Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You have used that straw man argument on many other threads in the past............Including at me when I said we should carpet bomb ISIS strong holds in Northern Syria...........or similar posts...................I asked you first, and you refuse to engage................No one said it is easy............You have NO SUGGESTIONS?
Do you?
I said many times what needs to be done, and you have criticized me for saying so.............Using the Straw man argument saying I hate all Muslims....................which you are using again on this thread..................
You know what must be done.................but refuse to state it.
My statement was that ISIS needs to be destroyed - that doesn't mean I know what needs to be done. I don't. It's a complicated situation that can't be resolved without the regional powers stepping up to the plate. The "easy" answer is "nuke 'em" - but like most easy answeres it's neither realistic nor practical nor a solution.
Where did I say you hate all Muslims?
Link?
You haven't done so in this thread..................
Riddle me this..................When you want them Destroyed........doesn't that mean kill them................They are in Northern Syria...........Head of the Snake........................what is so difficult to figure.......................
You seem to see "destruction" as nothing more than a bombing. That doesn't address the underlying problems that led to their creation and ability to gain territory.
Toppling Saddam was some sort of misguided "Head of the Snake" campaign that led to far worse consequences.
How would you prevent such unanticipated consequences?
You llike to throw "strawman" around alot - asking questions like these is not a strawman.
Are you a muslim?and the glee of muslims for the attacks on europe and calls for US blood. Or did you miss that?
I'm sure you didn't, since you are quite gleeful for attacks on Muslims.
Because I don't quite get your disconnect of what just happened and your apparent defense of islam.
There is a difference between Islam and extremism - it doesn't take a Muslim to note it.
but many don't make the distinction. They see muslim violence and not enough moderate muslims standing up against them, but standing on the sidelines holding their tongue. The majority of muslims need to stand up and say no.
Why are so many letting the non-muslims carry the burden to end the radicals and extremists speaking hate against the west? Why should the west open their doors to "refugees" they know nothing about and it is know many of them are ISIS infiltrator and not genuine refugees. There is almost a million refugees trying to enter europe and a third are ISIS or extremist. People should not be scared? They shouldn't care? They should let them all it even with the threat of terrorism?
How many more Paris like attacks should europe suffer for the sake of "refugees"?
Sweden want their muslims out and refuse refugees. Even Germany can't take them all. They did not expect hundreds of thousand, but thought a few thousand only would try to enter.
Refugees expect and are even suing for welfare and benefits like citizens are allowed. They want to free ride, but europe should not be concerned? Refugees except special treatment because of their faith at the cost of the majority of christians or other religions already there. They want special laws and not conformity to the state laws.
How is this supposed to make the citizens of those countries feel? Warm and fuzzy for the muslims?
Sympathy is one thing, invasion and conquest totally another.
Terrorism is an invasion. France suffered from an invasion and attempted conquest of their people by outsiders. Thousands of muslims cheer the attacks and europe is supposed to welcome unconditionally more muslims into their countries?
It is one thing to know not all muslims are like that, and other to not care what kind of muslims are entering their neighborhoods.
You know, some of this is not so different than what they used to say about Jewish refugees in WW2, when the concern then was Anarchist Terrorism.
That is ad hominem bullshit. The facts are presented, if you can refute them then do so, but you dont get off with some generic broad slam on those who present the facts to you, dude.
No, not for a libtard, not really, not at all.
I'm not playing the link game tonight..............going back in time where you used the straw man to attack various posters including me........I'm sure more posters are used to your tactics.............You have used that straw man argument on many other threads in the past............Including at me when I said we should carpet bomb ISIS strong holds in Northern Syria...........or similar posts...................I asked you first, and you refuse to engage................No one said it is easy............You have NO SUGGESTIONS?
Do you?
I said many times what needs to be done, and you have criticized me for saying so.............Using the Straw man argument saying I hate all Muslims....................which you are using again on this thread..................
You know what must be done.................but refuse to state it.
My statement was that ISIS needs to be destroyed - that doesn't mean I know what needs to be done. I don't. It's a complicated situation that can't be resolved without the regional powers stepping up to the plate. The "easy" answer is "nuke 'em" - but like most easy answeres it's neither realistic nor practical nor a solution.
Where did I say you hate all Muslims?
Link?
You haven't done so in this thread..................
Riddle me this..................When you want them Destroyed........doesn't that mean kill them................They are in Northern Syria...........Head of the Snake........................what is so difficult to figure.......................
You seem to see "destruction" as nothing more than a bombing. That doesn't address the underlying problems that led to their creation and ability to gain territory.
Toppling Saddam was some sort of misguided "Head of the Snake" campaign that led to far worse consequences.
How would you prevent such unanticipated consequences?
You llike to throw "strawman" around alot - asking questions like these is not a strawman.
Are you a muslim?I'm sure you didn't, since you are quite gleeful for attacks on Muslims.
Because I don't quite get your disconnect of what just happened and your apparent defense of islam.
There is a difference between Islam and extremism - it doesn't take a Muslim to note it.
but many don't make the distinction. They see muslim violence and not enough moderate muslims standing up against them, but standing on the sidelines holding their tongue. The majority of muslims need to stand up and say no.
Why are so many letting the non-muslims carry the burden to end the radicals and extremists speaking hate against the west? Why should the west open their doors to "refugees" they know nothing about and it is know many of them are ISIS infiltrator and not genuine refugees. There is almost a million refugees trying to enter europe and a third are ISIS or extremist. People should not be scared? They shouldn't care? They should let them all it even with the threat of terrorism?
How many more Paris like attacks should europe suffer for the sake of "refugees"?
Sweden want their muslims out and refuse refugees. Even Germany can't take them all. They did not expect hundreds of thousand, but thought a few thousand only would try to enter.
Refugees expect and are even suing for welfare and benefits like citizens are allowed. They want to free ride, but europe should not be concerned? Refugees except special treatment because of their faith at the cost of the majority of christians or other religions already there. They want special laws and not conformity to the state laws.
How is this supposed to make the citizens of those countries feel? Warm and fuzzy for the muslims?
Sympathy is one thing, invasion and conquest totally another.
Terrorism is an invasion. France suffered from an invasion and attempted conquest of their people by outsiders. Thousands of muslims cheer the attacks and europe is supposed to welcome unconditionally more muslims into their countries?
It is one thing to know not all muslims are like that, and other to not care what kind of muslims are entering their neighborhoods.
You know, some of this is not so different than what they used to say about Jewish refugees in WW2, when the concern then was Anarchist Terrorism.
Jews were look for a safe place to Iive in peace and security where they could practice their faith.
Jews did not come as terrorist but builders and investors. They came to improve and modernize, to share their knowledge and skills. They were greeter by some with abuse and death.
Some even suspected them as german infiltrators and not as refugees.
Now muslim are seem as infiltrators because a large percentage of the refugees are infiltrators and not refugees. They need to be vetted and those willing to work and improve the countries can be given entry, but those who want to bleed the countries and cause harm should not be given open access.
It is not about being mean but being smart and careful.
Are you a muslim?
Because I don't quite get your disconnect of what just happened and your apparent defense of islam.
There is a difference between Islam and extremism - it doesn't take a Muslim to note it.
but many don't make the distinction. They see muslim violence and not enough moderate muslims standing up against them, but standing on the sidelines holding their tongue. The majority of muslims need to stand up and say no.
Why are so many letting the non-muslims carry the burden to end the radicals and extremists speaking hate against the west? Why should the west open their doors to "refugees" they know nothing about and it is know many of them are ISIS infiltrator and not genuine refugees. There is almost a million refugees trying to enter europe and a third are ISIS or extremist. People should not be scared? They shouldn't care? They should let them all it even with the threat of terrorism?
How many more Paris like attacks should europe suffer for the sake of "refugees"?
Sweden want their muslims out and refuse refugees. Even Germany can't take them all. They did not expect hundreds of thousand, but thought a few thousand only would try to enter.
Refugees expect and are even suing for welfare and benefits like citizens are allowed. They want to free ride, but europe should not be concerned? Refugees except special treatment because of their faith at the cost of the majority of christians or other religions already there. They want special laws and not conformity to the state laws.
How is this supposed to make the citizens of those countries feel? Warm and fuzzy for the muslims?
Sympathy is one thing, invasion and conquest totally another.
Terrorism is an invasion. France suffered from an invasion and attempted conquest of their people by outsiders. Thousands of muslims cheer the attacks and europe is supposed to welcome unconditionally more muslims into their countries?
It is one thing to know not all muslims are like that, and other to not care what kind of muslims are entering their neighborhoods.
You know, some of this is not so different than what they used to say about Jewish refugees in WW2, when the concern then was Anarchist Terrorism.
Jews were look for a safe place to Iive in peace and security where they could practice their faith.
Jews did not come as terrorist but builders and investors. They came to improve and modernize, to share their knowledge and skills. They were greeter by some with abuse and death.
Some even suspected them as german infiltrators and not as refugees.
Now muslim are seem as infiltrators because a large percentage of the refugees are infiltrators and not refugees. They need to be vetted and those willing to work and improve the countries can be given entry, but those who want to bleed the countries and cause harm should not be given open access.
It is not about being mean but being smart and careful.
Jews were seen as infiltrators then. Muslims are seen as infiltrators now. The perception and subsequent rhetoric is the same. The only difference is the name of the group. The language and fears are exactly the same.
http://www.economist.com/node/4292760
'ad hominem' is not the same thing as 'name calling'. It is a logical fallacy where one dismisses facts or arguments by attacking the messenger as illegitimate, like when libtards say a story is not tue because it is from world net daily or a Kluxer said it so it must be false.That is ad hominem bullshit. The facts are presented, if you can refute them then do so, but you dont get off with some generic broad slam on those who present the facts to you, dude.
No, not for a libtard, not really, not at all.
UnHm.
You don't prevent the unanticipated Consequences.........you smack them the hell down and leave.............and when it returns you smack it down at earlier stages to prevent it's growth............It has grown because the world refused to ACT.
There is a difference between Islam and extremism - it doesn't take a Muslim to note it.
but many don't make the distinction. They see muslim violence and not enough moderate muslims standing up against them, but standing on the sidelines holding their tongue. The majority of muslims need to stand up and say no.
Why are so many letting the non-muslims carry the burden to end the radicals and extremists speaking hate against the west? Why should the west open their doors to "refugees" they know nothing about and it is know many of them are ISIS infiltrator and not genuine refugees. There is almost a million refugees trying to enter europe and a third are ISIS or extremist. People should not be scared? They shouldn't care? They should let them all it even with the threat of terrorism?
How many more Paris like attacks should europe suffer for the sake of "refugees"?
Sweden want their muslims out and refuse refugees. Even Germany can't take them all. They did not expect hundreds of thousand, but thought a few thousand only would try to enter.
Refugees expect and are even suing for welfare and benefits like citizens are allowed. They want to free ride, but europe should not be concerned? Refugees except special treatment because of their faith at the cost of the majority of christians or other religions already there. They want special laws and not conformity to the state laws.
How is this supposed to make the citizens of those countries feel? Warm and fuzzy for the muslims?
Sympathy is one thing, invasion and conquest totally another.
Terrorism is an invasion. France suffered from an invasion and attempted conquest of their people by outsiders. Thousands of muslims cheer the attacks and europe is supposed to welcome unconditionally more muslims into their countries?
It is one thing to know not all muslims are like that, and other to not care what kind of muslims are entering their neighborhoods.
You know, some of this is not so different than what they used to say about Jewish refugees in WW2, when the concern then was Anarchist Terrorism.
Jews were look for a safe place to Iive in peace and security where they could practice their faith.
Jews did not come as terrorist but builders and investors. They came to improve and modernize, to share their knowledge and skills. They were greeter by some with abuse and death.
Some even suspected them as german infiltrators and not as refugees.
Now muslim are seem as infiltrators because a large percentage of the refugees are infiltrators and not refugees. They need to be vetted and those willing to work and improve the countries can be given entry, but those who want to bleed the countries and cause harm should not be given open access.
It is not about being mean but being smart and careful.
Jews were seen as infiltrators then. Muslims are seen as infiltrators now. The perception and subsequent rhetoric is the same. The only difference is the name of the group. The language and fears are exactly the same.
http://www.economist.com/node/4292760
Sorry...the behavior is completely different...muslims come into a country and refuse to assimilate...Jews become peaceful members of the society.
How the hell do you think.................Find as many as possible and kill them.................You don't prevent the unanticipated Consequences.........you smack them the hell down and leave.............and when it returns you smack it down at earlier stages to prevent it's growth............It has grown because the world refused to ACT.
Exactly how do you propose to do that?
but many don't make the distinction. They see muslim violence and not enough moderate muslims standing up against them, but standing on the sidelines holding their tongue. The majority of muslims need to stand up and say no.
Why are so many letting the non-muslims carry the burden to end the radicals and extremists speaking hate against the west? Why should the west open their doors to "refugees" they know nothing about and it is know many of them are ISIS infiltrator and not genuine refugees. There is almost a million refugees trying to enter europe and a third are ISIS or extremist. People should not be scared? They shouldn't care? They should let them all it even with the threat of terrorism?
How many more Paris like attacks should europe suffer for the sake of "refugees"?
Sweden want their muslims out and refuse refugees. Even Germany can't take them all. They did not expect hundreds of thousand, but thought a few thousand only would try to enter.
Refugees expect and are even suing for welfare and benefits like citizens are allowed. They want to free ride, but europe should not be concerned? Refugees except special treatment because of their faith at the cost of the majority of christians or other religions already there. They want special laws and not conformity to the state laws.
How is this supposed to make the citizens of those countries feel? Warm and fuzzy for the muslims?
Sympathy is one thing, invasion and conquest totally another.
Terrorism is an invasion. France suffered from an invasion and attempted conquest of their people by outsiders. Thousands of muslims cheer the attacks and europe is supposed to welcome unconditionally more muslims into their countries?
It is one thing to know not all muslims are like that, and other to not care what kind of muslims are entering their neighborhoods.
You know, some of this is not so different than what they used to say about Jewish refugees in WW2, when the concern then was Anarchist Terrorism.
Jews were look for a safe place to Iive in peace and security where they could practice their faith.
Jews did not come as terrorist but builders and investors. They came to improve and modernize, to share their knowledge and skills. They were greeter by some with abuse and death.
Some even suspected them as german infiltrators and not as refugees.
Now muslim are seem as infiltrators because a large percentage of the refugees are infiltrators and not refugees. They need to be vetted and those willing to work and improve the countries can be given entry, but those who want to bleed the countries and cause harm should not be given open access.
It is not about being mean but being smart and careful.
Jews were seen as infiltrators then. Muslims are seen as infiltrators now. The perception and subsequent rhetoric is the same. The only difference is the name of the group. The language and fears are exactly the same.
http://www.economist.com/node/4292760
Sorry...the behavior is completely different...muslims come into a country and refuse to assimilate...Jews become peaceful members of the society.
Most Muslims come in as peaceful members of society.
The only difference is perception.
Yesterday's anarchists are todays jihadists.
How the hell do you think.................Find as many as possible and kill them.................You don't prevent the unanticipated Consequences.........you smack them the hell down and leave.............and when it returns you smack it down at earlier stages to prevent it's growth............It has grown because the world refused to ACT.
Exactly how do you propose to do that?
Do you go out and say not all fire ants are bad in your yard win you put poison on them?
Your Pysc babble is humorous, as you still refuse to say what needs to be said................
You use PC to say they need to be destroyed, then bitch at me saying how when I say go in and kill them.
I asked you first, and you refuse to engage................No one said it is easy............You have NO SUGGESTIONS?What is your solution?
I don't have one - it's not an easy problem to solve at all.
Do you?
I said many times what needs to be done, and you have criticized me for saying so.............Using the Straw man argument saying I hate all Muslims....................which you are using again on this thread..................
You know what must be done.................but refuse to state it.
My statement was that ISIS needs to be destroyed - that doesn't mean I know what needs to be done. I don't. It's a complicated situation that can't be resolved without the regional powers stepping up to the plate. The "easy" answer is "nuke 'em" - but like most easy answeres it's neither realistic nor practical nor a solution.
Where did I say you hate all Muslims?
You know, some of this is not so different than what they used to say about Jewish refugees in WW2, when the concern then was Anarchist Terrorism.
Jews were look for a safe place to Iive in peace and security where they could practice their faith.
Jews did not come as terrorist but builders and investors. They came to improve and modernize, to share their knowledge and skills. They were greeter by some with abuse and death.
Some even suspected them as german infiltrators and not as refugees.
Now muslim are seem as infiltrators because a large percentage of the refugees are infiltrators and not refugees. They need to be vetted and those willing to work and improve the countries can be given entry, but those who want to bleed the countries and cause harm should not be given open access.
It is not about being mean but being smart and careful.
Jews were seen as infiltrators then. Muslims are seen as infiltrators now. The perception and subsequent rhetoric is the same. The only difference is the name of the group. The language and fears are exactly the same.
http://www.economist.com/node/4292760
Sorry...the behavior is completely different...muslims come into a country and refuse to assimilate...Jews become peaceful members of the society.
Most Muslims come in as peaceful members of society.
The only difference is perception.
Yesterday's anarchists are todays jihadists.
Do you really believe that? So, what has happened in France? This isn't the first problem they've had with the Muslims. I'm also remembering smaller problems not of the scope of this particular incident, of course. I believe that there are many who take advantage of certain situations to gain entrance into a country TO cause problems.
I asked you first, and you refuse to engage................No one said it is easy............You have NO SUGGESTIONS?I don't have one - it's not an easy problem to solve at all.
Do you?
I said many times what needs to be done, and you have criticized me for saying so.............Using the Straw man argument saying I hate all Muslims....................which you are using again on this thread..................
You know what must be done.................but refuse to state it.
My statement was that ISIS needs to be destroyed - that doesn't mean I know what needs to be done. I don't. It's a complicated situation that can't be resolved without the regional powers stepping up to the plate. The "easy" answer is "nuke 'em" - but like most easy answeres it's neither realistic nor practical nor a solution.
Where did I say you hate all Muslims?
WHAT HAS TO BE DONE IS FOR THE US , AND THE COALITION OF THE BRAIN DEAD, TO EXIT THE ME AND LEAVE THOSE UNFORTUNATE PEOPLE ALONE.
.
Everyone they are ignored or blamed for being insincere or too little too late.Then surely you can find thousands of videos that show moderate Muslims celebrating American victories and deploring ISIS abuses, other than the King of Jordan, a truly stand up guy.When they speak up, the likes of you ignore it.
Google is your friend. Google "Muslims condemn extremis" or "violence" etc and you'll find plenty of examples. They've been asked for in multiple threads and duly ignored so I am not going to research them again.
LOLHow the hell do you think.................Find as many as possible and kill them.................You don't prevent the unanticipated Consequences.........you smack them the hell down and leave.............and when it returns you smack it down at earlier stages to prevent it's growth............It has grown because the world refused to ACT.
Exactly how do you propose to do that?
Do you go out and say not all fire ants are bad in your yard win you put poison on them?
Your Pysc babble is humorous, as you still refuse to say what needs to be said................
You use PC to say they need to be destroyed, then bitch at me saying how when I say go in and kill them.
You are full of generalities and short of specifics - your the one that demanded solutions.
How will you find them? How will you kill them? Who will you send? Who will you work with?
.................I guess our military is just guessing..........
Everyone they are ignored or blamed for being insincere or too little too late.Then surely you can find thousands of videos that show moderate Muslims celebrating American victories and deploring ISIS abuses, other than the King of Jordan, a truly stand up guy.When they speak up, the likes of you ignore it.
Google is your friend. Google "Muslims condemn extremis" or "violence" etc and you'll find plenty of examples. They've been asked for in multiple threads and duly ignored so I am not going to research them again.
LOLHow the hell do you think.................Find as many as possible and kill them.................You don't prevent the unanticipated Consequences.........you smack them the hell down and leave.............and when it returns you smack it down at earlier stages to prevent it's growth............It has grown because the world refused to ACT.
Exactly how do you propose to do that?
Do you go out and say not all fire ants are bad in your yard win you put poison on them?
Your Pysc babble is humorous, as you still refuse to say what needs to be said................
You use PC to say they need to be destroyed, then bitch at me saying how when I say go in and kill them.
You are full of generalities and short of specifics - your the one that demanded solutions.
How will you find them? How will you kill them? Who will you send? Who will you work with?
They have strong holds there...............We know were they are at and are conducting limited air strikes on them now..............But we don't know where they are at.....................
You can kill them by various means..............bombs, bullets, mortars, cruise missiles................which do you prefer to use to Kill ..........oops that isn't politically correct for you.............destroy them with..................
Who will you work with........................................The other countries who are tired of this shit..............Maybe France? I think they are pissed right now............YA THINK...............
You are one Naive individual..............
