Peace Through Superior Firepower or Flower Power?

[TexaninVA]

When threads are started and get into topics of national security, I’ve observed that posters usually fall into two camps. Camp membership is probably a combination of life experiences, political preferences, common sense (as defined by the person) and so forth.

The first camp, probably about 2/3s if not more of TOTVers, instinctively understand the totalitarian leadership currently calling the shots in Iran, China, and elsewhere are best viewed as our enemy. That means they are inimical to our interests and national security if not dealt with and, ideally, should be removed from power. I will call this camp “Peace Through Superior Firepower” for lack of a better term, and identify them as right of center. Most in this camp view America as a force for good in the world, on balance and overall. Note that I did not say perfect or flawless, but still we essentially view America as the good guys.

The second camp could be described several ways. I’ll be nice, and just call them “Peace Through Superior Flower Power” and observe they are typically left of center. They tend to look at actions and say “Hey, it’s not any worse than anything the US has done.” The tendency is to view America as the source of problems, vs solutions, and seek to understand the “other” points of view, whether it’s Iran, China, Cuba et al. IMO this group takes a kind of multicultural approach to foreign policy where all other cultures are to be admired while one, ours, is kind of well … we do have our faults. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa would be another way of saying it.

The first camp views the second as having their heads firmly lodged in a very dark place, while usually rolling over in the face of America’s enemies.

The second camp views the first as warmongers who want to nuke the world because, after all, we don’t really have enemies just adversaries. Besides, wolves and sheep are not necessarily incompatible. Can’t we all just get along?

I don’t expect to change anyone’s minds, but I think it could make for an interesting discussion.

• Which camp do you think has proven more successful in our history and why?
• Which camp do you see yourself as being in, or maybe which do you find more compelling even if not persuasive?


...

[Nucky]

This is a rough one Mr. TexaninVa. I'll have to get back to you in a couple of minutes. I have to :boom: make :boom: up :boom: my :boom: mind. :boom:

Very nice observation though. This should be a good one. :boxing2:

OKAY I thought about it. I have plenty of Skin In The Game. 2 Closer than Close family members and they are not in the NAVY but if they were on the boat that was teased yesterday I would hope that Whoever has the call as to whether we shoot or not had the Guts to give the Captain The Green Light to Sink Their Boston Whaler. What a slap in the face to our country that was. B.S. No More!

[B767drvr]

Superior firepower camp! Why? Well...


Are you a Superior Flower Power Proponent, a Superior Firepower Proponent, or a Redneck?

Here is a little test that will help you decide:

You're walking down a deserted street with your wife and two small children. Suddenly, an Islamic terrorist with a huge knife comes around the corner, locks eyes with you, screams obscenities, praises Allah, raises the knife, and charges at you.

You are carrying a Glock cal. 40, and you are an expert shot. You have mere seconds before he reaches you and your family.

What do you do?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Superior Flower Power Answer:

Well, that's not enough information to answer the question!

Does the man look poor! Or oppressed?

Have I ever done anything to him that would inspire him to attack?

Could we run away?

What does my wife think? What about the kids?

Could I possibly swing the gun like a club and knock the knife out of his hand?

What does the law say about this situation?

Does the Glock have appropriate safety built into it?

Why am I carrying a loaded gun anyway, and what kind of message does this send to society and to my children?

Is it possible he'd be happy with just killing me?

Does he definitely want to kill me, or would he be content just to wound me?

If I were to grab his knees and hold on , could my family get away while he was stabbing me?

Should I call 9-1-1?

Why is this street so deserted?

We need to raise taxes, have a paint and weed day and make this a happier, healthier street that would discourage such behavior.

This is all so confusing!

I need to discuss with some friends over a latte and try to come to a consensus.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Superior Firepower's Answer:

BANG!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Redneck's Answer:

BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! Click....

(sounds of reloading)

BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! click .

Daughter: "Nice grouping, Daddy! Were those the Winchester Silver Tips or Hollow Points?"

Son: "You got him, Pop! Can I shoot the next one?"

Wife: "You are not taking that to the taxidermist!"

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Pragmatism all the way.

I'd look behind me to see if this "Islamic terrorist" was trying to rescue me and my family from a White Nationalist coming from behind with an AR-15. Because around here, that would be the more likely risk. If so, I would grab my family and get out of the way.

[2AFRetSNCOs]

That's an easy answer. Between us, my wife and I have a total of 50 years, 10 months, and 23 days of active military service. I think it's pretty safe to say we're in favor of the superior firepower approach.

[TexaninVA]

That's an easy answer. Between us, my wife and I have a total of 50 years, 10 months, and 23 days of active military service. I think it's pretty safe to say we're in favor of the superior firepower approach.

Thank you for your service :BigApplause:

[TexaninVA]

Pragmatism all the way.

I'd look behind me to see if this "Islamic terrorist" was trying to rescue me and my family from a White Nationalist coming from behind with an AR-15. Because around here, that would be the more likely risk. If so, I would grab my family and get out of the way.

It sounds like you might be somewhere between the two camps ... pragmatism kind of leans you into the firepower camp but that's just a guess. Good answer though.

[tophcfa]

Superior firepower camp! Why? Well...


Are you a Superior Flower Power Proponent, a Superior Firepower Proponent, or a Redneck?

Here is a little test that will help you decide:

You're walking down a deserted street with your wife and two small children. Suddenly, an Islamic terrorist with a huge knife comes around the corner, locks eyes with you, screams obscenities, praises Allah, raises the knife, and charges at you.

You are carrying a Glock cal. 40, and you are an expert shot. You have mere seconds before he reaches you and your family.

What do you do?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Superior Flower Power Answer:

Well, that's not enough information to answer the question!

Does the man look poor! Or oppressed?

Have I ever done anything to him that would inspire him to attack?

Could we run away?

What does my wife think? What about the kids?

Could I possibly swing the gun like a club and knock the knife out of his hand?

What does the law say about this situation?

Does the Glock have appropriate safety built into it?

Why am I carrying a loaded gun anyway, and what kind of message does this send to society and to my children?

Is it possible he'd be happy with just killing me?

Does he definitely want to kill me, or would he be content just to wound me?

If I were to grab his knees and hold on , could my family get away while he was stabbing me?

Should I call 9-1-1?

Why is this street so deserted?

We need to raise taxes, have a paint and weed day and make this a happier, healthier street that would discourage such behavior.

This is all so confusing!

I need to discuss with some friends over a latte and try to come to a consensus.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Superior Firepower's Answer:

BANG!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Redneck's Answer:

BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! Click....

(sounds of reloading)

BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! click .

Daughter: "Nice grouping, Daddy! Were those the Winchester Silver Tips or Hollow Points?"

Son: "You got him, Pop! Can I shoot the next one?"

Wife: "You are not taking that to the taxidermist!"

OK, this goes down as one of my favorite all time posts :)

[Hayek1957]

Look back into history to find the answer: quote from Publius Flavius Vegetius Renatus (Rome, 4th century AD)

The original Latin phrase: Si vis pacem, para bellum
Translation: If you want peace, prepare for war.

This is wise advise, that has transcended the centuries.

[arbajeda]

Several sayings that sum up many people's feelings, two of which are:

"Speak softly and carry a big stick." You should know who said this.

"You negotiate with your enemy with your knee on his chest and your knife at his throat." A great military man I knew many years ago.

[stadry]

you go to war with the army you have, NOT the army you wish you had,,, i don't know of any soldier who wants to go to war

[bmit16]

Redneck is a little offensive. We prefer Appalachian American! Either way, I shoot to kill and high 5 that group behind me that the other snowflake was worried about.

[Hayek1957]

Another of my favorite military quotes:
Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.
General James Mattis

[J1ceasar]

Thank you for your service.

[ldecaterina]

I would ask him to please social distance himself at least 6-feet from my family during these uncertain times when the new normal means we are all fighting an invisible enemy rather than one another.

[davem4616]

I am not a hawk...but I have to go with the Superior Fire Power camp on this one

it just doesn't sit right with me to watch some guy in a robe cutting off the heads of folks kneeing down with their hands tied behind their backs and blindfolded

it just doesn't sit right with me to watch our ambassador killed and dragged through the streets

I laugh when I hear all 'the buttercups' say that we need to live peacefully with the nation of Islam....that is never going to happen cupcake....read their play book!!!!!!!!

[Pedrocarrasco01@yahoo.com]

:boom::boom::boom::boom::boom::boom:Superior firepower camp! Why? Well...


Are you a Superior Flower Power Proponent, a Superior Firepower Proponent, or a Redneck?

Here is a little test that will help you decide:

You're walking down a deserted street with your wife and two small children. Suddenly, an Islamic terrorist with a huge knife comes around the corner, locks eyes with you, screams obscenities, praises Allah, raises the knife, and charges at you.

You are carrying a Glock cal. 40, and you are an expert shot. You have mere seconds before he reaches you and your family.

What do you do?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Superior Flower Power Answer:

Well, that's not enough information to answer the question!

Does the man look poor! Or oppressed?

Have I ever done anything to him that would inspire him to attack?

Could we run away?

What does my wife think? What about the kids?

Could I possibly swing the gun like a club and knock the knife out of his hand?

What does the law say about this situation?

Does the Glock have appropriate safety built into it?

Why am I carrying a loaded gun anyway, and what kind of message does this send to society and to my children?

Is it possible he'd be happy with just killing me?

Does he definitely want to kill me, or would he be content just to wound me?

If I were to grab his knees and hold on , could my family get away while he was stabbing me?

Should I call 9-1-1?

Why is this street so deserted?

We need to raise taxes, have a paint and weed day and make this a happier, healthier street that would discourage such behavior.

This is all so confusing!

I need to discuss with some friends over a latte and try to come to a consensus.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Superior Firepower's Answer:

BANG!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Redneck's Answer:

BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! Click....

(sounds of reloading)

BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! click .

Daughter: "Nice grouping, Daddy! Were those the Winchester Silver Tips or Hollow Points?"

Son: "You got him, Pop! Can I shoot the next one?"

Wife: "You are not taking that to the taxidermist!"

[kenoc7]

When threads are started and get into topics of national security, I’ve observed that posters usually fall into two camps. Camp membership is probably a combination of life experiences, political preferences, common sense (as defined by the person) and so forth.

The first camp, probably about 2/3s if not more of TOTVers, instinctively understand the totalitarian leadership currently calling the shots in Iran, China, and elsewhere are best viewed as our enemy. That means they are inimical to our interests and national security if not dealt with and, ideally, should be removed from power. I will call this camp “Peace Through Superior Firepower” for lack of a better term, and identify them as right of center. Most in this camp view America as a force for good in the world, on balance and overall. Note that I did not say perfect or flawless, but still we essentially view America as the good guys.

The second camp could be described several ways. I’ll be nice, and just call them “Peace Through Superior Flower Power” and observe they are typically left of center. They tend to look at actions and say “Hey, it’s not any worse than anything the US has done.” The tendency is to view America as the source of problems, vs solutions, and seek to understand the “other” points of view, whether it’s Iran, China, Cuba et al. IMO this group takes a kind of multicultural approach to foreign policy where all other cultures are to be admired while one, ours, is kind of well … we do have our faults. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa would be another way of saying it.

The first camp views the second as having their heads firmly lodged in a very dark place, while usually rolling over in the face of America’s enemies.

The second camp views the first as warmongers who want to nuke the world because, after all, we don’t really have enemies just adversaries. Besides, wolves and sheep are not necessarily incompatible. Can’t we all just get along?

I don’t expect to change anyone’s minds, but I think it could make for an interesting discussion.

• Which camp do you think has proven more successful in our history and why?
• Which camp do you see yourself as being in, or maybe which do you find more compelling even if not persuasive?


...
Moderator, why are you allowing this political post?

[WesMan]

I agree!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!

[WesMan]

Redneck is a little offensive. We prefer Appalachian American! Either way, I shoot to kill and high 5 that group behind me that the other snowflake was worried about.

Love your comments!!!!!!! Shoot them all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[maggie1]

Several sayings that sum up many people's feelings, two of which are:

"Speak softly and carry a big stick." You should know who said this.

"You negotiate with your enemy with your knee on his chest and your knife at his throat." A great military man I knew many years ago.

And let us not forget "Never bring a knife to a gun fight!":boom:

[WesMan]

When threads are started and get into topics of national security, I’ve observed that posters usually fall into two camps. Camp membership is probably a combination of life experiences, political preferences, common sense (as defined by the person) and so forth.

The first camp, probably about 2/3s if not more of TOTVers, instinctively understand the totalitarian leadership currently calling the shots in Iran, China, and elsewhere are best viewed as our enemy. That means they are inimical to our interests and national security if not dealt with and, ideally, should be removed from power. I will call this camp “Peace Through Superior Firepower” for lack of a better term, and identify them as right of center. Most in this camp view America as a force for good in the world, on balance and overall. Note that I did not say perfect or flawless, but still we essentially view America as the good guys.

The second camp could be described several ways. I’ll be nice, and just call them “Peace Through Superior Flower Power” and observe they are typically left of center. They tend to look at actions and say “Hey, it’s not any worse than anything the US has done.” The tendency is to view America as the source of problems, vs solutions, and seek to understand the “other” points of view, whether it’s Iran, China, Cuba et al. IMO this group takes a kind of multicultural approach to foreign policy where all other cultures are to be admired while one, ours, is kind of well … we do have our faults. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa would be another way of saying it.

The first camp views the second as having their heads firmly lodged in a very dark place, while usually rolling over in the face of America’s enemies.

The second camp views the first as warmongers who want to nuke the world because, after all, we don’t really have enemies just adversaries. Besides, wolves and sheep are not necessarily incompatible. Can’t we all just get along?

I don’t expect to change anyone’s minds, but I think it could make for an interesting discussion.

• Which camp do you think has proven more successful in our history and why?
• Which camp do you see yourself as being in, or maybe which do you find more compelling even if not persuasive?


...
“Peace Through Superior Firepower” I'll take this camp every time!!!!! Thanks

[Jubal Early]

Sic semper tyrannis

[TNLAKEPANDA]

Anyone who reads and knows History would understand that Flower Power would never work. Why can’t we all get along? It’s not in our DNA 🧬. Hell we can’t even get along in the US been Democrats and Republicans! Even though it would benefit all Americans.
Only the Strong will survive!

[TexaninVA]

Moderator, why are you allowing this political post?

This was consciously crafted as a NON-political post. If you think about it, this thread is basically a current events topic, or maybe even a behavioral topic, both within the rules.

I think the issue a few may have is that it forces them to defend their beliefs, and there's not really that good of a case to be made for Flower Power. At least none have been posted to date. I hope someone does.

Hence, some apparently feel it's time to get out the silencing club and say this should not be allowed to be discussed etc which is a form of censorship or perhaps PC.

[TexaninVA]

OK, this goes down as one of my favorite all time posts :)


Me too. :bigbow: B767drvr's post was classic.

It cracked me up because it was so funny. Humor, to be effective as well all know, also has to be grounded upon some element of truth for it to resonate.


...

[bumpygreens]

Moderator, why are you allowing this political post?

Why are you so anxious to have censorship? This isn't a political post. It's an opinion post. It's a discussion about two sides of an issue. You know, like our universities used to do before they were infiltrated. Grown-ups do these things because they are healthy. It helps them to understand each others points of view, and maybe even come to a consensus. Now run along back to your safe space. The adults are talking.

[bumpygreens]

Has the evening news ever showed security camera footage from an all night convenience store where the night clerk successfully counseled an armed robber who then peacefully went on his way a happier, more caring individual?

[dtennent]

When threads are started and get into topics of national security, I’ve observed that posters usually fall into two camps. Camp membership is probably a combination of life experiences, political preferences, common sense (as defined by the person) and so forth.

The first camp, probably about 2/3s if not more of TOTVers, instinctively understand the totalitarian leadership currently calling the shots in Iran, China, and elsewhere are best viewed as our enemy. That means they are inimical to our interests and national security if not dealt with and, ideally, should be removed from power. I will call this camp “Peace Through Superior Firepower” for lack of a better term, and identify them as right of center. Most in this camp view America as a force for good in the world, on balance and overall. Note that I did not say perfect or flawless, but still we essentially view America as the good guys.

The second camp could be described several ways. I’ll be nice, and just call them “Peace Through Superior Flower Power” and observe they are typically left of center. They tend to look at actions and say “Hey, it’s not any worse than anything the US has done.” The tendency is to view America as the source of problems, vs solutions, and seek to understand the “other” points of view, whether it’s Iran, China, Cuba et al. IMO this group takes a kind of multicultural approach to foreign policy where all other cultures are to be admired while one, ours, is kind of well … we do have our faults. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa would be another way of saying it.

The first camp views the second as having their heads firmly lodged in a very dark place, while usually rolling over in the face of America’s enemies.

The second camp views the first as warmongers who want to nuke the world because, after all, we don’t really have enemies just adversaries. Besides, wolves and sheep are not necessarily incompatible. Can’t we all just get along?

I don’t expect to change anyone’s minds, but I think it could make for an interesting discussion.

• Which camp do you think has proven more successful in our history and why?
• Which camp do you see yourself as being in, or maybe which do you find more compelling even if not persuasive?


...

To me, the discussion is much more complex. For instance, the firepower we developed during World War II is what won the war. However, our reaching out to Germany, Italy, and Japan after the war and helping them rebuild dynamic economies, is what stopped the cycle of wars that had occurred over the previous decades. While there are certainly hostile countries, the larger battle is economic. China is currently winning this war. Even if we could destroy them militarily, another state equal to or worse than the current one would rise up in its place. Nor can we continue to cede our manufacturing and technology to them. Furthermore, they have bought and secured key mining interests around the world. IMO, we need to lead the world (and bring our European allies with us) in holding China accountable for their current practice of stealing technology, keeping prices low to drive out competition, and using workers as disposable items. To simply slap tariffs on products without detailed context of what they need to change doesn’t help our cause. However, a concerted and planned multinational effort could create the economic pain that would bring China around. It will take time as we cannot reverse the effects of the last 50 years overnight.

I guess this puts me into a third camp. Having the superior firing power but using diplomacy to achieve lasting changes. Instead of using the Glock, let’s use a taser to immobilize the fanatic no matter what his religious beliefs are.

[sloanst]

If one is in "Flower Power" camp and had their location published saying "These people are rich beyond reason and have no security to protect them", would you expect bad elements to take the opportunity to break into your home? Those bad elements are determined to steal all you have and leave you deceased. What would you do? Remain as you are, unprotected? Leave and let those bad elements steal everything you have worked for all of your life? Or - Would you call the police, hire some body guards and install a security system and armor your doors? If you do the last then you have joined the "Superior Firepower" camp. If you would decide to do either of the first two, then by all means, respond with your address. Let the test begin.

[croughwell]

I don't find this post to be political in the least... IMO, if anyone calls it political, they are only try to stifle a different opinion as one side has become famous for.

[wamley]

That is hysterical.

[wamley]

I'd rather be judged by 12 then Carried by 6.

[TexaninVA]

To me, the discussion is much more complex. For instance, the firepower we developed during World War II is what won the war. However, our reaching out to Germany, Italy, and Japan after the war and helping them rebuild dynamic economies, is what stopped the cycle of wars that had occurred over the previous decades. While there are certainly hostile countries, the larger battle is economic. China is currently winning this war. Even if we could destroy them militarily, another state equal to or worse than the current one would rise up in its place. Nor can we continue to cede our manufacturing and technology to them. Furthermore, they have bought and secured key mining interests around the world. IMO, we need to lead the world (and bring our European allies with us) in holding China accountable for their current practice of stealing technology, keeping prices low to drive out competition, and using workers as disposable items. To simply slap tariffs on products without detailed context of what they need to change doesn’t help our cause. However, a concerted and planned multinational effort could create the economic pain that would bring China around. It will take time as we cannot reverse the effects of the last 50 years overnight.

I guess this puts me into a third camp. Having the superior firing power but using diplomacy to achieve lasting changes. Instead of using the Glock, let’s use a taser to immobilize the fanatic no matter what his religious beliefs are.

Thanks for you post. You make some excellent points and I agree with many of them. When I started the thread I thought about a third camp but decided it was best to let that emerge in the discussion. Wanted to keep it simple to start off with.

Certainly agree with your comments about China too … there are multiple levels of warfare beyond the kinetic, and they are eating our lunch in that regard. Best left for a separate thread.

One area of disagreement, and harkening back to 767’s post, I would opt for the single “bang” vs a taser to immobilize. :boom:

[Car400]

This post is very political, as is most of the replies.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

It sounds like you might be somewhere between the two camps ... pragmatism kind of leans you into the firepower camp but that's just a guess. Good answer though.

Not really. I'm more in favor of the "let idiots be idiots" camp. If some idiot was coming at me with a DAGGER...and I was at a distance where shooting them with a gun would not end up with pieces of fat globules and brain matter on my own outfit...then I'd duck away. His dagger might end up in your chest, or it might end up in the tree behind me. Or it might end up with him trying to chase me, and giving up. Why? Because he's already pumped up and enraged. It's just a matter of time before all that adrenaline wears off, and mine only JUST started going into overdrive. I'll outlast him even if he chases me.

No need to shoot anyone, in this scenario.

[TexaninVA]

Not really. I'm more in favor of the "let idiots be idiots" camp. If some idiot was coming at me with a DAGGER...and I was at a distance where shooting them with a gun would not end up with pieces of fat globules and brain matter on my own outfit...then I'd duck away. His dagger might end up in your chest, or it might end up in the tree behind me. Or it might end up with him trying to chase me, and giving up. Why? Because he's already pumped up and enraged. It's just a matter of time before all that adrenaline wears off, and mine only JUST started going into overdrive. I'll outlast him even if he chases me.

No need to shoot anyone, in this scenario.

You sound like a responsible supporter of the 2nd amendment. Concealed Weapons License holders know that, if you can avoid the fight, that's always the recommended course.

[TexaninVA]

This post is very political, as is most of the replies.

If someone's opinion differs from yours on this topic, does that ipso facto make it "political?"

Instead, why not analyze and explain which course of action makes more sense to you. That's the discussion focus.

[NoVa_Jim]

To me, the discussion is much more complex. For instance, the firepower we developed during World War II is what won the war. However, our reaching out to Germany, Italy, and Japan after the war and helping them rebuild dynamic economies, is what stopped the cycle of wars that had occurred over the previous decades. While there are certainly hostile countries, the larger battle is economic. China is currently winning this war. Even if we could destroy them militarily, another state equal to or worse than the current one would rise up in its place. Nor can we continue to cede our manufacturing and technology to them. Furthermore, they have bought and secured key mining interests around the world. IMO, we need to lead the world (and bring our European allies with us) in holding China accountable for their current practice of stealing technology, keeping prices low to drive out competition, and using workers as disposable items. To simply slap tariffs on products without detailed context of what they need to change doesn’t help our cause. However, a concerted and planned multinational effort could create the economic pain that would bring China around. It will take time as we cannot reverse the effects of the last 50 years overnight.

I guess this puts me into a third camp. Having the superior firing power but using diplomacy to achieve lasting changes. Instead of using the Glock, let’s use a taser to immobilize the fanatic no matter what his religious beliefs are.

Thank you, dtennent. This was one of the best, most thoughtful comments I've seen on TOTV!

[bumpygreens]

The philosophical root of the question is: do you think all people are basically good, or do you think many people are basically evil. There is no third camp. Basically good people with superior firepower don't automatically obliterate people who oppose them. They will always, given the opportunity, try to rectify differences through negotiation and diplomacy. If they lack superior firepower, evil has no incentive to come to the table.

[Bucco]

To me, the discussion is much more complex. For instance, the firepower we developed during World War II is what won the war. However, our reaching out to Germany, Italy, and Japan after the war and helping them rebuild dynamic economies, is what stopped the cycle of wars that had occurred over the previous decades. While there are certainly hostile countries, the larger battle is economic. China is currently winning this war. Even if we could destroy them militarily, another state equal to or worse than the current one would rise up in its place. Nor can we continue to cede our manufacturing and technology to them. Furthermore, they have bought and secured key mining interests around the world. IMO, we need to lead the world (and bring our European allies with us) in holding China accountable for their current practice of stealing technology, keeping prices low to drive out competition, and using workers as disposable items. To simply slap tariffs on products without detailed context of what they need to change doesn’t help our cause. However, a concerted and planned multinational effort could create the economic pain that would bring China around. It will take time as we cannot reverse the effects of the last 50 years overnight.

I guess this puts me into a third camp. Having the superior firing power but using diplomacy to achieve lasting changes. Instead of using the Glock, let’s use a taser to immobilize the fanatic no matter what his religious beliefs are.

Your understanding of the complexities of international relations is appreciated.

The simplicity thus far has been stunning, and reflects lack of understanding, but suppose some like to talk tough.

Thanks again.

[TexaninVA]

Your understanding of the complexities of international relations is appreciated.

The simplicity thus far has been stunning, and reflects lack of understanding, but suppose some like to talk tough.

Thanks again.

I'm guessing many would be most interested, as in very, to hear you wax eloquent on this topic.

Here's your chance to make your case ...

[bumpygreens]

Maybe I haven't had enough experience in this world, but I've never encountered a good intent that came shrouded in complexity.

[Bucco]

I'm guessing many would be most interested, as in very, to hear you wax eloquent on this topic.

Here's your chance to make your case ...

I believe DTENNENT said it well in his.her post. No case to be made. The kind of action you are ranting on about has been happening for a lot of years by many countries. It is handled mostly without a show of manly words, as our Navy is well trained to do. A tweet as was given, sort of hogties our Naval leaders.

People know who has military power, and who doesn't...no need to brag in the playground about how strong you are. Our State Department has been watered down, but we still can handle this without braggadocio.

[ronvillages]

What about camp 0. That's the people who fit in camp 1 but became greedy and got rich with trading with China and sending our factories overseas and supporting conflicts around the world with no resolution. How many American lives were lost in Korea to Chinese bullets?

[bumpygreens]

Whoever called out for a delivery of non sequiturs, your order has arrived. :icon_wink:

[TexaninVA]

I believe DTENNENT said it well in his.her post. No case to be made. The kind of action you are ranting on about has been happening for a lot of years by many countries. It is handled mostly without a show of manly words, as our Navy is well trained to do. A tweet as was given, sort of hogties our Naval leaders.

People know who has military power, and who doesn't...no need to brag in the playground about how strong you are. Our State Department has been watered down, but we still can handle this without braggadocio.

I agree that DTENNET said it well … I so posted in fact.

Ranting is a loaded term so I won’t take the bait.

Having deployed many times, my experience is the Navy operates best with strong leadership and support from the top -- something that’s been lacking in the past. You use the term “manly” words derisively, which inadvertently gives an insight into your thinking actually. The tweet, rather than hogtying, empowers local commanders to use their best judgement to defend their ships without worrying about CYA from DC deskbound commandos and legal beagles.

You use the term bragging, again not the optimal choice. The objective is deterrence which is the real point. I must respectfully disagree w/r/t to State. They made a hash on things in the Middle East and, while we’re at it, China. In addition, any genuine diplomat knows that, without the credible threat of force somewhere in the background, diplomacy is ineffective.

...

[rustyp]

[QUOTE=B767drvr;1752111]Superior firepower camp! Why? Well...


Are you a Superior Flower Power Proponent, a Superior Firepower Proponent, or a Redneck?

Here is a little test that will help you decide:

You're walking down a deserted street with your wife and two small children. Suddenly, an Islamic terrorist with a huge knife comes around the corner, locks eyes with you, screams obscenities, praises Allah, raises the knife, and charges at you.

You are carrying a Glock cal. 40, and you are an expert shot. You have mere seconds before he reaches you and your family.

What do you do?

I was smart enough not to be in that neighborhood to begin with.

[TexaninVA]

[QUOTE=B767drvr;1752111]Superior firepower camp! Why? Well...


Are you a Superior Flower Power Proponent, a Superior Firepower Proponent, or a Redneck?

...

I was smart enough not to be in that neighborhood to begin with.

That's definitely the preferable option, but sometimes the neighborhood comes to you, so to speak.

[jimjamuser]

I would ask him to please social distance himself at least 6-feet from my family during these uncertain times when the new normal means we are all fighting an invisible enemy rather than one another.
Cute.

[LiverpoolWalrus]

Thank you for your brief, prejudicial and grammatically incorrect opinion. Next time you might want to at least offer a modicum of evidence in support of your view.

Bumpy, I share your frustration with rampant grammatical atrocities all over social mania. My position, though, is that if we purists tried to correct everyone, we'd have no time to do anything else, so I just let it go.

<Um, you might want to take a closer look at your signature quote.> :):):)

[amexsbow]

Re: Peace Through Superior Firepower or Flower Power?

As an observer of history and a retired Law Enforcement Officer, I feel I must comment.

The last war we won decisively was WWII. Why did we win? We firebombed enemy cities and factories in and near large population areas and in so doing killed a large number of civilians as collateral damage. We dropped an atomic bomb and destroyed cities. After the war we humanely treated the conquered enemy. We fought to win and brought the battle to the enemy. That was the last war we fought to win the rest we fought to a truce, and look where we are now. Surrounded by enemies or people who think we are weak and will not take action against "incursions," or minor "harassment."

[TexaninVA]

Re: Peace Through Superior Firepower or Flower Power?

As an observer of history and a retired Law Enforcement Officer, I feel I must comment.

The last war we won decisively was WWII. Why did we win? We firebombed enemy cities and factories in and near large population areas and in so doing killed a large number of civilians as collateral damage. We dropped an atomic bomb and destroyed cities. After the war we humanely treated the conquered enemy. We fought to win and brought the battle to the enemy. That was the last war we fought to win the rest we fought to a truce, and look where we are now. Surrounded by enemies or people who think we are weak and will not take action against "incursions," or minor "harassment."

Wow, sadly is that ever true. Fifty years of peace & prosperity has bred weakness, naivete and a spoiled people who can apparently no longer muster what it takes to win against our enemies.

Worse, a lot of our people are so soft(headed) they don't even realize we have enemies as witnessed by some postings on this board.

[fromct]

Wow, sadly is that ever true. Fifty years of peace & prosperity has bred weakness, naivete and a spoiled people who can apparently no longer muster what it takes to win against our enemies.

Worse, a lot of our people are so soft(headed) they don't even realize we have enemies as witnessed by some postings on this board.


Hard times make strong men - Strong men make good times - Good times make weak men - Weak men make hard times

[Twiganne]

Lmao

[TexaninVA]

Hard times make strong men - Strong men make good times - Good times make weak men - Weak men make hard times

That's pretty much the cycle of history ... concisely stated.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

You sound like a responsible supporter of the 2nd amendment. Concealed Weapons License holders know that, if you can avoid the fight, that's always the recommended course.

I am. I'm also personally anti-gun. Meaning - I refuse to own one, and I refuse to allow one in my house. But I'm also in favor of protecting the rights of other people to own them, as long as THEY are responsible and have respect for the fact that the #1 primary function and purpose of a gun, the reason they exist in the first place - is to kill people or animals. And - if you are carrying one, you'd better be prepared, trained, and mentally capable of using it.

I know that I am not capable of killing another human being. And so - I refuse to own a gun. Simple as that.

[JimJohnson]

I beleave you must add one more very important ingredient. Capability of your personal Gray Matter. If your slow to process complex thought, shoulder your gun. If you are a quick thinker, you would process the situation in an attempt to find a less violent method to defuse the situation.

[l2ridehd]

Speak softly and carry a big stick. Teddy Roosevelt.

Don't need to brag about your superior power, just make sure you have it. So as it pertains to the OP's example. It said you were an excellent shot. So if possible I would fire just at his feet. If he stopped OK. If not or I didn't have time for step one then take out his knee. If he keeps coming, use the redneck method.

In reality you don't know what you would do if placed in a kill or be killed situation. Most of us, even the most flower power of you, would fall back to basic survival instincts and protect your loved ones.

[TexaninVA]

I beleave you must add one more very important ingredient. Capability of your personal Gray Matter. If your slow to process complex thought, shoulder your gun. If you are a quick thinker, you would process the situation in an attempt to find a less violent method to defuse the situation.

I think you meant to say "holster your gun" vs shoulder it since it was in the context of CWP carrier.

If a situation can be defuzed and a fight avoided, that is always the recommended course.

[Inexes@aol.com]

Has the evening news ever showed security camera footage from an all night convenience store where the night clerk successfully counseled an armed robber who then peacefully went on his way a happier, more caring individual?
Hysterical...... makes me think of my sisters, 15 & 13 years younger than me...... this would be their take on the matter.......lol