films
Generally, it's more about WW1 products that they're assmad of seeing less relevant Brits getting more representation

That being said, with that particular WW2 movie, their buttpain is justified as it takes an event in which pathetic Brits cowered and had their arses saved by frogs, and try to turn it into a glorious moment for Brits

>>3143162
>why is there so little said by the French about the Vichy regime?

Btw that's true
For exemple, very few people know that Vichy literally saved Britain's asspussy from German invasion by scutteling its huge fleet rather than letting it fall to German hands

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scuttling_of_the_French_fleet_in_Toulon

How in the fuck did Hollywood and the BBC let Christopher Nolan not cast Beyonce as Winston Churchill?

>inb4 Nolan suicided

>>3138818
>Ypres
>their soil
anon...

>>3137775
A spitfire circling the beach, shooting down an enemy plane and then landing safely seemed a little bit bullshit. But the rest seemed reasonable.

Movie was like a documentary without a narrator. I kind of feel like a narrator would have made for an interesting addition. Also kudos for not playing bs identity politics and just representing the mostly truth.

>>3143523
The spitfire having no fuel and doing so that is.

>>3143200
lmao.
Even with the French fleet there is zero way Sea Lion was ever a success.
They would never have gotten out of the Mediterranean, and if they had they would have been annihilated by the RAF and the Home Fleet.

>>3143377

you need to listen to the hour long episode of opie and anthony where patrice oneal talks about how hollywood works. Nolan is at a level now where he can fight the machine and do whatever he wants

File: Grand Briton.png (355KB, 1094x963px) Image search: [Google]

355KB, 1094x963px

>>3143200
Operation Sea Lion never stood a chance( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Sea_Lion_(wargame) ) even with the French Fleet anon, WW2 is not nearly as close run a thing as both the Allies and Axis make it out to be, the Nazis take France and then whatever they do afterwards is just postponing the inevitable Soviet military and American manufacturing onslaught, both would have eventually got involved against the Germans. Just wasted planes in the battle of Britain and strengthened British resolve.

>>3143590

>victory was inevitable
>ww2 ez win!

the british and americans were expecting the red army to collapse after moscow.

the british almost didn't break the enigma

america almost didn't enter the war

It's a shit movie just like the rest of them.

It's a highly intense, matter of fact exhibition of the crises, both physical and moral, that wartime brings.
As others have said the French rearguard is featured in the first five minutes and is referenced throughout.
Refreshingly, the film is true to life in that all but three soldiers are white, and those that aren't are French colonial troops who are in the background for about 20 seconds. Women are literally only shown pouring tea for the soldiers and giving them towels.

Above all it is a remarkable testament to the valour and sacrifice of the men of that war.

>>3143606
>Almost

>>3137795
>Didnt watch it, but it probably

4chan in six words

>>3143625

>WW2 is not nearly as close run a thing as both the Allies and Axis make it out to be

hindsight makes u sm3rt

>>3142368
that's because americans did 90% of the work in ww2 you faggot europoors

>>3141085
agree. even if just for the bangs from the very beginning of the film deessuu.

File: maxkek.png (84KB, 240x228px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 240x228px

>>3142368
good bait well done i am mad.

>>3144717
this was meant to be in response to >>3144537

>>3144717
I try anon

File: 1488874431513.jpg (58KB, 259x220px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 259x220px

>>3143200
>This is what the frog believes

>>3139053
my god are you some sort of fucking moron,

>>3143190
>That being said, with that particular WW2 movie, their buttpain is justified as it takes an event in which pathetic Brits cowered and had their arses saved by frogs, and try to turn it into a glorious moment for Brits
You also haven't seen the film I suppose?

>>3137795
French soldiers were mentioned, but only for the first part of the movie and didnt really go super in depth about them

>>3145946
It's shown multiple times the British are being pricks about putting themselves before the French, to the point where they are willing to knowingly sacrifice the life of a "frog" over their own. This is redeemed by the end of the movie, when the admiral decides to stay behind and help the French. It's not given an overwhelming focus but clearly ties in with the recurring theme of the struggle between personal, selfish survival over being courageous.

>>3146423
>selfish survival
Their boats, their rules.

>>3143590
>le axis could never have won meme

>>3146462
The French were literally holding off the enemy while the British retreated home. They're supposed to be allies on the same side. That's what the movie is trying to say.

>>3137775
They forget the Indian troops

>>3146701
>The French were literally holding off the enemy while the British retreated home.
I'm LITERALLY not denying that.

>They're supposed to be allies on the same side.
And they're supposed to die and surrender with the French? That's not how it works.

>That's what the movie is trying to say.
The most is trying to say that the evacuation of Dunkirk was half a combined effort of the British military and half an act of God presenting and showcasing classic British stubbornness.

>>3146714
The movie also makes the British look selfish. That's what the scene in the boat is about.

>>3147121
>selfish
It's called wanting to survive when your order is to retreat using your own boats to get back to your own home.

Sorry Frenchies, maybe you should have extended that Maginot Line a little more and give half a shit.

The only thing I noticed while watching was that the 109s they were fighting weren't actually 109s. They were Hispano Buchons, which are basically license built Spanish 109s with a different engine. However, this seems like something only turbo autists like me would notice.

That being said, great film. Bravo Nolan.

>>3144537
this is what no culture land actually believes

>>3141426
http://www.express.co.uk/entertainment/films/833729/Tom-Hardy-face-Christopher-Nolan-Dunkirk-Bane-Dark-Knight-Rises-Mad-Max-James-Bond
Here you go anon

>>3143068
God that scene gave me the feels. And I'm pretty much never emotionally impacted by films

>>3142368
this

>>3143200
kek

>>3137775
the Brits ran away

>>3150063

Alongside the French.

>>3137795
>but it probably leave out important facts (like the fact the French were protecting the evacuation the whole time)
why do you say this with indignation?
What other way should it be?
Dunkirk is in france, after all.
Should the British expeditionary force be rear guard, whilst the french army is evacuated to Britain?
stop being a fucking idiot. it's war.
logical choices were made. they sacrificed an already defeated and diminished force, belonging to a nation who had already officially surrendered to save an almost entirely intact force of a country that hadn't been subjugated and was still opposing the nazis.

I've seen it, and I'd say that although it does show some the French and highlight some of the injustices the French faced at the battle (there's a part where many French soldiers are trying to get on a boat but a British officer tells them "no French"), it still doesn't really give the full scope of what the French did at the battle of Dunkirk. I don't know enough about the battle to say anything about the historical accuracy of other parts though.

>>3137865
Lol no

>>3141552
>those stuka dive bombings

gave me second hand PTSD tbqh

>>3141527
>expecting Dunkirk to be about anything other than the evacuation

>>3151164
>why do you say this with indignation?
>What other way should it be?

The exact other way, since Britain (and not France) was the country benefiting from the evacuation
France was already lost regardless, the operation was only in the interest of the British

>>3151164
>belonging to a nation who had already officially surrendered

Are you retarded?
The surrender happened three weeks later
If France had already surrendered, they sure wouldnt have fought the Germans to defend fleeing Brits, use your brain

>>3151164
>who had already officially surrendered
Wrong

>>3151270
> the operation was only in the interest of the British
British forces trying to stop the german invasion of france was an operation that only benefited Britain?
and these British forces should take rear guard whilst the french army is evacuated from their own country?
and you wonder why people think the french are cowards?
The majority of french troops at dunkirk were scrambling to get on boats, and abandon their country, against orders. That's the reason they were initially turned away. Because they had orders, from their own commanders, to defend dunkirk. Most of them tried to flee, and abandon their country and countrymen, like the turn coat cowards they are.

>>3146704

This.

The 300 Indian troops who where there were critical to defending and stopping Hitler.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-40724861

>The Stuka's attacking the beach
>Jesus I've never heard anything so loud in the cinema
>The creeping barrage as the kid hits the dirt

>Everyone gets back up and starts queuing again.
Yup, definitely british.

>>3141426
It was also part of his plan at the end to be caught by the germans.

>>3151633
>British forces trying to stop the german invasion of france was an operation that only benefited Britain?

No, it was an operation that benefited both countryoes but failed
The Dunkirk evacuation however, was an operation that benefited Britain only as the wars was already lost for France
It was France's way to thank Brits for their attempt to help, despite their effective uselessness and failure to do anything worthwhile

>>3151633
>and these British forces should take rear guard whilst the french army is evacuated from their own country?
>and you wonder why people think the french are cowards?

If the French were the only ones to evacuate, then the rearguard should have been French only
If both French and Brits evacuated equally, then the rearguard should have been both French and British
But what happened is that Brits were the ones who evacuated in priority, while the rearguard was French only

>>3151633
>The majority of french troops at dunkirk were scrambling to get on boats, and abandon their country, against orders. That's the reason they were initially turned away. Because they had orders, from their own commanders, to defend dunkirk. Most of them tried to flee, and abandon their country and countrymen, like the turn coat cowards they are

That's pure lie btw
And the little piece of shit you are (fatass calling warriors from past wars cowards on his pc while pakis are raping women in your British streets) won't ever find a source to back it

What happened is that the biggest chunk of the French army was committed to the rearguard while another smaller one waited on the beach with Brits (manning anti-aicract guns on the beach) and waited for Brits to have fled in order to get their right to embark themselves
None of the troops committed to the rearguard gave up their post (which is why the evacuation was successful), so watch your mouth

>>3140889
>The French: Why?

>>3151658
lol that was such a brilliant scene

>>3151912
>while pakis are raping women in your British streets
have you had a look at the state of france?
people in glass houses etc.

the brits had every right to evacuate their forces as priority, as not doing so would have almost certainly brought about an invasion of Britain. France was already gone.
You want the Brits to show the French army gratitude for fighting the Nazis in France? are you having a fucking laugh?
It's quite telling that the only time the French forces really gave the Germans a fight is when you literally had nowhere left to run, because the royal navy wouldn't let you on their ships.

>>3152068
>have you had a look at the state of france?

I'm not French, but you're right they're no better
Y'all yuropoors are in the same sinking boat

>>3152068
>You want the Brits to show the French army gratitude for fighting the Nazis in France? are you having a fucking laugh?

No, but for covering British fleeing ass while they could have simply surrendered before Brits even fled (the battle was already lost anyway), Brits sure should thank them

>>3152087
I fucking hate you Americans.
>56%
You're much worse off than us.

>>3152098
you guys are pretty much where america was in the 70s and 80s. it'll likely get worse if you don't do something about it.

>>3137865

Not really. A frenchman is quasi-prominently in it, the French as a whole are alluded to right at the start, have a brief bit partway in, and then are offhandedly mentioned at the end.

I think it was enough to tell anyone who's not an idiot that they were there holding the line, but 'prominent' is misleading.

>>3152098
At least we have no muslims rampaging in our streets
Meanwhile in the UK

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/double-manhunt-after-girl-15-10883264

>A double manhunt was launched after a 15-year-old girl was raped at a railway station then abused again by a man she flagged down to help.

>The first attacker is described as Asian with light skin, brown eyes, was of a skinny build and about 6ft tall.

>The second attacker is also described as Asian, in his early 20s, 5ft 6 or 7ins tall, of large build with a tight-cropped beard and was wearing a blue jumper and black jeans.

Lol, "asians"....

>>3152108
Much better to have your cities burnt down by BLM right?

>>3152114
>bunch of chimps reducing their own shitholes to charcoal
>only confined to like one or two of the worst cities in North America
wow so bad

meanwhile places like London and Paris are experiencing truck attacks and beheadings on the regular.

>>3152108
>Asian
how is this wrong?