• 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!

ISIS massacres 90 Yazidis in Northern Iraq

annata said:
uh.. i'm not sure of yur reference,
not disagree,just not sure
Click to expand...

What's there not to understand? He believes Obama intentionally supplied terrorists (and altered law so he could extensively) so that the US MIC would have someone to fight. He honestly believes that's what the US does - on purpose.
 
Montecresto said:
The US most certainly DID supply terrorist groups with weapons. And in an attempt to stave off culpability, the arms were the ones pilfered from Gaddafi's military smuggled from the Benghazi annex to Turkey and then into Syria. Of course the State depart continued to ensure everyone that they were only going to good rebel fighters, lol.
Click to expand...
Rand Paul tried to dig into this -he hit the CIA "black ops" stonewall,so whatever happened isn't known.

I do remember a Turkish ship seized off the Coast of Lebanon full of Libyan MANPADS,and such (?)..Something like that.

But it's fairly evident the CIA annex that was supposed to be securing Libyan weapons caches, was transshipping them to Syria -yes
 
Kobie said:
What?
Click to expand...

He's claiming the US was intentionally supplying terrorists through Benghazi, thereby the attack on the operation is just.
 
ecofarm said:
You claim there are no human rights in the US and the West, while Albania is a pile of **** - so spare us.
Click to expand...

Jesus, I though we were clear about that "human right" case.
What I've said was that Human Right is not about only the freedom of speech ect etc. W/E

And what has to do Albania here. Unlike you, I know my country pretty much well because I recognize both of it's sides, the good one and the bad one.
 
Coin said:
Jesus, I though we were clear about that "human right" case.
What I've said was that Human Right is not about only the freedom of speech ect etc. W/E
Click to expand...

We heard that BS already. Everyone knows human rights are not only free speech. Who do you think you're talking to, monkeys?

And what has to do Albania here. Unlike you, I know my country pretty much well because I recognize both of it's sides, the good one and the bad one.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you know everything about the US and I don't know Albania is a pile ****.
 
Coin said:
Jesus, I though we were clear about that "human right" case.
What I've said was that Human Right is not about only the freedom of speech ect etc. W/E

And what has to do Albania here. Unlike you, I know my country pretty much well because I recognize both of it's sides, the good one and the bad one.
Click to expand...

You'll find very few Americans reticent to do that, however, they're here.
 
ecofarm said:
We heard that BS already. Everyone knows human rights are not only free speech. Who do you think you're talking to, monkeys?



Yeah, you know everything about the US and I don't know Albania is a pile ****.
Click to expand...
C'mon Eco. I would never expect from you to decrease the level of the debate in such a way.
It is typical to many people here. Every time you run out of will, nerves, words, mind (call it w/e you want), you tend to turn it in personal attack (smth like that), with statements like "Albania is this or that". Statements which have nothing to do with the debate here.
If you are curious about my country, go ahead and make a topic in the relevant place and we can discuss about it all night long.

Of course we are in democracy and you can use Albania against me the way you want to, but let me suggest that it doesn't hurt my feelings. I know to criticize my country harder than you when it is necessary.

It just make you look really bad, believe me.
 
Montecresto said:
Sorry, nice try, but I have ridiculed the Obama policy in Syria that has facilitated IS, so stop lying.
Click to expand...

Nice attempt to avert the reality of the situation but it didn't work. This issue is in Iraq, not Syria.

Your aversion to the US intervening in Iraq to stop genocide from continuing and me pointing out you share those sentiments with the Obama administration doesn't make me a liar. I'm not sure what is says about you though.
 
Coin said:
C'mon Eco. I would never expect from you to decrease the level of the debate in such a way.
Click to expand...

I'm not the one that claimed there are no human rights in the US and the West. The bottom falling out of your bucket of "reason" is your fault.
 
ecofarm said:
I'm not the one that claimed there are no human rights in the US and the West. The bottom falling out of your bucket of reason is your fault.
Click to expand...
ye, ye, you should have become a journalist, you know. ;)
 
Coin said:
ye, ye, you should have become a journalist, you know. ;)
Click to expand...

I'm sure the Elders of Zion/Rothschild conspiracy would have appreciated my services, right?

But enough about me. Please, tell us about journalists. Why do you claim the above?
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1063648480 said:
Nice attempt to avert the reality of the situation but it didn't work. This issue is in Iraq, not Syria.

Your aversion to the US intervening in Iraq to stop genocide from continuing and me pointing out you share those sentiments with the Obama administration doesn't make me a liar. I'm not sure what is says about you though.
Click to expand...

There's something very wrong with your knowledge of IS, they came out of Syria, due to Obama's failed policy there! You're trying to make me out to be a supporter of Obama's ME policy which is a huge fail. I don't. IS is, in large part the result of failed US policy, or maybe its intended US policy, perhaps I should say, bad US policy.
 
Gardener said:
Albania -- cradle of democracy, bastion of freedom.
Click to expand...

Excuse me, this is my accusation of being useful to the Elders. No reason to mooch on my creds. What, worried I'll be promoted above you?
 
Montecresto said:
There's something very wrong with your knowledge of IS, they came out of Syria, due to Obama's failed policy there!
Click to expand...

What about Iran intentionally supplying terrorists? That doesn't matter?
 
I would have thought it was already clear well before World War II that this country can't afford to extend its lines of defense no farther than its borders. Thank God President Truman didn't take the attitude that what happened in Berlin or Greece or Korea was only the business of the people living in those places, and none of ours. Thank God President Kennedy didn't just shrug his shoulders and say it was Cuba's business to decide what kind of military equipment to have on its own soil.

It's clear these savages in Iraq, whatever the hell they're calling themselves this week, are the enemies of civilized people everywhere. If these evil thugs are tolerated, more like them, in other parts of the world, will take notice--and take heart. This country's policy should be to destroy Muslim jihadists as fast as possible, wherever they can be found, starting with this group.

There seem to be no more of them than a couple infantry divisions would contain, spread out over a vast area. A force that thin is vulnerable, because it can never be very strong at any given point. These people are not very well trained, and having a lot of new, advanced equipment doesn't mean they know how to use it effectively. Once they ventured outside populated areas in substantial numbers, they would be nothing but largely defenseless targets for aircraft.

I think some of those aircraft, from this country and any allies who will join us, should already be operating out of bases in secure Kurdish areas in support of the Peshmerga and whatever Iraqi troops are willing and able to fight. And they should not be so fastidious about killing people in cities. If there is no way to dislodge them without doing that, then, however gruesome, it has to be done. We should remember that despite the best efforts to spare the innocent, about 40,000 French civilians were killed by the Allies after Normandy in the process of liberating that country from the Germans.

Unless we are willing to accept some inevitable horrors now, we may well have to accept much worse ones later. And there is no way to separate the truly innocent from those who are helping the jihadists. As small a fraction of the population of a city like Mosul as these people are, they could not possibly be in control there unless a great many locals were sympathetic to them.

The world needs to see the U.S. show, even at this late date, that it is resolved to crush jihadism for good. When eight Nazi saboteurs were captured here in 1942 after landing by U-boats, President Roosevelt took the opportunity to show Hitler we were not the weak, decadent people he imagined. The rules for a military tribunal were drawn up in less than a week; the men, although they were represented by some of the best criminal lawyers in the U.S., were shortly convicted and sentenced to death for war crimes; the Supreme Court (against FDR's wishes) very quickly heard their habeas petition; and it denied every claim, including the claim that one of the men, as a U.S. citizen, had wrongly been denied his constitutional right to a jury trial. One day, less than two months after they had landed here, six of the saboteurs, one each hour, were electrocuted.

If this country, under the greatest liberal U.S. President ever, could deal with enemy war criminals in such a no-nonsense way in 1942, why should we insist on being a nation of hand-wringers and navel-gazers today? Has forty years of political correctness made us a nation of milksops? It's almost as if being weak-willed and dithering, even in the face of truly shocking wickedness, is dolled up and portrayed as evidence of how "evolved," "sensitive to other cultures," etc. a person is. But if a culture is about beheading people, burying them alive, clitoridectomy, honor killings, and exterminating Jews, I no more want to be sensitive to it than I do to a poisonous spider. No need to hem and haw and think the problem to death--just kill the damned thing.

One step we should take, which will have to wait for the laughingstock now occupying the White House to be replaced with someone who loves this country, is to at long last try, convict, and execute the unrepentant mastermind of 9/11, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. More than a decade after his capture, this yellow cur is still alive and well at Guantanamo, getting his three squares a day. The rules for the military tribunal should be kept simple and drawn up quickly this time, instead of dragging the process out for two years and letting it finally be crippled by petty legal maneuvers. The President can make those things happen very fast when he has the will, as FDR did.

The rules should abandon execution by lethal injection for war criminals--that is for U.S. servicemen convicted of capital crimes in courts-martial. Used against monstrous war criminals, who are outside even the protections of the Geneva Conventions, it is only a badge of effeteness. Instead, the rules should specify hanging, the time-honored means of executing war criminals, and the one used after WWII at both Nurmberg and the Far East Tribunals.

Far from doing them in private, the executions should purposely be broadcast live around the world, and the more of the world's Muslims watch, the better the object lesson. We are in a fight for Western Civilization, and any potential opponents could use a clear demonstration that we do not intend to lose. With the cameras rolling and hundreds of U.S. troops guarding the scene, march the jihadist mass murderers onto a gallows, give them the chance for a last word, hood them--and then let them take the drop.
 
Last edited:
matchlight said:
I would have thought it was already clear well before World War II that this country can't afford to extend its lines of defense no farther than its borders.
Click to expand...

Maybe someday, perhaps even before you die, you'll be right. But I wouldn't count on it.
 
ecofarm said:
Excuse me, this is my accusation of being useful to the Elders. No reason to mooch on my creds. What, worried I'll be promoted above you?
Click to expand...

You are still young and vital. I am old decrepit.

I need every advantage I can get.
 
Gardener said:
You are still young and vital. I am old decrepit.

I need every advantage I can get.
Click to expand...

Perhaps if you served the Rothschild family, and other Elders, as gloriously as I (I could be a journalist, ya know), then you wouldn't be a mid-level Illuminati schlepper.
 
matchlight said:
I would have thought it was already clear well before World War II that this country can't afford to extend its lines of defense no farther than its borders. Thank God President Truman didn't take the attitude that what happened in Berlin or Greece or Korea was only the business of the people living in those places, and none of ours. Thank God President Kennedy didn't just shrug his shoulders and say it was Cuba's business do decide what kind of military equipment to have on its own soil.

It's clear these savages in Iraq, whatever the hell they're calling themselves this week, are the enemies of civilized people everywhere. If these evil people are tolerated, more like them, in other parts of the world will take notice--and take heart. This country's policy should be to destroy Muslim jihadists as fast as possible, wherever they can be found, starting with this group.

There seem to be no more of them than a couple infantry divisions would contain, spread out over a vast area. A force that thin is vulnerable, because it can never be very strong at any given point. These people are not very well trained, and having a lot of new, advanced equipment doesn't mean they know how to use it effectively. Once they venture outside populated areas in substantial numbers, they are just largely defenseless targets for aircraft.

I think some of those aircraft, from this country and any allies who will join us, should already be operating out of bases in secure Kurdish areas in support of the Peshmerga and whatever Iraqi troops are willing and able to fight. And they should not be so fastidious about killing people in cities. If there is no way to dislodge them without doing that, then it has to be done. We should remember that despite the best efforts to spare the innocent, about 40,000 French civilians were killed by the Allies after Normandy in the process of liberating that country from the Germans.

Unless we are willing to accept some inevitable horrors now, we may well have to accept much worse ones later. And there is no way to separate the truly innocent from those who are helping the jihadists. As small a fraction of the population of a city like Mosul these people are, they could not possibly be in control there unless a great many locals were sympathetic to them.

The world needs to see the U.S. show, even at this late date, that it is resolved to crush jihadism for good. When eight Nazi saboteurs were captured here in 1942 after landing by U-boats, President Roosevelt took the opportunity to show Hitler we were not the weak, decadent people he imagined. The rules for a military tribunal were drawn up in less than a week; the men, although they were represented by some of the best criminal lawyers in the U.S., were shortly convicted and sentenced to death for war crimes; the Supreme Court (against FDR's wishes) very quickly heard their habeas petition; and it denied every claim, including the claim that one of the men, as a U.S. citizen, had wrongly been denied his constitutional right to a jury trial. One day less than two months after they had landed here, six of the saboteurs, one each hour, was electrocuted in New York.iI reali

If this country, under the greatest liberal U.S. President ever, could deal with enemy war in such a no-nonsense way in 1942, why
should we insist on being a nation of hand-wringers and navel-gazers today? It's almost as if being weak-willed and equivocal, even in the face of shocking wickedness, is polished up and mad into of how "evolved," "sensitive to other cultures," etc. a person is. But if a culture is about beheading people, burying them alive, clitoridectomy, honor killings, and exterminating Jews, I no more want to be sensitive to it than I do to a poisonous spider. No need to hem and haw and think the problem to death--just kill the damned thing.

One step we should take, which will have to wait for the zero now occupying the White House to be replaced with someone who loves this country, is to try, convict, and execute the unrepentant mastermind of 9/11, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. More than a decade after his capture, this yellow cur is still alive and well at Guantanamo, getting his three squares a day. The rules for the military tribunal should be kept simple and drawn up quickly this time, instead of dragging the process out for two years and letting it finally be crippled by petty legal maneuvers. The President can make those happen very fast when the will is there, as FDR did.

The rules should abandon execution by lethal injection for war criminals--that is for U.S. servicemen convicted of capital crimes in courts-martial. Used against monstrous war criminals, who are outside even the protections of the Geneva Conventions, it is only a badge of effeteness. Instead, the rules should specify hanging, the time-honored means of executing war criminals, and the one used after WWII at both Nurmberg and the Far East Tribunals.

Far from doing them in private, the executions should purposely be broadcast live around the world, and the more of the world's Muslims watch, the better the object lesson. We are in a fight for Western Civilization, and any potential opponents could use a clear demonstration that we do not intend to lose. With the cameras rolling and hundreds of U.S. troops guarding the scene, march the jihadist mass murderers onto a gallows, give them the chance for a last word, hood them--and then let them take the drop.
Click to expand...

Savages yes, but savages enjoying US support in one conflict zone, just to be fought in another.
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1063647982 said:
How many here have stated over and over its the US fault terrorists are in Iraq?

So continue to make it the US fault the terrorists are committing genocide? See the connection?
Click to expand...

I disagree with those folks. I think the US facilitated, but much of the cause was centuries in the making, we may have altered the timeline a bit.
 
Montecresto said:
Savages yes, but savages enjoying US support in one conflict zone, just to be fought in another.
Click to expand...

Yeah, yeah, the US supplies terrorists on purpose to support the MIC, we got it already.
 
tacomancer said:
I think the US facilitated, but much of the cause was centuries in the making, we may have altered the timeline a bit.
Click to expand...

And it's about time the subjects of dictators rose up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom