• 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!

Anit-American violence sweeps across 23 world nations

OldWorldOrder said:
I dunno about more so much as better. Like more further thought out. Killing a bunch of people and destroying one of their holy sites to "get them to think" is...well, not well thought out. There's a reason why the US would never do this, and it has nothing to do with having ******s in charge.
Click to expand...
First we need to get their attention. Destroying Mecca will do that. The only ones who will die are the ones who do not move. Tough for them.

I cannot help that the US does not have the political will to fight a long duration war of attrition. But that is what it will take.

We could create a list of all known holy sites and destroy them all in one afternoon. I think we could do it if we used nuclear weapons. Our once powerful military is not up to the job any longer. And that is because of the sissies who are in charge.
 
OldWorldOrder said:
Richard Feynman also knew the difference between "you're" and "your". He also probably knew what a strawman was, and the difference between explaining an in-depth policy and offering a thesis. Do you? If you do, why did you transpose them?
Click to expand...
LOL. Medical problem. It is the same reason I occasionally drop letters. I usually catch the errors. But thanks for the help. I appreciate it.
 
Misterveritis said:
First we need to get their attention. Destroying Mecca will do that. The only ones who will die are the ones who do not move. Tough for them.
Click to expand...

Dude, that's silly.

I cannot help that the US does not have the political will to fight a long duration war of attrition. But that is what it will take.
Click to expand...

No, that's really not what it takes.

We could create a list of all known holy sites and destroy them all in one afternoon. I think we could do it if we used nuclear weapons. Our once powerful military is not up to the job any longer. And that is because of the sissies who are in charge.
Click to expand...

To 'get their attention' right? That's laughable, man.
 
ChrisL said:
Obviously, you don't want to discuss reasonable solutions and you don't understand that it would be impossible to kill them all . . . in every country, and that we don't have either the resources, the means or the support to take on such an impossible task.
Click to expand...
How many people do you think would need killing?

I think the number is probably less than one percent. How many high value targets do you believe there are?

We would be forced to become energy independent. I think that drilling here and drilling now is a good idea anyway.
 
Misterveritis said:
LOL. Medical problem. It is the same reason I occasionally drop letters. I usually catch the errors. But thanks for the help. I appreciate it.
Click to expand...

But what about the strawman? Explaining American policy across the Middle East in a paragraph and explaining a thesis in a paragraph aren't the same thing. Why would you conflate them? Was it on purpose?
 
PirateMk1 said:
You are both right. You have to be brutal and compasionate at the same time. That is very hard to do. It will not take the resoarces Misterverritis thinks, nor is giving up their religous beliefs nessecarry for their eventual defeat. All war is won and lost in the mind. We faced this before with the Japanese, and their bushido warrior code of ethics. They had to face extinction to be defeated, but they WERE defeated and now their are among our greatest allies. To defeat the Jihadists we must convince them that we are utterly implacable and WILL do anything to defeat them. The object is NOT to convice the true believer of jihaid but to convice those the true believer depends on. You go after what supports them. Ruthlessly. At the same time those who do not support them are left alone. You induce fear into their supporters by making examples of SOME of them, NOT ALL. Fear is your ally and will help induce victory. Example would be this, say you find that Jihadists have been using a Mosque to hide weapons and use it as a base to conduct opperations. You then select the day that the mosque has the most visitors and destroy it utterly with all its visitors and without warning. You then destroy a randomly seclected number of mosques either at the same time or over a relitively short period of time in the same manner. If they use a school with young children you would do the same thing and attempt to make sure it was published far and wide. You not attempt at all to diminish collateral damage, I would in fact myself consider maximizing collateral damage. Imeadiatley after you destroy those mosque, schools, whatever, you announce that you will continue to destroy them without notice if you find they are being used for military purposes again. You do this sequence several times with other supossedly "offlimit" buildings structures places ect. you do this with a frequency that keeps pressure and minimises your resource expenditure. The idea is to make being around the Jihadists a death sentance for ANYBODY innocent or not. You make the people around your Jihadists aware that you are willing to make THEM extinct if they continue working with or for that matter tolerate the presence of Jihadists. This playes with their mind on several levels. It forces them to consider themselves and their families. It puts pressure on them to not assist the Jihadists for fear of harm or death. It brings a countervailing religous pressure becuase they begin to question their coarse and their leadership. You must bring fear into the equasion. They do not fear us now. The Russians could have won Afaganistan if they wanted to. They lost because they didnt have the will to do what was nessesary. It is a matter of will, for both sides.
Click to expand...

I don't think it will take all that many resources. We need to take away the things those in charge hold dear. For me that list includes their holy places, and their clerical structure. Your concept is similar to mine. Start large. Destroy Mecca. And destroy any mosque that has been used as a staging area for an attack on us.

Do not kill people unnecessarily. But when it is time to kill then do it with gusto, imagination and firepower.
 
No, leave Mecca alone. And Jerusalem and Bethlehem too.
 
OldWorldOrder said:
Because that doesn't solve the issue. Killing every Muslim will make things harder on the US vis-a-vis the rest of the world. That's just the fact.

The issue isn't Muslims or even Islamic extremism. The issue, for the US, is how to make things easier/more profitable for the US. That's all. That's the bottom line.
Click to expand...
Why do you believe that I am even thinking about killing every Muslim?

How many are clerics? How many are in positions of power and authority? is it one half of one percent? Those are the targets. Of course we should kill the street thugs when they attack us. We should capture a few to find out the street address of their mosque. The mosque and itss cleric will have to go.
 
zstep18 said:
Are you advocating the purposeful killing of innocent civilians?
Click to expand...

Yes.

And the incidental killing of them as well, with no regard to collatiral damage.

War is brutal. It is by its very definition the lack of rules. War is cruel. You cannot reform it. The more brutal it is the quicker it will be done with the least of amount of carnage. William Tecumsea Sherman, Union General in the Cival War who burned Atlanta and Charlotte to the ground, said best "War is hell."

I have been to war I have seen it first hand, and smelled it, tasted it, heard it in all its................................glory. I hate it with all the passion I am capable. It should be avoided if at all possible. But it IS a neccesarry evil. Because it is neccsary doesnt make it any less evil.
 
Misterveritis said:
Why do you believe that I am even thinking about killing every Muslim?
Click to expand...

Your posts?

How many are clerics? How many are in positions of power and authority? is it one half of one percent? Those are the targets. Of course we should kill the street thugs when they attack us. We should capture a few to find out the street address of their mosque. The mosque and itss cleric will have to go.
Click to expand...

To 'get their attention', right?
 
Strucky said:
No you prefer to slaughter people into submission,something that will only play into the fanatics hands.
Click to expand...
LOL. Not when the fanatics are the targets.

The only ones who will be killed are the ones who are involved in harming Americans. So after the big ban in Mecca we do need to actively seek out every mosque where attacks are planned, staged or supported and utterly destroy them. I do like the pigs blood and offal treatment. That is a nice touch.
 
PirateMk1 said:
Yes.

And the incidental killing of them as well, with no regard to collatiral damage.

War is brutal. It is by its very definition the lack of rules. War is cruel. You cannot reform it. The more brutal it is the quicker it will be done with the least of amount of carnage. William Tecumsea Sherman, Union General in the Cival War who burned Atlanta and Charlotte to the ground, said best "War is hell."

I have been to war I have seen it first hand, and smelled it, tasted it, heard it in all its................................glory. I hate it with all the passion I am capable. It should be avoided if at all possible. But it IS a neccesarry evil. Because it is neccsary doesnt make it any less evil.
Click to expand...

So, if killing innocents is a necessary evil, why don't we just nuke the entire Middle East?
 
ChrisL said:
The Art of War?
Click to expand...

Unfortunately it has been elevated to Art and Science. I prefer that it not be .......................practiticed at all.
 
OldWorldOrder said:
But what about the strawman? Explaining American policy across the Middle East in a paragraph and explaining a thesis in a paragraph aren't the same thing. Why would you conflate them? Was it on purpose?
Click to expand...
If your author cannot explain the core of the problem in the middle east in one paragraph then he does not understand the problem.

Until he understands the core of the problem he is just one more voice trying to sell a book.
 
Misterveritis said:
LOL. Not when the fanatics are the targets.

The only ones who will be killed are the ones who are involved in harming Americans. So after the big ban in Mecca we do need to actively seek out every mosque where attacks are planned, staged or supported and utterly destroy them. I do like the pigs blood and offal treatment. That is a nice touch.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry,but this thinking does not conform to reality.Each attack on Mecca or a mosque will create more fanatics and more targets....They kill people over cartoons and cheaply made movies nobody watches....I think attacking Muslim holy sites would only make things much much worse.
 
zstep18 said:
Because usually who should go after those who are responsible for attacking you?
Click to expand...
Do we need to go over the entire sordid history?

Why muddy the waters? Kill the one in front of you. Let that be enough for today.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom