• 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!

ISIS Demands $6.6M Ransom for 26-Year-Old American Woman.....

You forgot after Obama made a 3 minute statement on the tragic murder of Foley he was back on the golf course yuking it up.............I can't tell you how this burns me up. This man is the ultimate scumbag.

Good Navy....you were equally as incensed about this I'm guessing? (hmmm...maybe not...I forgot about the (R)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FWYE068Niw
 
Well tell me, what could have been worse then what we have with the US having been the dominant influence in the ME for twenty years?
Wars between ME Nations, genocide, the development of WMD, and the worlds oil in the hands of fanatical dictators.
 
Wars between ME Nations, genocide, the development of WMD, and the worlds oil in the hands of fanatical dictators.

Typical conservative position. The regions oil belongs to the world. I've got news for you Grant, that's not democratic at all. And that the US being at war with Middle East nations is better then them being at war between themselves is one of the reasons I resent your constant volunteering of Americans blood and treasure. Get Canada to do more!
 
It was Reagan that created the first power vacuum in the ME. He armed the Mujahideen. This denied the soviets influence in Afghanistan, but it gave rise to an American enemy, the Taliban, which we then had to spend a trillion dollars and how much blood now? fighting them there. And when we leave here in a little bit, it will NOT be a democracy. Add that trillion dollars to Reagan's national debt and he quadrupled it instead of tripling it.

It is funny how when the US attacks an Islamic country the US is responsible for creating terrorists. When the Soviets attack an Islamic country the US is also responsible to creating terrorists.

You have your history of Afghanistan incredibly screwed up. The remains of the US involvement in Afghanistan was the Northern Alliance, a moderate, pro-west, pro-human rights group.

The radical Islamists flocked to Afghanistan to fight the Soviets, not the US.

It's essentially the same nonsense that had brain dead people claiming for 20 years that the US made Saddam Hussein the threat he was... all while Saddam tooled around Iraq and Kuwait killing innocent civilians with Soviet armor and weaponry.
 
It is funny how when the US attacks an Islamic country the US is responsible for creating terrorists. When the Soviets attack an Islamic country the US is also responsible to creating terrorists.

You have your history of Afghanistan incredibly screwed up. The remains of the US involvement in Afghanistan was the Northern Alliance, a moderate, pro-west, pro-human rights group.

The radical Islamists flocked to Afghanistan to fight the Soviets, not the US.

It's essentially the same nonsense that had brain dead people claiming for 20 years that the US made Saddam Hussein the threat he was... all while Saddam tooled around Iraq and Kuwait killing innocent civilians with Soviet armor and weaponry.

Sorry dude. The United States is the biggest weapons dealer, and both directly and indirectly we are responsible for more then most in terms of human suffering. Afghanistan is Russia's neighbour, and we shouldn't have been there, not in 1980 nor in 2001. And a majority of Americans now view A-Stan as such.
 
You made reference to a man who brought weapons into Mexico and is now in jail.

Isn't that right?

You are comparing Mexico to the middle east. They are very different.

No, I compared someone going on a recreational tour vs making a wrong turn.
 
Sorry dude. The United States is the biggest weapons dealer, and both directly and indirectly we are responsible for more then most in terms of human suffering. Afghanistan is Russia's neighbour, and we shouldn't have been there, not in 1980 nor in 2001. And a majority of Americans now view A-Stan as such.

I made no claim about who sells more weapons, I am making a specific point hat the Soviets and now the Russians have had an amazing track record of arming the brutal regimes of the world.

Assad is killing Syrians with Russian hardware.

Saddam's army was made up entirely of Soviet made weaponry.

Iran's army is armed by ... hey look, the Russians.

Hamas fires... hey look, Russian rockets! And hey, they have Russian assault rifles... hmmm... there is a trend here.

Boko Haram uses... hey look! Russian weapons.

The Taliban use.... hey look! Russian weapons.

Al Qaeda uses... hey look! Russian weapons.

Libya... Russian.

Venzuela... Russian.

Cuba... Russian.

And on and on.

The only bad actor in the world right now that doesn't use Russian weaponry almost exclusively is ISIS but that is mostly because their weapons were taken of the bodies of the dead Iraqis defending their country who were the people the US armed.

You can't sweep this simple truth aside just because the US sells fighter jets to Canada.
 
Last edited:
I made no claim about who sells more weapons, I am making a specific point hat the Soviets and now the Russians have had an amazing track record of arming the brutal regimes of the world.

Assad is killing Syrians with Russian hardware.

Saddam's army was made up entirely of Soviet made weaponry.

Iran's army is armed by ... hey look, the Russians.

Hamas fires... hey look, Russian rockets! And hey, they have Russian assault rifles... hmmm... there is a trend here.

Boko Haram uses... hey look! Russian weapons.

The Taliban use.... hey look! Russian weapons.

Al Qaeda uses... hey look! Russian weapons.

Libya... Russian.

Venzuela... Russian.

Cuba... Russian.

And on and on.

The only bad actor in the world right now that doesn't use Russian weaponry almost exclusively is ISIS but that is mostly because their weapons were taken of the bodies of the dead Iraqis defending their country who were the people the US armed.

You can't sweep this simple truth aside just because the US sells fighter jets to Canada.

And I'm making the point that US hardware is killing MORE civilians then Russian. And that you don't care about civilian life.
 
Yet your reaction to muslims (as an example barring all muslims from being able to immigrate to Canada) suggests perhaps you do not know this.

Again, not all Muslims are terrorists. Can we agree on that?

Can you tell the difference between a neighbor who is an Islamic terrorist and a 'moderate' Muslim before the bomb explodes? Of course not.

As a Canadian my interest is in protecting my fellow Canadians and not following any politically correct immigration policies. We already have Muslims rioting with shouts of 'Kill The Jews', planned on planting bombs on a passenger train, decapitating our PM, and so on. Why would we want more Muslims when there are plenty of people from other countries throughout the world who would love to live in Canada in peace with no serious chance at all that they'll become Islamist terrorists?
 
And I'm making the point that US hardware is killing MORE civilians then Russian. And that you don't care about civilian life.

And that is false. You may argue that the most lopsided body counts of the last 40 years favor US hardware, but the AK-47 has killed more people than pretty much any other weapon in the last 50 years. It is the staple for rebel uprisings and tyrannical crushing of rebel uprisings alike.
 
Last edited:
Sorry dude. The United States is the biggest weapons dealer, and both directly and indirectly we are responsible for more then most in terms of human suffering. Afghanistan is Russia's neighbour, and we shouldn't have been there, not in 1980 nor in 2001. And a majority of Americans now view A-Stan as such.

Well you've almost convinced me that the American people are evil. Just a few more posts oughta go it.
 
Again, not all Muslims are terrorists. Can we agree on that?

yep.

Can you tell the difference between a neighbor who is an Islamic terrorist and a 'moderate' Muslim before the bomb explodes? Of course not.

can you tell the difference between your neighbor who is white/black/asian and a child molestor before your daughter is raped?

Can you tell the difference between a your neighbor who's quiet and a nutcase before he shoots up the shopping centre?

I could go on...

As a Canadian my interest is in protecting my fellow Canadians and not following any politically correct immigration policies.

you know nothing about Canadas immigration policies, they are strict and they are unforgiving, I'm married to a Japanese women with a child and we are struggling to get her permanent residency.

We already have Muslims rioting with shouts of 'Kill The Jews', planned on planting bombs on a passenger train, decapitating our PM, and so on.

How many people was this?

How many muslims compared to extremists in the general population would kill the prime minister if it was possible?

Why would we want more Muslims when there are plenty of people from other countries throughout the world who would love to live in Canada in peace with no serious chance at all that they'll become Islamist terrorists?

There's a chance anyone can become violent and hurt people, it really has nothing to do with Islam.

at the end of the day islam is merely the tool, the old fellas who recruit these youngsters have a political agenda, not a religious one and I'll tell yah, when it comes to security in my immediate vicinity, the greatest threat is a white male between the ages of 18 and 35 that is intoxicated (considering it was the only violent encounter with a guest i've ever had).
 
Well tell me, what could have been worse then what we have with the US having been the dominant influence in the ME for twenty years?

Twice the amount of carnage and the sectarian divide would have exploded already and Israel, just might have been taken out of the picture. As none would have been able to intervene. Which would have gave the Russians the favors with the Suez, Bahrain, the Persian Gulf and the Arabian Sea. Now you think how that works out with our best interests at hand or in mind.
 
And that is false. You may argue that the most lopsided body counts of the last 40 years favor US hardware, but the AK-47 has killed more people than pretty much any other weapon in the last 50 years. It is the staple for rebel uprisings and tyrannical crushing of rebel uprisings alike.

Well, that's all I was arguing. Are we going to now blame fighters for considering the AK47 to be superior to the M16?
 
Well you've almost convinced me that the American people are evil. Just a few more posts oughta go it.

By a post that points out that a majority of Americans view the afghan war a mistake? And since when do you consider Americans to be superior, didn't you just point out elsewhere that the majority of Americans are stupid?
 
Twice the amount of carnage and the sectarian divide would have exploded already and Israel, just might have been taken out of the picture. As none would have been able to intervene. Which would have gave the Russians the favors with the Suez, Bahrain, the Persian Gulf and the Arabian Sea. Now you think how that works out with our best interests at hand or in mind.

The problem is that what the White House considers our best interests, aren't mine!
 
Ronny Reagan was the first and only president to triple our nations national debt. In Clintons 8 years, he added less then two trillion. Bush doubled it from 5 to 10 trillion, and Obama's on course to double it again. BUT......our national debt is a bi-partisan effort, don't let anybody tell you different. It's been known by only a few unfortunately, that there's a dime thickness of difference between the two parties. This is why there's so many independents compared with 3-4 decades ago. They just all need to get together, form a party and put the fear of god into the smart ass and the dumb elephant!

:agree: It seems that people on both sides of the aisle are so disgusted with the status quo these days - we see the people we elect to govern us, and whose salaries are paid by us, BTW! - ignoring us in favor of those who lobby them with money, and voting how they expect them to; we watch our infrastructure crumble while billions of dollars are sent to other countries who love our dollars but hate us; we see our food dollars not going as far as they used to - c'mon...hamburg per pound costing as much as a expensive good steak used to?; we see our good jobs leaving our shores and moving to more business-friendly climates, so we're left with the Mc-type jobs that don't pay much for people who have little schooling or skills; and on and on.

The problem with getting a good third-party candidate is that it is nearly impossible to do. It's too expensive! The two major parties have written laws that benefit them, and since it takes so much money to run for office - One $ billion dollars each for Obama and Romney in the last election :eek: they simply don't have the means to even get on the ballot in all 50 states. It's unfair, but that's how it is. Got any suggestions?

Greetings, Montecresto. :2wave:
 
Well, that's all I was arguing. Are we going to now blame fighters for considering the AK47 to be superior to the M16?

Hahahah! Whoa, your argument sure has changed!

From "American weapons cause more deaths!!" to "Whoo Hoo! Soviet Weapons are great!" :roll:

It also doesn't help that the US wasn't in the habit of arming brutal dictatorships, not at the pace of the Russians/Soviets, anyway.

Once you get past the "HooRah" bit from Arlee Ermy this is a pretty interesting comparison of the M-16 and AK-47:



AK is easier to keep and per-bullet is better than the M-16, but the M-16 is more accurate, especially when firing fully-auto.

In the end the bad guys of the world buy the AK-47 because it is cheap and easier to maintain and someone will sell it to them.
 
Last edited:
:agree: It seems that people on both sides of the aisle are so disgusted with the status quo these days - we see the people we elect to govern us, and whose salaries are paid by us, BTW! - ignoring us in favor of those who lobby them with money, and voting how they expect them to; we watch our infrastructure crumble while billions of dollars are sent to other countries who love our dollars but hate us; we see our food dollars not going as far as they used to - c'mon...hamburg per pound costing as much as a expensive good steak used to?; we see our good jobs leaving our shores and moving to more business-friendly climates, so we're left with the Mc-type jobs that don't pay much for people who have little schooling or skills; and on and on.

The problem with getting a good third-party candidate is that it is nearly impossible to do. It's too expensive! The two major parties have written laws that benefit them, and since it takes so much money to run for office - One $ billion dollars each for Obama and Romney in the last election :eek: they simply don't have the means to even get on the ballot in all 50 states. It's unfair, but that's how it is. Got any suggestions?

Greetings, Montecresto. :2wave:

Hi there Polgara! Great post, all very good points. If those people that identify themselves as independent, truly are independent. Take the jump, they make up a third. The money will be there.
 
Hahahah! Whoa, your argument sure has changed!

From "American weapons cause more deaths!!" to "Whoo Hoo! Soviet Weapons are great!" :roll:

Um, in the post you quoted, I was agreeing with you that the killing has been lopsided toward the US in the past several decades. That was the part where I said "that's all I was arguing"! As to the AK47 being superior, I said that foreign fighters believe it so, obviously. I personally haven't an opinion on that.
 
Then please lets not hear any more nonsense along these lines.
can you tell the difference between your neighbor who is white/black/asian and a child molestor before your daughter is raped?
No, I cannot. But if there was a way I could stop any child molesters from entering Canada I certainly would. What a weak analogy that is, btw.
Can you tell the difference between a your neighbor who's quiet and a nutcase before he shoots up the shopping centre?
No, I cannot.
I could go on...
I have no doubt about that, though none of these silly analogies work. That you actually think they work hints strongly at the leanings of a leftist mind.
you know nothing about Canadas immigration policies, they are strict and they are unforgiving, I'm married to a Japanese women with a child and we are struggling to get her permanent residency.
And I wish you all the luck in the world. They wouldn't let my Scottish brother-in-law reside here several years ago either. Perhaps they have a politically correct immigration board.
How many people was this?
I don't know but 100% of the ones I saw were Muslim.
How many muslims compared to extremists in the general population would kill the prime minister if it was possible?
I haven't any stats on this but I would aim for zero. There is only one group of people in the world who would even contemplate such an idea and they happen to be Muslims. That is bad luck for the 'moderates', perhaps, but we can, and do, judge people by their belief systems as well as their assimilation into their host countries. Muslims tend to have a spotty record in this regard, as many Europeans will tell you.
There's a chance anyone can become violent and hurt people, it really has nothing to do with Islam.
Is there any other group you can name who compares with Muslims?
at the end of the day islam is merely the tool, the old fellas who recruit these youngsters have a political agenda, not a religious one and I'll tell yah, when it comes to security in my immediate vicinity, the greatest threat is a white male between the ages of 18 and 35 that is intoxicated (considering it was the only violent encounter with a guest i've ever had).
Along those lines I was once a bouncer in a Gay bar in Melbourne and, after several drinks, many wanted to fight to demonstrate that just because they were Gay didn't mean they weren't men. I have never associated any of that with the Gay community. Of course there are bad people born into Canadian society but there is little we can do except sent them to jail. What we don't want to do is add to Canada's social ills if we know there is a way to possibly avoid them.
 
Yeah, ok. Sad thing is, before the US supported violence to overthrow president Assad (our favourite ME policy) Americans vacationed there. We need to bring this woman back. If it was your daughter you'd agree, so don't be selfish. I would agree that all Americans in Syria should be told to leave. But then they should probably be told to leave all the countries in which we've created enemies. I'll spare you the list, it may be lengthy.

No, the US should not bring her back.

She chose to go there, as an adult, and she can get herself out.

This is what happens when people have too much time on their hands.

People should go back to working to survive and not go thinking she has some obligation to go to a war torn country to do whatever she was doing.

Those people can save themselves.

My daughter wouldn't be there. I wouldn't raise a stupid person.

It is not heroic to put yourself in danger for absolutely no reason then cry when something does happen to you.
 
Back
Top Bottom