Motherfuckers

[tinselwolverine]

It's obvious turning the whole region to sand is the only logical conclusion.

derp.

???

I'm no geologist...but...isn't the whole region pretty much sand already?

And I'm no sociologist...but...isn't that where the demographic identification "sandnigger" derives from?

 

[Thumb]

???

I'm no geologist...but...isn't the whole region pretty much sand already?

And I'm no sociologist...but...isn't that where the demographic identification "sandnigger" derives from?

My apologies, I meant glass. As in drop a few thermonuclear bombs on sandytown and turn it to a 70's style ashtray.

At least, that's the logic I have read by a certain someone.

 

[Gulo Blue]

I'm no geologist...but...isn't the whole region pretty much sand already?

To turn sand into sand, 1st you have to turn it into glass, then you can pound it back into sand.

 

[tinselwolverine]

My apologies, I meant glass. As in drop a few thermonuclear bombs on sandytown and turn it to a 70's style ashtray.

At least, that's the logic I have read by a certain someone.

Meanwhile, back at the Tigers Ranch...this crap is killin' me...

 

[Thumb]

To turn sand into sand, 1st you have to turn it into glass, then you can pound it back into sand.

 

[zyxt9]

My apologies, I meant glass. As in drop a few thermonuclear bombs on sandytown and turn it to a 70's style ashtray.

At least, that's the logic I have read by a certain someone.

Blue and I have already gone round and round with this and I spelled it out in more detail earlier in the thread. Specifically in that post is where I said the use of nukes is option X and simply turning the region over to ISIS is X+1. Now if you are incapable of that level of math, I will gladly explain it in more detail; however, despite your efforts to show otherwise, I think you actually are intelligent enough to understand it. Why not read what I posted and actually grasp what I was saying about that specific topic.

 

[Thumb]

Why not read what I posted and actually grasp what I was saying about that specific topic.

I noticed you completely passed by my last response to your bullshit, so now you are trying an end-around?

 

[zyxt9]

Find one goddamned instance of me defending/supporting ISIS that's not just a theory you made up in your crazy ass mind because I didn't jump on your "yee-haaw, let's bomb some motherfuckers" bandwagon shit.

I'm dodging nothing tool, read the thread. I have stated many times ISIS is a problem for the countries in the region to sort out, those countries being Syria, Egypt, Iraq, Iran, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, and the like. Unless you are as dense as a neutron star you should be able to understand our presence in that region creates far more problems than it solves. ISIS is the biggest example.

Right. Because they were doing such a great job of controlling ISIS without US support when it was small and insignificant.

Our presence kept educational facilities available to women. Our presence continued to provide food, medical assistance, technical advances, jobs, protection, and a higher standard of living. Our presence was able to provide a "face" of the supposed "infidel", many of our troops fighting to keep the women, children, business owners, elderly, and others alive.

Too many people act as though the only thing the troops were doing there was direct conflict, when there were more who were providing a higher quality of life and trying to help the region understand that there is more to life than what the terrorists offer. Unfortunately these were the stories swept under the rug by the media because those were the "good" news that doesn't drive ratings due to Liberals not wishing to provide an ounce of possibility that Iraq could be developed into a nation with much to offer the Muslims in and around it.

In order for the Middle East to move forward and stop fighting wars, we need to create a foundation they can build upon and help support them through the multiple challenges that exist. The greatest of those challenges remains the Muslim Extremist groups, whether ISIS or others, who are doing everything possible to intimidate and keep their society repeating the same wars.

So no, I completely disagree with allowing the dysfunctional neighbors of the region be the sole entities battling ISIS. I completely disagree that the region will magically find its way and it will never again be a problem that the US has to face. I do believe that providing a zone of safety where people are able to work toward a better life, a better education, and allowing Moderate Muslims be the leaders in changing their society is the only chance for peace.

 

[zyxt9]

I noticed you completely passed by my last response to your bullshit, so now you are trying an end-around?

No, not at all. I was composing a separate post in response to yours.

Keep trying to paint me as something else though. You can try all you want to make me into the bad guy, I will keep fighting you with logic and intelligence, pointing out that YOU have not admitted that YOUR perception of what I stated about using nukes was not accurate...or did you once again fail to grasp what was written in the aforementioned post about X and X+1?

 

[zyxt9]

So Thumb, you advocate pulling out of the Middle East entirely and try to explain that in so doing the Middle East will attain peace on its own. That's your Master Plan, your grandiose idea on how to protect those who are being slaughtered. Basically let "Survival of the Fittest" rule the region, and who cares about how many innocent people die in the process. The educated women, the minority religious groups, the homosexuals, countless children and elderly...you can just turn your back and run knowing that their death is the only thing remaining that you are willing to leave them with hope to achieve.

Just because Bush and Obama have screwed up, we should cut and run instead of working toward a better solution that actually effectively makes a difference, but can only happen by having US military support available as necessary to step up and assist when extremists otherwise would break the lines and run rampant.

 

[Thumb]

Right. Because they were doing such a great job of controlling ISIS without US support when it was small and insignificant.

Our presence kept educational facilities available to women. Our presence continued to provide food, medical assistance, technical advances, jobs, protection, and a higher standard of living. Our presence was able to provide a "face" of the supposed "infidel", many of our troops fighting to keep the women, children, business owners, elderly, and others alive.

Too many people act as though the only thing the troops were doing there was direct conflict, when there were more who were providing a higher quality of life and trying to help the region understand that there is more to life than what the terrorists offer. Unfortunately these were the stories swept under the rug by the media because those were the "good" news that doesn't drive ratings due to Liberals not wishing to provide an ounce of possibility that Iraq could be developed into a nation with much to offer the Muslims in and around it.

In order for the Middle East to move forward and stop fighting wars, we need to create a foundation they can build upon and help support them through the multiple challenges that exist. The greatest of those challenges remains the Muslim Extremist groups, whether ISIS or others, who are doing everything possible to intimidate and keep their society repeating the same wars.

So no, I completely disagree with allowing the dysfunctional neighbors of the region be the sole entities battling ISIS. I completely disagree that the region will magically find its way and it will never again be a problem that the US has to face. I do believe that providing a zone of safety where people are able to work toward a better life, a better education, and allowing Moderate Muslims be the leaders in changing their society is the only chance for peace.

Again, please point out where I have supported/defended ISIS. You have accused me of that in multiple posts. You can explain your position untill you're blue in the face, I don't give a fuck. But you keep making FALSE statements about me (and others) and when called on it you dodge them and try to sidestep it.

Keep trying to paint me as something else though.

That's pretty rich coming form you.

 

[Thumb]

So Thumb, you advocate pulling out of the Middle East entirely and try to explain that in so doing the Middle East will attain peace on its own. That's your Master Plan, your grandiose idea on how to protect those who are being slaughtered. Basically let "Survival of the Fittest" rule the region, and who cares about how many innocent people die in the process. The educated women, the minority religious groups, the homosexuals, countless children and elderly...you can just turn your back and run knowing that their death is the only thing remaining that you are willing to leave them with hope to achieve.

Just because Bush and Obama have screwed up, we should cut and run instead of working toward a better solution that actually effectively makes a difference, but can only happen by having US military support available as necessary to step up and assist when extremists otherwise would break the lines and run rampant.

More Strawman.

Never said it would attain peace on it's own. I doubt true peace will ever be possible there.

 

[zyxt9]

Again, please point out where I have supported/defended ISIS. You have accused me of that in multiple posts. You can explain your position untill you're blue in the face, I don't give a fuck. But you keep making FALSE statements about me (and others) and when called on it you dodge them and try to sidestep it.





That's pretty rich coming form you.

I'm not sidestepping anything, but keep trying to once again make me the bad guy.

YOU keep saying we should not send troops to the Middle East. THAT is defending ISIS. Plain and simple, you are advocating that they continue doing what they do because you don't think the US should get involved.

You also never criticize them for their actions, you just blow it off and ignore and hope it will go away, which it NEVER will. You blame Israel and the US for their behavior. THAT IS HOW YOU DEFEND ISIS, BY PLACING THE BLAME FOR THEIR BEHAVIOR ON OTHERS!!!! Do I really have to go through the entirety of all your countless posts to demonstrate how many times you have blamed the US and Israel? Or are you now going to deny that you blame the US and Israel for ISIS existing, that the US and Israel are the REAL problem and the solution is for the US and Israel to no longer exist in the Middle East, that by pulling out and let the Muslims sort it out themselves that all will be fine in your little world.

I'm not side stepping a damn thing. You support ISIS and other extremist Muslims every time you place the blame for their behavior on the US and Israel, because according to you and your ilk, they are the ones actually committing the atrocities and should be banished.

Funniest part is, you don't even understand how the things you say are defending ISIS, because you are incapable of grasping what will happen next if the US and Israel actually did remove all of their people from the areas. And no, as I have said countless times, I do not hold them blameless, but I certainly do not push the agenda that you do simply because they have faults, make mistakes, and have bad people too. Just like I do not blame the Moderate Muslims for the actions of Extremist Muslim terrorists. Heck, I don't really have an issue with some extremist Muslims provided they are not killing, torturing, denying basic human rights, teaching others to kill, torture, etc. and other actions that make them cross into the realm of criminal behavior at best...but the extremist Muslims not doing those things are very few and far between unfortunately while the majority are exactly those types of people. Of course, according to you, they only behave that way because of what the US and Israel have done to them.

 

[zyxt9]

More Strawman.

Never said it would attain peace on it's own. I doubt true peace will ever be possible there.

How is what you bolded strawman when YOU said it? YOU said we need to stay out of the Middle East, remove all the troops, it's another Vietnam, blah, blah, blah. That isn't strawman, that is YOUR exact viewpoint that YOU have posted numerous times.

 

[zyxt9]

Furthermore, your belief that peace will never come to the Middle East means what exactly? You threw it out there, define it...own it...expand upon it. What should we do? Should we leave it completely? Should we just sit back and watch what happens without supporting the people then? Come on Thumb, answer it yourself. I don't want to put words in your mouth, work through that scenario, what will happen in your opinion?

 

[zyxt9]

My consider the source comment was right on target, or do we need to revisit the whole Molotov cocktail thing again?

Also you say we should fight them. Okay, how? Because we can't do shit to Al Qaeda because they are not a country, they don't wear uniforms, they don't have a capitol or ambassadors, they attack us and plant IED's in plain sight because we don't know they are bag guys until it's too late. So while it's easy for you and jdilco to say yeah, let's go kick their [ISIS/ISIL] asses, you have not put an ounce of reasonable thought into it.

How many dead, wounded, and PTSD'd Soldiers, Airmen, Sailors and Marines came out of the last knee-jerk reaction? You cannot fight a conventional war against these people, and even if we could...it's not our fucking business. We are not the worlds policemen, and it's not our place to go and deal with what is not a direct threat to us. We have enough problems as it is. Besides, Iraq has an army, Jordan has an army, Egypt has an army, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Israel.....let the people in the region deal with the problems in the region.

How many fucking Vietnams do we have to have before idiots will learn that just throwing military force at something is no solution at all?

Not our business, let the people of the region deal with it. Your words Thumb, your words that if followed will lead to ISIS becoming more powerful because we have already witnessed the inability of the people in those regions to deal with ISIS.

 

[byco42]

Eventually we will get up-close and personal with ISIS, whether we like it or not. It's inevitable. In fact, there are reports of it happening already. So do not be surprised that a year from now U.S. troops are back in Iraq, if not sooner than that. Our politicians are telling us that it won't happen ... a sure sign that it will happen.

 

[zyxt9]

However, I will say it appears I have gotten crossed up between your views and michchamp, my apologies. Looking back at the other thread about Israel, you actually are not advocating Israel leave, just that they should remove the illegal settlers from the regions they are not recognized to be in by all international entities.

On that front I will COMPLETELY agree. As I said, I do not hold Israel blameless. There is a ton that they can do to help reduce tensions, that is for certain. You posted they should share Jerusalem, pretty sure my prior posts support the same thing. I don't disagree with you on these points Thumb, just so you know.

 

[zyxt9]

Eventually we will get up-close and personal with ISIS, whether we like it or not. It's inevitable. In fact, there are reports of it happening already. So do not be surprised that a year from now U.S. troops are back in Iraq, if not sooner than that. Our politicians are telling us that it won't happen ... a sure sign that it will happen.

LOL...yeah, unfortunately they will likely go overboard and do a full scale operation again. I'm actually more in favor of providing operational support. The "good guys" have to learn how to defeat ISIS and stop relying on the US so much. Unfortunately, the way they surrender or turn and run, it appears our troops will likely face the enemy head on more than what anyone would consider desirable. The airstrikes from drones and other aircraft are only capable of doing so much, the ground troops they are supporting have to step up or we will be forced to send our ground troops back in...which is not ideal to anyone...yes, Thumb, even me. I do not prefer our troops being on the front line, I just prefer they are available and ready to assist when necessary as opposed to just letting ISIS take control of whatever target they are after due to the ineffectiveness of the Iraqi military.

 

[Michchamp]

it's funny watching Republicans (or "centrist" DC Democrats) suddenly care about gay rights, women's rights, minority rights, the safety and access of reporters/media, etc. when they're trying to justify bombing someone in the Middle East.

if Foley had been covering race riots in Ferguson, MO and gotten the crap beat out of him by the Ferguson PD, Republicans would cheer for more.