Do you agree with Obama?

[NYcarbineer]

Obama explains why he doesn't use 'radical Islam'

President Obama recently answered criticisms from Trump that he never uses the words, "radical Islam", because he thinks it is a "distraction" that will create needless agitation towards those who practice Islam, even though that is what it is.

So is he right? Should we continue the PC charade of never saying "radical Islam"?

Obama says,

"We are not at war with Islam. We are at war with people who have perverted Islam,"

What part of that do you disagree with?

Its constantly proven wrong just like global warming

So you're another who takes the view that there are no innocent Muslims.

lol, I'm beginning to think this is the consensus on the Right.

So treat Muslims like Hitler treated the Jews, eh? Since they're all guilty...

 

[G.T.]

GT, you don't have a clue here..

No, they are sitting on their hands waiting for him to say "fully engage".

Are you meaning to say that the military is currently sitting on its hands waiting for obama to say "islam?"

you really dont think these things through, huh?

Yea well, Im sure youve all the classified intel of the joint chiefs in order to logically determine if you , and where you, disagree with any of the current strategies of the top brass.

if not, why are you so content with arguing about something you know for a fact that youre missing all of the classified intel on?

do you put 100pc puzzles together with only 25 pieces and argue that theyre done?

Thats nice and all, you, userhandle "depotoo" are still playing sideseat quarterback without a single bit of a ******* clue what ANY classified intel, what ANY Military advisor says at the daily briefings, etc...


And think you somehow have an informed opinion.




Thats an ego thing, not an intelligence thing.

Right, intelligence is thinking that a general saying not identifying the enemy doesn't affect his implementation of a lame, incoherent strategy somehow fixes that it's a lame, incoherent strategy ...

Id like to point out - albeit youre unable to absorb it because you dont seem all that bright......


That the "headline" that you know of, or "synopsis made public" of.......our "strategy," is not, in fact or in detail, our strategy.

Again, you dont have the security clearance to know what the **** is going on




but your ego allows you to be here criticizing that which youre ignorant of......while acting like youre saying something.


Youre not.

Youve no clue.

Theres a reason you dont, as well.

 

[NYcarbineer]

What the Right in America and ISIS most have in common...

...both want this to be a religious war.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Attacking Obama over semantics is just one more symptom of ODS.

 

[kaz]

GT, you don't have a clue here..

No, they are sitting on their hands waiting for him to say "fully engage".

Yea well, Im sure youve all the classified intel of the joint chiefs in order to logically determine if you , and where you, disagree with any of the current strategies of the top brass.

if not, why are you so content with arguing about something you know for a fact that youre missing all of the classified intel on?

do you put 100pc puzzles together with only 25 pieces and argue that theyre done?

Thats nice and all, you, userhandle "depotoo" are still playing sideseat quarterback without a single bit of a ******* clue what ANY classified intel, what ANY Military advisor says at the daily briefings, etc...


And think you somehow have an informed opinion.




Thats an ego thing, not an intelligence thing.

Right, intelligence is thinking that a general saying not identifying the enemy doesn't affect his implementation of a lame, incoherent strategy somehow fixes that it's a lame, incoherent strategy ...

Id like to point out - albeit youre unable to absorb it because you dont seem all that bright......


That the "headline" that you know of, or "synopsis made public" of.......our "strategy," is not, in fact or in detail, our strategy.

Again, you dont have the security clearance to know what the **** is going on




but your ego allows you to be here criticizing that which youre ignorant of......while acting like youre saying something.


Youre not.

Youve no clue.

Theres a reason you dont, as well.

So all you have is baa, government will inform you what it wants you to know when it wants you to know it ...

And again, the hyperbolic hypocrisy after W ...

 

[irosie91]

People who believe women cannot be allowed to go to school or drive a car are Islamic Extremists, some maybe even violent. But that doesn't mean they had something to do with killing people or that we are at war with them.

I don't think there is anything to demands that the shootings be explicitly broad-brushed to Islam than basic bigotry. Middle east is socially and economically backward and how they practice religion is a reflection, not a cause of it. Just as Christianity and Judaism as they are practiced are not causes, but reflections of societies.

anton----you know virtually nothing. I am a jew by virtue of having jewish parents---both born in the USA----and firmly liberal secular. ----so that's me-----I consider divulging that fact
VITAL to understanding my POV-----I grew up in a VERY VERY white bread town----protestant at its base-----a bit Nazi-----some of the local yokes boasted kinship to pre 1776
colonial patriots. ------VERY GOOD PEOPLE----not a single "colored" person in town----(the local yokels called 'em ----N^%%ahs) The biggest events in my childhood were ---MEMORIAL DAY, FOURTH OF JULY---thanks giving and Halloween ---of course Christmas and Easter but not something my relatives actually celebrated. Until I was twelve---firmly convinced that "the pilgrims invented democracy" But the fact that
my parents were firm LIBERALS took me off the path------I befriended the friendless-----which in my case were lots of persons from south east asia-----some from Africa ---etc etc. I read lots too-----before I reached 20 I had read the koran----at a time when the majority of people in my "neck of the woods"---never heard of that book. You know very little other than meaningless platitudes. POVERTY DOES IT? does what? I doubt that you know what poverty really is

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Isn't it interesting that when we talk of Islamic terrorists the left prattles on about the "tiny Percent" of followers yet when we talk of firearms the fact that less than a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of firearms are ever used in killing people never penetrates and they insist that all firearms owners must be treated the same?

 

[irosie91]

Attacking Obama over semantics is just one more symptom of ODS.

actually---if there is anyone in the world for whom SEMANTICS is paramount----it is a HARVARD TRAINED LAWYER

 

[Ava]

Obama explains why he doesn't use 'radical Islam'

President Obama recently answered criticisms from Trump that he never uses the words, "radical Islam", because he thinks it is a "distraction" that will create needless agitation towards those who practice Islam, even though that is what it is.

So is he right? Should we continue the PC charade of never saying "radical Islam"?

We should call it what it is: radical Islamist terrorism. Obama is afraid to.

 

[G.T.]

GT, you don't have a clue here..

Yea well, Im sure youve all the classified intel of the joint chiefs in order to logically determine if you , and where you, disagree with any of the current strategies of the top brass.

if not, why are you so content with arguing about something you know for a fact that youre missing all of the classified intel on?

do you put 100pc puzzles together with only 25 pieces and argue that theyre done?

Thats nice and all, you, userhandle "depotoo" are still playing sideseat quarterback without a single bit of a ******* clue what ANY classified intel, what ANY Military advisor says at the daily briefings, etc...


And think you somehow have an informed opinion.




Thats an ego thing, not an intelligence thing.

Right, intelligence is thinking that a general saying not identifying the enemy doesn't affect his implementation of a lame, incoherent strategy somehow fixes that it's a lame, incoherent strategy ...

Id like to point out - albeit youre unable to absorb it because you dont seem all that bright......


That the "headline" that you know of, or "synopsis made public" of.......our "strategy," is not, in fact or in detail, our strategy.

Again, you dont have the security clearance to know what the **** is going on




but your ego allows you to be here criticizing that which youre ignorant of......while acting like youre saying something.


Youre not.

Youve no clue.

Theres a reason you dont, as well.

So all you have is baa, government will inform you what it wants you to know when it wants you to know it ...

And again, the hyperbolic hypocrisy after W ...

Umm, all I have is the reality that you dont have a security clearance, thus dont have the first ******* clue, yet you feel the need to blather your criticisms regardless of that ignorance.

Dont worry, its normal. A lot of ppl are just as bright as you are.

 

[bendog]

Obama explains why he doesn't use 'radical Islam'

President Obama recently answered criticisms from Trump that he never uses the words, "radical Islam", because he thinks it is a "distraction" that will create needless agitation towards those who practice Islam, even though that is what it is.

So is he right? Should we continue the PC charade of never saying "radical Islam"?

Obama says,

"We are not at war with Islam. We are at war with people who have perverted Islam,"

What part of that do you disagree with?

I get that he doesn't want to use the word Islam, but I don't see why he can't refer to them as terrorists who pervert Islam.

That will not satisfy the Trumpeters who want to believe Islam itself is the enemy, but ... who cares.

 

[bendog]

Obama explains why he doesn't use 'radical Islam'

President Obama recently answered criticisms from Trump that he never uses the words, "radical Islam", because he thinks it is a "distraction" that will create needless agitation towards those who practice Islam, even though that is what it is.

So is he right? Should we continue the PC charade of never saying "radical Islam"?

We should call it what it is: radical Islamist terrorism. Obama is afraid to.

It is not about Islam.

 

[G.T.]

Obama explains why he doesn't use 'radical Islam'

President Obama recently answered criticisms from Trump that he never uses the words, "radical Islam", because he thinks it is a "distraction" that will create needless agitation towards those who practice Islam, even though that is what it is.

So is he right? Should we continue the PC charade of never saying "radical Islam"?

Obama says,

"We are not at war with Islam. We are at war with people who have perverted Islam,"

What part of that do you disagree with?

I get that he doesn't want to use the word Islam, but I don't see why he can't refer to them as terrorists who pervert Islam.

That will not satisfy the Trumpeters who want to believe Islam itself is the enemy, but ... who cares.

He does say theyre terrorists who pervert Islam.

Ive seen him say it myself like 20times.

 

[bendog]

Obama explains why he doesn't use 'radical Islam'

President Obama recently answered criticisms from Trump that he never uses the words, "radical Islam", because he thinks it is a "distraction" that will create needless agitation towards those who practice Islam, even though that is what it is.

So is he right? Should we continue the PC charade of never saying "radical Islam"?

Obama says,

"We are not at war with Islam. We are at war with people who have perverted Islam,"

What part of that do you disagree with?

I get that he doesn't want to use the word Islam, but I don't see why he can't refer to them as terrorists who pervert Islam.

That will not satisfy the Trumpeters who want to believe Islam itself is the enemy, but ... who cares.

He does say theyre terrorists who pervert Islam.

Ive seen im say it myself like 20times.

Yeah, but the criticism seems to be he can't use the word Islam in his standard label for the bustards. I think Obama understands the problem clearly. But, he undervalues the unique qualities of American political liberalism (as in the John Locke / Rousseau liberalism)

 

[irosie91]

Isn't it interesting that when we talk of Islamic terrorists the left prattles on about the "tiny Percent" of followers yet when we talk of firearms the fact that less than a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of firearms are ever used in killing people never penetrates and they insist that all firearms owners must be treated the same?

the TINY PERCENT of followers-----in countries which have muslim majorities or just significant muslim populations (eg. India) is about the same as the "TINY PERCENTAGE"---of four year old Christian children in the USA believe who that santa comes around on Christmas eve

 

[kaz]

GT, you don't have a clue here..

Thats nice and all, you, userhandle "depotoo" are still playing sideseat quarterback without a single bit of a ******* clue what ANY classified intel, what ANY Military advisor says at the daily briefings, etc...


And think you somehow have an informed opinion.




Thats an ego thing, not an intelligence thing.

Right, intelligence is thinking that a general saying not identifying the enemy doesn't affect his implementation of a lame, incoherent strategy somehow fixes that it's a lame, incoherent strategy ...

Id like to point out - albeit youre unable to absorb it because you dont seem all that bright......


That the "headline" that you know of, or "synopsis made public" of.......our "strategy," is not, in fact or in detail, our strategy.

Again, you dont have the security clearance to know what the **** is going on




but your ego allows you to be here criticizing that which youre ignorant of......while acting like youre saying something.


Youre not.

Youve no clue.

Theres a reason you dont, as well.

So all you have is baa, government will inform you what it wants you to know when it wants you to know it ...

And again, the hyperbolic hypocrisy after W ...

Umm, all I have is the reality that you dont have a security clearance, thus dont have the first ******* clue, yet you feel the need to blather your criticisms regardless of that ignorance.

Dont worry, its normal. A lot of ppl are just as bright as you are.

Funny, I've never seen you say that to a liberal. You don't have a security clearance! You can't have an opinion!

You know, say on WMD's? How can you even sit right now with the ass flaming hypocrisy you're spewing?

And wow, what a government suckler ...

 

[irosie91]

Obama explains why he doesn't use 'radical Islam'

President Obama recently answered criticisms from Trump that he never uses the words, "radical Islam", because he thinks it is a "distraction" that will create needless agitation towards those who practice Islam, even though that is what it is.

So is he right? Should we continue the PC charade of never saying "radical Islam"?

Obama says,

"We are not at war with Islam. We are at war with people who have perverted Islam,"

What part of that do you disagree with?

I get that he doesn't want to use the word Islam, but I don't see why he can't refer to them as terrorists who pervert Islam.

That will not satisfy the Trumpeters who want to believe Islam itself is the enemy, but ... who cares.

He does say theyre terrorists who pervert Islam.

Ive seen im say it myself like 20times.

Yeah, but the criticism seems to be he can't use the word Islam in his standard label for the bustards. I think Obama understands the problem clearly. But, he undervalues the unique qualities of American political liberalism (as in the John Locke / Rousseau liberalism)

coming from KENYA---of course he knows----the Kenyan muslims are ANIMALS Ask any
HINDU OR CHRISTIAN who has endured them

 

[irosie91]

Obama explains why he doesn't use 'radical Islam'

President Obama recently answered criticisms from Trump that he never uses the words, "radical Islam", because he thinks it is a "distraction" that will create needless agitation towards those who practice Islam, even though that is what it is.

So is he right? Should we continue the PC charade of never saying "radical Islam"?

Obama says,

"We are not at war with Islam. We are at war with people who have perverted Islam,"

What part of that do you disagree with?

Its constantly proven wrong just like global warming

So you're another who takes the view that there are no innocent Muslims.

lol, I'm beginning to think this is the consensus on the Right.

So treat Muslims like Hitler treated the Jews, eh? Since they're all guilty...

from where did you scrape that libel----achmed? So far NO ONE HAS STATED ALL MUSLIMS ARE GUILTY-----
It might interest you to know that all Christians who do not either convert to islam or agree to enslavement to islam are VERY GUILTY

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Obama explains why he doesn't use 'radical Islam'

President Obama recently answered criticisms from Trump that he never uses the words, "radical Islam", because he thinks it is a "distraction" that will create needless agitation towards those who practice Islam, even though that is what it is.

So is he right? Should we continue the PC charade of never saying "radical Islam"?

Obama is an idiot. Seems to enjoy pretending to be a Christian but acts like an offended Muslim.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Obama explains why he doesn't use 'radical Islam'

President Obama recently answered criticisms from Trump that he never uses the words, "radical Islam", because he thinks it is a "distraction" that will create needless agitation towards those who practice Islam, even though that is what it is.

So is he right? Should we continue the PC charade of never saying "radical Islam"?

He is not right. No one is condemning Islam, only radical Islam. The fact that he can't/won't make that distinction is disturbing.