ISIS the new reality.

[Guest]

I suggest reading "Team of Teams" by General Stanley McChrystal. Quote "ISIS is using frightening tactics and digital communication" to bring constantly changing modern warfare to the Middle East.

[Guest]

And very socially savvy trying to recruit our young ones

[Guest]

And very socially savvy trying to recruit our young ones
I really think you need to add the word disenfranchised to our young for this to be true. That segment is growing.

[Guest]

I haven't read the book. I have it on order. With all the comment I see about ISIS and our involvement in the fight with them, I thought it might be interesting to read about how to deal with the enemy. The "lock and load" and "bomb them all and let God sort them out" mentality doesn't work in the real world and we are paying the price in taxpayer dollars and American lives.

[Guest]

In my opinion they are embldened knowing that the USA will not come to the rescue of those they continue to slaughter.

We and the rest of the world are literally standing by and allowing them to evolve from a rag tag 20 or 30,000 to a fairly sopisticated, intelligently run force. They have graduated to become holders of substantial portions of entire countries.

They are generating such a fear that American trained Iraqi forces lay down their weapons and run!?!?!

At some point it will be too late. I do believe what does not get stated often enough is the fact they are sworn to kill Americans and cripple the USA. They have vowed to aquire to obtain nuclear devices to do so.

Given our current mindset toward Muslim terrorism in general and ISIS in specific we will continue to do nothing until we are attacked here at home.....we should all pray to our God this does not ever happen.....and especially to not happen during Obama's remaining term.

[Guest]

In my opinion they are embldened knowing that the USA will not come to the rescue of those they continue to slaughter.

We and the rest of the world are literally standing by and allowing them to evolve from a rag tag 20 or 30,000 to a fairly sopisticated, intelligently run force. They have graduated to become holders of substantial portions of entire countries.

They are generating such a fear that American trained Iraqi forces lay down their weapons and run!?!?!

At some point it will be too late. I do believe what does not get stated often enough is the fact they are sworn to kill Americans and cripple the USA. They have vowed to aquire to obtain nuclear devices to do so.


Given our current mindset toward Muslim terrorism in general and ISIS in specific we will continue to do nothing until we are attacked here at home.....we should all pray to our God this does not ever happen.....and especially to not happen during Obama's remaining term.
I believe you are sadly misguided thinking this can be solved with military might. We will run out of bullets, troops, and money before these kind of uprisings are stopped. It is not about religion it is economics. We won the cold war when the Soviet Union bankrupted themselves trying to match our military spending, a lesson we did not learn but our enemies have.

[Guest]

I believe you are sadly misguided thinking this can be solved with military might. We will run out of bullets, troops, and money before these kind of uprisings are stopped. It is not about religion it is economics. We won the cold war when the Soviet Union bankrupted themselves trying to match our military spending, a lesson we did not learn but our enemies have.

In a small part I think you speak the truth, but allow me to correct your recollection of history.

The cold war as you mention was about MILITARY MIGHT. An attitude conveyed, knowing that the USA was in the mix, and would protect freedom all over the world. That attitude was the reason for the military buildup, and that is not a guess, but fact of history.

Secondly, it does not seem to be about economics at all with ISIS. They seem pretty fat with money, have oil fields, etc. I will not argue with you on this but would ask you to support that premise, which is something I have never ever heard of before.

In my opinion, most do not want us to have troops on the ground, but want us to at least be in a position to take a leadership role in the world, even if it means military. We showed the world with Syria that children can die by gassing and we will do nothing. We continue to show the world that we will not step up despite the atrocities in Africa. We continue to negotiate, and I DO understand negotiation, but we are talking with a country that CONTINUES TO ACT WITH AND SUPPORT TERRORISM throughout the region. We are negotiation with a country that makes fun of all of us. Now, and not sure how serious it might be, Russia ignores us DESPITE ECONOMIC SANCTIONS.

I would really need to hear your premise for saying this is economic. How do you propose to stop ISIS with economics ?

[Guest]

Unfortunately this thread is a microcosm of the total NATIONAL debate. The debate should not be if we should or shouldn't, the debate should focus on how much force we NEED to throw at them. We need to exterminate these vermin because they are destroying innocent people lives and will do so until they are stopped. If we wait it will only be more difficult WWII should have taught us all of that.

Personal Best Regards:

[Guest]

Unfortunately this thread is a microcosm of the total NATIONAL debate. The debate should not be if we should or shouldn't, the debate should focus on how much force we NEED to throw at them. We need to exterminate these vermin because they are destroying innocent people lives and will do so until they are stopped. If we wait it will only be more difficult WWII should have taught us all of that

I hear you but wars are not fought on convenional front lines anymore. The foreign troops mix in with the civilian population when they have struck and fought.

It basically sounds as if your solution would be to blow up the entire area to get rid of the evil forces - but the amount of civilian casualities would reach the tens of thousands. We would be responsible for destroying the innocent people as well as the ones who need destroying.

How do you resolve that situation?

[Guest]

Anybody remember the Vietnam War? We are using the same mentality in a different era. More of everything will win the war? China doesn't have these problems. Wonder why.
I suggest again read the book I suggested in the opening post. Someone has an understanding of what works against the enemy in 2015. Cruise missiles, bunker busters and smart bombs ain't gonna do it this time.

[Guest]

I hear you but wars are not fought on convenional front lines anymore. The foreign troops mix in with the civilian population when they have struck and fought.

It basically sounds as if your solution would be to blow up the entire area to get rid of the evil forces - but the amount of civilian casualities would reach the tens of thousands. We would be responsible for destroying the innocent people as well as the ones who need destroying.

How do you resolve that situation?

Dear Guest: I hear you too. You are referring to a "just war" one where the moral imperative is invoked to cause no harm to the innocence. It is a concept deeply espoused by the left. (From Joe Angione recent column)

Such an idea is peaceful indeed but war is by nature ugly. So a "just war" is an oxymoron. I do not say this lightly and without compassion but if we follow a strict adherence to this "just war" concept then we will create substantially more loss of live because we will allow evil to continue to grow and fester.

