• 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 beheads 21 christians, promises to ‘conquer rome, by allah’s permission

Montecresto said:
For pointing out that not everybody came out winners, lol. Some critical thinking. Anyway, there are none righteous, no not one.
Click to expand...

It is not about pointing out that not everybody came out as winners that is showing anti-American/Dardanian positions. But it is pointing them out continuously in every context that is occurring globally even if they have lost long ago and were a minority.

Begs the question, if the majority of Yugoslavian countries lost to Serbia and Russia, and the majority of USA/NATO/Dardania/Bosnia/Croatia/Slovenia lost, would it please you instead?
 
DDD said:
It is not about pointing out that not everybody came out as winners that is showing anti-American/Dardanian positions. But it is pointing them out continuously in every context that is occurring globally even if they have lost long ago and were a minority.

Begs the question, if the majority of Yugoslavian countries lost to Serbia and Russia, and the majority of USA/NATO/Dardania/Bosnia/Croatia/Slovenia lost, would it please you instead?
Click to expand...

What would please me is for people's to determine their own futures absent US intrigue, and interference. Before Milosevic was the US's bad guy, he was the good guy. He turned out to be the tool used to break up Yugoslavia.

And unfortunately for Milosevic, he wasn't alive for this.

Slobodan Milosevic was posthumously exonerated on Monday when the international court of justice ruled that Serbia was not responsible for the 1995 massacre at Srebrenica. The former president of Serbia had always argued that neither Yugoslavia nor Serbia had command of the Bosnian Serb army, and this has now been upheld by the world court in The Hague. By implication, Serbia cannot be held responsible for any other war crimes attributed to the Bosnian Serbs.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2007/feb/28/warcrimes.balkans
 
Last edited:
There were of course many tussles with Milosevic in the past, many moments of anger, and even some instances where Western governments thought they had outwitted him. But the reality has been, as Quintin Hoare of the Bosnian Institute wrote recently, that Slobodan Milosevic has been 'Our Man in Belgrade'. For Carrington, Vance, Owen, Stoltenberg, Hurd, Holbrooke and all the others handed the dismal task of dealing with the Yugoslav mess, he has been the indispensable leader who alone could deliver solutions.

How the man we could-do-business-with is becoming the man we must destroy | World news | The Guardian
 
Montecresto said:
What would please me is for people's to determine their own futures absent US intrigue, and interference. Before Milosevic was the US's bad guy, he was the good guy. He turned out to be the tool used to break up Yugoslavia.

And unfortunately for Milosevic, he wasn't alive for this.

Slobodan Milosevic was posthumously exonerated on Monday when the international court of justice ruled that Serbia was not responsible for the 1995 massacre at Srebrenica. The former president of Serbia had always argued that neither Yugoslavia nor Serbia had command of the Bosnian Serb army, and this has now been upheld by the world court in The Hague. By implication, Serbia cannot be held responsible for any other war crimes attributed to the Bosnian Serbs.

John Laughland: Lies of the vigilantes | Comment is free | The Guardian
Click to expand...

Montecresto said:
There were of course many tussles with Milosevic in the past, many moments of anger, and even some instances where Western governments thought they had outwitted him. But the reality has been, as Quintin Hoare of the Bosnian Institute wrote recently, that Slobodan Milosevic has been 'Our Man in Belgrade'. For Carrington, Vance, Owen, Stoltenberg, Hurd, Holbrooke and all the others handed the dismal task of dealing with the Yugoslav mess, he has been the indispensable leader who alone could deliver solutions.

How the man we could-do-business-with is becoming the man we must destroy | World news | The Guardian
Click to expand...

Alright, the deal is off.

I no longer care whether we misunderstand each other. I have made my estimate and you are either a troll or our positions are too polar for me to share personal insights on my posts.

See yah out there.
 
DDD said:
Alright, the deal is off.

I no longer care whether we misunderstand each other. I have made my estimate and you are either a troll or our positions are too polar for me to share personal insights on my posts.

See yah out there.
Click to expand...

Lol, ok buddy. Take care now, hear.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
for more:
Libya and Egypt launch air strikes against Isis after militants post beheadings video | World news | The Guardian





So lets talk about the Templars and the Crusades, because dawdling on the past will address this current reality.




"At least 21 Egyptians were kidnapped in two separate incidents in the city of Sirte, Libya in December and January. "




If your are not a muslim and still hanging around where these savages ISIS are, you are an idiot.


[/FONT]
[/INDENT]
Click to expand...

Por que? There's no way they could take so many of us withtout a fight **** YOU!!!
 
Feed them to the moon door:
 
Last edited:
Anthony60 said:
There is no cause for the savage activity of these people. They have the same justification as the Nazi's did. They are animals, nothing more.
Click to expand...

No... ISIS' motivation is religious apocalypse. Not quite what the NAZI's had in mind.
 
chainsaw said:
obama has that lying pos susan rice out on the stump claiming the 21 beheadings were caused by a movie carried out by over zealous film critics.
Click to expand...

benghaziiiiiiiiii!!!!!11!!!!1!!1!
 
Oberon said:
Left wing antisemitism is on a par with neo-Nazi and white nationalist antisemtism, so no suprises here. As for 'neutrality', it's just another euphemism for supporting genocide against Israeli Jews and Christians both. The 'neutrality' meme isn't even remotely neutral re real life consequences.
Click to expand...

:lamo

So what's your excuse for American Jews constantly voting left?
 
face said:
Por que? There's no way they could take so many of us withtout a fight **** YOU!!!
Click to expand...



They seem to be doing just that. if you are not in support of ISIS and have the means to return to your home country, It would be wise to do so.

staying to maybe get your head cut off is actually kind of selfish.
 
poweRob said:
OOOOHhhhhhhh yes yes... I see. THe video's context is a Republican said it. All the difference that's needed I suppose.
Click to expand...

Bush fought islamic terrorists, he could say they were Islamic, he didn't call terror attacks "random" or "workplace violence" he committed to a surge, and he actually led.

We can't say the same about chump Obama, can we?
 
US Conservative said:
Bush fought islamic terrorists, he could say they were Islamic, he didn't call terror attacks "random" or "workplace violence" he committed to a surge, and he actually led.

We can't say the same about chump Obama, can we?
Click to expand...

Your short memory isn't working well for you. Bush wouldn't commit to saying it was mulsim or a war on islam. He made speeches to make this perfectly clear. As far as the surge.... it's was simply convincing the Shia to ethnically cleanse the Sunni's from the area. Obama got Bin Landen. We can't say the same about chump Bush, can we?
 
US Conservative said:
Bush fought islamic terrorists, he could say they were Islamic, he didn't call terror attacks "random" or "workplace violence" he committed to a surge, and he actually led.

We can't say the same about chump Obama, can we?
Click to expand...

He could, and he did, until it was pointed out to him that the language was inadvertently encouraging, and legitimising terrorism, and then all such language was expunged from his administrations rhetoric. God your so plainly hypocritical about this!


But this shift in language used to discuss terrorism predates the Obama administration. In May 2008, UPI reported that "U.S. officials are being advised in internal government documents to avoid referring publicly to al-Qaida and other terrorist groups as Islamic or Muslim, and not to use terms like jihad or mujahedin, which "unintentionally legitimize" terrorism."
 
poweRob said:
Your short memory isn't working well for you. Bush wouldn't commit to saying it was mulsim or a war on islam. He made speeches to make this perfectly clear. As far as the surge.... it's was simply convincing the Shia to ethnically cleanse the Sunni's from the area. Obama got Bin Landen. We can't say the same about chump Bush, can we?
Click to expand...

Its not a "muslim war" or "war on Islam"-its a war on terror and the overwhelming majority is Islamic terrorism.
And Obama got Bin Laden because of the intelligence obtained by Bush.
 
Montecresto said:
He could, and he did, until it was pointed out to him that the language was inadvertently encouraging, and legitimising terrorism, and then all such language was expunged from his administrations rhetoric. God your so plainly hypocritical about this!


But this shift in language used to discuss terrorism predates the Obama administration. In May 2008, UPI reported that "U.S. officials are being advised in internal government documents to avoid referring publicly to al-Qaida and other terrorist groups as Islamic or Muslim, and not to use terms like jihad or mujahedin, which "unintentionally legitimize" terrorism."
Click to expand...

Obama is an appeaser who can't call things what they are-thats why he's getting called out on it.
 
US Conservative said:
Its not a "muslim war" or "war on Islam"-its a war on terror and the overwhelming majority is Islamic terrorism.
And Obama got Bin Laden because of the intelligence obtained by Bush.
Click to expand...

Nice fantasy bubble you live in there champ. :lamo
 
Now might be as good time for liberals to re-think banning U.S. citizens from carrying weapons. When you are at the shopping malls from now on make sure you are carrying a picture of Obama or Hillary so you can throw it at the terrorists shooting up the joint with AK47s.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom