ADVERTISEMENT

OT ISIS

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally posted by Jaaa:

I'm not an isolationist, but can't the parties directly affected take care of this themselves? Tired of the US having to run and save every single foreign country on the planet.

I know it's short sighted -but with 3 sons between the ages of 17 and 21 I don't care for any more world wars anytime soon.
Do you not think the US is a party that is directly affected by ISIS?

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/ISIS-Iraq-video-White-House/2014/08/08/id/587653/
 
Originally posted by Medic007:
gsxr, I have no words man. That video is ummmm, not sure you should have posted that...

You should have added - "GRAPHIC CONTENT. Watch at your own risk."

Posted from Rivals Mobile
im the guy in the car,wreckless with no rules in my life,saved by isis.
3dgrin.r191677.gif
seriously looks like jordan is doing a great job,and i agree with jaaa,let's let the muslim countries take care of this problem.
 
Originally posted by Jaaa:

I'm not an isolationist, but can't the parties directly affected take care of this themselves? Tired of the US having to run and save every single foreign country on the planet.
I can certainly understand this stance, but when ISIS is making videos of cutting the heads off Americans and threatening the US with attacks, then it's hard to simply turn a blind eye to those type of events and threats. If we allow Iraq and maybe Syria to fall into the hands of this group, then there is plenty of reason to believe they will use that areas to prepare for attacks on the US mainland, such as Al Queda had in Afghanistan up till 9/11. Because no doubt they want to kill Americans. Then if that happens, the US would have to reconquer Iraq. So makes sense to get involved now and prevent the threat from growing.

The latest is apparently that young American girl they had captured has been killed over there now. ISIS claims she was killed in a Jordanian airstrike, but who knows if that is true or not.
 
The countries can't and won't take care of themselves. If we don't intervene then these terror groups will continue to grow and be even more of a threat to the US.
 
3.2M (million) based on JCon's (non-linked) potential numbers divided by 49 states (according to the FBI) is enough to reek havoc in the USA already; only a fool would think otherwise.

These assholes could care less what your race, creed, sexual preference are or if you do or do not believe in any kind of Supreme being or force of nature (unless its exactly theirs)

Oh and its proven that some of the pilots who started this on our soil on 9/11 received some of their education & practiced their vile, twisted philosophies in Norman, OK so it's probably safe to assume that they hate texass football at the very least...




This post was edited on 2/8 8:23 PM by iasooner1
 
That's a peculiar statistic, especially when you consider our government put thousands of natural born Japanese citizens in internment camps during WW2 for merely being of Japanese origin, yet, in the idol worshiping of all things PC, this government won't do thing one until they, the Muslim terrorist have the blood flowing into the storm sewers on our American soil.

Sorry, it's true, you know it, I know it...let's just accept that and hope that someone will rise up and do their damn job and protect us.

Sorry bastards...
 
Good point fitty. We've become more concerned with offending someone than we are protecting our country.
 
Originally posted by Soonersincefitty:
That's a peculiar statistic, especially when you consider our government put thousands of natural born Japanese citizens in internment camps during WW2 for merely being of Japanese origin, yet, in the idol worshiping of all things PC, this government won't do thing one until they, the Muslim terrorist have the blood flowing into the storm sewers on our American soil.

Sorry, it's true, you know it, I know it...let's just accept that and hope that someone will rise up and do their damn job and protect us.

Sorry bastards...
American military operations against ISIS have come out to about $7.5 million a day In comparison, back in 2007 when the Iraq War was full blown, the U.S. was spending $720,000 to keep their forces in the fight. By the time the war had ended, the United States had spent $2.2 trillion on the goal of establishing a safe and secure Iraq. A goal, which ISIS has now obliterated.
 
So, I ask yet again... What are the facts?

Is the good old U.S. of A. the world police? Are the actions taken by the U.S. even legal by U.S. law?

Are the stories being broadcast by the American media outlets the truth? Do they even match up with the reports from U.S. allies?

Glenn Beck says that a leopard can't change it's spots, yet 12 steps changed him from a drunk into a sober idiot... I still ask, where is the truth, what are the facts?

Do we have room to complain or wage war against countries when we fail in our attempt to overthrow a sovereign state's government? What about the one's that were democratically elected? Is this legal under U.S. law?

Why can't third party candidates get on the ballot in most states? Is the ink on ballots that expensive? What about a 4th or 5th party?

Why are we worried about people moving about in other parts of the world, but not about the people coming into our country illegally? Other than the i and l at the beginning, is there a difference in "illegal" and "legal"????

Can we really have this discussion here?
 
ISIS just executed a 26 year old American women. What is it going to take to take these savages out? Your family member?
 
Originally posted by K2C Sooner:

ISIS just executed a 26 year old American women. What is it going to take to take these savages out? Your family member?
A 26 yr old American woman who was in Syria. Seeing that she graduated in 2009 in Arizona, and went into the lion's den by her own choice. I don't condone the killing of anyone. Don't confuse that with the idea I won't though. She died where she wanted to be, trying to help people, I commend her for that.

Yet those who killed her were armed and put into a position of power through the actions of the U.S. of A. whether directly or indirectly. While any can argue about how long this has been going on over there, if the U.S. had never gotten involved in the first place then we probably wouldn't be now. I'd prefer my tax dollars working here, protecting our borders, instead of policing the world.

Savages are the same thing white Europeans called some of my ancestors while they killed them. Enough of my family members have served and some given their life for the freedoms we have here, yet I will not be calling any of them a p****y if they chose to bow down before meeting their Maker. More likely a martyr, in the true sense of the word.
 
Originally posted by PtLavacaSooner:

A 26 yr old American woman who was in Syria. Seeing that she graduated in 2009 in Arizona, and went into the lion's den by her own choice. I don't condone the killing of anyone. Don't confuse that with the idea I won't though. She died where she wanted to be, trying to help people, I commend her for that.

Yet those who killed her were armed and put into a position of power through the actions of the U.S. of A. whether directly or indirectly. While any can argue about how long this has been going on over there, if the U.S. had never gotten involved in the first place then we probably wouldn't be now. I'd prefer my tax dollars working here, protecting our borders, instead of policing the world.
So in others words...you think all of us American's "have it coming" because of the Middle Eastern politics of this country of the last 50-60 years??
 
Originally posted by BillyRay:
Originally posted by PtLavacaSooner:

A 26 yr old American woman who was in Syria. Seeing that she graduated in 2009 in Arizona, and went into the lion's den by her own choice. I don't condone the killing of anyone. Don't confuse that with the idea I won't though. She died where she wanted to be, trying to help people, I commend her for that.

Yet those who killed her were armed and put into a position of power through the actions of the U.S. of A. whether directly or indirectly. While any can argue about how long this has been going on over there, if the U.S. had never gotten involved in the first place then we probably wouldn't be now. I'd prefer my tax dollars working here, protecting our borders, instead of policing the world.
So in others words...you think all of us American's "have it coming" because of the Middle Eastern politics of this country of the last 50-60 years??
Did I say that anywhere?

Did all Americans have anything to do with the politics of of the Middle East?

I guess I could ask you the same thing, do all Jordanians, Iraqis, Syrians, Saudis, etc. "have it coming" because of the politics of their leaders?
 
Originally posted by PtLavacaSooner:

Originally posted by BillyRay:
Originally posted by PtLavacaSooner:

A 26 yr old American woman who was in Syria. Seeing that she graduated in 2009 in Arizona, and went into the lion's den by her own choice. I don't condone the killing of anyone. Don't confuse that with the idea I won't though. She died where she wanted to be, trying to help people, I commend her for that.

Yet those who killed her were armed and put into a position of power through the actions of the U.S. of A. whether directly or indirectly. While any can argue about how long this has been going on over there, if the U.S. had never gotten involved in the first place then we probably wouldn't be now. I'd prefer my tax dollars working here, protecting our borders, instead of policing the world.
So in others words...you think all of us American's "have it coming" because of the Middle Eastern politics of this country of the last 50-60 years??
Did I say that anywhere?

Did all Americans have anything to do with the politics of of the Middle East?

I guess I could ask you the same thing, do all Jordanians, Iraqis, Syrians, Saudis, etc. "have it coming" because of the politics of their leaders?
No, I was just asking. Your last couple of posts just seemed to have that kind of tone. Figured I would pose it in the form of a question and ask to make sure before assuming that was the case. I won't claim that the US policies and actions in the middle east over the last half century have been perfect or completely justified. But the same can be said about this countries involvements in conflicts like Korea, Vietnam, Panama, the drug war in central and south America, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, etc. But the populations of countries or regions like those didn't have radical groups of people hanging on to a level of hatred for the US that lead them to endlessly declare a jihad to kill any and all Americans on the planet. Make no mistake, that people associated with groups like Al Queda, ISIS, etc will continue to hate and murder any Americans they can get their hands on, and retreating within our borders will simply mean they will come here to do it, rather than fight us over there. I do understand what you are trying to say, but I simply don't believe that just because we get out of the middle east that they will lose interest in coming here to attack and kill us. It's one thing when those countries over there are fighting and killing each other. It's another thing when they decide to capture and cut off the heads of American's that were aid workers and journalists over there that had nothing to do with the political structure of this country.




This post was edited on 2/11 2:40 AM by BillyRay
 
I'm not speaking from the world of stupidity here, but I do think it's time that the issue of oppression in the Mid East and the acts of violence against innocent be handled straight up. Strategically, the US knows where these asshats are in Syria, and Northern Iraq, so why not drop a big on in this area and simply wipe out certain cities/towns that are considered the home of Isis?

I do believe it's time.
 
There are always going to be nutjobs in other countries that want to destroy the United States. the more we bomb the more they seem to multiply. The federal government seems obsessed with stamping out all terrorists wherever they may be found around the globe. Does our government intend to occupy all of the countries of the Middle East eventually, Do we really have the money and troops to police the entire globe .What we are doing is not working.

maybe it is time to re evaluate our foreign policy.we need help to fight these scumbags.
 
Originally posted by gsxrace01:


maybe it is time to re evaluate our foreign policy.we need help to fight these scumbags.
It becomes a tough moral issue. Maybe not to some, but it should to most.

I think most believe you're morally responsible to offer help to the old lady getting mugged in the grocery store parking lot. If you do, then where do you draw the line as you scale up? Abused people in your neighborhood? In your city? In your state? In your country? In your continent? In your hemisphere? In the world?

When you react to that old woman being mugged, you don't think, "What if this guy finds out who I am and targets my home, my family and children?" You help if you can, and then you deal with the repercussions later.

ISIS isn't just a government with a beef against another government. This is a fundamentalist group that is OK with what amounts to genocide against their own people and others (Zionists - which to them is just about the entire world) given the opportunity.

Hitler was an Austrian that avoided military duties in order to become an artist. Once his parents died and he used up their inheritance, he was a poor and starving artist. He fled Austria to Germany to avoid being imprisoned for skipping out on military service. It was there that he got pulled into World War 1 as a soldier which finally gave him "direction and purpose" in life.

The Nazi party was a minority, extreme-right wing political party. However, they were intimidating by use of violence. They were able to intimidate other parties and leaders to promote them or move out of their way until their momentum could not be stopped.
 
Originally posted by BillyRay:
Originally posted by PtLavacaSooner:

Did I say that anywhere?

Did all Americans have anything to do with the politics of of the Middle East?

I guess I could ask you the same thing, do all Jordanians, Iraqis, Syrians, Saudis, etc. "have it coming" because of the politics of their leaders?
No, I was just asking. Your last couple of posts just seemed to have that kind of tone. Figured I would pose it in the form of a question and ask to make sure before assuming that was the case. I won't claim that the US policies and actions in the middle east over the last half century have been perfect or completely justified. But the same can be said about this countries involvements in conflicts like Korea, Vietnam, Panama, the drug war in central and south America, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, etc. But the populations of countries or regions like those didn't have radical groups of people hanging on to a level of hatred for the US that lead them to endlessly declare a jihad to kill any and all Americans on the planet. Make no mistake, that people associated with groups like Al Queda, ISIS, etc will continue to hate and murder any Americans they can get their hands on, and retreating within our borders will simply mean they will come here to do it, rather than fight us over there. I do understand what you are trying to say, but I simply don't believe that just because we get out of the middle east that they will lose interest in coming here to attack and kill us. It's one thing when those countries over there are fighting and killing each other. It's another thing when they decide to capture and cut off the heads of American's that were aid workers and journalists over there that had nothing to do with the political structure of this country.




This post was edited on 2/11 2:40 AM by BillyRay
Yes, and groups like them got started while America was illegally arming them to fight the Soviet Union in the 1980's. But then we get into a completely different discussion. Rule of law. And then it will be which law, U.S., International, or at this point, Sharia. Why? Because those are the three in play at this point. Any American who decides to go to the Middle East for any reason right now should be aware of what might happen to them. American law doesn't apply there.

Yet American law does apply to the actions of the American government and it's officials who either directly or inadvertently engage in activities in foreign lands. Instead of the officials who are responsible for the illegal activities being brought up on charges and prosecuted, some 'fall guy' gets punished for following orders or nothing happens at all. Who pays the price for it? We do. Of course the jihadists are not going to lose interest in us. We are their enemy at this point. And while most Americans are completely innocent of any crime against them, the American government, over the years, isn't. That is according to not just Sharia law, but American law as well.

It was one thing when Iraq was fighting Iran, the U.S. had no issue with Saddam fighting with the government of the Ayatollah who had ousted the Shah. America didn't like that the leader that they had placed in power in an illegal coup d'etat years earlier had been the victim of the same type of overthrow. Interestingly, the Iranian government was led by a democratically elected prime minister until the CIA and MI-5 put a dictator in his place. While the British and Americans were told one thing, something totally different was going on. All of the CIA documents are now declassified. We can go and look at the facts, and they are totally different from what the American media was telling us. There wasn't a popular movement there, they were happy with their government wanting to keep the profits from oil pulled out of their lands. Yet the greed of British and American companies wanted more. Those are facts that the U.S. now admits to, and we wonder why these people hate us?

To think that we Americans should be able to freely go wherever we want and face no consequences for the actions of our former government leaders actions is nice, yet not realistic. Jihadists have now brought to us what we brought to them. Is it right? No. Were we right in involving ourselves in their business? No. The peace process rarely works when staring down the barrel of a gun, yet since we have the bigger guns, we seem to feel that it is okay to impose our will on the world. That in and of itself is against U.S. law. Those who swear to defend, and obey, the Constitution of the United States of America, rarely seem to know anything about it or what it actually says. The only real interest the American government has in most areas of the world comes from greed and the almighty dollar. That, in and of itself, is the root of the problem, IMO.

If they want to bring a war here to America, bring it. Do you fear the success they might have? Are our defenses not good enough to fight them? We have 10 Nimitz class carriers that are surrounded by cruisers and battle ships, destroyers, frigates, etc. Our navy is as large as the next 13 countries combined. Do you think we couldn't stop an attack here if that was what all that power was dedicated to? That doesn't even start to include all of our other defenses. Yet we have to largest open border in the world with Mexico. It goes undefended for the most part, while we wage war all over the world. Does that bother you at all? There are plenty of Latin American countries that hate us as well. It comes from meddling in their business. At what point do they decide to cross the border to bring war to us? Will it be the kind we expect, or one they like to employ to their advantage? Should we in America be more concerned with our own land than that of someone else, or does it just depend on how much money is involved?
 
After reading my Hitler history, I realized I didn't make my point clear.

I'm just saying that it doesn't take entirely crazy people to create crazy organizations and circumstances. All it takes is for a couple of lost souls to latch on to a purpose. It wouldn't matter if the U.S. was involved or not. These aren't people with some grand plan and purpose. These are people who found nothing better to do in their lives. Their "purpose" is actually just an excuse.

Hitler wasn't crazy. He was actually sane and smart enough to take his "excuse" from start to finish.

The Nazi party went unchecked. Most people, even Germans, thought they were crazies that would just go away, but they were just violent and crazy enough to make people fear standing up to them. So other parties just stepped out of the way with an idea that they would eventually fade or implode.

They didn't.
 
Originally posted by JConXtsy:

Originally posted by gsxrace01:



maybe it is time to re evaluate our foreign policy.we need help to fight these scumbags.
It becomes a tough moral issue. Maybe not to some, but it should to most.

I think most believe you're morally responsible to offer help to the old lady getting mugged in the grocery store parking lot. If you do, then where do you draw the line as you scale up? Abused people in your neighborhood? In your city? In your state? In your country? In your continent? In your hemisphere? In the world?

When you react to that old woman being mugged, you don't think, "What if this guy finds out who I am and targets my home, my family and children?" You help if you can, and then you deal with the repercussions later.

ISIS isn't just a government with a beef against another government. This is a fundamentalist group that is OK with what amounts to genocide against their own people and others (Zionists - which to them is just about the entire world) given the opportunity.

Hitler was an Austrian that avoided military duties in order to become an artist. Once his parents died and he used up their inheritance, he was a poor and starving artist. He fled Austria to Germany to avoid being imprisoned for skipping out on military service. It was there that he got pulled into World War 1 as a soldier which finally gave him "direction and purpose" in life.

The Nazi party was a minority, extreme-right wing political party. However, they were intimidating by use of violence. They were able to intimidate other parties and leaders to promote them or move out of their way until their momentum could not be stopped.
im not disagreeing with you,but we cannot continue what were doing now.right now, the us government is essentially bankrupt and the us financial system is on the verge of the collapse.U.S. military spending is greater than the military spending of China, Russia, Japan, India, and the rest of nato combined.
 
Originally posted by gsxrace01:
im not disagreeing with you,but we cannot continue what were doing now.right now, the us government is essentially bankrupt and the us financial system is on the verge of the collapse.U.S. military spending is greater than the military spending of China, Russia, Japan, India, and the rest of nato combined.
I can agree with that.
Not saying this was your stance, but I just don't understand people with isolationist theories.
Isolation gets you under the boot of another person in a hurry.
 
Originally posted by JConXtsy:

Originally posted by gsxrace01:
im not disagreeing with you,but we cannot continue what were doing now.right now, the us government is essentially bankrupt and the us financial system is on the verge of the collapse.U.S. military spending is greater than the military spending of China, Russia, Japan, India, and the rest of nato combined.
I can agree with that.
Not saying this was your stance, but I just don't understand people with isolationist theories.
Isolation gets you under the boot of another person in a hurry.
So does spreading yourself too thin. The U.S. was an isolationist nation until the late 19th century and it didn't hurt us any. Even in WWII we had to be engaged before entering into the conflict. Since then we have a habit of using covert ops to meddle in others business, and then preach morals. Where are the morals when covertly engaging in someone else's business?
 
Originally posted by PtLavacaSooner:

So does spreading yourself too thin. The U.S. was an isolationist nation until the late 19th century and it didn't hurt us any. Even in WWII we had to be engaged before entering into the conflict. Since then we have a habit of using covert ops to meddle in others business, and then preach morals. Where are the morals when covertly engaging in someone else's business?
I don't think it's very fair to compare the late-20th and 21st century U.S. to the late 19th century or even WW2 U.S.
We didn't even know we could be a world power in either of those situations.

We're about as far away from WW2 today as late-19th century U.S. was from the Civil War which decimated and left the nation in shambles. They were busy with rebuilding, restructuring and figuring out who we were back then - probably a little skittish about the effects of full scale war.

WW2 came at the heels of the Great Depression. We had no idea how powerful we were. We had no idea that so many Americans sitting around idle, desperate for work, would be the catalyst for such a powerful military infrastructure..

As far as covert ops versus overt military maneuvers, I think you're also comparing apples and oranges. I think it was pretty obvious that the majority of Americans were upset with the news that our government was running covert ops on our allies. I don't think that was a favorable position for Americans, whereas a majority probably do favor some intervention in the Middle East against extremist groups that are mass killing entire towns and religious sects for not being extreme enough.

I've never understood the argument that we "preach morals." What morals do we preach? Don't kill people for none other than you don't see eye to eye with them? Is that the moral we preach? I'm OK preaching that one if it is.

I could be reading you wrong, but what I get is that you're more upset with how our government operates (without the knowledge or support of its people). However, your wording makes it sound like you're blaming the people of the country for their opinion, but I think the majority of people have some agreeing basline with what you believe.
 
Originally posted by JConXtsy:

As far as covert ops versus overt military maneuvers, I think you're also comparing apples and oranges. I think it was pretty obvious that the majority of Americans were upset with the news that our government was running covert ops on our allies. I don't think that was a favorable position for Americans, whereas a majority probably do favor some intervention in the Middle East against extremist groups that are mass killing entire towns and religious sects for not being extreme enough.

I've never understood the argument that we "preach morals." What morals do we preach? Don't kill people for none other than you don't see eye to eye with them? Is that the moral we preach? I'm OK preaching that one if it is.

I could be reading you wrong, but what I get is that you're more upset with how our government operates (without the knowledge or support of its people). However, your wording makes it sound like you're blaming the people of the country for their opinion, but I think the majority of people have some agreeing basline with what you believe.
Overthrowing a foreign government is just that. It matters little in how it is accomplished. The result is the same. Opinions are varied. Many polls show differing rates of approval/disapproval depending on the question or country involved. So far our actions in the Middle East have helped strengthen al-Qaida/ISIS/ISIL rather than quell the threat.

The morals that 'we,' and I use that term loosely, preach, is that of freedom and democracy, human rights, and prosperity are just a few. Yet that doesn't always work. By imposing one's ideology on another against their will, often ill results follow. What a lot of people in the Middle East see as human rights, others see as oppression. Our cultures are entirely different. Being a democratic republic, spreading democracy is an interesting way of putting it. The two systems are different.

I am opposed to the government operating outside of it's own laws and contrary to the Constitution of the United States of America. Why should I or anyone else have to obey the law if the government doesn't?

Please show me an example of my wording blaming the people of the country for their opinion. I fail to see what you are getting at after rereading my posts here.

You are free to choose for yourselves who you want to lead you, as long as it is who we want. You are free to pass laws that are in the best interest of your society, as long as they are in line with what we want. You are free to do whatever you want, as long as it is what we want. Oh, and don't complain, our guns are bigger, and we have more of them than you...
 
The US isn't playing to win. If we put our minds to it we could wipe out this despicable group of people and the world we be better off for it.
 
I must say that I'm very impressed with all of you participating in this thread. Seriously. And not just from a moderator who is watching to lock this perspective. It is really awesome when people, strangers really, of opposing viewpoints can discuss their views without belittling, name calling, stereotyping, etc.

I'm not a soapbox kind of dude, but if the populace of the world, including those that "run" our government, could debate the way you all have on this thread, the world would be a better place. I'll let the cheesy emoticon do the rest of my talking.

happy0030.r191677.gif
 
U.S. foreign policy reminds me of a Saxon song... "Stop, get out, we are the strong arm of the law..."

All of this happening while the leaders of Ukraine, Russia, Germany, and France are in Minsk, Belarus trying to negotiate a peace plan...

Operation Atlantic Resolve... Didn't see it on your nightly news? No worries, it wasn't on them. Missed the AP report on it? No worries, they didn't have it either. So where is this news coming from and what is it? U.S. Department of Defense website has a lot to say about it. So does Military dot com.

What it is is the deployment of A-10 Thunderbolt II attack aircraft to Eastern Europe along with 300 airmen and support equipment going to be used for? To fight Russian separatists in the Ukraine of course. One of those countries that we had covert and not so covert ops working in last year. Does Obama think he can squeeze Putin's balls and get no response? How far will he push before the Bear's claws come out? Is this in the best interest of the U.S.A. or is it about Monsanto, Cargill, Dow, DuPont, and others working on ways to grab the Ukrainian farm lands?

Then there was Black Sabbath with War Pigs... "Generals gathering in their masses, just like witches at black masses... Evil minds that plot destruction, sorcerers of death's construction..."

War Pigs
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT