Does Anyone Not Know We're in World War III ?

[protectionist]

They are not for no reason. Are you blind ? You haven't seen ISIS come into Iraq right after Obama pulled the troops out n 2010 ? And aren't you aware of the significance of the combination of the largest unproven oil reserves in the world in Iraq, and the wealth to acquire nuclear weapons ? Think man, think.

In one of his final acts in office, President Bush in December of 2008 had signed a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) with the Iraqi government that set the clock ticking on ending the war he’d launched in March of 2003. The SOFA provided a legal basis for the presence of U.S. forces in Iraq after the United Nations Security Council mandate for the occupation mission expired at the end of 2008. But it required that all U.S. forces be gone from Iraq by January 1, 2012, unless the Iraqi government was willing to negotiate a new agreement that would extend their mandate.

Iraq 8217 s Government Not Obama Called Time on the U.S. Troop Presence TIME.com

What a lame answer. Obama didn't try to extend it. Man up and take a position.

My position is we should have left, stayed out and we should stay out of fighting ISIS now. I stand behind leaving.

At least if you say Obama should have tried to stay and didn't, you disagree with him on that you'd be taking a stand on a view.

Just saying it was W means you need political Viagara.

It was for historical accuracy. Not only was the date of withdrawal inaccurate but also the fact that it was President Bushes time frame not President Obama's. Furthermore it was the Shiite dominated Iraq government that is mostly responsible for the rekindling of the Iraq Civil war, and the alliance between the Sunnis and ISIS, not Bush, not Obama.

This is a current events thread, not a history one.

If you're willing to play fast and loose with facts your conclusion is suspect. Fact is the terrorist threat does not rise to the level of either of the two world wars.

That's right. It rises FAR ABOVE them, because of the NUCLEAR component, as well as CYBERwarfare, EMPs, and other WMD that weren't a threat in the first 2 world wars. How dumb could anyone be, to not see this obvious fact ?

 

[protectionist]

I didn't say ISIS was World War III. ISIS is one jihadist group in the world war, among dozens of others scattered all over the globe.

you can come out from under your bed now...

Beds won't protect against nuclear missles, EMPs, or CYBER attacks. Get with it. This ain't 1955.

 

[protectionist]

In one of his final acts in office, President Bush in December of 2008 had signed a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) with the Iraqi government that set the clock ticking on ending the war he’d launched in March of 2003. The SOFA provided a legal basis for the presence of U.S. forces in Iraq after the United Nations Security Council mandate for the occupation mission expired at the end of 2008. But it required that all U.S. forces be gone from Iraq by January 1, 2012, unless the Iraqi government was willing to negotiate a new agreement that would extend their mandate.

Iraq 8217 s Government Not Obama Called Time on the U.S. Troop Presence TIME.com

What a lame answer. Obama didn't try to extend it. Man up and take a position.

My position is we should have left, stayed out and we should stay out of fighting ISIS now. I stand behind leaving.

At least if you say Obama should have tried to stay and didn't, you disagree with him on that you'd be taking a stand on a view.

Just saying it was W means you need political Viagara.

It was for historical accuracy. Not only was the date of withdrawal inaccurate but also the fact that it was President Bushes time frame not President Obama's. Furthermore it was the Shiite dominated Iraq government that is mostly responsible for the rekindling of the Iraq Civil war, and the alliance between the Sunnis and ISIS, not Bush, not Obama.

This is a current events thread, not a history one.

If you're willing to play fast and loose with facts your conclusion is suspect. Fact is the terrorist threat does not rise to the level of either of the two world wars.

Yes, it's not like they are bringing down buildings in Manhattan or anything.

I want to fight anyone who attacks us, I just don't want to fight people who don't and I don't want to be in countries we don't belong propping up dictators.

As the Rolling Stones still say > "You can't always get what you want."

 

[kaz]

I want to retaliate when we are attacked. I don't want to be in the middle east at all, I don't want to be engaged in wars like Iraq that aren't our problem, I don't want to be nation building in Afghanistan.

You support a party that is far more militaristic than that. Obama continued the war in Iraq, continued nation building in Afghanistan, got us into war in Libya and saber rattled in Egypt and Syria. And you call me scary militaristic? Dante is completely ******* delusional.

nice to know some things in life stay the same

Seriously? Dante thinks it's "" to respond when we are attacked, but not when we are not? What is scary about that exactly?

 

[protectionist]

What a lame answer. Obama didn't try to extend it. Man up and take a position.

My position is we should have left, stayed out and we should stay out of fighting ISIS now. I stand behind leaving.

At least if you say Obama should have tried to stay and didn't, you disagree with him on that you'd be taking a stand on a view.

Just saying it was W means you need political Viagara.

It was for historical accuracy. Not only was the date of withdrawal inaccurate but also the fact that it was President Bushes time frame not President Obama's. Furthermore it was the Shiite dominated Iraq government that is mostly responsible for the rekindling of the Iraq Civil war, and the alliance between the Sunnis and ISIS, not Bush, not Obama.

This is a current events thread, not a history one.

If you're willing to play fast and loose with facts your conclusion is suspect. Fact is the terrorist threat does not rise to the level of either of the two world wars.

Yes, it's not like they are bringing down buildings in Manhattan or anything.

I want to fight anyone who attacks us, I just don't want to fight people who don't and I don't want to be in countries we don't belong propping up dictators.

Oh please, al qaeda attacked the WTC in 2001. People like you would wage constant war, ala Israel with her neighbors, in order to keep us safe from a mythical giant. People like you would bankrupt us to keep us safe from you mythical giant

Does THIS look mythical to you ? >>

 

[kaz]

This is a current events thread, not a history one.

If you're willing to play fast and loose with facts your conclusion is suspect. Fact is the terrorist threat does not rise to the level of either of the two world wars.

Yes, it's not like they are bringing down buildings in Manhattan or anything.

I want to fight anyone who attacks us, I just don't want to fight people who don't and I don't want to be in countries we don't belong propping up dictators.

Well if their Air Force had bombed Manhattan or their Navy had been shelling it, I might have a different opinion.

LOL, the blind spot of the British as well in 1776. The Americans didn't fight like Europeans on battlefields did, we were no threat to them. It's funny how liberals like to think of yourselves as progressive thinkers when you are regressive. Threats are threats, you don't get to tell your enemy the rules of how to fight you.

The Americans didn't always fight like the British but mostly they did. Especially after we started receiving aid from the French. The scumbag suicide bombers represent a threat, anyone willing to die in an attack is hard to stop. But it's not a threat like the Wolfe Pack patrolling our east coast and Atlantic sinking our merchant vessels.

Ignoring the world trade center, the Boston Marathon, Fort Hood, ... you haven't been following what' happening in Europe, are you?

 

[kaz]

LOL, so we're not in the Middle East fighting wars because there is oil there, only ISIS is doing that? Sure, Virginia, sure...

Dolt! We've been there for years, and haven't gotten one drop of Iraq's oil. We get our oil from Canada, KSA, Venezuela, Mexico, and what we drill here. NUCLEAR WEAPONS is the issue here.

Read my post again, only slower this time

 

[protectionist]

What a lame answer. Obama didn't try to extend it. Man up and take a position.

My position is we should have left, stayed out and we should stay out of fighting ISIS now. I stand behind leaving.

At least if you say Obama should have tried to stay and didn't, you disagree with him on that you'd be taking a stand on a view.

Just saying it was W means you need political Viagara.

It was for historical accuracy. Not only was the date of withdrawal inaccurate but also the fact that it was President Bushes time frame not President Obama's. Furthermore it was the Shiite dominated Iraq government that is mostly responsible for the rekindling of the Iraq Civil war, and the alliance between the Sunnis and ISIS, not Bush, not Obama.

This is a current events thread, not a history one.

If you're willing to play fast and loose with facts your conclusion is suspect. Fact is the terrorist threat does not rise to the level of either of the two world wars.

Yes, it's not like they are bringing down buildings in Manhattan or anything.

I want to fight anyone who attacks us, I just don't want to fight people who don't and I don't want to be in countries we don't belong propping up dictators.

Well if their Air Force had bombed Manhattan or their Navy had been shelling it, I might have a different opinion.

So THIS isn't quite enough ?

