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.

Our GOD is love ....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Awj...ature=youtu.be

...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 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.

[quote=Guest;1072350]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:

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.

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.

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

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.

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!

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

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 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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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

Understanding Islamic Extremism

A review of Understanding Islamic Terrorism: The Islamic Doctrine of War. By Patrick Sookhdeo. » Bill Muehlenberg

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."

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

After 7 pages of is so is not ......
 

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


Personal Best Regards:

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:

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.

I suppose this supplies the answer.

YES, it will always involve the calling of names.

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).

Read the book!
 

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!

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.