The World has been castrated
So I guess we need to be accepting and kind. That will make the terrorists stop...
Certain people just shouldn't reproduce.
Comments
-
"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...
-
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. -
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 -
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 -
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.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.
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. -
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 -
That's exactly what is a happening now. Sniper bombing isn't workingGreenRiverGatorz 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 -
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
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.
-
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 -
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. -
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... -
Which is really something only military experts can accurately comment on. It would seem that our drone and surveillance technology should have progressed to the point where we can take out targets without killing innocents. Yet time and time again we are finding that collateral damage is still occurring. Hell, it was just six months ago that we accidentally took out a Doctors Without Borders hospital. Is our technology still not developed enough to avoid these situations? Are these just cases of incompetence on the parts of the military personnel carrying out the attacks?greenblood said:
That's exactly what is a happening now. Sniper bombing isn't workingGreenRiverGatorz 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
I don't pretend to know what the answer is, or what the best approach going forward is. It's an extremely complex foreign policy issue, and I'm not convinced it's one we'll ever solve. It may take generations for ISIS and other violent jihadist groups to die off on their own. -
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 -
Drumpf seems like he's ready to adopt Sharia Law. Praise Allah.
-
It's a religious war. You think, they'll just die naturally? WTF? This is built in to their radical religion. This isn't going to stop until they are neutralized.GreenRiverGatorz said:
Which is really something only military experts can accurately comment on. It would seem that our drone and surveillance technology should have progressed to the point where we can take out targets without killing innocents. Yet time and time again we are finding that collateral damage is still occurring. Hell, it was just six months ago that we accidentally took out a Doctors Without Borders hospital. Is our technology still not developed enough to avoid these situations? Are these just cases of incompetence on the parts of the military personnel carrying out the attacks?greenblood said:
That's exactly what is a happening now. Sniper bombing isn't workingGreenRiverGatorz 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
I don't pretend to know what the answer is, or what the best approach going forward is. It's an extremely complex foreign policy issue, and I'm not convinced it's one we'll ever solve. It may take generations for ISIS and other violent jihadist groups to die off on their own. -
I agree, when I said tens of thousands I wasn't thinking 10k but more like 35k-75k. I am unsure that you could be done in a year, however. You have to establish a somewhat stable government, military, police force, economy, and education system. The real problem would not be suppressing the militants and terrorists, but leaving a situation where these groups did not just arise again within an unstable situation where they could flourish.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. -
Nevermind.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 -
You need to back it up, with a rotating national defense once the war is over. You provide the area with a military consisting of multiple country forces working under direction of the new government. You gradually build the new governments military to defend future insurgents. That may take 10-15 years, agreed. But it's done through a rotating force of multiple countries, so the individual contributions of each country is limited. Unlike in Iraq where the US was doing all the heavy lifting, and another country world occasionally give us a spot. This needs to be a cooperative effort by multiple countries, and all need to contribute more than what was contributed before.Hippopeteamus said:
I agree, when I said tens of thousands I wasn't thinking 10k but more like 35k-75k. I am unsure that you could be done in a year, however. You have to establish a somewhat stable government, military, police force, economy, and education system. The real problem would not be suppressing the militants and terrorists, but leaving a situation where these groups did not just arise again within an unstable situation where they could flourish.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.
You then provide a period of time, where an attack on them is an attack on everybody. So if insurgents come back down the road, you bring the hammer again, before they have enough time to mobilize like ISIS has done now.
This minimal soldier and bombing brigade only gives these lunatics hope. You crush ISIS if you show them that they have no chance. You drop the hammer, your drop the hammer, and you drop the hammer. Eventually, they fall in line, because there is no other option. -
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... -
If you are looking for things we do that piss of the terrorists look no further than their own words. Our fancy modern ways and gays and women are an abomination to the religion of peace. We have a female Secretary of State - more than one. We have gay marriage. We have a gay President.
Nobody seriously goes around saying we need to stone gays and put women in burkahs so we don't offend anyone. That would be insane.
So is blaming the stupid shit the left blames.
As for war, if we aren't in it to win it then no thanks. I've learned my lesson. If we had all been alive in WW2 and could follow it on TV or the internet we'd be sick and throwing up at (fuck - shaking and vomiting) at what the allies did to the axis to keep the axis from doing it to us.
And we are still there to keep the peace
If we aren't going to do that against these rag head pieces of shit then I am OUT! No more half wars for me. I don't think collateral damage is the cause of terrorism but I don't think we need to inflict it for no good reason either -
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. -
How about we bring back colonialism and say fuck the middle east. Fuck the idea of liberating countries just to see them pussy out and not even defend themselves. They want to be independent so bad, they can nut up and kick the bad guys out themselves or they can fuck off and become an American territory where none of that shit will be allowed to happen. Fuck em.
-
Does that mean we cut their balls off?greenblood said:
It's a religious war. You think, they'll just die naturally? WTF? This is built in to their radical religion. This isn't going to stop until they are neutralized.GreenRiverGatorz said:
Which is really something only military experts can accurately comment on. It would seem that our drone and surveillance technology should have progressed to the point where we can take out targets without killing innocents. Yet time and time again we are finding that collateral damage is still occurring. Hell, it was just six months ago that we accidentally took out a Doctors Without Borders hospital. Is our technology still not developed enough to avoid these situations? Are these just cases of incompetence on the parts of the military personnel carrying out the attacks?greenblood said:
That's exactly what is a happening now. Sniper bombing isn't workingGreenRiverGatorz 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
I don't pretend to know what the answer is, or what the best approach going forward is. It's an extremely complex foreign policy issue, and I'm not convinced it's one we'll ever solve. It may take generations for ISIS and other violent jihadist groups to die off on their own. -
Why do that? Just have them adopt our left wing bleeding heart agenda, and they'll just fall off.DuckHHunterisafag said:
Does that mean we cut their balls off?greenblood said:
It's a religious war. You think, they'll just die naturally? WTF? This is built in to their radical religion. This isn't going to stop until they are neutralized.GreenRiverGatorz said:
Which is really something only military experts can accurately comment on. It would seem that our drone and surveillance technology should have progressed to the point where we can take out targets without killing innocents. Yet time and time again we are finding that collateral damage is still occurring. Hell, it was just six months ago that we accidentally took out a Doctors Without Borders hospital. Is our technology still not developed enough to avoid these situations? Are these just cases of incompetence on the parts of the military personnel carrying out the attacks?greenblood said:
That's exactly what is a happening now. Sniper bombing isn't workingGreenRiverGatorz 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
I don't pretend to know what the answer is, or what the best approach going forward is. It's an extremely complex foreign policy issue, and I'm not convinced it's one we'll ever solve. It may take generations for ISIS and other violent jihadist groups to die off on their own. -
"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. -
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. -
It was "tongue and cheek" to the main point. Israel is the root of the problem. As long as we support Israel, then we are a target. So, you have to destroy the aggressor. That's the only way to support Israel and not be at constant state of war.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.
Giving them resources only multiplies the problem. -
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
-
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. -
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.