Internal US terrorist plots since 9/11 (this is an incomplete list > It omits the July 2002 LAX shooting attack and the 2002 Beltway Sniper shootings which killed 19 people, and only goes up to April 2013)


1. Richard Reid (the Shoe Bomber)—December 2001

2. Jose Padilla—May 20023. Lackawanna Six—September 2002

4. Uzair and Saifullah Paracha—March 2003

5. Iyman Faris—May 2003

6. Ahmed Omar Abu Ali—June 2003

7. Virginia Jihad Network—June 2003

8. Nuradin M. Abdi—November 2003

9. Dhiren Barot—August 2004

10. James Elshafay and Shahawar Matin Siraj—August 2004

11. Yassin Aref and Mohammad Hossain—August 2004

12. Hamid Hayat—June 2005

13. Levar Haley Washington, Gregory Vernon Patterson, Hammad Riaz Samana, and Kevin James—August 2005

14. Michael C. Reynolds—December 2005

15. Mohammad Zaki Amawi, Marwan Othman El-Hindi, and Zand Wassim Mazloum—February 2006

16. Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar—March 2006

17. Syed Haris Ahmed and Ehsanul Islam Sadequee—April 2006

18. Narseal Batiste, Patrick Abraham, Stanley Grant Phanor, Naudimar Herrera, Burson Augustin, Lyglenson Lemorin, and Rotschild Augustine—June 2006

19. Assem Hammoud—July 2006

20. Liquid Explosives Plot—August 2006

21. Derrick Shareef—December 2006

22. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed—March 200723. Fort Dix Plot—May 200724. JFK Airport Plot—June 2007

25. Hassan Abujihaad—March 2008

26. Christopher Paul—June 2008

27. Bryant Neal Vinas—November 2008

28. Synagogue Terror Plot—May 200929. Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad—June 2009

30. Raleigh Jihad Group—July 2009

31. Najibullah Zazi—September 2009

32. Maher Husein Smadi—September 2009

33. Michael Finton—September 2009

34. Tarek Mehanna and Ahmad Abousamra—October 2009

35. Major Nidal Malik Hasan—November 2009

36. The Christmas Day (Underwear) Bomber—December 2009

37. Raja Lahrasib Khan—March 2010

38. Faisal Shahzad (Times Square bomber) —May 2010

39. Paul G. Rockwood Jr. and Nadia Piroska Maria Rockwood—July 2010

40. Farooque Ahmed—October 2010

41. Air Cargo Bomb Plot—October 2010

42. Mohamed Osman Mohamud—November 2010

43. Antonio Martinez—December 2010

44. Khalid Ali-M Aldawsari—February 2011

45. Ahmed Ferhani and Mohamed Mamdouh—May 2011

46. Yonathan Melaku—June 2011

47. Abu Khalid Abdul-Latif and Walli Mujahidh—June 2011

48. Ulugbek Kodirov—July 2011

49. Emerson Winfield Begolly—August 2011

50. Rezwan Ferdaus—September 201151. Iranian Terror Plot—October 201152. Jose Pimentel—November 2011

53. Sami Osmakac—January 2012

54. Amine El Khalifi—February 2012

55. AQAP Plane Bomb Plot—May 2012

56. Adel Daoud—September 2012

57. Quazi Mohammad Rezwanul Ahsan Nafis—October 2012.

58. Qazi Brothers’ Plot—November 2012

59. Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev (Boston Marathon bombing)—April 2013

60. Chiheb Esseghaier and Raed Jaser—April 2013

 

[kaz]

They are not for no reason. Are you blind ? You haven't seen ISIS come into Iraq right after Obama pulled the troops out n 2010 ? And aren't you aware of the significance of the combination of the largest unproven oil reserves in the world in Iraq, and the wealth to acquire nuclear weapons ? Think man, think.

In one of his final acts in office, President Bush in December of 2008 had signed a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) with the Iraqi government that set the clock ticking on ending the war he’d launched in March of 2003. The SOFA provided a legal basis for the presence of U.S. forces in Iraq after the United Nations Security Council mandate for the occupation mission expired at the end of 2008. But it required that all U.S. forces be gone from Iraq by January 1, 2012, unless the Iraqi government was willing to negotiate a new agreement that would extend their mandate.

Iraq 8217 s Government Not Obama Called Time on the U.S. Troop Presence TIME.com

What a lame answer. Obama didn't try to extend it. Man up and take a position.

My position is we should have left, stayed out and we should stay out of fighting ISIS now. I stand behind leaving.

At least if you say Obama should have tried to stay and didn't, you disagree with him on that you'd be taking a stand on a view.

Just saying it was W means you need political Viagara.

Neville Chamberlain would be proud.

What a stupid analogy

Pretense will get you nowhere.

What does "pretense" have to do with anything? What does going to the middle east and fighting ISIS virtually by ourselves when they aren't attacking us have to do with appeasing the Nazis when they were directly threatening England and Europe where England actually is located? It's a stupid analogy.

 

[protectionist]

This is a current events thread, not a history one.

If you're willing to play fast and loose with facts your conclusion is suspect. Fact is the terrorist threat does not rise to the level of either of the two world wars.

Yes, it's not like they are bringing down buildings in Manhattan or anything.

I want to fight anyone who attacks us, I just don't want to fight people who don't and I don't want to be in countries we don't belong propping up dictators.

Oh please, al qaeda attacked the WTC in 2001. People like you would wage constant war, ala Israel with her neighbors, in order to keep us safe from a mythical giant. People like you would bankrupt us to keep us safe from you mythical giant

Didn't actually read my post, did you Skippy? You support a President who wages far more war than I would. LOL. What a tool.

read your post.

I disagree with some of the President's actions and agree with others. Your type fears criminals and turns them into mythical giants

Jihadists aren't robbing 7-11s. They are all over the world, waging a world war.

 

[kaz]

In one of his final acts in office, President Bush in December of 2008 had signed a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) with the Iraqi government that set the clock ticking on ending the war he’d launched in March of 2003. The SOFA provided a legal basis for the presence of U.S. forces in Iraq after the United Nations Security Council mandate for the occupation mission expired at the end of 2008. But it required that all U.S. forces be gone from Iraq by January 1, 2012, unless the Iraqi government was willing to negotiate a new agreement that would extend their mandate.

Iraq 8217 s Government Not Obama Called Time on the U.S. Troop Presence TIME.com

What a lame answer. Obama didn't try to extend it. Man up and take a position.

My position is we should have left, stayed out and we should stay out of fighting ISIS now. I stand behind leaving.

At least if you say Obama should have tried to stay and didn't, you disagree with him on that you'd be taking a stand on a view.

Just saying it was W means you need political Viagara.

It was for historical accuracy. Not only was the date of withdrawal inaccurate but also the fact that it was President Bushes time frame not President Obama's. Furthermore it was the Shiite dominated Iraq government that is mostly responsible for the rekindling of the Iraq Civil war, and the alliance between the Sunnis and ISIS, not Bush, not Obama.

This is a current events thread, not a history one.

If you're willing to play fast and loose with facts your conclusion is suspect. Fact is the terrorist threat does not rise to the level of either of the two world wars.

That's right. It rises FAR ABOVE them, because of the NUCLEAR component, as well as CYBERwarfare, EMPs, and other WMD that weren't a threat in the first 2 world wars. How dumb could anyone be, to not see this obvious fact ?

With Iran, Pakistan, North Korea and so forth that cat is out of the bag. When the Euroweenies, Russia and China and we want to work together to actually address the threat then we're talking. Going it alone while they undermine us is a non-starter, or it should be. We should only do that when the threat is to us.

 

[kaz]

What a lame answer. Obama didn't try to extend it. Man up and take a position.

My position is we should have left, stayed out and we should stay out of fighting ISIS now. I stand behind leaving.

At least if you say Obama should have tried to stay and didn't, you disagree with him on that you'd be taking a stand on a view.

Just saying it was W means you need political Viagara.

It was for historical accuracy. Not only was the date of withdrawal inaccurate but also the fact that it was President Bushes time frame not President Obama's. Furthermore it was the Shiite dominated Iraq government that is mostly responsible for the rekindling of the Iraq Civil war, and the alliance between the Sunnis and ISIS, not Bush, not Obama.

This is a current events thread, not a history one.

If you're willing to play fast and loose with facts your conclusion is suspect. Fact is the terrorist threat does not rise to the level of either of the two world wars.

Yes, it's not like they are bringing down buildings in Manhattan or anything.

I want to fight anyone who attacks us, I just don't want to fight people who don't and I don't want to be in countries we don't belong propping up dictators.

As the Rolling Stones still say > "You can't always get what you want."

Ditto

 

[kaz]

If you're willing to play fast and loose with facts your conclusion is suspect. Fact is the terrorist threat does not rise to the level of either of the two world wars.

Yes, it's not like they are bringing down buildings in Manhattan or anything.

I want to fight anyone who attacks us, I just don't want to fight people who don't and I don't want to be in countries we don't belong propping up dictators.

Oh please, al qaeda attacked the WTC in 2001. People like you would wage constant war, ala Israel with her neighbors, in order to keep us safe from a mythical giant. People like you would bankrupt us to keep us safe from you mythical giant

Didn't actually read my post, did you Skippy? You support a President who wages far more war than I would. LOL. What a tool.

read your post.

I disagree with some of the President's actions and agree with others. Your type fears criminals and turns them into mythical giants

Jihadists aren't robbing 7-11s. They are all over the world, waging a world war.

I agree. However, as long as we are willing to be the global policeman and do it on our own while our "allies" stab us in the back, why would they man up to confronting it? Imagine the brick they would lay if they found out we aren't doing it anymore other than to protect ourselves without a global ... team ... effort to do that.

 

[protectionist]

In one of his final acts in office, President Bush in December of 2008 had signed a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) with the Iraqi government that set the clock ticking on ending the war he’d launched in March of 2003. The SOFA provided a legal basis for the presence of U.S. forces in Iraq after the United Nations Security Council mandate for the occupation mission expired at the end of 2008. But it required that all U.S. forces be gone from Iraq by January 1, 2012, unless the Iraqi government was willing to negotiate a new agreement that would extend their mandate.

Iraq 8217 s Government Not Obama Called Time on the U.S. Troop Presence TIME.com

What a lame answer. Obama didn't try to extend it. Man up and take a position.

My position is we should have left, stayed out and we should stay out of fighting ISIS now. I stand behind leaving.

At least if you say Obama should have tried to stay and didn't, you disagree with him on that you'd be taking a stand on a view.

Just saying it was W means you need political Viagara.

Neville Chamberlain would be proud.

What a stupid analogy

Pretense will get you nowhere.

What does "pretense" have to do with anything? What does going to the middle east and fighting ISIS virtually by ourselves when they aren't attacking us have to do with appeasing the Nazis when they were directly threatening England and Europe where England actually is located? It's a stupid analogy.

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt that you weren't so stupid as to not see the analogy of Neville Chamberlain the appeaser and the appeasing going on right now. And you have it mixed up. The NAzis were attacking US too (our ships in the Atlantic. And ISIS has attacked us many times already by way of their cyber-publicity campaigning, and resulting attacks in the US. Don't watch the news ? ALso, they are bogged down in the ME now, but their effort is worldwide and have vowed to destroy America. "See you in New York" "ISIS flag over the White House"

And it's not just ISIS. They're only one component of the worldwide jihad. There are dozens all over the world (Boko Haram, al Shabbab, Taliban, Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, AQAP, AQIM, Jemaah Islamiah, Abu Sayaf, Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis, + thousands of Muslim Brotherhood front groups, many of them in the USA,etc.

BBC News - Jihadist groups around the world

 

[protectionist]

protist 10585507

Today, we have the radical Muslims fighting against everyone who doesn't share their insane ideology.

Stupid Comment #002 - I don't share DAIISH terrorist scum's insane ideology. Not one of those terrorist scum have attempted to fight me.

Why dignify the terrorist scum by declaring them fighters. They prey on the weak and unarmed and used social media to exaggerate their strength in numbers that caused an 'on paper only' army in northern Iraq to flee rather than fight. They are not fighters or anything close to being a soldier or warrior.

Posts like this always make me suspicious if the writer is from ISIS (or a jihadist sympathizer himself) No normal, intelligent person could think like this.

 

[protectionist]

Yes, it's not like they are bringing down buildings in Manhattan or anything.

I want to fight anyone who attacks us, I just don't want to fight people who don't and I don't want to be in countries we don't belong propping up dictators.

Oh please, al qaeda attacked the WTC in 2001. People like you would wage constant war, ala Israel with her neighbors, in order to keep us safe from a mythical giant. People like you would bankrupt us to keep us safe from you mythical giant

Didn't actually read my post, did you Skippy? You support a President who wages far more war than I would. LOL. What a tool.

read your post.

I disagree with some of the President's actions and agree with others. Your type fears criminals and turns them into mythical giants

Jihadists aren't robbing 7-11s. They are all over the world, waging a world war.

I agree. However, as long as we are willing to be the global policeman and do it on our own while our "allies" stab us in the back, why would they man up to confronting it? Imagine the brick they would lay if they found out we aren't doing it anymore other than to protect ourselves without a global ... team ... effort to do that.

France is conducting airstikes against ISIS. So is Saudi Arabia.

 

[protectionist]

What a lame answer. Obama didn't try to extend it. Man up and take a position.

My position is we should have left, stayed out and we should stay out of fighting ISIS now. I stand behind leaving.

At least if you say Obama should have tried to stay and didn't, you disagree with him on that you'd be taking a stand on a view.

Just saying it was W means you need political Viagara.

It was for historical accuracy. Not only was the date of withdrawal inaccurate but also the fact that it was President Bushes time frame not President Obama's. Furthermore it was the Shiite dominated Iraq government that is mostly responsible for the rekindling of the Iraq Civil war, and the alliance between the Sunnis and ISIS, not Bush, not Obama.

This is a current events thread, not a history one.

If you're willing to play fast and loose with facts your conclusion is suspect. Fact is the terrorist threat does not rise to the level of either of the two world wars.

That's right. It rises FAR ABOVE them, because of the NUCLEAR component, as well as CYBERwarfare, EMPs, and other WMD that weren't a threat in the first 2 world wars. How dumb could anyone be, to not see this obvious fact ?

With Iran, Pakistan, North Korea and so forth that cat is out of the bag. When the Euroweenies, Russia and China and we want to work together to actually address the threat then we're talking. Going it alone while they undermine us is a non-starter, or it should be. We should only do that when the threat is to us.

Threat ? Threat are thing that might happen in the future. We've been getting attacked left and right (over 100 times) since 9/11, See Posts # 125 & 128.

60 Terrorist Plots Since 9 11 Lessons in Domestic Counterterrorism

 

[Dante]

I didn't say ISIS was World War III. ISIS is one jihadist group in the world war, among dozens of others scattered all over the globe.

you can come out from under your bed now...

Beds won't protect against nuclear missles, EMPs, or CYBER attacks. Get with it. This ain't 1955.

I'll take my chances. Stop giving away my freedoms because you are a scaredy cat

 

[Dante]

I want to retaliate when we are attacked. I don't want to be in the middle east at all, I don't want to be engaged in wars like Iraq that aren't our problem, I don't want to be nation building in Afghanistan.

You support a party that is far more militaristic than that. Obama continued the war in Iraq, continued nation building in Afghanistan, got us into war in Libya and saber rattled in Egypt and Syria. And you call me scary militaristic? Dante is completely ******* delusional.

nice to know some things in life stay the same

Seriously? Dante thinks it's "" to respond when we are attacked, but not when we are not? What is scary about that exactly?

nope.

 

[Syriusly]

I didn't say ISIS was World War III. ISIS is one jihadist group in the world war, among dozens of others scattered all over the globe.

you can come out from under your bed now...

Beds won't protect against nuclear missles, EMPs, or CYBER attacks. Get with it. This ain't 1955.

Beds will protect just fine against any nuclear missiles or EMP's ever launched by a jihadist group- which will be none.

There are no jihadist groups that can launch nuclear missiles or EMP's against the United States- there are extremely few countries in the entire world that can do that- lets name them shall we?
- North Korea (barely)
- China
- Russia
- France
- UK
- Israel(?)

The other nuclear countries- India, Pakistan have no ability to lob a missile at the United States.

As far as cyberwarfare is concerned we are in more danger from NK, Russia and China than any jihadist group.