• 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!

US hostage Kassig 'killed by IS'

TheNextEra said:
Your opinion noted, but the reality is the GOP supports many of that federal spending.
Click to expand...

Establishment Republicans want massive government just as the Democrats do. I made no argument involving the establishment Republicans. I argued that we have plenty of money if we eliminate all the things the government currently does for which there is no Constitutional basis.
 
Misterveritis said:
Had Obama been a leader he could have negotiated a reasonable arrangement to secure peace in Iraq. But Obama has never been a leader. He is an agitator and propagandist.
Click to expand...

So the problem here, then, is that Obama simply couldn't convince Iraqi leadership to budge on a hard-line policy that Bush agreed to before Obama took office.
 
Kobie said:
So the problem here, then, is that Obama simply couldn't convince Iraqi leadership to budge on a hard-line policy that Bush agreed to before Obama took office.
Click to expand...
Poor Obama.... How could he be so unlucky to have to follow such masterminds like GWB.
 
US Conservative said:
You are picking and choosing here pal. My point (backed by my citation) is that OBAMA HAD ALTERNATE ROUTES HE COULD HAVE TAKEN BUT DID NOT.
Click to expand...

If any agreement was dependent on the Iraqis denying us extraterritoriality, then your statement is false. There were no other routes. Again, you're going against your own sources on this.
 
CRUE CAB said:
Should have left a residual force. Should not have lied about the rise if ISIS. Should call them ISIS, not ISL. Should have met them head on with a quick strike force. Those are just for a start.
Click to expand...




Since we don't have a time machine they're off the table.

We can only do what we can do now and in the future.
 
Misterveritis said:
Obama's chickens are coming home to roost.
Click to expand...

I think that's just a cheap shot at the Reverend Jeremiah "God damn America" Wright, the Obamas' preacher of twenty years. You are mocking his claim that America brought 9/11 on itself. I'll bet you don't believe rape victims asked for it by wearing sexy clothing, either! Next you'll be trying to say there's something wrong with being a leftist who despises America, resents Jews, and pals around with Black Muslims like Louis Farrakhan.

I'm sure you agree with me that it was wrong of the U.S. to have kept troops in Germany, South Korea, and Okinawa all these years, even though the host countries often objected to it pretty strongly. Our national security should never have been a higher priority for any U.S. President than complying with the wishes of every government of Germany, Japan and South Korea through the decades.

Reactionary warmongers like Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower, John Kennedy, and Ronald Reagan lacked the exquisite cultural sensitivity of the cosmopolitan Barack Obama. Thank God we have evolved from those bad old pro-America days. When a foreign politician objects to the having U.S. forces in his country, Mr. Obama just tells them he can't stand the U.S. or its military, either, and agrees to do exactly what the foreigner asks.
 
Kobie said:
1. I don't live in Utica, kid. I used to. I'm not sure why you continue to mention it ... you must see some relevance in it.
2-4. I see no denial of facts, which means you must accept them, yet still continue your blatant shilling.
Click to expand...

:think: I know where Kobie lives, he lives in a state of denial.
 
"Had Obama been a leader he could have negotiated a reasonable arrangement to secure peace in Iraq. But Obama has never been a leader. He is an agitator and propagandist."
Kobie said:
So the problem here, then, is that Obama simply couldn't convince Iraqi leadership to budge on a hard-line policy that Bush agreed to before Obama took office.
Click to expand...
If only the Iraqis had been American voters Obama and his regime could have lied to them and passed legislation in the middle of the night...

He failed to lead and Iraq hangs in the balance. In some places we view people based on what they accomplish. With Obama supporters no failure is too great to tarnish him. Why is that?
 
Misterveritis said:
"Had Obama been a leader he could have negotiated a reasonable arrangement to secure peace in Iraq. But Obama has never been a leader. He is an agitator and propagandist."

If only the Iraqis had been American voters Obama and his regime could have lied to them and passed legislation in the middle of the night...

He failed to lead and Iraq hangs in the balance. In some places we view people based on what they accomplish. With Obama supporters no failure is too great to tarnish him. Why is that?
Click to expand...

This country is now so infested with leftist drones that there could be a damn video of Obama agreeing to sell our nuclear secrets to our enemies, and about forty per cent of the population would find a way to explain it away. As long as that check keeps coming, there are millions of takers for whom Barry the Red can do no wrong.
 
CRUE CAB said:
You need the whole list or just the fop few?
Click to expand...

Go with the whole list, please. I just want to know what is more effective than killing Terrorists with air strikes and drones.
 
American said:
I said they are ineffective, is that not clear enough? Listen to the news, it's common knowledge.
Click to expand...

Right, I won't argue that the current policy of bombing their buildings and drone strikes are ineffective. I'm just asking the question as to why those are not serious?
 
CMPancake said:
Go with the whole list, please. I just want to know what is more effective than killing Terrorists with air strikes and drones.
Click to expand...

Combat troops enmasse. Pure and absolute power to completely demolish any and all remnants of the enemy.
 
Sad news, but I see this as the same situation as the guy in the Grizzly Man movie. When you start to think that animals are not really animals, they'll prove you wrong every time. ISIS has the added element of being truly evil, so this poor guy never had a chance.
 
CRUE CAB said:
Combat troops enmasse. Pure and absolute power to completely demolish any and all remnants of the enemy.
Click to expand...

So you're suggesting a war then, how do we go about that? Kick in any door on foreign soil and shoot anything that looks ISIS'iy?
 
CMPancake said:
So you're suggesting a war then, how do we go about that? Kick in any door on foreign soil and shoot anything that looks ISIS'iy?
Click to expand...

Well heck. Lets just drop flowers and greeting cards and see how that works. If we dont want to have to keep running back there then yes, war. Full out take no prisoners war.
 
CRUE CAB said:
Well heck. Lets just drop flowers and greeting cards and see how that works. If we dont want to have to keep running back there then yes, war. Full out take no prisoners war.
Click to expand...

Who would you declare war on then? The country, the group the country resides in, or what? Because the last time we tried a "full out" war we ended up with more Terrorists.
 
CMPancake said:
Who would you declare war on then? The country, the group the country resides in, or what? Because the last time we tried a "full out" war we ended up with more Terrorists.
Click to expand...

No, last time we halfassed it.
 
CRUE CAB said:
No, last time we halfassed it.
Click to expand...

So another war would be any different? Please tell me you're just yanking my chain here because the last thing our country can afford is another war.
 
CMPancake said:
Right, I won't argue that the current policy of bombing their buildings and drone strikes are ineffective. I'm just asking the question as to why those are not serious?
Click to expand...

What do you mean serious?
 
CMPancake said:
Go with the whole list, please. I just want to know what is more effective than killing Terrorists with air strikes and drones.
Click to expand...
Are you serious? If you refer to ISIS then ground troops supported by artillery and air power will do quite nicely.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom