• 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. confirms Islamic State planning infiltration of southern border

Luftwaffe said:
Make your own vote?

Is this the post you want to vote for or the post where I said 1 million Iraqis aren't even worth a single American soldier?
Click to expand...

My vote...stay out of that mess. None of America's business.
 
Luftwaffe said:
I'm all about whatever we decide to do as long as it doesn't involve troops back in Iraq. If air bombing isn't the answer because people complain it does nothing, what else can we do? What else is stronger?

I like two options.

#1 nuke Iraq and parts of Syria

#2 Stay out of Iraq and Syria, it's their problem we're done, they wanna complain so hard then maybe they can do something for change.
Click to expand...

I think the below image might fit your mindset:

la-na-tt-dick-cheney-advice-20140625-002.jpg
 
Montecresto said:
I don't think anybody denies that IS is a threat in some form or fashion.
Click to expand...
Oh I disagree. I think people are sleepwalking again. We have the luxury of living in a 'safe' country. By and large, our presidents have done a good job of combating terrorist attacks. Anyone that thinks you can stop ALL terror attacks is not being realistic. Clinton wasnt negligent the first time the World Trade center was bombed. Bush was not negligent. Obama is not negligent. "There might be at some point in time a terrorist attack" is not actionable intel. I believe Homeland Security is investigating and acting as well as they can. The trick is finding the balance between doing all you can and trampling on US citizens rights.

The only REAL solution is to make the message clearly known and understood...we will hold the head of the snake accountable. Thats why I believe it is a mistake to NOT confront ISIS where we can SEE them operating. I think Obama has done exactly the right thing engaging them (even if he waited too long to do so).

I also believe that one of the reasons we are sleepwalking as a country is that the incidents involving Muslim fundamentalists are being downplayed. Every time there has been a terror attack involving a Muslim the administration and the media have gone out of their way to downplay it, or to rush to point out well golly...its not ALL Muslims. No...its NOT all Muslims...but we SHOULD be concerned about EVERY fundamentalist/extremist Muslim. We as a country and hell...EVERY Muslim.
 
VanceMack said:
Oh I disagree. I think people are sleepwalking again. We have the luxury of living in a 'safe' country. By and large, our presidents have done a good job of combating terrorist attacks. Anyone that thinks you can stop ALL terror attacks is not being realistic. Clinton wasnt negligent the first time the World Trade center was bombed. Bush was not negligent. Obama is not negligent. "There might be at some point in time a terrorist attack" is not actionable intel. I believe Homeland Security is investigating and acting as well as they can. The trick is finding the balance between doing all you can and trampling on US citizens rights.

The only REAL solution is to make the message clearly known and understood...we will hold the head of the snake accountable. Thats why I believe it is a mistake to NOT confront ISIS where we can SEE them operating. I think Obama has done exactly the right thing engaging them (even if he waited too long to do so).

I also believe that one of the reasons we are sleepwalking as a country is that the incidents involving Muslim fundamentalists are being downplayed. Every time there has been a terror attack involving a Muslim the administration and the media have gone out of their way to downplay it, or to rush to point out well golly...its not ALL Muslims. No...its NOT all Muslims...but we SHOULD be concerned about EVERY fundamentalist/extremist Muslim. We as a country and hell...EVERY Muslim.
Click to expand...

Well I appreciate your opinion, but, those that aren't making too much out of IS (with its 10-15 thousand fighters, and its capacity which is absolutely little threat to the US military) are the same people, generally, complaining that it's US policies in the Middle East that have emboldened IS and other militant Islamic groups to begin with.
 
Fearandloathing said:
Irrelevant.

Simply because two administrations in a row underestimated the Al Qaeda threat does not mean that ISIS is automatically about to blow up Washington. Because Obama had an agenda of "I stopped racism" in an election does not mean that the US need start nuking the region as some have openly suggested...and let's include Iran because they will have the bomb any day now. And we never hear about how the terrorists came to live among you\even after being under suspicion at one time, take flying lessons in your schools while taking months to study your security....

Sooner or later a frightened populace needs to take a look at the real evidence and decide whether living in a military state is worth it.

Syria/Iraq is not a security issue, it is purely political, staging for the mid terms, with the hawks trying to make Obama a dove, and Obama trying to make it look like he knows where to take a dump.

Fact - more people die EVERY year on US highways than all the foreign terrorists deaths of civilians.
Fact - NOT ONE terrorist has ever successfully penetrated US security.
Fact - there have been more deaths through domestic security than foreign
Fact - 14 years of continuous warfare, half of it on two fronts, an aggressive drone killing campaign and billions in aid to stop terrorism and the problem is worse.


So, let's do more of what we've been doing.
Click to expand...
You dont have to live in a military state to be vigilant in fighting terrorism. You have to be conscious and aware and when possible, you have to attack the head of the snake so they know to stay under their little rock. That doesnt require nukes and it DOES require exercising better intel. It also requires better cooperation with non-fundamentalist states and better education/awareness progress throughout the ME.

There are better models to follow in places like Iraq. They will never be a US style democracy. They dont have to be controlled by a brutal dictator like Saddam. Both Bush and Obama have done a dismal job of engaging Muslim leaders in helping Iraq establish a healthy government.

You are simply wrong if you believe ISIS is not a threat because they are 'only' butchering people in Iraq and Syria.
 
VanceMack said:
You dont have to live in a military state to be vigilant in fighting terrorism. You have to be conscious and aware and when possible, you have to attack the head of the snake so they know to stay under their little rock. That doesnt require nukes and it DOES require exercising better intel. It also requires better cooperation with non-fundamentalist states and better education/awareness progress throughout the ME.

There are better models to follow in places like Iraq. They will never be a US style democracy. They dont have to be controlled by a brutal dictator like Saddam. Both Bush and Obama have done a dismal job of engaging Muslim leaders in helping Iraq establish a healthy government.

You are simply wrong if you believe ISIS is not a threat because they are 'only' butchering people in Iraq and Syria.
Click to expand...

They were under their little rock until the US flipped the damn thing over is the freaking point!
 
Montecresto said:
Well I appreciate your opinion, but, those that aren't making too much out of IS (with its 10-15 thousand fighters, and its capacity which is absolutely little threat to the US military) are the same people, generally, complaining that it's US policies in the Middle East that have emboldened IS and other militant Islamic groups to begin with.
Click to expand...
What has emboldened them is the belief that we will not engage. They can also trust that our politicians (and a large number of our citizens) only give a damn about votes and elections and will spend more time blaming the 'other guys' than they will engaging the enemy.
 
Montecresto said:
They were under their little rock until the US flipped the damn thing over is the freaking point!
Click to expand...
No...they werent. Fundamentalists have ALWAYS existed in that region. Fundamentalists are not progressive...they arent liberty minded...they dont believe in a happy peaceful world where we will all live together in harmony. We didnt 'create' fundamentalists.
 
Montecresto said:
Indeed. And the left rolls out Orwell when it suites the meme and the right rolls him out when it suits theirs and they both trivialise the others. Which is why I always maintain that a partisan is part of the problem. Otherwise I can't tell if Orwell was a prophet or whether US leadership has mistaken his work for a manual. Either way we've trouble on our hands.
Click to expand...

I don't think either when reading Orwell, that government was neither....and it's been my experience that both sides as as guilty as the others. And yes, both trivialize....usually with never having read it. And you have a point, the US across two regimes has seemed to favor Orwell as handbook

There is no mistake though, that Animal Farm is based on the 1930's image of the collective.....but it really is a story about totalitarianism.
 
VanceMack said:
You dont have to live in a military state to be vigilant in fighting terrorism. You have to be conscious and aware and when possible, you have to attack the head of the snake so they know to stay under their little rock. That doesnt require nukes and it DOES require exercising better intel. It also requires better cooperation with non-fundamentalist states and better education/awareness progress throughout the ME.

There are better models to follow in places like Iraq. They will never be a US style democracy. They dont have to be controlled by a brutal dictator like Saddam. Both Bush and Obama have done a dismal job of engaging Muslim leaders in helping Iraq establish a healthy government.

You are simply wrong if you believe ISIS is not a threat because they are 'only' butchering people in Iraq and Syria.
Click to expand...


'
A threat? Perhaps.

A direct threat?

Please demonstrate with suitable references that ISIS is a direct threat to the security of the US at this moment.

Do you have ANY evidence that agents of ISIS have penetrated US security and that civilian live are at risk.

And please demonstrate how, if waring against terrorists over there is the answer, you have an even greater, and more brutal threat after nearly 14 years of war, 7 of which occurred in the very country the president is attacking again.
 
VanceMack said:
No...they werent. Fundamentalists have ALWAYS existed in that region. Fundamentalists are not progressive...they arent liberty minded...they dont believe in a happy peaceful world where we will all live together in harmony. We didnt 'create' fundamentalists.
Click to expand...

Who's denying that there has always been fundamentalists in the ME? You said they need to be taught to stay under their little rock, while I said that they were always there. Until we engaged in regime change throughout the region which has created the vacuums for them to exploit, and thrive in.
 
Fearandloathing said:
'
A threat? Perhaps.

A direct threat?

Please demonstrate with suitable references that ISIS is a direct threat to the security of the US at this moment.

Do you have ANY evidence that agents of ISIS have penetrated US security and that civilian live are at risk.

And please demonstrate how, if waring against terrorists over there is the answer, you have an even greater, and more brutal threat after nearly 14 years of war, 7 of which occurred in the very country the president is attacking again.
Click to expand...
Right up until 8:48 AM on 9/11 we had no direct evidence Al Qaida was a threat to the US.

At some point, all we can really do is take them at their word.
 
Montecresto said:
Who's denying that there has always been fundamentalists in the ME? You said they need to be taught to stay under their little rock, while I said that they were always there. Until we engaged in regime change throughout the region which has created the vacuums for them to exploit, and thrive in.
Click to expand...
Again...you are completely mistaken. You HAVE to understand...history did not begin with the first Gulf War. Or the 2nd. Saudi Arabia, UAE, Oman, Kuwait...those countries have battled fundamentalist Muslims for a long long time. They keep them in check in a lot of different ways.

Khomeni was not a benevolent religious leader until he was unjustly targeted by the Shah. He was a fundamentalist and advocated for the violent overthrow of the government and the installation of Shariah.

Fundamentalists are what they are. Always have been...always will be.
 
VanceMack said:
Right up until 8:48 AM on 9/11 we had no direct evidence Al Qaida was a threat to the US.

At some point, all we can really do is take them at their word.
Click to expand...

Oh....

So you didn't fix the problem is that it?

Cuba then is also a direct threat and you've never had an indication Canadians are attacking....better go condition red.

OK, you were asked for a citation and failed to do so..instead carried the debate on speculation, hearsay and it appears some steer manure

We're done here.
 
Fearandloathing said:
'
A threat? Perhaps.

A direct threat?

Please demonstrate with suitable references that ISIS is a direct threat to the security of the US at this moment.

Do you have ANY evidence that agents of ISIS have penetrated US security and that civilian live are at risk.

And please demonstrate how, if waring against terrorists over there is the answer, you have an even greater, and more brutal threat after nearly 14 years of war, 7 of which occurred in the very country the president is attacking again.
Click to expand...

Here's your sign:

Fort Bliss raises security as Sept. 11 approaches, ISIS developments raise concern - El Paso Times
 
VanceMack said:
Again...you are completely mistaken. You HAVE to understand...history did not begin with the first Gulf War. Or the 2nd. Saudi Arabia, UAE, Oman, Kuwait...those countries have battled fundamentalist Muslims for a long long time. They keep them in check in a lot of different ways.

Khomeni was not a benevolent religious leader until he was unjustly targeted by the Shah. He was a fundamentalist and advocated for the violent overthrow of the government and the installation of Shariah.

Fundamentalists are what they are. Always have been...always will be.
Click to expand...

How's it that really different from what I'm saying? THEY, kept them in check indeed, and several of "they" have been removed, and in the power vacuum that was left these guys have crawled out from under their rocks and are menacing the ME, and now allegedly, supposedly, are even a threat to the US mainland!
 
Montecresto said:
How's it that really different from what I'm saying? THEY, kept them in check indeed, and several of "they" have been removed, and in the power vacuum that was left these guys have crawled out from under their rocks and are menacing the ME, and now allegedly, supposedly, are even a threat to the US mainland!
Click to expand...

You probably have missed it but I have stated numerous times that in 2011 Obama was 'kinda' correct. Al Qaida WAS on the run. ISIS WAS for all intent and purposes a non-entity. And then, something happened.

We left.
 
Montecresto said:
How's it that really different from what I'm saying? THEY, kept them in check indeed, and several of "they" have been removed, and in the power vacuum that was left these guys have crawled out from under their rocks and are menacing the ME, and now allegedly, supposedly, are even a threat to the US mainland!
Click to expand...
They are not a direct threat to the US mainland and never will be, but you are forgetting that this war is based on terrifying the enemy. That's why the decapitations, the rape of women, etc.

Terror attacks have been happening repeatedly in the US with the DC snipers, Fort Hood murders and the Boston Marathon killings getting the most publicity. There have also been several unsuccessful attempts. This is how the jihadists will attack. One person will kill one, three or thirty, it doesn't really matter. We have seen the same thing happening in the UK as well. And each time this happens, if the media reports it, we call them temporarily insane, or workplace violence, etc. But of course there will be more of this and, I believe, it will increase.

You have to think like a terrorist in order to understand how they can defeat their enemies. They certainly aren't going to try it through traditional means.

Here's a list of some of the killings in the US since 9/11, though I don't think honor killings should be included. Nonetheless you get the idea. List of Islamic Terror Attacks in America
 
Fearandloathing said:
Well, lets see....

Approximately 500,000 people sneak into the US annually, and about 85% across the US-Mexican border.

Now, if I am a terrorist do I:

1] try to sneak in aboard a container?
2] try to fly in?
or 3] walk across with a few dozen Mexicans.

I'll go with door number 3 Alex!
Click to expand...

So you think middle easterners look just like hispanics and speak the local dialect fluently?
 
EnigmaO01 said:
Just like you are par for the course attacking the admin ad nauseam.
Click to expand...

It's not difficult but, nowhere near the grief that Bush took.

Maybe you guys can come up with someone who's not lame.
 
EnigmaO01 said:
So you think middle easterners look just like hispanics and speak the local dialect fluently?
Click to expand...

They don't have to do any of that. Just blend in with groups that avoid capture.

You really don't know squat about the border or illegal immigration do you?
 
I think there could be a low cost option to keep ISIS from coming in through Mexico.
Any person who reports ISIS related activity, that is validated.
Them and their entire family will be granted permanent worker status in the US.
 
A senior Homeland Security (DHS) official confirmed to Congress on Wednesday that militants associated with the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL or ISIS) are planning to enter the United States via the porous southern border.
Click to expand...

This border has been open from north and south for how long? What about all the refuges being sent to various U.S. cities by the U.N.? How many babies are being born here to obtain a U.S. passport, then being taken back to being radicalized?
Are planning to? Are you telling me they aren't here already? Get real.
These people need to be fired, from the bottom up all the way to the WH. ( Yes, we can't fire previous administrations, they are gone now. BHO and our no good Congress are in charge.) If I did a lousy job like they are doing, boss man would have fired me a long time ago.
Are they really finally waking up, realizing that everyone who wants to can just walk in, and are they really telling us those who are walking across are just poor folks from down south who want to better their lives? Who naive do they think we really are? Well, strike that. Some are being naive, and it won't be long for the responses to my post to come in, telling me that I am paranoid and ill informed.
Get real, think. How do you know who walks across the border?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom