***Political Thread*** (Massive merge)

[warrior-cat]

Re: Political Thread: Closing Guantanamo?


The unfortunate truth of this world is that appeasement has never worked and will never work. There is always someone who wants what you have, or, just plain hates you for who you are and what you stand for. For that reason, they will try to destroy you and take what you have. Equal or stronger force is the only thing that will keep them at bay. If you want to be ruled by tyrants and dictators, follow the liberal lead.

 

[KyFaninNC]

Re: Political Thread: Closing Guantanamo?

Originally posted by warrior-cat:

The unfortunate truth of this world is that appeasement has never worked and will never work. There is always someone who wants what you have, or, just plain hates you for who you are and what you stand for. For that reason, they will try to destroy you and take what you have. Equal or stronger force is the only thing that will keep them at bay. If you want to be ruled by tyrants and dictators, follow the liberal lead.

X 100000000000000000000000

 

[Deeeefense]

Re: Political Thread: Closing Guantanamo?

Originally posted by ukfit:

Originally posted by Deeeefense:

Originally posted by ukfit:


Are you against giving GB back to Cuba?




This post was edited on 1/24 4:50 PM by kybobcat

We don't own Gitmo dude, we lease it, and the last time I checked President Reagan and General Secretary Gorbachev ended the cold war nearly 3 decades ago.

We do lease it, but our country can cancel the lease if they desire. And Hussein desires. Im not clear if Congress has any say, but Obama acts unconstitutionally any way. So right after he says he cant do it, he probably will, even if its illegal.
Obama was the most liberal congressman and now he is the most liberal president.

To you and everyone else that never heard of Guantanamo Bay or Gitmo until after 9-11-01, Gitmo is a Naval Base not a penal colony, one that I have actually been to while I was on active duty. It plays a vital roll in providing logistical support to the Navy's operations in the Caribbean. It's not going to be returned to Cuba by this president or any other president any time soon.

BTW Obama never served as a Congressman







This post was edited on 2/7 11:07 AM by Deeeefense

 

[Deeeefense]

Re: Political Thread: Closing Guantanamo?

Originally posted by warrior-cat:

The unfortunate truth of this world is that appeasement has never worked and will never work. There is always someone who wants what you have, or, just plain hates you for who you are and what you stand for. For that reason, they will try to destroy you and take what you have. Equal or stronger force is the only thing that will keep them at bay. If you want to be ruled by tyrants and dictators, follow the liberal lead.

How then would you suggest we respond differently to the ISIS situation? are you suggesting we send in massive numbers of troops?




This post was edited on 2/7 7:58 PM by Deeeefense

 

[Bill Cosby]

Re: Political Thread: Closing Guantanamo?

Originally posted by Deeeefense:

BTW Obama never served as a Congressman

 

[kghighroller]

Re: Political Thread: Closing Guantanamo?

Hmm Obama wasn't in congress. Who knew

 

[warrior-cat]

Re: Political Thread: Closing Guantanamo?


No Deee, I think you already know that I am for pulling our troops out of everywhere. But, call a terrorist a terrorist and stop trying to appease everyone or being scared to call them what they are. Secondly, if they kill an american, retaliate with a quick strike in areas we know they are occupying. Thirdly, if a country wants our help, they should foot the bill and use their forces to spearhead any attack with ours in support. Do this everytime they strike and take out a lot more of theirs when only one of ours is killed and they will learn to leave us be for the most part. It will not stop it completely but it will surely slow them down.

Instead, your savior wants to step back, talk about it, and wait while many more are being brutalized and killed. Quit being a dumbass, you knew my stance from before, your just being a jerk. Grow a pair.

 

[Deeeefense]

Re: Political Thread: Closing Guantanamo?

Originally posted by kghighroller:
Hmm Obama wasn't in congress. Who knew

I guess the person that said: "Obama was the most liberal congressman" didn't.

 

[Chuckinden]

Obama needs to get his head out of his ass and form a coalition with boots on the ground to eradicate ISIS. He needs to do it now while so many middle eastern countries are upset over the Jordan pilot execution.

If he lets this opportunity go by, then he will have blood on his hands for the rest of ISIS executions.

 

[Deeeefense]

Re: Political Thread: Closing Guantanamo?

Originally posted by warrior-cat:

No Deee, I think you already know that I am for pulling our troops out of everywhere. But, call a terrorist a terrorist and stop trying to appease everyone or being scared to call them what they are.

so name-calling is your solution to ISIS? comon man

===================================================================


Secondly, if they kill an american, retaliate with a quick strike in areas we know they are occupying.

You just said above you wanted to pull troops out everywhere? But I agree in principal that our response to any terrorist threat to kill an American hostage is some sort of retaliation, but the problem is we don't even have sufficient targeting right now to keep all our air power busy.

================================================================
Thirdly, if a country wants our help, they should foot the bill and use their forces to spearhead any attack with ours in support. Do this everytime they strike and take out a lot more of theirs when only one of ours is killed and they will learn to leave us be for the most part. It will not stop it completely but it will surely slow them down.

We do too much of the heavy lifting I'll agree with that. The US taxpayer should not have to shoulder a global police force.

===================================================================

Instead, your savior wants to step back, talk about it, and wait while many more are being brutalized and killed. Quit being a dumbass, you knew my stance from before, your just being a jerk. Grow a pair.

Yes I have read your stance which is why I asked - it didn't seem to be consistent. Anyway retaliation sounds good and I'm for it, but the problem is there isn't much else we can do right now becasue these thugs are imbedded in Mogul and other places so you need troops to go in and clean them out, but none of us want that to be US troops.






This post was edited on 2/7 8:10 PM by Deeeefense

 

[Deeeefense]

Originally posted by Chuckinden:
Obama needs to get his head out of his ass and form a coalition with boots on the ground to eradicate ISIS. He needs to do it now while so many middle eastern countries are upset over the Jordan pilot execution.

If he lets this opportunity go by, then he will have blood on his hands for the rest of ISIS executions.

I think they are trying to do that but the situation is complex. ISIS is occupaying portions of Iraq, but we have already seen how "brave" the Iraqi's are. Early on they left weapons including heavy armor even helicoptors for the thugs, and ran. They are a Shi'ite army under the defacto control of Iran, anyone that says otherwise is lying. We can't jump in bed with Iran. Then there's Turkey, they hate the Kurds who are our best ally. They think they "stole" part of Turkey. Then there's Syria and you know what a mess that is. The Saudi's won't send troops to fight alongside the Iraqi Shi'ite against fellow Sunnis.

Jordon is stepping up to the plate but it's going to take more than Jordan and the UAE to take on this pack of barbarians.
It would be nice to pick up the phone and get a coalition established but from what I can see it ain't happening anytime soon.

 

[warrior-cat]

Re: Political Thread: Closing Guantanamo?

OrigiIally posted by Deeeefense:

Originally posted by warrior-cat:

No Deee, I think you already know that I am for pulling our troops out of everywhere. But, call a terrorist a terrorist and stop trying to appease everyone or being scared to call them what they are.

so name-calling is your solution to ISIS? comon man

===================================================================


Secondly, if they kill an american, retaliate with a quick strike in areas we know they are occupying.

You just said above you wanted to pull troops out everywhere? But I agree in principal that our response to any terrorist threat to kill an American hostage is some sort of retaliation, but the problem is we don't even have sufficient targeting right now to keep all our air power busy.

================================================================
Thirdly, if a country wants our help, they should foot the bill and use their forces to spearhead any attack with ours in support. Do this everytime they strike and take out a lot more of theirs when only one of ours is killed and they will learn to leave us be for the most part. It will not stop it completely but it will surely slow them down.

We do too much of the heavy lifting I'll agree with that. The US taxpayer should not have to shoulder a global police force.

===================================================================

Instead, your savior wants to step back, talk about it, and wait while many more are being brutalized and killed. Quit being a dumbass, you knew my stance from before, your just being a jerk. Grow a pair.

Yes I have read your stance which is why I asked - it didn't seem to be consistent. Anyway retaliation sounds good and I'm for it, but the problem is there isn't much else we can do right now becasue these thugs are imbedded in Mogul and other places so you need troops to go in and clean them out, but none of us want that to be US troops.






This post was edited on 2/7 8:10 PM by Deeeefense

Which is why I said they spearhead and we are in support. And no, I am not inconsistent. What I suggested can be done, we just need leaders who have the balls to do it.

This post was edited on 2/8 8:20 AM by warrior-cat

 

[Bill Cosby]

Re: Political Thread: Closing Guantanamo?

Originally posted by Deeeefense:

Originally posted by kghighroller:
Hmm Obama wasn't in congress. Who knew

I guess the person that said: "Obama was the most liberal congressman" didn't.

 

[From-the-stands]

Originally posted by P19978:
Obama really wow'ed them at the National Prayer Breakfast.

Obviously he wasn't a history major lol...

I thought the President made a pretty strong point.

Don't forget to pack some fried chicken in case you get hungry, could be a long day....

 

[Bill Derington]

Why would the president even bring these up? What purpose does it serve him, it's the national day of prayer breakfast!

I swear I don't understand the apologists for Islam on here. Obviously they aren't all terrorists, but an extremely large portion I side the religion are right now, not sometime in the past or distant past.

 

[Chuckinden]

Originally posted by Deeeefense:

Originally posted by Chuckinden:
Obama needs to get his head out of his ass and form a coalition with boots on the ground to eradicate ISIS. He needs to do it now while so many middle eastern countries are upset over the Jordan pilot execution.

If he lets this opportunity go by, then he will have blood on his hands for the rest of ISIS executions.

I think they are trying to do that but the situation is complex. ISIS is occupaying portions of Iraq, but we have already seen how "brave" the Iraqi's are. Early on they left weapons including heavy armor even helicoptors for the thugs, and ran. They are a Shi'ite army under the defacto control of Iran, anyone that says otherwise is lying. We can't jump in bed with Iran. Then there's Turkey, they hate the Kurds who are our best ally. They think they "stole" part of Turkey. Then there's Syria and you know what a mess that is. The Saudi's won't send troops to fight alongside the Iraqi Shi'ite against fellow Sunnis.

Jordon is stepping up to the plate but it's going to take more than Jordan and the UAE to take on this pack of barbarians.
It would be nice to pick up the phone and get a coalition established but from what I can see it ain't happening anytime soon.

You're right. It is a complex situation.

 

[KyFaninNC]

Originally posted by From-the-stands:

Originally posted by P19978:
Obama really wow'ed them at the National Prayer Breakfast.

Obviously he wasn't a history major lol...

I thought the President made a pretty strong point.

Don't forget to pack some fried chicken in case you get hungry, could be a long day....

What? No Nazi death camp pictures?

 

[qwesley]

Per Obama terrorism gets too much news attention and climate changes gets too little, via The Hill:




The news media "absolutely" overstates the risks of terrorism because stories about things like climate change aren't "sexy" and don't drive ratings, President Obama said in an interview published Monday.

"What's the famous saying about local newscasts, right? If it bleeds, it leads, right?" Obama told Vox. "You show crime stories and you show fires, because that's what folks watch, and it's all about ratings. And, you know, the problems of terrorism and dysfunction and chaos, along with plane crashes and a few other things, that's the equivalent when it comes to covering international affairs. "

 

[qwesley]

I was (mostly) joking a couple of weeks ago that we should drone Gitmo. Below is an example of the ungodly irrational view we have on detainees/waterboarding versus drones. Outrage that we would have them in a jail on a tropical island....yawn that they and their family gets bombed by a drone. Couldn't make it up.


CNN Breaking News þ@cnnbrk 45m45 minutes ago

Ex-Gitmo detainee turned ISIS recruiter killed in Afghanistan drone strike http://cnn.it/1vA1jZI

 

[wkycatfan]

Regarding the prayer breakfast, I think the main point is that the POTUS seemed to go out of his way to defend Islam rather than address he current threat of ISIS. He referenced things that happened a long time ago 'done in the name of Christ'.

Relevance?

I don't remember Jim Crow having anything to do with Jesus Christ.

 

[Deeeefense]

Originally posted by wkycatfan:

Regarding the prayer breakfast, I think the main point is that the POTUS seemed to go out of his way to defend Islam rather than address he current threat of ISIS. He referenced things that happened a long time ago 'done in the name of Christ'.

Relevance?

I don't remember Jim Crow having anything to do with Jesus Christ.

The KKK bastardized the Christian faith in a way similar to what ISIS and Al Quida have done to the Muslim faith. The KKK took symbols of Christianity and used Bible verses to attempt to justify their tactics, but we don't, and shouldn't refer to the Klan as "Christian Terrorists". By sure numbers the KKK is by some estimates responsible for over 3500 lynchings plus thousands of other instances of torture and burnings, during their existence. The modern day skinhead groups also use Christian symbols and references.

I think the President wanted to justify his position on not using the term Islamic Terrorists by bringing up these examples. He doesn't want to inflame the situation any further. The thugs recruit new members by propaganda. The US tying Islam with terrorism is a tool they will use. Just because terrorist claim the Muslim faith or the Christian faith or any other faith doesn't mean they are truly linked to them. Clearly they are not.

We need all the friends we can get in that part of the world to fight these lunatics, so it's important not to insult the religion practiced by Jordan, Lebanon and other allies just to make ourselves feel good. I think that's the larger point.

 

[wkycatfan]

I see the point you are attempting to make. However, what you seem to be describing is appeasement.

That takes the conversation in yet another direction.
This post was edited on 2/9 9:40 AM by wkycatfan

 

[Deeeefense]

Originally posted by wkycatfan:

I see the point you are attempting to make. However, what you seem to be describing is appeasement.

That takes the conversation in yet another direction.
This post was edited on 2/9 9:40 AM by wkycatfan

appeasement of who? not ISIS since they are still referred to as "terrorists"

 

[wkycatfan]

The idea that calling out things 'done in the name of Christ' is going to somehow make the situation better, or stop the outrage against radical islam seemed really out of place at a 'prayer breakfast'.

 

[P19978]

Are you libs actually defending Obama's performance at the Prayer Breakfast?

Libs would defend Hitler if he ran as a Democrat.

I can see it now: Hitler/Hillary 2016!

 

[Bill Cosby]

Obama never actually spoke at the prayer breakfast.

 

[BlueManToo]

Kind of funny that Obama makes an irrelevant reference to the Crusades in an effort to draw some type of moral equivalency with the militant Islam of today (which also happens to be the same violent Islam that spurred the Crusades). He failed to mention that the Crusades were a response to over 400 years of gradual and violent Muslim creep into nearly 2/3 of the Old Christian world. Obama certainly has to know this (he's a blind ideologue, but he's not uneducated). However, he also knows that most of the voting public and the news media are little more than lemmings who have been misinformed about the Crusades over the years, and as such, he knows that the average person believes that the Crusades were simply evil Christians killing nonbelievers and pillaging the countryside in a zealous effort to 'Spread the Gospel'. Such disinformation creates a great soundbite for the Islamic-apologist media who carry the Obama water, and the myth of the unjust Crusades continues for yet another day.






This post was edited on 2/9 10:45 AM by BlueManToo

 

[qwesley]

Originally posted by wkycatfan:
The idea that calling out things 'done in the name of Christ' is going to somehow make the situation better, or stop the outrage against radical islam seemed really out of place at a 'prayer breakfast'.

There is the rub. Present day pussyfooting around clear terrorism being performed directly in the name of religion and coordinated out of mosques and religious school while at the same time correlating events 800 years ago (500 before we even became a country) as direct Christian event even though the religious element that drove that violence is at best, a subtext or excuse. Sectarian and/or territorial combat is not the same as direct religious cleansing.

EG....Taliban are not terrorist yet the Crusaders were. Stupid. And zero surprise Deeee slurps it right up.

 

[Bill Derington]

I wonder how many members of ISIS, Al Qaeda,Taliban, Boko Harem or any other muslim terrorist group knows what the KKK is, or Jim Crow?

 

[jamo0001]

Originally posted by Bill Derington:

I wonder how many members of ISIS, Al Qaeda,Taliban, Boko Harem or any other muslim terrorist group knows what the KKK is, or Jim Crow?

A lot of them. American racial inequality and violence are huge propaganda tools for political Islamism (which claims utter racial equality for all those sharing a common religion).

Remember how the Iranians released all African American hostages back in Nov 1979? And only kept the white male hostages? There was a reason for that.

 

[Willy4UK]

Originally posted by jamo0001:

Originally posted by Bill Derington:

I wonder how many members of ISIS, Al Qaeda,Taliban, Boko Harem or any other muslim terrorist group knows what the KKK is, or Jim Crow?

A lot of them. American racial inequality and violence are huge propaganda tools for political Islamism (which claims utter racial equality for all those sharing a common religion).

Remember how the Iranians released all African American hostages back in Nov 1979? And only kept the white male hostages? There was a reason for that.

It was said that Hitler learned about concentration camps from America's handling of Native Americans.

 

[Bill Cosby]

Well, I guess it's settled. America is no better than the muslim terrorists over in the middle east.


The KKK lit crosses on fire to show their burning love for their Christian god. No different than a muslim yelling alahu akbar while he blows away aa bunch of civilians.

 

[jamo0001]

Originally posted by Bill Cosby:

Well, I guess it's settled. America is no better than the muslim terrorists over in the middle east.


The KKK lit crosses on fire to show their burning love for their Christian god. No different than a muslim yelling alahu akbar while he blows away aa bunch of civilians.

Well, I guess it's settled. American and Western Christianity have been inerrant and never contradicted their own professed ideals.


I haven't read Obama's comments at the National Prayer Breakfast, but the faux outrage over them is absurd. A president's comments on religion should mean precisely nothing. That's like the Pope giving comments on US fiscal policy.

 

[Bill Derington]

Jamo, As far as I know you may be right, but I don't think the president was saying that for the terrorist groups. Personally, I think he was trying to bring the US christian population down a notch or two, jmo.

 

[Bill Cosby]

Really don't give a shit about Obama's comments at any breakfast. Anything he says is complete and total bullshit.

I find it funny when the left tries to excuse the violence of a large percentage of modern day Muslims because of something that happened hundreds of years ago. Defense giving history lessons on Christian violence when he doesn't even know Obama was a Congressman. That's laughable.


Sorry, I can't go back in time and do anything about the crusades. Or even go back in time and do anything about the KKK burning crosses. There are people that can stand up TODAY against muslim violence.

If someone goes and bombs an abortion clinic yelling "I'm a Christian and doing this because I'm a Christian, praise god" they will be denounced by everyone in America. Sure, some people have their own warped twisted views. But we aren't dealing with large groups of weaponized Christians trying to irradicate other religions and people from the face of the planet.

 

[jamo0001]

"Excusing" violence and saying "they're not the first" are totally different things.

 

[wkycatfan]

Originally posted by jamo0001:


I haven't read Obama's comments at the National Prayer Breakfast, but the faux outrage over them is absurd. A president's comments on religion should mean precisely nothing. That's like the Pope giving comments on US fiscal policy.

Jam, I'm not sure this is true. If ISIS is motivated by their religion to expand through military force and borderline genocide, I would think what the POTUS says on the subject has a lot of relevance. Especially when you consider that radical Islam could be further galvanized by thinking their cause is perceived at least partially just by the leader of the US, and that they may not have that much to fear in terms of retaliation (except of course, now Jordan). I think history shows that when radical Islam experiences setbacks, it's about they only thing discourages them.
This post was edited on 2/9 2:08 PM by wkycatfan

 

[Willy4UK]

Islam is about 600 years behind Christianity. So the idea is that hopefully that Islam evolves more quickly than Christianity. It has to. I don't think the world can deal with waiting 600 more years of extreme Islamic ideas with such technological advances of today's times.

 

[Bill Cosby]

Originally posted by jamo0001:
"Excusing" violence and saying "they're not the first" are totally different things.

No. They aren't.

 

[jamo0001]

Originally posted by Bill Cosby:

Originally posted by jamo0001:
"Excusing" violence and saying "they're not the first" are totally different things.

No. They aren't.

So if i say Sandusky wasn't the first pedophile, that means I'm excusing his actions?