• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Renditions continue under Obama, despite due-process concerns

Let's accept that (although it's not really borne out by intelligence): they go from almost barely nothing to barely nothing? Worth intelligence and military outfits noticing, not worth much more.

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/10/11/al-qaedas-resurgence/

Whatever they may be called - Al Qaeda, Taliban, or the Muslim Brotherhood, among many other names, it's all about spreading Islam around the world, and there is no doubt the Islamists are winning.

They are in the process of talking over Mali (where the French have just attacked) as well as other parts of Africa. They have a lock on the Middle East (and this President will not support Israel) and of course they continue their attacks in Asia. Europe will become more Islamic as well.

We know that the US, with the most expensive military in world history, just got beat by goat herders fighting with fertilizer and that Al Qaeda is now attacking in Iraq, which America has also abandoned and where more Americans ultimately died for nothing. In fact the Islamists even seem to be winning the propaganda wars.

The Islamists feel the future belongs to them and there is no clear evidence that they are wrong.
 
Al-Qaeda’s Resurgence « Commentary Magazine

Whatever they may be called - Al Qaeda, Taliban, or the Muslim Brotherhood, among many other names, it's all about spreading Islam around the world, and there is no doubt the Islamists are winning.

They are in the process of talking over Mali (where the French have just attacked) as well as other parts of Africa. They have a lock on the Middle East (and this President will not support Israel) and of course they continue their attacks in Asia. Europe will become more Islamic as well.

We know that the US, with the most expensive military in world history, just got beat by goat herders fighting with fertilizer and that Al Qaeda is now attacking in Iraq, which America has also abandoned and where more Americans ultimately died for nothing. In fact the Islamists even seem to be winning the propaganda wars.

The Islamists feel the future belongs to them and there is no clear evidence that they are wrong.

Be afraid. Be vewwy afraid! :shock:
 
Have we captured or killed anyone to date who fits into the GC definition of combatant?

Yes, during the war against the Taliban government in Afghanistan and the war against the Saddam government in Iraq.
 
Do I believe the islamists what? :confused:
 
Al-Qaeda’s Resurgence « Commentary Magazine

Whatever they may be called - Al Qaeda, Taliban, or the Muslim Brotherhood, among many other names, it's all about spreading Islam around the world, and there is no doubt the Islamists are winning.

They are in the process of talking over Mali (where the French have just attacked) as well as other parts of Africa. They have a lock on the Middle East (and this President will not support Israel) and of course they continue their attacks in Asia. Europe will become more Islamic as well.

We know that the US, with the most expensive military in world history, just got beat by goat herders fighting with fertilizer and that Al Qaeda is now attacking in Iraq, which America has also abandoned and where more Americans ultimately died for nothing. In fact the Islamists even seem to be winning the propaganda wars.

The Islamists feel the future belongs to them and there is no clear evidence that they are wrong.

The Islamists are wrong and so are you. The future belongs to freedom and nothing you can say will change that. There was nothing to win in Iraq anyway. America is not a country that conquers and enslaves other nations. You should know that.
 
The Islamists are wrong and so are you.

Islam is expanding but democracy seems to have slowed down a great deal.
The future belongs to freedom and nothing you can say will change that.

What evidence do you have of that? Do you think Western Europeans would be willing to fight and die for 'freedom'? I doubt it. But Muslims are certainly ready to fight and die for Islam.

There was nothing to win in Iraq anyway. America is not a country that conquers and enslaves other nations. You should know that.

Yes, I know that. And I also know that the US, the strongest military in world history with advantages overwhelmingly in its favor, hasn't won a war in 65 years, unless we include Grenada under Reagan. They've been defeated in Vietnam, Iraq and now Afghanistan.

The French are fighting the Muslims in Mali right now and we know they'll give up soon. The Muslims won't.
 
Be afraid. Be vewwy afraid! :shock:


You ask earlier questions that are answered in a post that you now mock? We may have entirely different views politically of what we should have done in the wake of 9/11 but facts are facts, and your tactic seems to be mock what you have no answer to in that respect....Why should anyone bother entertaining your own sophistry?
 
You ask earlier questions that are answered in a post that you now mock? We may have entirely different views politically of what we should have done in the wake of 9/11 but facts are facts, and your tactic seems to be mock what you have no answer to in that respect....Why should anyone bother entertaining your own sophistry?

Knowing several muslims over the years here in my home town, I do not consider it a fact that muslims are dangerous. You and others certainly are entitled to fear whatever you wish, but I'm not afraid of muslims.

Recognizing that the GWOT is a fraud, I understand that we have been manipulated and fooled.

It is WE who have invaded the muslim countries. So really, I understand why you think as you do, but I cannot embrace that fear posture that we are all supposed to embrace, according to the government and media. Sorry pal.
 
Knowing several muslims over the years here in my home town,.

Several Muslims? That's impressive.

I mean, out of the 1.3 billion and all, it sure does provide the basis for an informed view.
 
How many do you know Gardener?
 
How many do you know Gardener?

The word I might best use would be "several".


Which, of course, doesn't mean didn't squat since I am intelligent enough to understand the concept of statistical significance.
 
The word I might best use would be "several".


Which, of course, doesn't mean didn't squat since I am intelligent enough to understand the concept of statistical significance.

Bravo! That makes 2 of us, eh? :mrgreen:
 
Knowing several muslims over the years here in my home town, I do not consider it a fact that muslims are dangerous. You and others certainly are entitled to fear whatever you wish, but I'm not afraid of muslims.

First off thank you for responding rather than just being snarky. Now, you start off here with a fallacy. "You've known several muslims"? Really? Is that so? Well, you must be an expert on radical Islam then. For the record I don't think that "all muslims are dangerous" either, that is your second fallacy. Thirdly in this opening sentence, I am not "afraid of muslims" either. I am concerned that we don't recognize what we are up against, and who is at war with us.

Recognizing that the GWOT is a fraud, I understand that we have been manipulated and fooled.

The GWOT is a fraud, every bit as much as the "war on drugs", or the "war on poverty", or any "war on" anything that is not a tangible force that can be engaged in the practice of actual war. It is a catch phrase, a rallying cry, and a cover for spending.

It is WE who have invaded the muslim countries.

Just so I can be clear, please expand, in what way?

So really, I understand why you think as you do...

No, I don't think you do.

but I cannot embrace that fear posture that we are all supposed to embrace, according to the government and media.

I already told you, I don't have a "fear posture", so you just want to continue the same emotional logical fallacy, it is up to you, but probably best not to pile on the fail.

Sorry pal.

"pal"? Do you know me? Do I know you? Hmmmm...I don't think so....Buddy.
 
First off thank you for responding rather than just being snarky. Now, you start off here with a fallacy. "You've known several muslims"? Really? Is that so? Well, you must be an expert on radical Islam then. For the record I don't think that "all muslims are dangerous" either, that is your second fallacy. Thirdly in this opening sentence, I am not "afraid of muslims" either. I am concerned that we don't recognize what we are up against, and who is at war with us.



The GWOT is a fraud, every bit as much as the "war on drugs", or the "war on poverty", or any "war on" anything that is not a tangible force that can be engaged in the practice of actual war. It is a catch phrase, a rallying cry, and a cover for spending.



Just so I can be clear, please expand, in what way?



No, I don't think you do.



I already told you, I don't have a "fear posture", so you just want to continue the same emotional logical fallacy, it is up to you, but probably best not to pile on the fail.



"pal"? Do you know me? Do I know you? Hmmmm...I don't think so....Buddy.

Figure of speech, buddy. Sorry for the unsolicited cyber intimacy.

We actually agree on a few issues, mostly the cause of the drug war--funding, but there is more to it than that.

It is a fallacy that I have known and do still know certain muslims? Wow, that is an interesting form of logic.

No, I never stated I was an expert on radical islam. Never once. Perhaps you invoked that bit of innuendo to bolster your chosen position here, but I don't know. I'm glad to find out you're not afraid of muslims either. Perhaps I have you confused with another poster, but several posts here and elsewhere about 'radical islam' suggest some sort of fear factor, but maybe I'm misreading that?

In what way have we invaded muslim countries? It's hard not to be snarky or sarcastic in replying to such a question, but the straight answer is that we invaded Afghanistan and Iraq to save them from themselves, did so under fraud, and did so in violation of international laws forbidding military aggression.

Curveball, mobile chemical labs, and all those cute pictures Colin put up at the UN. It seemed to me at the time that he was grandstanding and exaggerating, and history has now shown that he was flat-out lying. Ahh, the idealism of a young man dashed to the ground by reality. :3oops:
 
Knowing several muslims over the years here in my home town, I do not consider it a fact that muslims are dangerous. You and others certainly are entitled to fear whatever you wish, but I'm not afraid of muslims.

Prior to WWII there were plenty of Germans of a very peaceful nature who had settled in North America. Many of their neighbors said that Germans were a nice people, we can trust them, some of my best friends are Germans, etc.

But of course the Germans they knew were quite different than the Nazis in Germany.

You seem to be of the school where either all Muslims are terrorists or no Muslims are terrorists. The fact is that some Muslims are Islamist terrorists and those who are, and they are a significant number it seems, must be stopped. Nobody is out to get your two or three Muslims friends specifically.
 
Prior to WWII there were plenty of Germans of a very peaceful nature who had settled in North America. Many of their neighbors said that Germans were a nice people, we can trust them, some of my best friends are Germans, etc.

But of course the Germans they knew were quite different than the Nazis in Germany.

You seem to be of the school where either all Muslims are terrorists or no Muslims are terrorists. The fact is that some Muslims are Islamist terrorists and those who are, and they are a significant number it seems, must be stopped. Nobody is out to get your two or three Muslims friends specifically.

An older relative of mine who has since passed told me that a German POW got left behind from a work gang when he was a kid and his family happened upon him. The guy apparently had gone up in the woods and taken a nap. They contacted the camp that didn't have anybody extra to come get him, so they fed him and drove him back to the camp. The guy didn't speak english, but seemed very nice and appreciated the meal and the ride. Another relative who fought in WWII said the Germans he encountered off the balltlefield were generally nice enough.

As for Islam, the estimates are that 15% of Muslims globally tend to the radical side, but not all those are anti-US. Unfortunately 15% of all Muslims is about equal to the entire US population. It is a war we would have long since lost if they were all out to kill us.
 
So... you conservative lot are now against renditions but under Bush you were for them?

And for the record... I passionately believe it is a crime what the US is doing and have been doing. Obama and his administration should be ashamed .. but then again they are just using the tools that the Bush administration put in place.

And for the record, I passionately believe that it is a crime what Muslims with power are doing, and have been doing. Not allowing female children and adults their rights, murdering Gays, ignoring basic human rights for everyone, and the list goes on.

The Left, as in the case of Communism, will always side with America's enemies and ignore the human rights violations they commit on a daily basis. Only the United States is held to impossibly high standards while America's enemies are not expected to have any standards whatsoever. This is okay with them, and why the US can never really win. The world drifts in one direction only.
 
An older relative of mine who has since passed told me that a German POW got left behind from a work gang when he was a kid and his family happened upon him. The guy apparently had gone up in the woods and taken a nap. They contacted the camp that didn't have anybody extra to come get him, so they fed him and drove him back to the camp. The guy didn't speak english, but seemed very nice and appreciated the meal and the ride. Another relative who fought in WWII said the Germans he encountered off the balltlefield were generally nice enough.

As for Islam, the estimates are that 15% of Muslims globally tend to the radical side, but not all those are anti-US. Unfortunately 15% of all Muslims is about equal to the entire US population. It is a war we would have long since lost if they were all out to kill us.

So your argument is that there were some nice Nazis?

What does that mean? We should have left them alone?
 
Prior to WWII there were plenty of Germans of a very peaceful nature who had settled in North America. Many of their neighbors said that Germans were a nice people, we can trust them, some of my best friends are Germans, etc.

But of course the Germans they knew were quite different than the Nazis in Germany.

You seem to be of the school where either all Muslims are terrorists or no Muslims are terrorists. The fact is that some Muslims are Islamist terrorists and those who are, and they are a significant number it seems, must be stopped. Nobody is out to get your two or three Muslims friends specifically.

I understand what you're saying. No, I'm 65 and have been aware for years that true bad guys exist.

Whether christian, muslim, jewish or otherwise, I understand that most are fine, but it is a certainty that certain elements of all religions practice violence, hatred and intolerance.

No, every individual must be judged separate from the crowd.
 
In addition to innocent detainees who have been tortured to death, in CIA custody, or in military custody, and an unknown number of additional prisoners who are held by the United States in various undisclosed locations around the world, the US currently house 131 detainees in their Guantanamo Bay gulag who are not party to any criminal charges or investigations whatsoever, (innocent), a facility in which the United States have since admitted they used torture.

The "battlefield" does not constitute the whole world. In fact, a "battlefield" as its name implies, is where armed combat occurs. Combatants are those engaged in armed warfare. Abducted persons from non-belligerent countries do not classify, in any definition, as a "combatant" or a POW. Nevertheless, contrary to assertions made by the executive branch, the Supreme Court have ruled that their prisoners in Guantanamo Bay shall at least be afforded protections under the Geneva Conventions Common Article III, while they have not however broached the topic of the other prisoners in other locations.

Additionally, the "War on Terror", while making a great buzzword and catchphrase, is not legally classified as an "armed conflict" per any of the Hague or Geneva Convention treaties, nor is it a war legally declared by the US congress pursuant to Article I of the US constitution.

The continued policy for these unlawful detentions undermine US credibility, especially in their aim to preach human rights to other nations, breed continued resentment towards the United States which can lead to further recruitment in terrorist organizations, and of course, most importantly, constitute an egregious moral outrage, in my opinion.

Most importantly, these unjustified incarcerations violate the fifth amendment of the US bill of rights, which states that "No person...shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law..."
 
So your argument is that there were some nice Nazis?

What does that mean? We should have left them alone?

I was not offering argument just sharing. If I were to make an argument I suppose it would be that some of them were just doing their job or defending their nation in the same way our soldiers do ours. Not every southern soldier in the civil war was likewise fighting for slavery. History likes to skip right over nuance to make whatever political point the writers want to make. Some people are too quick to let them do it as you have reminded me.
 
I understand what you're saying. No, I'm 65 and have been aware for years that true bad guys exist.

Whether christian, muslim, jewish or otherwise, I understand that most are fine, but it is a certainty that certain elements of all religions practice violence, hatred and intolerance.

No, every individual must be judged separate from the crowd.

Well there was a crowd of Nazis who were invading their neighbors, murdering Jews and fighting the Allies and we didn't judge them separately. The same holds true for the Fascists. Sometimes otherwise nice people can be quite pleasant racists, sexists or communists but will also more likely be judged on their strong ideologies.

No other religion in the world today is practicing violence, hatred and intolerance as much as Muslims. You must know that is true.
 
Well there was a crowd of Nazis who were invading their neighbors, murdering Jews and fighting the Allies and we didn't judge them separately. The same holds true for the Fascists. Sometimes otherwise nice people can be quite pleasant racists, sexists or communists but will also more likely be judged on their strong ideologies.

No other religion in the world today is practicing violence, hatred and intolerance as much as Muslims. You must know that is true.

Some sects of the Catholics, which I was raised, practice self-flaggelation. Most christians today in the US condone torture. How much violence do you want? No, the Inquisition is over, I know, but the history of war in the name of religion is as old as religion.
 
Some sects of the Catholics, which I was raised, practice self-flaggelation. Most christians today in the US condone torture. How much violence do you want? No, the Inquisition is over, I know, but the history of war in the name of religion is as old as religion.


Do Christians in this country demand that you either convert to Christianity, pay a tax, or be killed?
 
Back
Top Bottom