America and Americans need to regain the resolve we had during WWII. We let down our men in Vietnam and we did so with Iraq

As ugly as it is the only way to fight a war is to fight to win. The human race's history has demonstrated that over and over and that's the human experience and that's the limit of nature which some people just can't grasp

Finally remember ISIS has no such restriction and eat their own. It becomes the lesser of the two evils. Will America re-learn that lesson before it becomes too late? How many more innocent people will die needlessly because our leaders don't have the guts to do their jobs? Is it they like the prestige and the perks but can't make the decisions they were hired for?

Personal Best Regards

[Guest]

It is easy for those who are disconnected or have no investment to continue to vouch for the merits of it is not our fight, let them sort it out.
With that same attitude where could we have wound up with the Geror the Japanese? We would be speaking one of those languages....perhaps.

Why perhaps? Because maybe, just maybe, when they finally show up on a doorstep of a friend or family member it just might start to register what is at risk.

These people need to research and see those being slaughtered....and that is not just a poetic phrase....they are being slaughtered.
Check out those running for their lives....old folks like us, little kids like our grand children and great grand children and thousands the age of our children.

Given a choice, I would do what Teddy Roosevelt did in Cuba....take the fight to the enemy. DO NOT wait for them to drag one of your family members out of a bombed out mall or movie theatre or school or theme park.

Doing nothing for the past year has proven how much progress ISIS has made in their quest.

How can a bigger stronger ISIS any circumstance be allowed to continue?

[Guest]

Let us review our history in warfare over the last hundred years:

WWI - Helped to defeat the Wehrmacht, then stood by as they grew into an even greater military power in twenty years.

WWII - Helped defeat the Axis and Japan, then assisted the formation of the Soviet Union followed by forty years of cold war.

Korea - Helped contain the North Koreans who continue to be an unstable and worrisome dictator state.

Vietnam - Lost to Communist North Vietnam at a tremendous cost in lives and money.

Iraq - Beat them in Desert Storm quickly then back to business as usual.

Iraq II - Got rid of the dictator, then stayed way too long at a huge cost in lives and money, leaving the country destabilized.

Afghanistan - Eventually got Bin-Laden but accomplished little else. The Taliban is still strong and we fostered additional hatred among Islamic fundamentalists.

Now you say we need to go to war to fight an enemy that is indistinguishable from the general population, who are more than willing to die to take American lives, and who believe they are ordained by their God to kill infidels. NO THANKS!

[Guest]

Let us review our history in warfare over the last hundred years:

WWI - Helped to defeat the Wehrmacht, then stood by as they grew into an even greater military power in twenty years.

WWII - Helped defeat the Axis and Japan, then assisted the formation of the Soviet Union followed by forty years of cold war.

Korea - Helped contain the North Koreans who continue to be an unstable and worrisome dictator state.

Vietnam - Lost to Communist North Vietnam at a tremendous cost in lives and money.

Iraq - Beat them in Desert Storm quickly then back to business as usual.

Iraq II - Got rid of the dictator, then stayed way too long at a huge cost in lives and money, leaving the country destabilized.

Afghanistan - Eventually got Bin-Laden but accomplished little else. The Taliban is still strong and we fostered additional hatred among Islamic fundamentalists.

Now you say we need to go to war to fight an enemy that is indistinguishable from the general population, who are more than willing to die to take American lives, and who believe they are ordained by their God to kill infidels. NO THANKS!

Just a few corrections on your recitation of history as you see it.

At the end of WW II, there were two super powers in the world. The U.S. And Russia. The Soviet Union was NOT formed after WW II, but in fact was formed right after the turn of the century (1917?). Added to that existing USSR, was the countries overtaken by Russia during their victories over the Nazi's thus became satellite states. Europe was always considered to stop at Russia, so if those countries that they annexed by defeating Germany are considered by you as the USA helping to form what was already an extremely powerful force, then your interpretation of history is much different from mine. The Warsaw Pact is the actual beginning of the Cold War. There were many differences in culture involved and Russia wanted to maintain sovereignty over these countries, and the USA and allies were trying to insure peace to Europe, thus came the Warsaw Pact.

Not quite as simple as you make it, and this war was the single biggest and most significant event in the world in relationship to what is going on today. Russia was our ally and a darn good one. They deserved to be considered a super power.

The treaties were necessary because of the large differences in societies ( socialism, communism, democracy's)

Korea was a United Nation action in response to an invasion by North Korea. The UN troops pushed N Korea almost into China. A significant landmark relative to the point you are trying to make. President Truman fired Mccarthur because Mccarthur wanted to follow them into China to finish it off. Truman would not allow it, and China eventually pushed the UN troops back, an agreement was struck and had we not stayed there, you can pretty much figure how that would have worked out. Again, not quite as simple as you say.

Vietnam was the U.S. Trying to do something we were not prepared to do and really did not want to do, thus the carnage. Not sure how this would have worked out had we untied our hands.

Iraq....we beat nobody as you say. It was a UN mission that was required to cease by UN mandate once we drove Iraq from Kuwait. We stopped once again, by UN mandate

Second invasion does not need to be revisited. Congress overwhelmingly authorized the invasion, which in hinsight was based on faulty intelligence. We left despite sten warnings and statements by military and political leaders. As far as being not stabilized, President Obama, based on his comments would totally disagree with your comment.

Afghan was simply a failed attempt at avenging the attack in the U.S., and which I might add was supported by NATO

Bottom line is this, Iraq is a very important ally to the U.S. However ISIS got there is really not relevant. They are there and growing into many other countries and need to be stopped.

How to do it, I do not know. Our military make suggestions, but are rebuffed or so it seems. The USA, as you can see has a history of being the worlds policeman. You can argue that all you want, but if our military and security folks NOT OUR POLIICAL BODIES, think they are a potential threat to our country, then I say do whatever it takes.

Problem for me personally, I am not satisfied that those who,"know" are being heeded. I do not think I will ever get over seeing pics and reading accounts if CHILDREN STACKED IN THE STREETS, gassed dead in Syria and we did NOTHING..NADA for a year, and then we had Russia step in to help out, and now they are back with the gassing.

Do we need troops on the ground ? Military folks think so. When you hear that the air missions cannot even do much because of lack of ground support...well.

Again, I keep asking...SIXTY nation coalition. Where, what

[Guest]

Let us review our history in warfare over the last hundred years:

WWI - Helped to defeat the Wehrmacht, then stood by as they grew into an even greater military power in twenty years.

WWII - Helped defeat the Axis and Japan, then assisted the formation of the Soviet Union followed by forty years of cold war.

Korea - Helped contain the North Koreans who continue to be an unstable and worrisome dictator state.

Vietnam - Lost to Communist North Vietnam at a tremendous cost in lives and money.

Iraq - Beat them in Desert Storm quickly then back to business as usual.

Iraq II - Got rid of the dictator, then stayed way too long at a huge cost in lives and money, leaving the country destabilized.

Afghanistan - Eventually got Bin-Laden but accomplished little else. The Taliban is still strong and we fostered additional hatred among Islamic fundamentalists.

Now you say we need to go to war to fight an enemy that is indistinguishable from the general population, who are more than willing to die to take American lives, and who believe they are ordained by their God to kill infidels. NO THANKS!

Eloquent, albeit misguided post. You forcefully argue for doing nothing until you see a mushroom cloud go off in a US city. That's in effect what you are prescribing for our kids and grandkids. No thanks.

We're best off if we go and get the job done ... but I know America won't do that until we're backed into it so your strategy will prevail ... until it doesn't.

[Guest]

Eloquent, albeit misguided post. You forcefully argue for doing nothing until you see a mushroom cloud go off in a US city. That's in effect what you are prescribing for our kids and grandkids. No thanks.

We're best off if we go and get the job done ... but I know America won't do that until we're backed into it so your strategy will prevail ... until it doesn't.

Eloquent, AND inaccurate

[Guest]

I believe you are sadly misguided thinking this can be solved with military might. We will run out of bullets, troops, and money before these kind of uprisings are stopped. It is not about religion it is economics. We won the cold war when the Soviet Union bankrupted themselves trying to match our military spending, a lesson we did not learn but our enemies have.

I take offense at being labeled as "sadly misguided". You are entitled to your opinion and I have mine. Your opinion is not the base line for determining right or wrong let alone rudely labeling anybody as misguided. Adding insult to injury by further labeling one as "sadly misguided".

I also did not propose to solve the problem with military might and bullets....you did.

I strongly object to the do nothing role we as a country are taking. Doing other than nothing may well include some military action. And we all know that in war there will be innocents killed....some by the enemy = intent. Some by the military actions = not intentional.

As has been stated in a subsequent post we, the USA have amply demonstrated that we will not get involved in the slaughtering of innocents by terrorists, we won't even speak out against the marauding murderers who thumb their nose at us.

[Guest]

This thread is all over the place and the GUEST moniker does not help since I have no idea to whom to address my questions, so someone explain the meaning of some of the posts.

1. A poster said the war against ISIS is about economics and not religion. Can someone explain that to me ?

2. In the book by Mcchrystal he mentions his plan used earlier in Iraq. The OP suggests that this is the way to defeat ISIS. Does that not mean we need ground troops, which I thought he/she was opposed to ?

3. Another poster used revised history to come to a conclusion that we should not fight ISIS at all. What is the premise with that poster...just sit back and wait ?

Like I said, hard to tell who posted what but if those folks could clarify for me anyway, I would appreciate it.

[Guest]

The thread title is ISIS the new reality.

I am not sure anymore what to say. Ten months ago after Obama categorized ISIS as a JV team he subsequently stated there was no strategy, yet, to address ISIS. Today in front of world leaders he stated not yet having a strategy to address ISIS......TEN MONTHS LATER!!!!!!! No shame on a world stage. And trying to lay blame on Iraq saying he needed them to be on board.

Total and complete public display of incompetence in one of the most serious threats to Christians or any other non ISIS believer.

He is knowingly allowing ISIS to grow stronger and more powerful.....slaughtering innocents....

ISIS knows they are safe from intervention from Obama....and they count on it!!!!

[Guest]

The thread title is ISIS the new reality.

I am not sure anymore what to say. Ten months ago after Obama categorized ISIS as a JV team he subsequently stated there was no strategy, yet, to address ISIS. Today in front of world leaders he stated not yet having a strategy to address ISIS......TEN MONTHS LATER!!!!!!! No shame on a world stage. And trying to lay blame on Iraq saying he needed them to be on board.

Total and complete public display of incompetence in one of the most serious threats to Christians or any other non ISIS believer.

He is knowingly allowing ISIS to grow stronger and more powerful.....slaughtering innocents....

ISIS knows they are safe from intervention from Obama....and they count on it!!!!

If Obama was the CEO of any major corporation in this country, and said what he said today ... he would be fired by the Board in a heartbeat. He is so incompetent he makes the incapable look good by comparison.

[Guest]

If Obama was the CEO of any major corporation in this country, and said what he said today ... he would be fired by the Board in a heartbeat. He is so incompetent he makes the incapable look good by comparison.


And the SEC would be investigating him among all the shareholder lawsuits.

[Guest]

Eloquent, albeit misguided post. You forcefully argue for doing nothing until you see a mushroom cloud go off in a US city. That's in effect what you are prescribing for our kids and grandkids. No thanks.

We're best off if we go and get the job done ... but I know America won't do that until we're backed into it so your strategy will prevail ... until it doesn't.

"Get the job done". I cringe when I hear those words. I see little to show for the lives lost, horrible injuries, and 13 years worth of war cost we have passed onto our grandchildren all while putting "I support the troops" stickers on our cars.

[Guest]

"Get the job done". I cringe when I hear those words. I see little to show for the lives lost, horrible injuries, and 13 years worth of war cost we have passed onto our grandchildren all while putting "I support the troops" stickers on our cars.

Actually, you cringe at the thought of doing what it takes to win the war against Radical Islam ...

[Guest]

"get the job done". I cringe when i hear those words. I see little to show for the lives lost, horrible injuries, and 13 years worth of war cost we have passed onto our grandchildren all while putting "i support the troops" stickers on our cars.


excellent post!

[Guest]

Little to see for lives lost?
Such as?
Never mind you or any of us will never get a true picture of what was accomplished since any positive results would never be reported by the current administration or it's lemmings or the lemming media.
That would be counter to the agenda being worked.

[Guest]

Little to see for lives lost?
Such as?
Never mind you or any of us will never get a true picture of what was accomplished since any positive results would never be reported by the current administration or it's lemmings or the lemming media.
That would be counter to the agenda being worked.
It is said if you talk to an irrational person long enough they will convince you they are correct. You are not even close to be there yet.

[Guest]

It is said if you talk to an irrational person long enough they will convince you they are correct. You are not even close to be there yet.

:1rotfl::1rotfl:

Still looking for the bite me emoticon.

[Guest]

Actually, you cringe at the thought of doing what it takes to win the war against Radical Islam ...

And just exactly what are YOU willing to do? Watching faux news doesn't count as doing something.

[Guest]

"Get the job done". I cringe when I hear those words. I see little to show for the lives lost, horrible injuries, and 13 years worth of war cost we have passed onto our grandchildren all while putting "I support the troops" stickers on our cars.

Tell this to all the Jewish people who were saved because the boots hit the

ground!

We are letting these barbarians do this to Christians and to do nothing is

just not the answer!

Just keep looking the other way and it will be on your door step! Even if you

are one of them you could be stoned to death because of the sins you have done!

[Guest]

And just exactly what are YOU willing to do? Watching faux news doesn't count as doing something.

And neither do tough guy posts on on a Website. :posting:

[Guest]

Tell this to all the Jewish people who were saved because the boots hit the

ground!

We are letting these barbarians do this to Christians and to do nothing is

just not the answer!

Just keep looking the other way and it will be on your door step! Even if you

are one of them you could be stoned to death because of the sins you have done!

I'm so tough I am willing to send your grandkids over to fight the bastards.

[Guest]

I'm so tough I am willing to send your grandkids over to fight the bastards.

Uh Rah and Semper Fi.

[Guest]

I'm so tough I am willing to send your grandkids over to fight the bastards.


You are very disrespectful of those who do have family members who volunteered to serve and protect when called upon.
To make jokes about them is about as low as one can get.
You are only able to continue to be a smart a$$ because of the likes of them.

[Guest]

I'm so tough I am willing to send your grandkids over to fight the bastards.

Dear Guest: Actually I am for reinstating the draft. Far too many people simply have no skin in the game anymore. They are so engaged and they are unenlightened about what is going in the world. Too busy with their lives to care anything about anything except their selfish pursuit.

The result it causes them to believe that nothing is worth fighting for or over. They come to believe that the safety and security of America is a magical thing, a natural thing, an untouchable thing. They will argue over a Kardashian episode and defend a Bruce Jenner but America well that's all so common, so Republican. ... that's for fat old white guys who hang on to the 1950's.

Of course there are two sides to every story and well old fat white guys fought sacrificed life, limb and untimely interruptions in their lives to keep America safe and in return they find America turned over to the crazies that have absolutely no concept of how great traditional America was and that those values are what made America great.

So who exactly are the crazies running America, educating America, voting for American leaders willing to fight, to defend to die for? What does America really mean, represent for these crazies? Watch another episode of the Kardashian , or The View, or The Talk and you will have your answer because this what the liberals proudly call the "new normal"

Personal Best Regards:

[Guest]

[QUOTE=Guest;1072318]Dear Guest: Actually I am for reinstating the draft. Far too many people simply have no skin in the game anymore. They are so engaged and they are unenlightened about what is going in the world. Too busy with their lives to care anything about anything except their selfish pursuit

Of course there are two sides to every story and well old fat white guys fought sacrificed life, limb and untimely interruptions in their lives to keep America safe and in return they find America turned over to the crazies that have absolutely no concept of how great traditional America was and that those values are what made America great./QUOTE]

Us old fat white guys (and old fat black guys) did volunteer or get drafted and too many did lose lives, limbs, or others - but Vietnam was not about keeping America safe. It was a civil war that the US should not have been involved with in any way.

Americans would not back a reinstatement of the draft.

[Guest]

I'm so tough I am willing to send your grandkids over to fight the bastards.

In addition to be a leech who lives off others, you are also apparently a genuine piece of c*** to make that type of comment.

Do your kids or grandkids serve in the military?

No problem chump... I'll ask my grandkids to make it a point to identify your house as a protection free zone, while giving your coordinates to your local moderate Muslim jihadi.

[Guest]

in addition to be a leech who lives off others, you are also apparently a genuine piece of c*** to make that type of comment.

Do your kids or grandkids serve in the military?

No problem chump... I'll ask my grandkids to make it a point to identify your house as a protection free zone, while giving your coordinates to your local moderate muslim jihadi.

^^^^^keyboard tough-guy^^^^^

[Guest]

Oh how nice it would be to be able to sort out who some of these bravado-wanna-be posters are.

[Guest]

Dear Guest: Actually I am for reinstating the draft. Far too many people simply have no skin in the game anymore. They are so engaged and they are unenlightened about what is going in the world. Too busy with their lives to care anything about anything except their selfish pursuit.

The result it causes them to believe that nothing is worth fighting for or over. They come to believe that the safety and security of America is a magical thing, a natural thing, an untouchable thing. They will argue over a Kardashian episode and defend a Bruce Jenner but America well that's all so common, so Republican. ... that's for fat old white guys who hang on to the 1950's.

Of course there are two sides to every story and well old fat white guys fought sacrificed life, limb and untimely interruptions in their lives to keep America safe and in return they find America turned over to the crazies that have absolutely no concept of how great traditional America was and that those values are what made America great.

So who exactly are the crazies running America, educating America, voting for American leaders willing to fight, to defend to die for? What does America really mean, represent for these crazies? Watch another episode of the Kardashian , or The View, or The Talk and you will have your answer because this what the liberals proudly call the "new normal"

Personal Best Regards:

Totally agree ... bring back the draft and let's get those who take the country for granted into some type of uniform even if for only 2 years

[Guest]

I'm so tough I am willing to send your grandkids over to fight the bastards.

You're not tough, but simply despicable

[Guest]

We have seen what ISIS has done to some of the prisoners they have taken.

You know very well if an American flyer or soldier was captured by them, the prisoner would be killed in a very horrible manner such as gruesome beheading or burning in a cage and it would be videoed to sites worldwide.

Any atrocity on an American soldier would make for such public outcry that all troops would be pulled out immediately. It would not strengthen American resolve.

[Guest]

We have seen what ISIS has done to some of the prisoners they have taken.

You know very well if an American flyer or soldier was captured by them, the prisoner would be killed in a very horrible manner such as gruesome beheading or burning in a cage and it would be videoed to sites worldwide.

Any atrocity on an American soldier would make for such public outcry that all troops would be pulled out immediately. It would not strengthen American resolve.


Yes, you are very wise.

Since the enemy is barbaric, let's retreat to the safety of our shores, and put our heads up our b*** and pretend it's all good. Then, when someone is beheaded in America, let's just face reality ... we are too wussy to fight back. Thus, we can surrender at that point, convert to Islam and get a prayer rug before they're all sold out at Walmart.

You, as usual, prove yourself to be a genius.

[Guest]

Our GOD is love ....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0AwjhvMdjwo&feature=youtu.be

[Guest]

Yes, you are very wise.

Since the enemy is barbaric, let's retreat to the safety of our shores, and put our heads up our b*** and pretend it's all good. Then, when someone is beheaded in America, let's just face reality ... we are too wussy to fight back. Thus, we can surrender at that point, convert to Islam and get a prayer rug before they're all sold out at Walmart.

You, as usual, prove yourself to be a genius.

...and you are one of the keyboard heroes willing to send Americans to fight in a war that even the invaded country will not fight in?

You, as usual, have proved yourself to be ignorant with yet another brainless post.

[Guest]

I think some, who second guess America's resolve and are against sending in troops....consistently think in terms of the last 7 years.

Do not engage. If you see something call me, Obama, first, then I will consult with whoever it is I consult with and I will get back to you.....

How about using the prewe have new leadership that is not afraid to delegate to the military the objectives.....then tell the military leaders to do what they think needs to be done to win....and then let's the military do what we all know they can and will do.

We all know they have not been allowed to engage the enemy at Obama's direction. He, under the guise of using talk to soothe the enemy was and is still more interested in not causing ANY Muslims any harm.

Those of you who subscribe to Obama's version of war so be it.

But please don't think for a minute that the patriots here in America would respond to a call to arms to protect our way of life, our families and the country most of us love.

Some of us responded to the call many years ago and we did what we had to do to win....not the case today.
Some of us do have grandchildren and many other family members who are presently in the service, some of which have been to both Iraq and Afghanistan. And they would go back again if and when ordered to do so.

If one asks them or any other member of the armed services what is the single biggest action that the USA could do differently to change the outcome. CHANGE THE RULES OF ENGAGEMENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So those of you who do not have the time of day about the military, their use or what they can do......stop :swear: beliittling them from your arm chair, safe in TV behind a keyboard.

We are not asking you to change what you believe or support. Just stop pi$$ing all over anybody who does not support your position.

[Guest]

[QUOTE=Guest;1072318]Dear Guest: Actually I am for reinstating the draft. Far too many people simply have no skin in the game anymore. They are so engaged and they are unenlightened about what is going in the world. Too busy with their lives to care anything about anything except their selfish pursuit

Of course there are two sides to every story and well old fat white guys fought sacrificed life, limb and untimely interruptions in their lives to keep America safe and in return they find America turned over to the crazies that have absolutely no concept of how great traditional America was and that those values are what made America great./QUOTE]

Us old fat white guys (and old fat black guys) did volunteer or get drafted and too many did lose lives, limbs, or others - but Vietnam was not about keeping America safe. It was a civil war that the US should not have been involved with in any way.

Americans would not back a reinstatement of the draft.

Dear Guest: Forgive my oversight of including blacks etc from serving that was not my intent as I witnessed that they all served proudly

My comments were to draw distinctions between traditional America vis a vis the "new normal" Under the new normal white guys are the instigators of all this is bad and evil since the beginning of time. As an example a black woman refused to study the classic because it was mostly written by white guys whom she believed created all of human man kinds problems.

My cousin served in the Air Force and then upon discharge re-enlisted and went to Vietnam on two separate deployments. I was in the US Navy at that time.

The Vietnam war was not wrong the politicians were mistaken in bowing to the pressures of the same people who have been waging a cultural war in America since the 1960's.
So let me restate I am focused on traditional values and not ethnicity

Look what those 50 years of decadence ,social upheaval, push for secularism and disrespect for authority has yielded. You can see it in most movies, television shows, on colleges campuses or high schools, single mother percentages ..................................

But the pendulum swings both ways and I believe in the basic goodness of people and a return to Patriotism God and America's greatness.


Personal Best Regards:

[Guest]

What we need in the White House are some battle-tested, tough-minded former service men who know what war is like first hand and served honorably and would send our boys to battle only after seeking all other options. Men such as George W Bush, Dick Cheney, and Don Rumsfeld.

[Guest]

I think some, who second guess America's resolve and are against sending in troops....consistently think in terms of the last 7 years.

Do not engage. If you see something call me, Obama, first, then I will consult with whoever it is I consult with and I will get back to you.....

How about using the prewe have new leadership that is not afraid to delegate to the military the objectives.....then tell the military leaders to do what they think needs to be done to win....and then let's the military do what we all know they can and will do.

We all know they have not been allowed to engage the enemy at Obama's direction. He, under the guise of using talk to soothe the enemy was and is still more interested in not causing ANY Muslims any harm.

Those of you who subscribe to Obama's version of war so be it.

But please don't think for a minute that the patriots here in America would respond to a call to arms to protect our way of life, our families and the country most of us love.

Some of us responded to the call many years ago and we did what we had to do to win....not the case today.
Some of us do have grandchildren and many other family members who are presently in the service, some of which have been to both Iraq and Afghanistan. And they would go back again if and when ordered to do so.

If one asks them or any other member of the armed services what is the single biggest action that the USA could do differently to change the outcome. CHANGE THE RULES OF ENGAGEMENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So those of you who do not have the time of day about the military, their use or what they can do......stop :swear: beliittling them from your arm chair, safe in TV behind a keyboard.

We are not asking you to change what you believe or support. Just stop pi$$ing all over anybody who does not support your position.

You are spot on about the ROE ... they cripple us and prevent us from winning.

To make war is to kill the spirit, as well as the body, of the enemy, so terribly as to make sure they would not rise again. Our ROE since 9/11 has not even come close to that.

[Guest]

What we need in the White House are some battle-tested, tough-minded former service men who know what war is like first hand and served honorably and would send our boys to battle only after seeking all other options. Men such as George W Bush, Dick Cheney, and Don Rumsfeld.

Not needed! We already have THE fiercest warrior on the planet as POTUS ... Barack Hussein Obama. Actually, probably the fiercest since Attila the Hun or maybe Russell Crowe?

Baracko makes enemies cringe in cold fear at the mere mention of his name. When he draws red lines, the enemy c***s in their pants. He is THE ONE after all, one who can also heal the planet and make the oceans recede.

All hail Baracko, and watch as he effortlessly delivers America from evil

[Guest]

...and you are one of the keyboard heroes willing to send Americans to fight in a war that even the invaded country will not fight in?

You, as usual, have proved yourself to be ignorant with yet another brainless post.

I've thought about your brilliant comment and concluded you're right. War is not the answer ... but rather peaceful negotiations and understanding will win the day.

Thus, I suggest we air drop you into Raqqa and you can negotiate directly with ISIS to prevent war. Thanks in advance for your service.

[Guest]

What we need in the White House are some battle-tested, tough-minded former service men who know what war is like first hand and served honorably and would send our boys to battle only after seeking all other options. Men such as George W Bush, Dick Cheney, and Don Rumsfeld.

Isn't that exactly what the Regressives are always saying? You picked perfect examples. Mission accomplished!

[Guest]

Isn't that exactly what the Regressives are always saying? You picked perfect examples. Mission accomplished!

Sounds like a sound bite from pulling the string in the neck of a party parrot doll!

[Guest]

Isn't that exactly what the Regressives are always saying? You picked perfect examples. Mission accomplished!

a sound bite from pulling the string in the neck of a party parrot doll?

[Guest]

Here is a real hero -

WHAT PEOPLE ARE TALKING ABOUT…

Keith Broomfield. Yesterday, the US State Department said that the 36-year-old American was killed while fighting ISIS in Syria. Earlier this year, he took it upon himself to join the Kurds in Syria – aka the semi-autonomous ethnic group that's also in parts of Iraq and Turkey. They've been the most successful group in the fight against ISIS. Because of that, some Westerners have jetted off to Syria to join in. Reminder: the US is leading a coalition of countries launching airstrikes against ISIS, but hasn't committed any ground troops. Broomfield was a civilian who went on his own, and is thought to be the first US citizen to die while fighting with the Kurds.

[Guest]

I've thought about your brilliant comment and concluded you're right. War is not the answer ... but rather peaceful negotiations and understanding will win the day.

Thus, I suggest we air drop you into Raqqa and you can negotiate directly with ISIS to prevent war. Thanks in advance for your service.

I agree. Drop all those off over in Syria who believe war isn't the answer. Let them sit and negotiate with the enemy on co-existing. The stupidity of Americans who think this is possible is mind blowing. Enjoy the experience while the rest of us face reality and are prepared for what's coming

[Guest]

I agree. Drop all those off over in Syria who believe war isn't the answer. Let them sit and negotiate with the enemy on co-existing. The stupidity of Americans who think this is possible is mind blowing. Enjoy the experience while the rest of us face reality and are prepared for what's coming


The irony is this ... even though many Americans get weak at the knees at the very mention of war (a product of our cushy suburban lifestyle, made possible by WWII vets who beat the Nazis), ISIS doesn't give a s*** what the liberals think.

That's because, whether they like it or not, THEY have already declared war on us. The question is ... what are WE going to do about it besides whine and insult the people who make the points we all need to ponder?.

Anyway, for the lefties, go back to watching your television game shows and stuffing your face with popcorn and soda. Nothing to worry about yet.

[Guest]

Do not forget that Iraq is a soverign nation. Their prime minister told the US to leave the country. The US had no choice but to leave. It was determined by the Iraqis that their army was well trained and they could hold their country by themselves.

[Guest]

Do not forget that Iraq is a soverign nation. Their prime minister told the US to leave the country. The US had no choice but to leave. It was determined by the Iraqis that their army was well trained and they could hold their country by themselves.

As (almost) usual, your post is a total crock. Being uniformed is one thing ... ignorance is another. Iraq didn't "tell" us anything ... they could read the tea leaves the Baracko wanted out one way or the other. STOP with the making of excuses for what even you can now recognize has turned into a complete disaster which stems from the 2011 withdrawal ... after we had it stabilized. Yes, would have been better never to have gone to Iraq BUT we were there so it had to be dealt with.

A leader leads ... Barack is not cut from that cloth. His latest (non) strategy is too timed to even merit contempt.

[Guest]

Do not forget that Iraq is a soverign nation. Their prime minister told the US to leave the country. The US had no choice but to leave. It was determined by the Iraqis that their army was well trained and they could hold their country by themselves.

While no where as simplistic as you state, you are correct.

That is history.

Iraq has asked at least twice for help in fighting ISIS. Our President has said the U.S. and the coalition of 60 countries would destroy ISIS. They began their requests about two years ago. Syrian Rebels asked for help about 3 years ago when the gassing was taking place. We left Yemen and said it was "solid", a great example of our work.

The questions seems to be.....

Where is the 60 nation coalition ?

How much help are we willing to give Iraq, and what is our resolve in doing what we said, ie. Destroying ISIS ?

Since ISIS has now spread to Syria, Libya, Yemen , etc. and even to the continent of Africa, what is our resolve to destroy them ?

If we do not mean to destroy ISIS, why did we say it ?

If terrorism is our enemy, why are we negotiating with the ONLY state in the region that officially sponsors terrorism; Iran ?

Why are we saying that the leading sponsor of terrorism in the region, Iran...may have nukes, but we want them to wait a few years ?

Why are we not arming (and I might paraphrase this because it seems by reports to be changing) the tribes we were told by our military in the first place needed to be armed..the Sunnis ?

A few questions I have anyway.

[Guest]

As (almost) usual, your post is a total crock. Being uniformed is one thing ... ignorance is another. Iraq didn't "tell" us anything ... they could read the tea leaves the Baracko wanted out one way or the other. STOP with the making of excuses for what even you can now recognize has turned into a complete disaster which stems from the 2011 withdrawal ... after we had it stabilized. Yes, would have been better never to have gone to Iraq BUT we were there so it had to be dealt with.

A leader leads ... Barack is not cut from that cloth. His latest (non) strategy is too timed to even merit contempt.

So, in your vast (or half vast) mindset, the US should have maintained a 30,000 troop presence in Iraq, given Iraq even more money, and be the security force for Iraq for the next umteen years? :MOJE_whot: What a great idea!

Bring back the real military warriors of GW Bush, Rumsfield, and Cheney and parachute them into the mess they created. You can go along with them, too, as their puppy dog.

[Guest]

While no where as simplistic as you state, you are correct.

That is history.

Iraq has asked at least twice for help in fighting ISIS. Our President has said the U.S. and the coalition of 60 countries would destroy ISIS. They began their requests about two years ago. Syrian Rebels asked for help about 3 years ago when the gassing was taking place. We left Yemen and said it was "solid", a great example of our work.

The questions seems to be.....

Where is the 60 nation coalition ?

How much help are we willing to give Iraq, and what is our resolve in doing what we said, ie. Destroying ISIS ?

Since ISIS has now spread to Syria, Libya, Yemen , etc. and even to the continent of Africa, what is our resolve to destroy them ?

If we do not mean to destroy ISIS, why did we say it ?

If terrorism is our enemy, why are we negotiating with the ONLY state in the region that officially sponsors terrorism; Iran ?

Why are we saying that the leading sponsor of terrorism in the region, Iran...may have nukes, but we want them to wait a few years ?

Why are we not arming (and I might paraphrase this because it seems by reports to be changing) the tribes we were told by our military in the first place needed to be armed..the Sunnis ?

A few questions I have anyway.

...and you ask good questions. I do not answers.

[Guest]

So, in your vast (or half vast) mindset, the US should have maintained a 30,000 troop presence in Iraq, given Iraq even more money, and be the security force for Iraq for the next umteen years? :MOJE_whot: What a great idea!

Bring back the real military warriors of GW Bush, Rumsfield, and Cheney and parachute them into the mess they created. You can go along with them, too, as their puppy dog.

Why are we discussing history instead of the present and future ?

Instead the discussion should be on the matter at hand, don't you think ?

[Guest]

Why are we discussing history instead of the present and future ?

Instead the discussion should be on the matter at hand, don't you think ?

Wow, I can't believe you actually said that. However, it helps us better understand why you don't seem to understand the issue.

History is the best guide we have towards a more complete understanding of the matter at hand, and then charting a course for action. For example, the early history of Islam is instructive, especially since ISIS is trying to mimic the 1.0 version.

[Guest]

Wow, I can't believe you actually said that. However, it helps us better understand why you don't seem to understand the issue.

History is the best guide we have towards a more complete understanding of the matter at hand, and then charting a course for action. For example, the early history of Islam is instructive, especially since ISIS is trying to mimic the 1.0 version.

Ok.....as am amateur historian, I will agree with your statement about learning from history.

I know from history that Islamic aggression is to conguer, and is not restricted to killing other muslims. Mohammed himself led a conquest simply to plunder and there are many other examples, which would be pertinent IF you believe that this is a MUSLIM undertaking and not a TERRORIST undertaking.

If, as you imply, this is a war conducted by ISLAM, then all bets are off on what we should do. If it is TERRORISTS and NOT associated with ISLAM at all, and instead, as you say, a MIMIC of ISLAM then we are fighting terrorists and there is only to learn from recent history. That recent history tells us what we are seeing. A 20th century barbaric attack on anyone who is not believing in what they believe in, which we are not sure now what that is. They use 20th century tools to kill....the internet, videos, etc. Not much learning from the past there.

My point is, speaking of what an Iraq did or did not do in 2011 does not help the conversation at all. IF we want to defeat ISIS, and we believe they are terrorists and not representatives of Islam, as you seem to imply, then what history are we to learn from ?

ISIS was formed a few years ago....If you are saying that Islamic terrorism is the foe, then I would agree and will tell you that what we learn from history about Islamic terrorism is this.....

They are driven by a belief that Sharia law is an all encompassing system of politics, etc. They believe that all entities of the state should merge under Sharia law. Islamic extremists believe they are obligated to install this form of governance in Muslim-majority territories, countries and, eventually, the entire world.

It is the "entire world" part that bothers me, and thus any recent historic event in Iraq teaches me nothing except their ability to grow and fill vacuums when they exist.

I am open to hear what you meant and what history I should be reading to further my understanding.

A few links, not quoted in my post but might be of interest to you...

The Evolution Of Islamic Terrorism - An Overview | Target America | FRONTLINE | PBS (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/target/etc/modern.html)

Understanding Islamic Extremism (http://www.clarionproject.org/understanding-islamism/islamic-extremism)

A review of Understanding Islamic Terrorism: The Islamic Doctrine of War. By Patrick Sookhdeo. » Bill Muehlenberg (http://billmuehlenberg.com/2005/09/11/a-review-of-understanding-islamic-terrorism-the-islamic-doctrine-of-war-by-patrick-sookhdeo/)

I am sorry....I will end with a quote from the last link to better hope you understand.

"Indeed, traditional Muslims consider it blasphemous when non-Muslims rule over Muslims. While moderate Muslims today may not want to see Islam promoted by the edge of the sword, militant Muslims and terrorists certainly do, and they feel they have proper theological and historical justification for doing so."

"Consider also the Islamic understanding of peace. Peace is seen more as a negative, temporal and limited concept, while war, as defined above, is seen as a positive, ongoing and complete concept. Thus peace may be viewed as an interlude in jihad until all of the non-Muslim world submits to the house of Islam. Permanent peace in fact can only occur in the house of Islam. As long as some are outside that rule, real peace is not possible."

[Guest]

Here is a real hero -

WHAT PEOPLE ARE TALKING ABOUT…

Keith Broomfield. Yesterday, the US State Department said that the 36-year-old American was killed while fighting ISIS in Syria. Earlier this year, he took it upon himself to join the Kurds in Syria – aka the semi-autonomous ethnic group that's also in parts of Iraq and Turkey. They've been the most successful group in the fight against ISIS. Because of that, some Westerners have jetted off to Syria to join in. Reminder: the US is leading a coalition of countries launching airstrikes against ISIS, but hasn't committed any ground troops. Broomfield was a civilian who went on his own, and is thought to be the first US citizen to die while fighting with the Kurds.

I respectfully suggest that all you neocons who so want war should join with the Kurds.

[Guest]

I say "res ipsa loquitur" the thing speaks for itself


Personal Best Regards:

[Guest]

I respectfully suggest that all you neocons who so want war should join with the Kurds.

So even in your own words when supposedly speaking with "respect" includes name calling and intended didding.

Pretty much sums up the persona.

[Guest]

So even in your own words when supposedly speaking with "respect" includes name calling and intended didding.

Pretty much sums up the persona.

...and The Village Curmudgeon trolls in with his usual rant. :ohdear:

[Guest]

...and The Village Curmudgeon trolls in with his usual rant. :ohdear:

Ahhhh yes the cloak of anonymity and the bravado it contains!

Another indicator of persona....when one does not know who the individual is, what they have done in life and what they do currently....and takes upon themselves for their personal satisfaction and the compelling need to make their point.....consistently stoping to the level of always having to call ANY opposition names.

Continuously depicting the shallow level of participation and disrespect of anybody that does not follow your suit.

In a passing nano-second of considfor your type I just wonder if folks who behave like that from behind a keyboard are that way in real life....eye to eye. Human behavior stidies would strongly support the conclusion of no.

Times up. Now onto something of significance like measuring passing clouds.

[Guest]

Ahhhh yes the cloak of anonymity and the bravado it contains!

Another indicator of persona....when one does not know who the individual is, what they have done in life and what they do currently....and takes upon themselves for their personal satisfaction and the compelling need to make their point.....consistently stoping to the level of always having to call ANY opposition names.

Continuously depicting the shallow level of participation and disrespect of anybody that does not follow your suit.

In a passing nano-second of considfor your type I just wonder if folks who behave like that from behind a keyboard are that way in real life....eye to eye. Human behavior stidies would strongly support the conclusion of no.

Times up. Now onto something of significance like measuring passing clouds.


Well, it does allow them to totally ignore whatever the subject of the thread might be.

[Guest]

...and The Village Curmudgeon trolls in with his usual rant. :ohdear:

I suppose this supplies the answer.

YES, it will always involve the calling of names.

[Guest]

I would love to see these "trolls" reply to posts 59 and 64, just as an example.

It won't happen because that would be conforming to what this forum is about, AND it flies in the face of the objectives of a troll.

[Guest]

I would love to see these "trolls" reply to posts 59 and 64, just as an example.

It won't happen because that would be conforming to what this forum is about, AND it flies in the face of the objectives of a troll.

I do not think they would read an entire post of that length. They will make their judgement and pigeon hole the writer based on how quickly they ascertain a common accepatable allegiance.

Secondly there is a fair amount of understanding of the writing to reach an independent conclusion.

I defy anybody to argue against the intent and purpose of the last two paragraphs of post number 64....if they can get that far. And it DOES NOT require a political persuasion....unless one is a Muslim, Muslim terrorist or radical Muslim sympathizer (I know I step on some toes with these ategorizations...unfortunately warranted for general accuracy and intent).

[Guest]

I suggest reading "Team of Teams" by General Stanley McChrystal. Quote "ISIS is using frightening tactics and digital communication" to bring constantly changing modern warfare to the Middle East.
Regardless of what we believe about Muslims,the U.S. military and intelligence community are fighting the fight. I was in the military long enough to know that both ends of the political spectrum are well represented and are doing their best to prevail. America has past the point of no return with the political blame game. We as a nation and our politicians regardless of political stripe had better face reality. These terrorists are not dumb. The U.S. has been lucky because so far ISIS has only been using rookies here in the U.S.of A. READ THE BOOK!

[Guest]

ISIS is working toward a much more definitive statement here in America than can be supplied by the so called rookies.

Like Al Queda before them, they will be pbide their time, let the false senses of security set in and then will come forth with a much bigger event than 9/11.

We all pray that is not the case. Just look at the march of horror they continue to be on in the middle east. They are clearly outnumbered, yet even USA trained armies drop their weapons and run.

The open borders and general lack of illegal immigration enfrcement along with the permissive don't upset anybody rules of engagement or even investigation....are all to the benefit of ISIS achieving their mission here at home.....some day.