• 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!

Jordan Unleashes Wrath on ISIS

Dittohead not! said:
Why is it....

Conservatives (self described) criticize US domestic policy, and claim that criticizing foreign policy is un American.

Liberals (self described) criticize US foreign policy, and claim that criticizing domestic policy is un American.

Interesting.
Click to expand...

Hey ditto, I understand your rhetorical question isn't directed at anybody in particular, so I hope you don't mind my responding to it. For my part, our foreign policy is paramount, and I spend a great deal of time fretting over it, I can't be everywhere, all the time. But surely you have seen my support of Edward Snowden (I know, who's that right?) and my criticisms of domestic spying, the militarisation of our police, and the continual attacks to our civil liberties. I do care about domestic policy, but I suppose my thorn in the side is our FP, and I ABSOLUTELY DO NOT consider criticism of domestic policy as anti-American, or any dissent for that matter as anti-American. That distinction is for the partisan at heart, and I am most definitely not a partisan, for what that's worth.
 
Did Jordan get Obama's permission first?
 
Montecresto said:
Running down??? Are you running down the American president?
Click to expand...

I run down B. Hussein Obama for the damned, America-hating, limp-wristed liar he is any time I please. If he doesn't like it, he can sue me for defamation.

Your attempt to stifle dissent with your false characterisation, will not prevail.
Click to expand...

That's nothing but a pompous way of admitting you can't refute my arguments.

Otherwise, I don't know why you're speaking in the third party at times
Click to expand...

I don't know why you are claiming I did. I don't recall every speaking here as anything but myself, except when I was quoting someone else. Next you'll be accusing me of using the royal "we."

and at other times talking about other posters presumably which you consider to be "collectivist dim bulbs"
Click to expand...

You presume too much. You have no idea who I may be referring to by that phrase, unless I direct it at a specific person, and I would never do that. I'm content to leave it to other posters to decide where the description applies.

while attempting to enlighten me on the boards rules of civility, lol.
Click to expand...

I am not interested in enlightening you about anything. I said only that those rules should be respected.

That smoke screen cannot disguise the very real problems with US foreign policy that you choose to justify, I'm sorry.
Click to expand...

You don't need to apologize to me for your arguments. But if you think you owe anyone else here an apology for them, feel free to direct it their way.
 
matchlight said:
I run down B. Hussein Obama for the damned, America-hating, limp-wristed liar he is any time I please. If he doesn't like it, he can sue me for defamation.



That's nothing but a pompous way of admitting you can't refute my arguments.



I don't know why you are claiming I did. I don't recall every speaking here as anything but myself, except when I was quoting someone else. Next you'll be accusing me of using the royal "we."



You presume too much. You have no idea who I may be referring to by that phrase, unless I direct it at a specific person, and I would never do that. I'm content to leave it to other posters to decide where the description applies.



I am not interested in enlightening you about anything. I said only that those rules should be respected.



You don't need to apologize to me for your arguments. But if you think you owe anyone else here an apology for them, feel free to direct it their way.
Click to expand...

Ok, I read no further than the first line. If you truly believe that Obama HATES America, then you're blinded by hate yourself, and I haven't any further use for you, bye match.
 
Montecresto said:
Hey ditto, I understand your rhetorical question isn't directed at anybody in particular, so I hope you don't mind my responding to it. For my part, our foreign policy is paramount, and I spend a great deal of time fretting over it, I can't be everywhere, all the time. But surely you have seen my support of Edward Snowden (I know, who's that right?) and my criticisms of domestic spying, the militarisation of our police, and the continual attacks to our civil liberties. I do care about domestic policy, but I suppose my thorn in the side is our FP, and I ABSOLUTELY DO NOT consider criticism of domestic policy as anti-American, or any dissent for that matter as anti-American. That distinction is for the partisan at heart, and I am most definitely not a partisan, for what that's worth.
Click to expand...

I was hoping someone would respond.
Yes, I know who Edward Snowden is, and why he is out of the country. I think we're on the same page when it comes to the issues you mention.
Personally, I don't consider criticism of foreign or domestic policy as un American. It seems to me that it is un American to fail to exercise our first amendment rights, but then, that's just my opinion.
 
US Conservative said:
I already cited the "bitter clingers" comment. Another would be his comments on Christianity vs Islam.
Click to expand...

Just so we're on the same page, then, here's his "bitter clinger's" comment:

You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not.
And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.
Click to expand...

and, as we just saw, his comments on Christianity vs. Islam are about how atrocities were once committed in the name of Christianity, just as they are being committed in the name of Islam now, and that neither religion should be condemned due to what some have done in its name, or words to that effect.

Now, just what is wrong with those statements? How do they "tear down this nation?"
 
Abbazorkzog said:
They should be unleashing their wrath on Belgium and Romania.

But no, they believe the NATO/Russian propaganda.

Belgium's jihadist cells: A terror plot apparently foiled | The Economist

Romania rejects Iraqi claim of selling weapons to ISIS

Why There Are So Many Jihadists in Belgium

Kudos to him to accruing the acumen to become the first world leader in nearly a century to personally step up to the challenge of warfare, the fact that his aims are a bit off-target aside.
Click to expand...

I very much doubt that "Romania" sold weapons ti isil. That weapons could have been sold by Romanians or from out of the country is quite possible. Then it would be criminals and the question would only be why the bureaucracy did not pick it up and which persons it was. If the EU puts pepressure on the Romanians will do something. probably no more than Germany did against the Siemens corruption or the bribes paid the Greeks to buy weapons etc.
But something.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Just so we're on the same page, then, here's his "bitter clinger's" comment:



and, as we just saw, his comments on Christianity vs. Islam are about how atrocities were once committed in the name of Christianity, just as they are being committed in the name of Islam now, and that neither religion should be condemned due to what some have done in its name, or words to that effect.

Now, just what is wrong with those statements? How do they "tear down this nation?"
Click to expand...

Because he's speaking poorly of his nation and its citizens.
 
Dittohead not! said:
I was hoping someone would respond.
Yes, I know who Edward Snowden is, and why he is out of the country. I think we're on the same page when it comes to the issues you mention.
Personally, I don't consider criticism of foreign or domestic policy as un American. It seems to me that it is un American to fail to exercise our first amendment rights, but then, that's just my opinion.
Click to expand...

Lol. The Snowden parenthetical was suppose to be a joke of sorts. I know you're well aware of who he is, it's just that that news cycle is so far past. And yes, I get your opinion, which is all any of us are offering up.
 
US Conservative said:
Because he's speaking poorly of his nation and its citizens.
Click to expand...

And then there's that other group that's speaking poorly of the president and his supporters, which too are citizens.
 
Montecresto said:
Ok, I read no further than the first line. If you truly believe that Obama HATES America, then you're blinded by hate yourself, and I haven't any further use for you, bye match.
Click to expand...

well let's reverse that.

Let us examine what he has said and how he has handled the Muslim based terrorism file.

We must at the outset define that terror from say, the troops and tanks in the streets of Ferguson and accept that 911 and the rest were performed by stolid members of the Islamic faith.

He has voted "present" on a war against them. Apologized to them. He has deliberately mis-characterized the well planned, well armed and well executed assassination of a sitting US ambassador, allowed the terrorists to escape and turned Libya into an unstable country where it had been a stable non-terrorist haven prior. The president has responded to that attack by sending in the FBI to "arrest" an prosecute the terrorists who attacked the US, and come up empty for three years now. In the midst of that, he deliberately suggested that attack was a spontaneous demonstration that had got out of hand. he also, in the midst of an election campaign decreed "you cannot make fun of the prophet mohamed" Period. Never mind the first amendment....
Now we look on his pledge to preserve and protect the nation. When he came to office the US was waring in two countries, one of which he claimed was stable enough the US could leave and did.

Since then Egypt has become unstable, Libya, and the US is waging war in Afghanistan, 15 years in, Pakistan, Syria, Iraq, Somalia and NATO is on high alert in Europe as Putin makes a mockery of Obama.

Maybe he doesn't "hate" American, but I don't think he loves her enough to properly protect her.
 
JumpinJack said:
Starts bombing ISIS in Syria, after the burning alive of a Jordanian pilot, and states "This is just the beginning....."


Jordan unleashes wrath on ISIS: 'This is just the beginning' - CNN.com
Click to expand...

It's also the end.

Jordan doesn't have much wrath in its arsenal, compared to what ISIL (or whatever those terrorists are) has. All he has are a few old planes that are easy targets for SAMs.

Abdullah needs to pray that his own tiny little kingdom doesn't get run over by them.
 
Henrin said:
If you go around picking fights sooner or later someone is going to kick your ass. ISIS is a bunch of retards.
Click to expand...

Yet they seem to be kicking the aforementioned ass quite well.
 
Dittohead not! said:
I'm not sure committing US forces (ground forces, presumably) is a good idea, but I must say I'm impressed by a world leader who will actually go into combat personally.
Click to expand...

Because Jordan doesn't have much an AF so they need every man they can get their hands on, including the King himself. Doesn't matter--Jordan won't succeed.
 
US Conservative said:
Because he's speaking poorly of his nation and its citizens.
Click to expand...

So should he ignore small towns in the Midwest where the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them, or should he deny that they exist?
 
solletica said:
Because Jordan doesn't have much an AF so they need every man they can get their hands on, including the King himself. Doesn't matter--Jordan won't succeed.
Click to expand...

'ISIL is losing': Iraqis optimistic for 2015

Baghdad - Iraqi security forces backed by Shia militias, Kurdish forces and Sunni Muslim tribesmen will drive the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) from all Iraqi lands before the end of 2015, Iraqi security officials and analysts say.
Click to expand...

Jordan does have help. They don't have to do it all themselves.
 
Dittohead not! said:
'ISIL is losing': Iraqis optimistic for 2015
Click to expand...

14 years ago, the US govt. said the Taliban is losing.

Dittohead not! said:
Jordan does have help. They don't have to do it all themselves.
Click to expand...

Only if America's right wingers suit up, ship out, and start helping them. It was the right, after all, that elected the idiot whose reckless interventionist policies led to the current crisis in the ME.

So it's their responsibility to pick up the slack.
 
Dittohead not! said:
So should he ignore small towns in the Midwest where the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them, or should he deny that they exist?
Click to expand...

I have no idea what that means, but if you are suggesting his bizarre comments were therefore appropriate you are wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom