Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
The World has been castrated
Comments
-
I agree. But what I'm saying in the mind of ISIS, Israel just being there is the root of the problem. Israel and any nation that supports them, is subject to ISIS attacks. So if Israel is our ally, we need to quit fucking around and kick some ass.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Isreal isn't getting wiped outgreenblood said:
This is true. They do fly planes into building over a homeland that is a myth and none of them ever had.RaceBannon said:
What if the Palestians had been building a country since 1948 and all the Arab neighbors who love them so much had helped out. Israel built an economic power of a democracy right next door to a cesspool of death and despair.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
It's both. They would care a lot less about the social issues if Israel wasn't an issue. I don't think they take the time, money, and resources to come over here on Visas, train to fly planes, and then ram them into buildings just because we're tolerant of gays.greenblood said:
"We’re killing a lot of them and we’re going to keep killing more of them. So are the Egyptians, so are the Jordanians. They’re in this fight with us. But we cannot win this war by killing them. We cannot kill our way out of this war. We need in the medium to longer term to go after the root causes that leads people to join these groups, whether it’s lack of opportunity for jobs, whether…"DuckHHunterisafag said:greenblood said:http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2016/03/watch-terrorism-expert-school-donald-trump-his-calls-torture
So I guess we need to be accepting and kind. That will make the terrorists stop...
Certain people just shouldn't reproduce.
Didn't the twat Harf tell us they just need jobs?greenblood said:http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2016/03/watch-terrorism-expert-school-donald-trump-his-calls-torture
So I guess we need to be accepting and kind. That will make the terrorists stop...
Certain people just shouldn't reproduce.
"We can work with countries around the world to help improve their governance. We can help them build their economies so they can have job opportunities for these people…"
Yep
The left want to say it's a socio-economic problem when it's a religious issue. They can have all the wealth in the world, but like Race says, they'll still hate us for our designer clothes, equally of women, equality of race, acceptance of gays and transgenders, and our support for Israel. Giving them more money, just gives them more resources to cause further damage.
And that is Israel's fault, not the leaders of the cesspool who chose the pursuit of death over life.
Israel could LEAVE tomorrow and the next day the little sand savages would still be dealing in death.
But in your mind they fly planes into buildings over a homeland that is a myth and none of them ever had
And the shitheads that did fly the planes came from middle class and rich families. The Bin Ladens are very wealthy.
Next
They aren't rational, but where in history are religious disputes ever rational? This group is full of crazies that would love nothing more than to blow up Israel and claim the Islamic mythical land they feel they are entitled to.
If we left Israel alone to be wiped out we'd see the end of the conflict on our side, but we aren't going to let that happen, so we have to destroy ISIS, and the radical Islamic state that support it.
Muslims had their chance 50 years ago, and got assfucked by the Israelis.
Is Israeli part of the problem in brokering a peace? Sure.
Palestine and friends are 1,000,000 times more of an issue. -
Didn't say there was one. But if you think that some collateral damage isn't intentional, I have a bridge, er wall to sell you.greenblood said:
Name one war where there wasn't some form of collateral damage...salemcoog said:
That absolute statement is Bullshit.PostGameOrangeSlices said:GreenRiverGatorz said:Yeah, that's a bunch of nonsense. I don't believe for a second that anyone in the Middle East is committing themselves to violent jihad because of the offensive words of Donald Trump.
What does propel otherwise normal third-world Muslims (who haven't already joined ISIS because of economic reasons) to jihad, however, is when their family members are killed as collateral damage in air strikes carried out by the West.
there will always been collateral involved. the difference is that the US doesn't intend to kill non-combatants, it's an unfortunate reality of warfare. especially when terrorists often hide behind innocents...
on the other hand, collateral damage is entire purpose of carrying out terror attacks.
you can't just do nothing in return when a violent group attacks your civilian population. and you certainly can't give these groups a free pass into your country
Thought so -
I agree here. Dresden and Tokyo were designed to get the civilians to quit, as were the A bombs, along with saving us an invasion.salemcoog said:
Didn't say there was one. But if you think that some collateral damage isn't intentional, I have a bridge, er wall to sell you.greenblood said:
Name one war where there wasn't some form of collateral damage...salemcoog said:
That absolute statement is Bullshit.PostGameOrangeSlices said:GreenRiverGatorz said:Yeah, that's a bunch of nonsense. I don't believe for a second that anyone in the Middle East is committing themselves to violent jihad because of the offensive words of Donald Trump.
What does propel otherwise normal third-world Muslims (who haven't already joined ISIS because of economic reasons) to jihad, however, is when their family members are killed as collateral damage in air strikes carried out by the West.
there will always been collateral involved. the difference is that the US doesn't intend to kill non-combatants, it's an unfortunate reality of warfare. especially when terrorists often hide behind innocents...
on the other hand, collateral damage is entire purpose of carrying out terror attacks.
you can't just do nothing in return when a violent group attacks your civilian population. and you certainly can't give these groups a free pass into your country
Thought so
I think our attempts to limit collateral damage began about the time we stopped winning wars. But the damage continued.
Hence my total war or no war platform -
Intentional vs going out of your way to cause collateral damage. If you know a terrorist leader is in his bedroom sleeping, you drop the bomb on his bedroom right? Now if his wife is sleeping next to him, does that mean you don't drop it? So that's intentional collateral damage. You're not going out of your way to do it, but when an opportunity comes and you are in war, some things just have to be done.salemcoog said:
Didn't say there was one. But if you think that some collateral damage isn't intentional, I have a bridge, er wall to sell you.greenblood said:
Name one war where there wasn't some form of collateral damage...salemcoog said:
That absolute statement is Bullshit.PostGameOrangeSlices said:GreenRiverGatorz said:Yeah, that's a bunch of nonsense. I don't believe for a second that anyone in the Middle East is committing themselves to violent jihad because of the offensive words of Donald Trump.
What does propel otherwise normal third-world Muslims (who haven't already joined ISIS because of economic reasons) to jihad, however, is when their family members are killed as collateral damage in air strikes carried out by the West.
there will always been collateral involved. the difference is that the US doesn't intend to kill non-combatants, it's an unfortunate reality of warfare. especially when terrorists often hide behind innocents...
on the other hand, collateral damage is entire purpose of carrying out terror attacks.
you can't just do nothing in return when a violent group attacks your civilian population. and you certainly can't give these groups a free pass into your country
Thought so
But yes, like Race said, you are either in war or not in war. If you are in war there is some collateral damage that needs to be expected and accepted if you're going to win the war. All in or lose, is basically the point Race and many of us are making.. -
I agree, In order to make an omelet you have to break some eggs. And sometimes you know there will be collateral damage in the process. I was calling bs to the blanket post that said that our policy doesn't allow for collateral damage, because we will do it. If we have a situation where we can save a thousand other lives by taking a hundred innocent ones, we'll do it.greenblood said:
Intentional vs going out of your way to cause collateral damage. If you know a terrorist leader is in his bedroom sleeping, you drop the bomb on his bedroom right? Now if his wife is sleeping next to him, does that mean you don't drop it? So that's intentional collateral damage. You're not going out of your way to do it, but when an opportunity comes and you are in war, some things just have to be done.salemcoog said:
Didn't say there was one. But if you think that some collateral damage isn't intentional, I have a bridge, er wall to sell you.greenblood said:
Name one war where there wasn't some form of collateral damage...salemcoog said:
That absolute statement is Bullshit.PostGameOrangeSlices said:GreenRiverGatorz said:Yeah, that's a bunch of nonsense. I don't believe for a second that anyone in the Middle East is committing themselves to violent jihad because of the offensive words of Donald Trump.
What does propel otherwise normal third-world Muslims (who haven't already joined ISIS because of economic reasons) to jihad, however, is when their family members are killed as collateral damage in air strikes carried out by the West.
there will always been collateral involved. the difference is that the US doesn't intend to kill non-combatants, it's an unfortunate reality of warfare. especially when terrorists often hide behind innocents...
on the other hand, collateral damage is entire purpose of carrying out terror attacks.
you can't just do nothing in return when a violent group attacks your civilian population. and you certainly can't give these groups a free pass into your country
Thought so
But yes, like Race said, you are either in war or not in war. If you are in war there is some collateral damage that needs to be expected and accepted if you're going to win the war. All in or lose, is basically the point Race and many of us are making.. -
That's not what I believe. At all...lmaosalemcoog said:
If you truly believe that the US doesn't or hasn't strike knowing there will be collateral damage. I can't help you.PostGameOrangeSlices said:salemcoog said:
That absolute statement is Bullshit.PostGameOrangeSlices said:GreenRiverGatorz said:Yeah, that's a bunch of nonsense. I don't believe for a second that anyone in the Middle East is committing themselves to violent jihad because of the offensive words of Donald Trump.
What does propel otherwise normal third-world Muslims (who haven't already joined ISIS because of economic reasons) to jihad, however, is when their family members are killed as collateral damage in air strikes carried out by the West.
there will always been collateral involved. the difference is that the US doesn't intend to kill non-combatants, it's an unfortunate reality of warfare. especially when terrorists often hide behind innocents...
on the other hand, collateral damage is entire purpose of carrying out terror attacks.
you can't just do nothing in return when a violent group attacks your civilian population. and you certainly can't give these groups a free pass into your country
Thanks for the enlightening rebuttal...
They fucking know there will be collateral. I know there will be collateral. Everyone knows it. It's what happens during a conflict. -
Nice right wing narrative and way to put words in my mouthRaceBannon said:
What if the Palestians had been building a country since 1948 and all the Arab neighbors who love them so much had helped out. Israel built an economic power of a democracy right next door to a cesspool of death and despair.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
It's both. They would care a lot less about the social issues if Israel wasn't an issue. I don't think they take the time, money, and resources to come over here on Visas, train to fly planes, and then ram them into buildings just because we're tolerant of gays.greenblood said:
"We’re killing a lot of them and we’re going to keep killing more of them. So are the Egyptians, so are the Jordanians. They’re in this fight with us. But we cannot win this war by killing them. We cannot kill our way out of this war. We need in the medium to longer term to go after the root causes that leads people to join these groups, whether it’s lack of opportunity for jobs, whether…"DuckHHunterisafag said:greenblood said:http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2016/03/watch-terrorism-expert-school-donald-trump-his-calls-torture
So I guess we need to be accepting and kind. That will make the terrorists stop...
Certain people just shouldn't reproduce.
Didn't the twat Harf tell us they just need jobs?greenblood said:http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2016/03/watch-terrorism-expert-school-donald-trump-his-calls-torture
So I guess we need to be accepting and kind. That will make the terrorists stop...
Certain people just shouldn't reproduce.
"We can work with countries around the world to help improve their governance. We can help them build their economies so they can have job opportunities for these people…"
Yep
The left want to say it's a socio-economic problem when it's a religious issue. They can have all the wealth in the world, but like Race says, they'll still hate us for our designer clothes, equally of women, equality of race, acceptance of gays and transgenders, and our support for Israel. Giving them more money, just gives them more resources to cause further damage.
And that is Israel's fault, not the leaders of the cesspool who chose the pursuit of death over life.
Israel could LEAVE tomorrow and the next day the little sand savages would still be dealing in death.
But in your mind they fly planes into buildings over a homeland that is a myth and none of them ever had
And the shitheads that did fly the planes came from middle class and rich families. The Bin Ladens are very wealthy.
Next
Some might deal in death but it wouldn't be widespread.
I don't want to sound like Hondo but your news sources aren't giving you the full picture.
Go ahead, continue your rants though. Get it out of your system buddy. -
Either nuke the whole continent or go for systematic genocide. I think nukes are cheaper but radiation is a bitch. Maybe we can just carpet bomb without nukes. Make Mecca a Disneyworld Resort.
-
You sound like HondoFire_Marshall_Bill said:
Nice right wing narrative and way to put words in my mouthRaceBannon said:
What if the Palestians had been building a country since 1948 and all the Arab neighbors who love them so much had helped out. Israel built an economic power of a democracy right next door to a cesspool of death and despair.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
It's both. They would care a lot less about the social issues if Israel wasn't an issue. I don't think they take the time, money, and resources to come over here on Visas, train to fly planes, and then ram them into buildings just because we're tolerant of gays.greenblood said:
"We’re killing a lot of them and we’re going to keep killing more of them. So are the Egyptians, so are the Jordanians. They’re in this fight with us. But we cannot win this war by killing them. We cannot kill our way out of this war. We need in the medium to longer term to go after the root causes that leads people to join these groups, whether it’s lack of opportunity for jobs, whether…"DuckHHunterisafag said:greenblood said:http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2016/03/watch-terrorism-expert-school-donald-trump-his-calls-torture
So I guess we need to be accepting and kind. That will make the terrorists stop...
Certain people just shouldn't reproduce.
Didn't the twat Harf tell us they just need jobs?greenblood said:http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2016/03/watch-terrorism-expert-school-donald-trump-his-calls-torture
So I guess we need to be accepting and kind. That will make the terrorists stop...
Certain people just shouldn't reproduce.
"We can work with countries around the world to help improve their governance. We can help them build their economies so they can have job opportunities for these people…"
Yep
The left want to say it's a socio-economic problem when it's a religious issue. They can have all the wealth in the world, but like Race says, they'll still hate us for our designer clothes, equally of women, equality of race, acceptance of gays and transgenders, and our support for Israel. Giving them more money, just gives them more resources to cause further damage.
And that is Israel's fault, not the leaders of the cesspool who chose the pursuit of death over life.
Israel could LEAVE tomorrow and the next day the little sand savages would still be dealing in death.
But in your mind they fly planes into buildings over a homeland that is a myth and none of them ever had
And the shitheads that did fly the planes came from middle class and rich families. The Bin Ladens are very wealthy.
Next
Some might deal in death but it wouldn't be widespread.
I don't want to sound like Hondo but your news sources aren't giving you the full picture.
Go ahead, continue your rants though. Get it out of your system buddy.
What was my rant? The facts you can't refute? -
Israel should move to Baja like Adam Carolla has been saying forever. The Arab governments would just implode if they didn't have the Israeli scapegoat to pin their internal issues on to their people. Israel has provided a great common mythical enemy.
-
This is still in play
-
"again, and again, again, again, again and and again, la la la lala again, again and again.
It is going to keep happening. What is the surprise.
Lets just keep talking. Talk ,talk talk........
Lets just appease these fucks and enable them.
Neville Chamberlaine lovers unite. Peace in our time!!!! -
Only way to win this "war" is literally door to door. It's not about the quantity of troops it's about the quality (i.e. intelligence you gather), unless you just decide to Hiroshima/Nagasaki wherever you think ISIS is, which is "politically fine" if it's small communities/villages out in the sticks of Afghanistan. Problem is, they are in most every major city in Europe as well so that plan stops right there.greenblood said:
You don't send in 10,000 troops, that's the problem. You send in 50,000 troops, Spain sends in 50,000 troops, UK sends in 50,000 troops, and France sends in 50,000 troops. You send these troops in after you collectively carpet bomb the area to lower the amount of resistance you'll receive.Hippopeteamus said:
And unfortunately I don't think the American people are willing to send in tens of thousands of troops for 15-25 years, which might be what is required.GreenRiverGatorz said:
I don't disagree, but the asymmetry of the situation highlights just how difficult of a crisis this is. We have to have a heavy hand as we're fighting insurgents, but we also have to be cognizant of the fact that if not carried out tactically enough, our attacks could create more terrorists than they eliminate. And then there's the issue of many young Syrians, Iraqis, Libyans, etc. turning to ISIS because they have no other economic prospects. Obviously those countries need to be rebuilt to the point where jihad isn't the only feasible career path, but how do we accomplish that? Especially when our last couple "rebuilding efforts" have been such resounding failures.PostGameOrangeSlices said:GreenRiverGatorz said:Yeah, that's a bunch of nonsense. I don't believe for a second that anyone in the Middle East is committing themselves to violent jihad because of the offensive words of Donald Trump.
What does propel otherwise normal third-world Muslims (who haven't already joined ISIS because of economic reasons) to jihad, however, is when their family members are killed as collateral damage in air strikes carried out by the West.
there will always been collateral involved. the difference is that the US doesn't intend to kill non-combatants, it's an unfortunate reality of warfare. especially when terrorists often hide behind innocents...
on the other hand, collateral damage is entire purpose of carrying out terror attacks.
you can't just do nothing in return when a violent group attacks your civilian population. and you certainly can't give these groups a free pass into your country
Sending in a thousand here, a thousand there, is what drags a war on. You drop the hammer, this thing is done within a year.
ISIS can overplay their hand by attacking "neutral targets" like today which could band the world against the common enemy, but this only works if Russia/Israel are allowed to take the lead on "interrogation tactics". Europe and the US are to pussy to extract the info we need. Those two wouldn't GAF.
When your enemy doesn't care if they die, or who they take down with them, you better be willing to get in the gutter with them. Using rational/economic/any other logic is not going to make them stop. Their belief system says anyone not practicing hard core Islam is the devil and needs to be obliterated. Not much negotiating room with that.
-
Kill them until they don't want to fight anymore. Seems that's how we were successful before the "win hearts and minds" hippie asshats got involved. Collateral damage is unavoidable . The problem is we've been trying to avoid it.godawgst said:
Only way to win this "war" is literally door to door. It's not about the quantity of troops it's about the quality (i.e. intelligence you gather), unless you just decide to Hiroshima/Nagasaki wherever you think ISIS is, which is "politically fine" if it's small communities/villages out in the sticks of Afghanistan. Problem is, they are in most every major city in Europe as well so that plan stops right there.greenblood said:
You don't send in 10,000 troops, that's the problem. You send in 50,000 troops, Spain sends in 50,000 troops, UK sends in 50,000 troops, and France sends in 50,000 troops. You send these troops in after you collectively carpet bomb the area to lower the amount of resistance you'll receive.Hippopeteamus said:
And unfortunately I don't think the American people are willing to send in tens of thousands of troops for 15-25 years, which might be what is required.GreenRiverGatorz said:
I don't disagree, but the asymmetry of the situation highlights just how difficult of a crisis this is. We have to have a heavy hand as we're fighting insurgents, but we also have to be cognizant of the fact that if not carried out tactically enough, our attacks could create more terrorists than they eliminate. And then there's the issue of many young Syrians, Iraqis, Libyans, etc. turning to ISIS because they have no other economic prospects. Obviously those countries need to be rebuilt to the point where jihad isn't the only feasible career path, but how do we accomplish that? Especially when our last couple "rebuilding efforts" have been such resounding failures.PostGameOrangeSlices said:GreenRiverGatorz said:Yeah, that's a bunch of nonsense. I don't believe for a second that anyone in the Middle East is committing themselves to violent jihad because of the offensive words of Donald Trump.
What does propel otherwise normal third-world Muslims (who haven't already joined ISIS because of economic reasons) to jihad, however, is when their family members are killed as collateral damage in air strikes carried out by the West.
there will always been collateral involved. the difference is that the US doesn't intend to kill non-combatants, it's an unfortunate reality of warfare. especially when terrorists often hide behind innocents...
on the other hand, collateral damage is entire purpose of carrying out terror attacks.
you can't just do nothing in return when a violent group attacks your civilian population. and you certainly can't give these groups a free pass into your country
Sending in a thousand here, a thousand there, is what drags a war on. You drop the hammer, this thing is done within a year.
ISIS can overplay their hand by attacking "neutral targets" like today which could band the world against the common enemy, but this only works if Russia/Israel are allowed to take the lead on "interrogation tactics". Europe and the US are to pussy to extract the info we need. Those two wouldn't GAF.
When your enemy doesn't care if they die, or who they take down with them, you better be willing to get in the gutter with them. Using rational/economic/any other logic is not going to make them stop. Their belief system says anyone not practicing hard core Islam is the devil and needs to be obliterated. Not much negotiating room with that.
What I don't get is why aren't all these kind peaceful muslims ratting out the bad guys? Oh yeah, a large percentage like what they are doing.
