• 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!

U.S. considering 'limited' military action as militants gain in northern Iraq

Montecresto said:
Thanks for the link. That's concerning.

White House won’t commit to stopping looming genocide of Christians, Kurds in Iraq

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/aug/7/white-house-wont-commit-stopping-looming-genocide-/
Click to expand...

This all plays well for Russia who doesn't want the world focusing on them and the Ukraine.

If we hit ISIS, it will probably be substantial. Iraq, Syria, Libya, I/P and Ebola will all eventually level out but our ongoing struggle with Putin, trying to fight for the Russian economy, is the real future threat.
 
Montecresto said:
Oh, I see.
Click to expand...

So, if someone doesn't join, their support of a position is fake. And if someone does join, their support of a position is fake. That's quite a retreat from intellectual confrontation you've prepared.

All support of the counter position is fake!

:roll:
 
MadLib said:
For a moment, try to imagine if this ridiculous standard was applied to anything else. Want to stop illegal immigration? Go join the Border Guard or Minutemen. Want to cut down on crime? Become a cop or put on a bat costume. Otherwise, you have no right to an opinion on the matter.

Somehow, this ad hom constitutes an entire argument in its own right against any sort of military intervention.
Click to expand...

No, Mad, you're being absurd. I'm referring to the insanity of Iraq and the failed policy to attack the country that hadn't harmed us to begin with, and then the further insanity to go back in, and particularly as advocated by at least two people already on this board, to do it all the way.

I'm all for a defensive military to protect ourselves from any other that would seek to attack us, wars of choice, imperialism, hegemony, are out.
 
Montecresto said:
I'm referring to the insanity of Iraq and the failed policy to attack the country that hadn't harmed us to begin with, and then the further insanity to go back in, and particularly as advocated by at least two people already on this board, to do it all the way.
Click to expand...

Yeah, sure. Everyone that doesn't agree with you is insane. More running from confrontation.
 
Last edited:
ecofarm said:
So, if someone doesn't join, their support of a position is fake. And if someone does join, their support of a position is fake. That's quite a retreat from intellectual confrontation you've prepared.

All support of the counter position is fake!

:roll:
Click to expand...

Why is it you continue to use this word fake, I've never said that. I believe your support for further military action in Iraq is genuine, I just think you should be out front of this one.
 
Montecresto said:
No, Mad, you're being absurd. I'm referring to the insanity of Iraq and the failed policy to attack the country that hadn't harmed us to begin with, and then the further insanity to go back in, and particularly as advocated by at least two people already on this board, to do it all the way.

I'm all for a defensive military to protect ourselves from any other that would seek to attack us, wars of choice, imperialism, hegemony, are out.
Click to expand...

I don't think we should have gone into Iraq either (although for entirely different reasons). I'm just pointing out that "go fight yourself if you're so eager to stop ISIS" is not an actual argument against intervention.

Would you tell people who support the existence of a public fire department to either shut up or go around with a hose and put out fires themselves?
 
ecofarm said:
Yeah, sure. Everyone that doesn't agree with you is insane. More running from confrontation.
Click to expand...

Insanity is the best word to describe attacking a country that hasn't first attacked you or that there is credible evidence that such an attack is impending. Anyway, what does it say of yourself that you continue communicating with someone you consider to be void of intellect? Lol.
 
MadLib said:
I don't think we should have gone into Iraq either (although for entirely different reasons). I'm just pointing out that "go fight yourself if you're so eager to stop ISIS" is not an actual argument against intervention.

Would you tell people who support the existence of a public fire department to either shut up or go around with a hose and put out fires themselves?
Click to expand...

I've made my arguments against intervention Mad! I realize that you've just showed up today, but my opinion on this very specific issue, going to war with a militant group that US policy has facilitated is insanity, on both parts and this particular war hawk I'm communicating with in my opinion needs to lead the charge for a couple of reasons.
 
Last edited:
Montecresto said:
Insanity is the best word to describe attacking a country that hasn't first attacked you or that there is credible evidence that such an attack is impending.
Click to expand...

My opponents are insane!!11!! :scared:

We should also note that you are just making things up about troops. No one has advocated such.

Running away and making things up. Nice debate strategy.

Anyway, what does it say of yourself that you continue communicating with someone you consider to be void of intellect? Lol.
Click to expand...

I'm not posting for you. Let's turn down the self centered nonsense.
 
Before I'd let 40k people/families die on a mountain top for being the wrong religion, and have ISIS feel confident enough to strike the US on our own soil, I'd have the air force come in there like the hand of God. There are two carrier groups in the Persian Gulf, each with 2 squadrons flying F/A-18 Super Hornet fighter jets.
 
Montecresto said:
I've made my arguments against intervention Mad! I realize that you've just showed up today, but my opinion on this very specific issue, going to war with a militant group that US policy has facilitated is insanity, on both parts and this particular war hawk I'm communicating with in my opinion needs to lead the charge for a couple of reasons.
Click to expand...

That's false. MadLib has confronted you on this BS line of "reasoning" before.

Insanity, they're insane!!11!! :scared:

Please, spare us this BS.
 
ecofarm said:
My opponents are insane!!11!! :scared:

We should also note that you are just making things up about troops. No one has advocated such.

Running away and making things up. Nice debate strategy.



I'm not posting for you. Let's turn down the self centered nonsense.
Click to expand...

Our foreign policy in the Middle East is insane, my message for a very long time. And I don't recall discussing troops, so why are you making things up. I'm opposed to further military engagement in Iraq. That should be clear by now.
 
ecofarm said:
That's false. MadLib has confronted you on this BS line of "reasoning" before.

Insanity, they're insane!!11!! :scared:

Please, spare us this BS.
Click to expand...

Again, you fail to understand. It's the first I've seen of him today, and it doesn't appear by his line of questioning he's seen my arguments against further military engagement in Iraq and thinks that telling you to get out front is the only one. You can be spared of anything I have to say, use your ignore button, but I'll be continuing to oppose US military action and policy in the ME, and you can play with the other boys and girls.
 
Montecresto said:
Our foreign policy in the Middle East is insane, my message for a very long time.
Click to expand...

Or maybe... you are just ignoring the logic and reason behind an opposing position.

And I don't recall discussing troops, so why are you making things up.
Click to expand...

You claimed myself and others wanted to send troops. That's just making up BS.

So, what do we have... Running from confrontation by labeling the opposition insane and making crap up.
 
Montecresto said:
Again, you fail to understand. It's the first I've seen of him today, and it doesn't appear by his line of questioning he's seen my arguments against further military engagement in Iraq and thinks that telling you to get out front is the only one. You can be spared of anything I have to say, use your ignore button, but I'll be continuing to oppose US military action and policy in the ME, and you can play with the other boys and girls.
Click to expand...

Do try to maintain the point in question. MadLib is currently and has before confronted your BS about ~"serve immediately or your support of the opposing position is fake".
 
ecofarm said:
Or maybe... you are just ignoring the logic and reason behind an opposing position.



You claimed myself and others wanted to send troops. That's just making up BS.

So, what do we have... Running from confrontation by labeling the opposition insane and making crap up.
Click to expand...

Attacking Iraq was insane widely acknowledged by Americans now, and nearly universally acknowledge globally. And we've had troops in Iraq already, 4,500 of them lost their lives there, and now, apparently, military engagement is being discussed again, and we have troops on the ground already, I believe one thousand last I heard, and that doesn't count any covert operations that may be going on.
 
ecofarm said:
Do try to maintain the point in question. MadLib is currently and has before confronted your BS about ~"serve immediately or your support of the opposing position is fake".
Click to expand...

Again, why do you continue to use the word fake, and particularly in quotations, when I have clearly stated that I THINK YOUR SUPPORT OF FURTHER MILITARY ENGAGEMENT IN IRAQ IS GENUINE?? Just put your life on the line, not my sons!
 
Montecresto said:
Attacking Iraq was insane widely acknowledged by Americans now,
Click to expand...

Some think it was wrong, but "insane" is typical intellectual cowardice.

Montecresto said:
Again, why do you continue to use the word fake, and particularly in quotations, when I have clearly stated that I THINK YOUR SUPPORT OF FURTHER MILITARY ENGAGEMENT IN IRAQ IS GENUINE?? Just put your life on the line, not my sons!
Click to expand...

Ease up on the capslock, there's no need to yell. Let's keep the emotion under some kind of control. Explain this:

Montecresto said:
Another fallacious argument. Talking about it, is one thing, support for more US blood and treasure to be spent, should be accompanied with his commitment, yours too.
Click to expand...

If not because you believe his support is otherwise not legitimate, then why? Presuming you cannot come up with anything else, we can all see the emotion-based nonsense of that intellectual cowardice.
 
ecofarm said:
Some think it was wrong, but "insane" is typical intellectual cowardice.



Ease up on the capslock, there's no need to yell. Let's keep the emotion under some kind of control. Explain this:



If not because you believe his support is otherwise not legitimate, then why? Presuming you cannot come up with anything else, we can all see the emotion-based nonsense of that intellectual cowardice.
Click to expand...

You are the coward who won't man up and stand your position. And for Pete's sake, STOP TELLING ME HOW TO POST. Haven't you something better to be doing? Insane is the perfect definition of US foreign policy in the ME regardless of your warmongering rationale. And far more than "some" think it was wrong, that number is 57% and Eco, that number has been steadily climbing. And, IMO, his support should include him leading the charge against an enemy that our failed policies in the ME are strengthening. Now I can only hope that if there is any action at all, that it is truly, limited, although limited to what, that's pretty open ended.
 
Last edited:
I don't usually advocate using our military but unfortunately, we may not have any other good solutions to stopping a genocide and spreading terrorist group.

A heavy set of air strikes would accomplish several things. It would probably save 100,000 people in Iraq, severely damage ISIS and their ability to mount an attack on our own interests or Baghdad.

And it would send a signal to Russia that we're not screwing around or afraid to use force. The whole ME is becoming an unstable wildfire and we're sitting on our hands.
 
Montecresto said:
You are the coward who won't man up and stand your position.
Click to expand...

What about people that cannot? They are not permitted to hold a political position because of their age or disability?

And for Pete's sake, STOP TELLING ME HOW TO POST.
Click to expand...

Screaming is a sure sign of emotional distress. It demonstrates the lack of logic and reason of your absurd claim.

Insane is the perfect definition of US foreign policy in the ME regardless of your warmongering rationale.
Click to expand...

More intellectual cowardice.

And far more than "some" think it was wrong, that number is 57% and Eco, that number has been steadily climbing.
Click to expand...

Wrong, perhaps, but "insane" is nothing more than running away from a position that one is unable or incapable of addressing.

And, IMO, his support should include him leading the charge against an enemy that our failed policies in the ME are strengthening.
Click to expand...

That's a stupid claim. No one respects it and now matter how much you scream it will remain idiocy.
 
ecofarm said:
What about people that cannot? They are not permitted to hold a political position because of their age or disability?



Screaming is a sure sign of emotional distress. It demonstrates the lack of logic and reason of your absurd claim.



More intellectual cowardice.



Wrong, perhaps, but "insane" is nothing more than running away from a position that one is unable or incapable of addressing.



That's a stupid claim. No one respects it and now matter how much you scream it will remain idiocy.
Click to expand...



You should know by now that I don't care what you call it. For a dozen years the US's foreign policy in the ME has been insanity, lunacy, and what it's causing is unbelievable pain and suffering. It's rather pathetic that there remains people supportive of it, though that number is shrinking.
 
Montecresto said:
For a dozen years the US's foreign policy in the ME has been insanity, lunacy,
Click to expand...

Or perhaps you've simply failed to grasp your opponents' position and have substituted false motives and narratives.
 
mbig said:
You don't get it, didn't read the story or my post.
We Should HAVE sent them heavier weapons they asked for Weeks ago, but now it's too Late.
And I am Not calling for an invasion, but limited air/missile strikes.

They (USA friendly) and and their Oil Rich province, and Electric-providing Dams, and Heavy Christian population, are in IMMINENT danger of slaughter.
GOT IT?
Many are stranded/under Siege on a mountain as I post.
ANYONE Speak English?
This is an IMMINENT danger/slaughter situation.
No, all these Clowns see this as sending in 100,000 USA troops!
The objections do NOT address the immediacy of the situation as it exists NOW, despite the fact I presented it as such.
Click to expand...

Oh. You just want to support them with air strikes. I suppose that would be appropriate.

But, if we're going to send in the troops, then let's declare war and do it right this time.
 
grip said:
I don't usually advocate using our military but unfortunately, we may not have any other good solutions to stopping a genocide and spreading terrorist group.

A heavy set of air strikes would accomplish several things. It would probably save 100,000 people in Iraq, severely damage ISIS and their ability to mount an attack on our own interests or Baghdad.

And it would send a signal to Russia that we're not screwing around or afraid to use force. The whole ME is becoming an unstable wildfire and we're sitting on our hands.
Click to expand...

Prior uses of our military in Iraq, and Libya as well as our policy in Syria have given rise and strength to militant Islamic jihadists as it is, more of the same medicine won't help.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom