Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 35

Thread: Pakistan:43 Civilians die in Taliban crossfire

  1. #21
    Professor
    WillRockwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    07-10-10 @ 09:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,950

    Re: Into Pakistan?

    If Bush had concentrated on pursuing the perpetrators of 9/11, we would not be doing it now, we would not be on the verge of expanding the war in Afghanistan, we would not be dealing with suicides among our troops, and the "war on terror" would be won. Instead, Bush used the excuse of 9/11 to begin the war he had in mind since 2000, to overthrow Saddam Hussein in a personal, family vendetta. In the eyes of the Muslim world, the war against Iraq is a much greater crime against humanity than 9/11. If any religious group has proved it cannot be trusted to live in peace with its neighbors, it is the evangelical Christians, who wage war because God tells them to.

  2. #22
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,998

    Re: Into Pakistan?

    Quote Originally Posted by RiverDad View Post
    I advocate the resurrection of the containment doctrine - No Muslim immigration into the West, no Western support for corporations that invest in Muslim lands and then require Western support to protect their investments. We can trade, we can exchange ideas, but good fences make for good neighbors.
    Ah, a libertarian that completely ****s on the constitution. That's entertaining.

  3. #23
    Sage
    RiverDad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    04-20-14 @ 02:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    5,039

    Re: Into Pakistan?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Ah, a libertarian that completely ****s on the constitution. That's entertaining.
    The Constitution? I think you could do with a few moments of actually reading the document for it makes no declarations about foreign policy strategy and tactics.

  4. #24
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

    Re: Into Pakistan?

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    And I asked you a question, since you are so vocal about Obama, you are also claiming Bush is a war criminal yes? Keep your consistency at least.

    You think Bush is a war criminal right? Can't have it one way and not the other, so you are saying Bush is a war criminal yes?
    No he said he was using a definition applied to Bush, can't you read? Come on.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  5. #25
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,998

    Re: Into Pakistan?

    Quote Originally Posted by RiverDad View Post
    The Constitution? I think you could do with a few moments of actually reading the document for it makes no declarations about foreign policy strategy and tactics.
    You proposed banning people from entering this country simply based on religion. You can't possibly tell me you don't understand the ramification that has in regards to weakening the freedom of religion within the consitution.

  6. #26
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

    Re: Into Pakistan?

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNextEra View Post
    Well I guess Bush and Obama aren't war criminals then are they, so quit spreading that around if you want to be taken seriously. No U.S. court is ever gonna convict Bush.
    Really, better get word to your man Conyers.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  7. #27
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

    Re: Into Pakistan?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    You proposed banning people from entering this country simply based on religion. You can't possibly tell me you don't understand the ramification that has in regards to weakening the freedom of religion within the consitution.
    How can immigration policy contradict the 1st Amendment?
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  8. #28
    Sage
    RiverDad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    04-20-14 @ 02:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    5,039

    Re: Into Pakistan?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    You proposed banning people from entering this country simply based on religion. You can't possibly tell me you don't understand the ramification that has in regards to weakening the freedom of religion within the consitution.
    The Constitution applies to people who are within the borders of the United States, not to people all around the world.

    Look, we treat Canadians differently than we do Turks, in that we allow Canadians to enter the US without a visa but require that Turks apply for a visa. However, once the Canadian and Turkish visitors are within the borders of the US they have, generally, the very same rights as do American citizens.

    There is nothing unconstitutional about restricting immigration from specified countries, no matter the dominant or majority religion of those countries.

  9. #29
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,998

    Re: Into Pakistan?

    If you start denying people from entering this country and becoming citizens simply by which religion they follow then you are weakening to first amendment's freedom of religion and opening up a starting point for others within this country to make a case for further erosion of it and expansion of such policies to the citizenry of the United States.

    If you actually can convince the the American public that its okay to completely disregard the rights garaunteed unto men in the eyes of our founders as long as they're not citizens yet and we don't like their religion its not a far stretch to them start doing it to ones that ARE citizens.

    Not to mention its a ****ty policy. All that will do is cause those immigrating into the country to either claim no religion or claim a different religion and then suddenly, once becoming a citizen, become muslim again.

  10. #30
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,998

    Re: Into Pakistan?

    Quote Originally Posted by RiverDad View Post
    The Constitution applies to people who are within the borders of the United States, not to people all around the world.

    Look, we treat Canadians differently than we do Turks, in that we allow Canadians to enter the US without a visa but require that Turks apply for a visa. However, once the Canadian and Turkish visitors are within the borders of the US they have, generally, the very same rights as do American citizens.

    There is nothing unconstitutional about restricting immigration from specified countries, no matter the dominant or majority religion of those countries.
    You didn't say muslim countries, you said "Muslims".

    Refusing immigrants because of their religion, a founding principle of this country and one of the foundations of why people came here in the first place, is far different than refusing them based on their home state.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •