Time to dust off the 25th Amendment

[ThunderKiss1965]

Ignorant nonsense.

The president has no interest in sending Americans to the ME to die in a pointless, never-ending war.

Attempting to engage ISIS in a conventional ground war is exactly what the terrorists want: it would justify their anti-West rhetoric and succeed in only strengthening ISIS.

The president is showing wisdom and restraint by not making the mistake of perceiving ISIS as some sort of legitimate military entity that can be defeated using conventional methods.

It's becoming painfully clear that many Americans are falling prey to their fear and ignorance.

The fear, ignorance, and stupidity exhibited by this thread's premise is what represents the greatest threat to America and the American people, not ISIS.

But if the overwhelming majority of Muslims are the peace-loving group the left constantly claims wouldn't they ignore calls for Jihad by ISIS?

The overwhelming majority does ignore calls for Jihad. If they didn't we would be fighting 1.6 billion Muslims.That's close to a forth of the worlds population.

But if the amount of extremist is as small as you claim The US military would have no problem destroying them and justification of their anti-west rhetoric shouldn't matter to the moderates.

 

[Dot Com]

China will be more then happy to LOAN us another $2 TRILLION to fight a stateless ephemeral enemy that hides amongst civilians

rw'ers just don't get it, Never have, never will.

 

[Conservative65]

China will be more then happy to LOAN us another $2 TRILLION to fight a stateless ephemeral enemy that hides amongst civilians

rw'ers just don't get it, Never have, never will.

We are fighting those barbarians the way they need to be fought. We need to wipe their asses off the planet and anyone they hide among should be considered the enemy.

 

[Dot Com]

China will be more then happy to LOAN us another $2 TRILLION to fight a stateless ephemeral enemy that hides amongst civilians

rw'ers just don't get it, Never have, never will.

We are fighting those barbarians the way they need to be fought. We need to wipe their asses off the planet and anyone they hide among should be considered the enemy.

Who is "we" kiddo?

Besides you don't even pay enough taxes on your burger-flipping job for the Treasury to break even on your rw pipe dream foreign adventures.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

China will be more then happy to LOAN us another $2 TRILLION to fight a stateless ephemeral enemy that hides amongst civilians

rw'ers just don't get it, Never have, never will.[/QUOTE


The US taxpayer owns the majority of US debt and that didn't come from any war.

 

[BULLDOG]

Ignorant nonsense.

The president has no interest in sending Americans to the ME to die in a pointless, never-ending war.

Attempting to engage ISIS in a conventional ground war is exactly what the terrorists want: it would justify their anti-West rhetoric and succeed in only strengthening ISIS.

The president is showing wisdom and restraint by not making the mistake of perceiving ISIS as some sort of legitimate military entity that can be defeated using conventional methods.

It's becoming painfully clear that many Americans are falling prey to their fear and ignorance.

The fear, ignorance, and stupidity exhibited by this thread's premise is what represents the greatest threat to America and the American people, not ISIS.

But if the overwhelming majority of Muslims are the peace-loving group the left constantly claims wouldn't they ignore calls for Jihad by ISIS?

The overwhelming majority does ignore calls for Jihad. If they didn't we would be fighting 1.6 billion Muslims.That's close to a forth of the worlds population.

But if the amount of extremist is as small as you claim The US military would have no problem destroying them and justification of their anti-west rhetoric shouldn't matter to the moderates.

I didn't say there were only a few extremists. Obviously,there are many. I said there was only a small portion of all Muslims who are Jihadists. There are 1.6 billion Muslims. If more than a tiny percentage of them were a problem, they would have already started a world war.

 

[Boss]

I didn't say there were only a few extremists. Obviously,there are many. I said there was only a small portion of all Muslims who are Jihadists. There are 1.6 billion Muslims. If more than a tiny percentage of them were a problem, they would have already started a world war.

But the same argument could have been made for the Nazis. Only a small number of people who supported Nazism were incinerating Jews. Only a small number of Pol Pot supporters were executing people in the Killing Fields. It's always the case with extremists, they are always in the minority. So your argument simply becomes a non-sequitur.

 

[BULLDOG]

I didn't say there were only a few extremists. Obviously,there are many. I said there was only a small portion of all Muslims who are Jihadists. There are 1.6 billion Muslims. If more than a tiny percentage of them were a problem, they would have already started a world war.

But the same argument could have been made for the Nazis. Only a small number of people who supported Nazism were incinerating Jews. Only a small number of Pol Pot supporters were executing people in the Killing Fields. It's always the case with extremists, they are always in the minority. So your argument simply becomes a non-sequitur.

You know that's nuts, right?

 

[BULLDOG]

I didn't say there were only a few extremists. Obviously,there are many. I said there was only a small portion of all Muslims who are Jihadists. There are 1.6 billion Muslims. If more than a tiny percentage of them were a problem, they would have already started a world war.

But the same argument could have been made for the Nazis. Only a small number of people who supported Nazism were incinerating Jews. Only a small number of Pol Pot supporters were executing people in the Killing Fields. It's always the case with extremists, they are always in the minority. So your argument simply becomes a non-sequitur.

In 1944, Hitler had the biggest army in the history of the world. There have been larger since, but not up until that time.

 

[Conservative65]

China will be more then happy to LOAN us another $2 TRILLION to fight a stateless ephemeral enemy that hides amongst civilians

rw'ers just don't get it, Never have, never will.

We are fighting those barbarians the way they need to be fought. We need to wipe their asses off the planet and anyone they hide among should be considered the enemy.

Who is "we" kiddo?

Besides you don't even pay enough taxes on your burger-flipping job for the Treasury to break even on your rw pipe dream foreign adventures.

Kiddo? The WE is the country. The problem is we have an unqualified black in the White House that would rather pander to fags, sluts, blacks, spics, etc. in order to get vote. He's not interested in winning a damn thing.

I pay more than you make son. Being a piece of shit like you are can't pay much if any. I'm sure you'd do it for free since you're so good at it.

 

[Boss]

I didn't say there were only a few extremists. Obviously,there are many. I said there was only a small portion of all Muslims who are Jihadists. There are 1.6 billion Muslims. If more than a tiny percentage of them were a problem, they would have already started a world war.

But the same argument could have been made for the Nazis. Only a small number of people who supported Nazism were incinerating Jews. Only a small number of Pol Pot supporters were executing people in the Killing Fields. It's always the case with extremists, they are always in the minority. So your argument simply becomes a non-sequitur.

In 1944, Hitler had the biggest army in the history of the world. There have been larger since, but not up until that time.

Still.. Was everyone in his army committing atrocities and supporting genocide? Were the majority of German soldiers or German people doing this? Or was it a small minority?

 

[Boss]

I didn't say there were only a few extremists. Obviously,there are many. I said there was only a small portion of all Muslims who are Jihadists. There are 1.6 billion Muslims. If more than a tiny percentage of them were a problem, they would have already started a world war.

But the same argument could have been made for the Nazis. Only a small number of people who supported Nazism were incinerating Jews. Only a small number of Pol Pot supporters were executing people in the Killing Fields. It's always the case with extremists, they are always in the minority. So your argument simply becomes a non-sequitur.

You know that's nuts, right?

No, it's the truth.. not nuts at all.

 

[Moonglow]

All I see is tough talk from non-military members that don't even have the guts or the physical ability to join a mercenary group and do the fighting...Send your kids to war and let's see if you still support an invasion of ISIS territory with your kid(s) involved..All for nothing...Kill off ISIS and you will have another extreme group pop up...

 

[Boss]

All I see is tough talk from non-military members that don't even have the guts or the physical ability to join a mercenary group and do the fighting...Send your kids to war and let's see if you still support an invasion of ISIS territory with your kid(s) involved..All for nothing...Kill off ISIS and you will have another extreme group pop up...

And yours is the typical response of a scared as hell liberal who wants to keep his head firmly buried in the sand. Your fear is writ large in every word you utter. You believe the best way to camouflage your fear is to question the bravery of others or challenging them with impossibilities to prove their bravery. We don't send any kids to war.... no one does that except for barbarians and terrorist thugs. When our kids become adults they are free to join the armed services and many do. We have a 100% voluntary army, no one is forced to do anything. None of that has to do with our policies, they go do the job we ask them to do and they make great sacrifices to do so. Having you mock them by calling them children who have been sent naively to die for nothing, is reprehensible. But it's the kind of thing a despicable coward will do to cover up his cowardice.

The reason the extremist groups continue to pop up and wreak terror is because you refuse to let us kill them. We tried after 9/11, but you decided quickly to exploit the fears of other like-minded cowards to politicize it and turn it into a debacle. You succeeded and we pulled back, they re-energized and here we are again. That is why MY position on this has changed. Until this nation is 100% serious about fighting this evil, there is NO reason for us to embark on such a mission. Until cowards like you are ready to pull your heads out of the sand and face the music, let us do what we need to do, it's all pointless.

 

[JoeB131]

The reason the extremist groups continue to pop up and wreak terror is because you refuse to let us kill them. We tried after 9/11, but you decided quickly to exploit the fears of other like-minded cowards to politicize it and turn it into a debacle.

You STUPID FUCK!!! We killed ONE MILLIONS IRAQIS AND AFGHANIS in the "War on an Emotional State". The problem is not that we aren't killing enough people. The problem is that we are killing them at all, because you know, what, they always have friends and relatives who want to get even.

 

[JoeB131]

We tried after 9/11, but you decided quickly to exploit the fears of other like-minded cowards to politicize it and turn it into a debacle.

No, you STUPID FUCK. After 9/11, Bush let Bin Laden get away, and decided to use fear as an excuse to attack Saddam Hussein, who had nothing to do with 9/11, but did make his father look bad once.

And when everyone figured out what he did, that's when people turned against the war, but by that time, the Iraqis people were so angry we had killed so many of them that they were completely radicalized against us. THAT'S what we are paying for now.

 

[Boss]

The reason the extremist groups continue to pop up and wreak terror is because you refuse to let us kill them. We tried after 9/11, but you decided quickly to exploit the fears of other like-minded cowards to politicize it and turn it into a debacle.

You STUPID FUCK!!! We killed ONE MILLIONS IRAQIS AND AFGHANIS in the "War on an Emotional State". The problem is not that we aren't killing enough people. The problem is that we are killing them at all, because you know, what, they always have friends and relatives who want to get even.

Well we should kill all their friends and relatives too. Look... I can guarantee you... anytime you kill enough of some hell-bent entity, they fold and capitulate. In WWII the Japanese were committed to fighting us to the death... were not going to surrender until every last man was dead. It took 2 nukes and they issued an unconditional surrender, and we've been "friends" ever since. All it took was for them to realize that we were serious... we were going to kill them all and didn't have any problem with it. Today, we DO have a problem with it... we have to fight the liberal left who don't want to kill any terrorists. Instead, they want to give them constitutional rights and try to appease them somehow. Had we done that with the Japanese, we would still be fighting them.

 

[Boss]

We tried after 9/11, but you decided quickly to exploit the fears of other like-minded cowards to politicize it and turn it into a debacle.

No, you STUPID FUCK. After 9/11, Bush let Bin Laden get away, and decided to use fear as an excuse to attack Saddam Hussein, who had nothing to do with 9/11, but did make his father look bad once.

And when everyone figured out what he did, that's when people turned against the war, but by that time, the Iraqis people were so angry we had killed so many of them that they were completely radicalized against us. THAT'S what we are paying for now.

They were already radicalized against us. How stupid... "completely radicalized" ....oh, wait, I'm not ready, I need more radicalization! ...Dumb shit!

Saddam probably did have something to do with 9/11 because he helped finance the first attack on the WTC in the 90s. He was mad at us for running him out of Kuwait. He was letting radical Islamists train at Salman Pak. He was actively producing WMDs, most of which were spirited out to Syria before we invaded. Don't give a damn if this doesn't fit your narrative... don't give a damn about arguing it anymore.

Saddam was a piece of shit dictator who hated us and needed to go.. AND that was cool because we needed his country as a base of operations to launch attacks on radical Islam. Had we stuck with the strategy we'd probably have a handle on this by now. But... noooo... we had to politicize it and turn it into a debacle... a quagmire... Vietnam II. And THAT's what we're paying for now.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Today, we DO have a problem with it... we have to fight the liberal left who don't want to kill any terrorists. Instead, they want to give them constitutional rights and try to appease them somehow.

…and welcome them into our country as “refugees”.

 

[JoeB131]

Well we should kill all their friends and relatives too. Look... I can guarantee you... anytime you kill enough of some hell-bent entity, they fold and capitulate. In WWII the Japanese were committed to fighting us to the death... were not going to surrender until every last man was dead. It took 2 nukes and they issued an unconditional surrender, and we've been "friends" ever since. All it took was for them to realize that we were serious... we were going to kill them all and didn't have any problem with it. Today, we DO have a problem with it... we have to fight the liberal left who don't want to kill any terrorists. Instead, they want to give them constitutional rights and try to appease them somehow. Had we done that with the Japanese, we would still be fighting them.

Uh, guy, there are 1.3 billion Muslims in the world.

And Japan didn't surrender because we nuked them. Japan surrendered because the USSR declared war on them and might have gotten to Tokyo before the Americans did.

So if we want to use WWII as a model, I'm good with that.

First, we raise taxes on the rich to confiscatory levels, just like we did in WWII.

We then draft every able-bodied person, including the children of the rich, to fight it.

Then we make Faustian Bargains with other people to do the actual fighting.

Sounds like a pretty good plan to me.