Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

The World has been castrated

greenblood
greenblood Member Posts: 14,572
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.
«1345

Comments

  • PostGameOrangeSlices
    PostGameOrangeSlices Member Posts: 27,818
    "Terrorist expert"

    LOL

    so the reason terrorists are terrorists is because we condemn them for committing acts of terror, according to this fucking mouth breather...

    it has nothing to do with terrorists being a part of a death cult where heaven is the end reward for committing acts of terrorism...


  • GreenRiverGatorz
    GreenRiverGatorz Member Posts: 10,168
    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.
  • PostGameOrangeSlices
    PostGameOrangeSlices Member Posts: 27,818

    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
  • GreenRiverGatorz
    GreenRiverGatorz Member Posts: 10,168

    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
    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.
  • greenblood
    greenblood Member Posts: 14,572
    edited March 2016

    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.

    Collateral damage is a horrible deal, but you can't defeat ISIS one by one. That's like trying to stop a dam collapse with duct tape. You need to go full force. Citizens in the area really have no choice. They need to GTFO. Reason being, either they stay and be collateral damage, or with no air strikes, they eventually become sex slaves or labor slaves for the growing ISIS or of course, executed.

    But again, we can listen to the expert and play nice, and let them infiltrate our defenses internally. I'd rather actually do something about it.
  • Hippopeteamus
    Hippopeteamus Member Posts: 1,958
    edited March 2016

    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
    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.
    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.
  • greenblood
    greenblood Member Posts: 14,572

    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
    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.
    That's exactly what is a happening now. Sniper bombing isn't working
  • PostGameOrangeSlices
    PostGameOrangeSlices Member Posts: 27,818

    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
    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.

    I hate to say it, but you let them sort their own mess out. The collapse of the Ottoman Empire after WW1, along with European meddling in the Middle East, is the root cause of many of these issues. Why the fuck should people in the Middle East care about their country when their borders were created by the English and the French? They are more loyal to their local tribe than they are to their state, by a huge margin.

    So what should we do? We should not topple evil, yet stable, dictatorships. When you do, you get even worse shit like ISIS and the Libyan civil war. We should support the most rational parties in the region, like the Kurds.

    And either way, the Wahhabists will still fucking hate us.
  • Kaepsknee
    Kaepsknee Member Posts: 14,919

    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
    That absolute statement is Bullshit.
  • greenblood
    greenblood Member Posts: 14,572
    edited March 2016

    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
    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.
    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.
    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.

    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.