• 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!

Gov. Scott Walker: Don't Rule Out 'Boots on the Ground' Against ISIS

imagep said:
Maybe, but maybe not.

Sometimes you can avoid conflict simply by flying under the radar. It's entirely possible that the US is just too large and economically and culturally powerful to not be noticed, and hated, by people all over the world though.

My best guess is that if we had never got involved with mid-east politics to begin with, 911 would have never occurred.

So far, other than a couple retaliatory beheadings, and some spouting off at the mouth, ISIS has done nothing to the US, and has shown no serious motivation or intent to attack the US with terroristic acts.

As far as your point goes, I fully support our current level of support in the fight against ISIS. We have little need to make this into an all out war, the longer we keep ISIS tied up in Iraq and Syria, the less likely they are to be able to put any real effort into attacking us at home. Our only need is to contain them, and it's unrealistic to think that we could ever kill every radical Islamist who would wish to do us harm.

It's not like there are only X individuals who would do us harm, and we kill X, and it's over with. There are X today, minus whatever we kill, plus whatever new radical are recruited by ISIS or are created indirectly by the US in response to our involvement in the middle east. As long as we are involved with the middle east, we will always have enemies there.
Click to expand...

They come for us because of who we are, not because of what we do. They plot and plan every day to do us harm.
 
Caine said:
Are you just falling in with the rhetoric..... or can you actually explain how this is true?
Click to expand...

They hate us for who we are, not because of what we do. Their rage has its roots in the failure of their own society.
 
Jack Hays said:
They come for us because of who we are, not because of what we do. They plot and plan every day to do us harm.
Click to expand...

Thank God that they are planners and not doers.

We would have major problems if they actually "came at us" ever day.
 
imagep said:
Yea, and it's that response that ends up with the death of Americans. Maybe no response at all is preferable in this case.
Click to expand...

No response cost us 400,000 American lives during WW2. Are you ready to lose 400,000 Americans, or are you betting it can't happen?
 
Jack Hays said:
The fact that they do not succeed does not mean they do not try.
Click to expand...

that's true.

So thank God that they aren't very good at what they plot and plan.

Maybe Allah isn't on their side. You would think eventually they would figure that out.
 
imagep said:
that's true.

So thank God that they aren't very good at what they plot and plan.

Maybe Allah isn't on their side. You would think eventually they would figure that out.
Click to expand...

Perhaps their own capabilities are less of a factor than those of their opponents.
 
imagep said:
that's true.

So thank God that they aren't very good at what they plot and plan.

Maybe Allah isn't on their side. You would think eventually they would figure that out.
Click to expand...

After 1,400 years? No, they haven't figured it out yet.
 
imagep said:
Thank God that they are planners and not doers.
Click to expand...

....what?

1. Those who plan well do well. Those who fail to plan, conversely, are planning to fail.
2. These guys are definitely doers.

We would have major problems if they actually "came at us" ever day.
Click to expand...

No. We will have a problem if more self important, self-aggrandizing a-holes were to continue to publish the ways in which we track them so that we can disrupt those plans before they become operational.
 
Jack Hays said:
That was not the sense of their claim.
Click to expand...

That was my sense. You can feel any way you want. The truth is we left Iraq more broken than when we arrived and far more dangerous to us. Obama had nothing he could do about it but stop the bleeding. Maliki was pure poison, propping him up would have been criminal.

What We Left Behind - The New Yorker
 
iguanaman said:
That was my sense. You can feel any way you want. The truth is we left Iraq more broken than when we arrived and more dangerous to us. Obama had nothing he could do about it but stop the bleeding.

What We Left Behind - The New Yorker
Click to expand...

By 2009 Iraq was a functional state with reasonable security and good economic prospects. Had BHO followed through on the US defense commitment all planners expected it would still be that way.
 
apdst said:
No response cost us 400,000 American lives during WW2. Are you ready to lose 400,000 Americans, or are you betting it can't happen?
Click to expand...

We are responding to ISIS and in a way that is not self-defeating. Sending 200,000 troops into Iraq is what brought all of this on. Doing it again would be madness but maybe if another Bush gets elected it is possible. That family has a weakness for the ME. Hopefully the American people will see the connection.
 
Last edited:
iguanaman said:
We are responding to ISIS and in a way that is not self-defeating. Sending 200,000 troops into Iraq is what brought all of this on. Doing it again would be madness but maybe if another Bush gets elected it is possible. That family has a weakness for the ME. Hopefully the American people will see the connection.
Click to expand...

Iraq was a victory that BHO threw away.
 
Jack Hays said:
By 2009 Iraq was a functional state with reasonable security and good economic prospects. Had BHO followed through on the US defense commitment all planners expected it would still be that way.
Click to expand...

Iraq was led by a homicidal maniac with ties to IRAN that sent hit squads into Sunni Villages. There was no functionality to Iraq since Saddam was ousted. Maliki kicked us out so he could continue his genocide while handing the country to the Iranians. That is what 4000 Americans died for. You might as well come to grips with that.
 
iguanaman said:
Iraq was led by a homicidal maniac with ties to IRAN that sent hit squads into Sunni Villages. There was no functionality to Iraq since Saddam was ousted. Maliki kicked us out so he could continue his genocide while handing the country to the Iranians. That is what 4000 Americans died for. You might as well come to grips with that.
Click to expand...

I prefer to come to grips with reality.
 
iguanaman said:
We are responding to ISIS and in a way that is not self-defeating. Sending 200,000 troops into Iraq is what brought all of this on. Doing it again would be madness but maybe if another Bush gets elected it is possible. That family has a weakness for the ME. Hopefully the American people will see the connection.
Click to expand...

Oh, yeah! Obama is really kickin' butt! :lamo
 
Jack Hays said:
The post was a propaganda fiction.
Click to expand...

You meant to say verified truth and you know that.

As for accusing propaganda fiction of another poster, you must have a guilty conscience .
 
Misterveritis said:
Right. I suppose with all of the benefit of hindsight everything is obvious. Cool for you. Reagan did the right thing. You want an administration to look 40 years into the future. Obama was unwilling or unable to look two years into the future.
Click to expand...

There was no need to look 40 years into the future. Islamic terrorism was already a fact in the 1980s. Hell, the attack on the Beirut barracks - the deadliest attack on Americans at the time - happened in 1983. What Reagan didn't foresee was that these attacks would continue and maybe funding these people wasn't a good idea. Now we can reap his harvest. :(
 
Jack Hays said:
They hate us for who we are, not because of what we do. Their rage has its roots in the failure of their own society.
Click to expand...

That my friend..... is just the rhetoric.
 
Jack Hays said:
The fact that they do not succeed does not mean they do not try.
Click to expand...

Yes..

Let us continue to wage international decades long wars spanning my children's lifetime because a group of dudes with swords "be dissin' us"

g1376261279864433200.jpg
 
Caine said:
You seem to think so. I don't give a **** what Obama thinks... Im not in a forum with him. I am with you. And I want to know why you agree with him.

We all know Iraq will never be an ally of the United States. That part of the world is too volatile for anything to last long at all..
Click to expand...

What Obama thinks matters-so you should care.

I think we should commit to expelling ISIS, that includes ground troops. Obama would rather symbolically strike them.
 
Caine said:
And what hard way was that?

You mean before we were known around the world to have a 1st class military and someone decided to attack us?

The world is a different scene now..... You can't use Pearl Harbor as an example anymore.
Click to expand...

We absolutely can use Pearl Harbor now, as we can 9/11.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom