• 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!

Obama refuses to acknowledge ‘Muslim terrorists’ at summit

Montecresto said:
I would prefer an emphasis on prevention, don't you know. When something's not working, stop repeating it over and over and over! You know what "they" say about that.
Click to expand...



What I know, is you must first identify the problem correctly if you want to find a solution. pretending this is not an islamic terrorist issue, is a mistake.


arguing "derp, but but CHRISTIANS!!!!!!" is also not helpful.


IF these are fringe muslims, why them are seemingly well to do, stable muslims joining them? (see my other thread)
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
It's a stupid red herring. Why are we incapable of talking about the coming storm?
Click to expand...

Because it's the same "coming storm" they pimped in the "Domino Theory" and the "Soviet takeover" of Central America. Don't believe the hype, it's a sequel.
 
MMC said:
Mornin' Grant. Chris Matthews and now even, the Mister I wear Brown, Ed Schultz is taking BO peep to task over his concepts on ISIS.

How many more on the left have to turn against BO peep and start calling him and his lost sheep.....out? Time to put the Mopes in that real spot light. Including any in the MS media still carrying BO's water.
Click to expand...
Apart from the most abject bootlickers most people with some political knowledge must eventually come to realize what's going on here. They must also consider turning on Obama now in order to present Hillary as the unObama later.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
What I know, is you must first identify the problem correctly if you want to find a solution. pretending this is not an islamic terrorist issue, is a mistake.


arguing "derp, but but CHRISTIANS!!!!!!" is also not helpful.


IF these are fringe muslims, why them are seemingly well to do, stable muslims joining them? (see my other thread)
Click to expand...

Lol! I've been identifying the problem since I've been posting at DP. And long before. Btw, our own government NIE (yes, the one you folks need to ignore) has identified the problem as well. As have other heads of state, presidential contenders, historians, educators, think tanks like the Council on Foreign relations, constitutional and international law attorneys, the UN................................and you STILL won't ****ing listen!
 
Montecresto said:
Lol! I've been identifying the problem since I've been posting at DP. And long before. Btw, our own government NIE (yes, the one you folks need to ignore) has identified the problem as well. As have other heads of state, presidential contenders, historians, educators, think tanks like the Council on Foreign relations, constitutional and international law attorneys, the UN................................and you STILL won't ****ing listen!
Click to expand...



I am unaware of any of your posts, sorry.


What's the problem then.
 
Montecresto said:
I would prefer an emphasis on prevention, don't you know. When something's not working, stop repeating it over and over and over! You know what "they" say about that.
Click to expand...

Prevention of what Monte? Are you stating that US forces Intel or Other should not counter those that try and affect our interests? That they aren't suppose to work with other allies involved in Foreign Policy?

That the US FP should be based on never using violence and walking with Halos over our heads and Wings off our shoulders.

Do you think you could ever ensure the Physical safety of the US......with your uhm lacking strategy in holding a country status as a Major Power to be reckoned with? Hows your Emphasis with that, huh? As With all your talk about the US, we would be nothing more than just a paperweight. A mere paper Tiger.
 
Frantz Fanon said:
Because it's the same "coming storm" they pimped in the "Domino Theory" and the "Soviet takeover" of Central America. Don't believe the hype, it's a sequel.
Click to expand...


So there is no ISIS, and they are not moving towards a pan-arabic caliphate?
 
Montecresto said:
Let's continue to ignore the FACT that the Bush administration expunged the language of Islamic extremism, jihad and Muslim Holy War that the right is insisting Obama use. Because it was learned that such usage was counterproductive and had the unintended consequence of legitimising terrorism.
Click to expand...
Has his refusal to say what everyone knows it to be been effective in countering Islamic terrorism?
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Right, perhaps you can talk about the topic, not your prejudices.
Click to expand...

I've done just that, it was your choice to focus on the emoticon.

I will be more specific. Bush and Obama are self-professed Christians. Both are responsible, though will not be held accountable, for war crimes against Iraqi and Afghani civilians. Both carried out an illegal program of torture. Both are responsible for the deaths of thousands of unarmed civilians and millions of refugees as a result of their foreign policy.

The invasion and occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan by Bush and Obama meet the definition of terrorism.

Title 18 of the United States Code (regarding criminal acts and criminal procedure) defines international terrorism as:

(1) [T]he term 'international terrorism' means activities that —

(A) involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or of any State;
(B) appear to be intended —
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
(C) occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States, or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum".[54]
 
MMC said:
Prevention of what Monte? Are you stating that US forces Intel or Other should not counter those that try and affect our interests? That they are suppose to work with other allies involved in Foreign Policy?

That the US FP should be based on never using violence and walking with Halos over our heads and Wings off our shoulders.

Do you think you could ever ensure the Physical safety of the US......with your uhm lacking strategy in holding a country status as a Major Power to be reckoned with?
Click to expand...

Stop asking me the same god damn question over and over and over again. Do not execute foreign policy in the Middle East that emboldens and encourages the growth of Islamic extremism, and makes America less safe as our NIE concluded about our invasion and occupation of Iraq particularly, and our policies of the "war on terror" generally. WHAT PART OF THIS CONFUSES YOU!
 
Frantz Fanon said:
I've done just that, it was your choice to focus on the emoticon.

I will be more specific. Bush and Obama are self-professed Christians. Both are responsible, though will not be held accountable, for war crimes against Iraqi and Afghani civilians. Both carried out an illegal program of torture. Both are responsible for the deaths of thousands of unarmed civilians and millions of refugees as a result of their foreign policy.

The invasion and occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan by Bush and Obama meet the definition of terrorism.

Title 18 of the United States Code (regarding criminal acts and criminal procedure) defines international terrorism as:

(1) [T]he term 'international terrorism' means activities that —

(A) involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or of any State;
(B) appear to be intended —
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
(C) occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States, or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum".[54]
Click to expand...




So, I take that as a no, we are just going to have to read your screed on America the horrible.


Are you actually saying that ISIS, and islamic terrorist have a point and a right to do what they do?
 
Grant said:
Has his refusal to say what everyone knows it to be been effective in countering Islamic terrorism?
Click to expand...

Bush's or Obama's? They both refused to use it. Besides mr. coy, if everybody knows it, why do you need to be reminded about it. Hate much.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
So there is no ISIS, and they are not moving towards a pan-arabic caliphate?
Click to expand...

Never stated that. Feel free to directly quote me.

Ho Chi Minh was on his way to conquering Asia back in the day. Addressing the coming storm equates to a perpetual illegal occupation. There is no way to force Shi'ites and Sunnis to create a democratic state.

Boots on the ground? For how long? How much more American blood is worth "stabilizing" the Middle East?
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
So, I take that as a no, we are just going to have to read your screed on America the horrible.


Are you actually saying that ISIS, and islamic terrorist have a point and a right to do what they do?
Click to expand...

Again, when I type it, feel free to quote it. ISIS is a band of barbarians capitalizing on the slaughter of innocent civilians via a misguided US foreign policy of attempting to create a democratic state in Iraq.
 
Frantz Fanon said:
Never stated that. Feel free to directly quote me.

Ho Chi Minh was on his way to conquering Asia back in the day. Addressing the coming storm equates to a perpetual illegal occupation. There is no way to force Shi'ites and Sunnis to create a democratic state.

Boots on the ground? For how long? How much more American blood is worth "stabilizing" the Middle East?
Click to expand...




You shouldn't assume.


I am against sending troops to the mideast, we don't have the stamina to do it right and all it does is create vaccumes for assholes like ISIS.

That said, I also know that there may come a time, when we HAVE to deal with these clowns, and it should be, well, it should be an action you can add to your "I hate America list".

For now, Close the borders, and profile people coming into the country.
 
Frantz Fanon said:
Again, when I type it, feel free to quote it. ISIS is a band of barbarians capitalizing on the slaughter of innocent civilians via a misguided US foreign policy of attempting to create a democratic state in Iraq.
Click to expand...


But according to you, if anyone tries to stop them, it would be a war crime I gather from your other list.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
You shouldn't assume.


I am against sending troops to the mideast, we don't have the stamina to do it right and all it does is create vaccumes for assholes like ISIS.

That said, I also know that there may come a time, when we HAVE to deal with these clowns, and it should be, well, it should be an action you can add to your "I hate America list".

For now, Close the borders, and profile people coming into the country.
Click to expand...

To the bolded, I appreciate that acknowledgement.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
You shouldn't assume.


I am against sending troops to the mideast, we don't have the stamina to do it right and all it does is create vaccumes for assholes like ISIS.

That said, I also know that there may come a time, when we HAVE to deal with these clowns, and it should be, well, it should be an action you can add to your "I hate America list".

For now, Close the borders, and profile people coming into the country.
Click to expand...

Apparently there is a big offensive planned for spring 2015 which will mean more chaos and dead Iraqis and less stability in the region. Never said I hate America. I disapprove of the foreign policy about 100% of the time when it involves killing civilians.
 
Frantz Fanon said:
Apparently there is a big offensive planned for spring 2015 which will mean more chaos and dead Iraqis and less stability in the region. Never said I hate America. I disapprove of the foreign policy about 100% of the time when it involves killing civilians.
Click to expand...


What actions would you support and by whom?
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
But according to you, if anyone tries to stop them, it would be a war crime I gather from your other list.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should just have a discussion with yourself as all you seem to want to do is misrepresent my opinion.

"According to you . . . " "So what you're saying . . ."
 
Montecresto said:
Stop asking me the same god damn question over and over and over again. Do not execute foreign policy in the Middle East that emboldens and encourages the growth of Islamic extremism, and makes America less safe as our NIE concluded about our invasion and occupation of Iraq particularly, and our policies of the "war on terror" generally. WHAT PART OF THIS CONFUSES YOU!
Click to expand...

What part confuses you when those in the ME cross into that territory of our own interests Monte? Wherein they initiate the issue Monte. Do you always tuck tail and run? Do you always give up and let others run rampshod over you? How would you protect your people or interests when you are afraid to go out in the big bad world to play?

Let me guess.....those in the ME make a mean face hack up a few sounds, and all of a sudden you don't have a clue as to what to do. That's not a Foreign Policy Monte.....what you advocate is Submission to all others and don't do anything as it might upset the natives. Just let them do to us.

Now you know where that BS of yours really stands. :lamo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom