ISIS now a FULL BLOWN ARMY, thanks Obama

[Delta4Embassy]

ISIS Now 'a Full-Blown Army,' State Department Official Says

This is akin to when Clinton let Osama get away. Only 10000 times worse because now they have our own military equipment to use against us.

Once they consolidate their power in Iraq we all know that the west will become their next target. It's only a matter of time.

Thanks Obama for turning some terrorist thugs into a full blown Army through your own inaction.

6,000 guys is an 'army' now? Mmkay. According to our terminology, they're just over the 3,000 to 5,000 for a 'regiment or brigade,' but still 4,000 short for a division.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Division_(military)

They'd need 80,000+ to be any sort of 'army.'

Before wetting yourselves because of political fearmongering or news sensationalism, remember the words everyone uses aren't accidental or incidental. They're by design to push an agenda. Someone wrote everything Presidents say unless they're speaking informally.

 

[EconChick]

Maliki has been begging for airstrikes for a year. As well the US has been delaying military aircraft that has been on order for ages by Iraq so consequently they have no effective air power to have conducted their own air war.

So coming to Iraq's aid is Iran and Russia. All because Obama wanted regime change in Iraq as well as Syria. He has this penchance for Sunnis. And no it's not my imagination nor is it a conspiracy theory.

He has consistently sided with all Sunnis. Egypt/Muslim Brotherhood/Libya/Sunni militias taking out Gaddafi with Obama's help and NATO's air strikes (note: Helping Sunnis in Libya and telling Maliki to go fuck himself. Maliki is Shia/Sunni paid mercenaries and terrorists in Syria errrrrrrrrrrrr Rebels to overthrow Assad/

There is no doubt that this is a solid pattern. This is a big fuck up in Iraq though. The west has just handed the country to Iran and Russia who is now going to supply Iraq with military aircraft. And that's just for starters.

Iraq was handed to the Shiite Iran on the day that Shiite Maliki became president, instead of a Sunni Iraqi.

You know that Maliki was persecuted by Saddam, right? And that he exiled himself to Iran until Saddam's overthrow, right?

24 years! 24 years of living in Iran and Syria, his fellow Shiites. In a part of the world with artificial boundaries. He may as well be an Iranian.

Now tell me, TD: do you think that George W. Bush considered any of this when he was endorsing al Maliki as Prime Minister? TWICE???

So stop with the "Obama lost Iraq to Iran" crap. It just makes you look ignorant.

Bullshit that he might as well be Iranian. He is a very proud and patriotic Iraqi.

Now to handing over Iraq to Iran. You are saying that it happened the day Maliki was elected are you? I'm praying you mean figuratively.

Because Iran is really really involved now. Tell me. Were Iranian troops deployed in 2006 to help Iraq when you say the hand over happened? Of course they weren't.

You do know that considering Obama wasn't doing jack shit that Iranian forces were accepted to help defend Baghdad correct?

And I said more than Iraq lost to Iran. Obama's administration weren't getting the purchased military planes ready for Iraq and so now Russia will supply the hardware.

I'm not talking in general terms like you are. I'm talking hard core specifics. Iran has boots on the ground and Russia is supplying hardware.

Not "Oh he might as well be Iranian". Give me a freaking break Syn. AND to top it all off Maliki and the Iraqis feel betrayed by Obama. For a reason. Because they were betrayed by Obama.

So well said, tinydancer. So well said.

I don't know how people can NOT know what you just typed ...even if they watched very little news.

 

[Moonglow]

Maliki has been begging for airstrikes for a year. As well the US has been delaying military aircraft that has been on order for ages by Iraq so consequently they have no effective air power to have conducted their own air war.

So coming to Iraq's aid is Iran and Russia. All because Obama wanted regime change in Iraq as well as Syria. He has this penchance for Sunnis. And no it's not my imagination nor is it a conspiracy theory.

He has consistently sided with all Sunnis. Egypt/Muslim Brotherhood/Libya/Sunni militias taking out Gaddafi with Obama's help and NATO's air strikes (note: Helping Sunnis in Libya and telling Maliki to go fuck himself. Maliki is Shia/Sunni paid mercenaries and terrorists in Syria errrrrrrrrrrrr Rebels to overthrow Assad/

There is no doubt that this is a solid pattern. This is a big fuck up in Iraq though. The west has just handed the country to Iran and Russia who is now going to supply Iraq with military aircraft. And that's just for starters.

Iraq was handed to the Shiite Iran on the day that Shiite Maliki became president, instead of a Sunni Iraqi.

You know that Maliki was persecuted by Saddam, right? And that he exiled himself to Iran until Saddam's overthrow, right?

24 years! 24 years of living in Iran and Syria, his fellow Shiites. In a part of the world with artificial boundaries. He may as well be an Iranian.

Now tell me, TD: do you think that George W. Bush considered any of this when he was endorsing al Maliki as Prime Minister? TWICE???

So stop with the "Obama lost Iraq to Iran" crap. It just makes you look ignorant.

Bullshit that he might as well be Iranian. He is a very proud and patriotic Iraqi.

Now to handing over Iraq to Iran. You are saying that it happened the day Maliki was elected are you? I'm praying you mean figuratively.

Because Iran is really really involved now. Tell me. Were Iranian troops deployed in 2006 to help Iraq when you say the hand over happened? Of course they weren't.

You do know that considering Obama wasn't doing jack shit that Iranian forces were accepted to help defend Baghdad correct?

And I said more than Iraq lost to Iran. Obama's administration weren't getting the purchased military planes ready for Iraq and so now Russia will supply the hardware.

I'm not talking in general terms like you are. I'm talking hard core specifics. Iran has boots on the ground and Russia is supplying hardware.

Not "Oh he might as well be Iranian". Give me a freaking break Syn. AND to top it all off Maliki and the Iraqis feel betrayed by Obama. For a reason. Because they were betrayed by Obama.

We as a nation owe the Iraqis nothing, they wanted us out, they wanted no troops to stay behind, so they wanted to be the big man and carry their own weight and with that weight comes responsibility..they dropped the ball on responsibility and started the same sectarian strife that has existed for centuries.. But please don't blame the Iraqis blame the current president..It works better in the land of denial...

 

[ChrisL]

ISIS Now 'a Full-Blown Army,' State Department Official Says

This is akin to when Clinton let Osama get away. Only 10000 times worse because now they have our own military equipment to use against us.

Once they consolidate their power in Iraq we all know that the west will become their next target. It's only a matter of time.

Thanks Obama for turning some terrorist thugs into a full blown Army through your own inaction.

6,000 guys is an 'army' now? Mmkay. According to our terminology, they're just over the 3,000 to 5,000 for a 'regiment or brigade,' but still 4,000 short for a division.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Division_(military)

They'd need 80,000+ to be any sort of 'army.'

Before wetting yourselves because of political fearmongering or news sensationalism, remember the words everyone uses aren't accidental or incidental. They're by design to push an agenda. Someone wrote everything Presidents say unless they're speaking informally.

And they also use those same tricks to make us feel "safe" too.

 

[ChrisL]

Iraq was handed to the Shiite Iran on the day that Shiite Maliki became president, instead of a Sunni Iraqi.

You know that Maliki was persecuted by Saddam, right? And that he exiled himself to Iran until Saddam's overthrow, right?

24 years! 24 years of living in Iran and Syria, his fellow Shiites. In a part of the world with artificial boundaries. He may as well be an Iranian.

Now tell me, TD: do you think that George W. Bush considered any of this when he was endorsing al Maliki as Prime Minister? TWICE???

So stop with the "Obama lost Iraq to Iran" crap. It just makes you look ignorant.

Bullshit that he might as well be Iranian. He is a very proud and patriotic Iraqi.

Now to handing over Iraq to Iran. You are saying that it happened the day Maliki was elected are you? I'm praying you mean figuratively.

Because Iran is really really involved now. Tell me. Were Iranian troops deployed in 2006 to help Iraq when you say the hand over happened? Of course they weren't.

You do know that considering Obama wasn't doing jack shit that Iranian forces were accepted to help defend Baghdad correct?

And I said more than Iraq lost to Iran. Obama's administration weren't getting the purchased military planes ready for Iraq and so now Russia will supply the hardware.

I'm not talking in general terms like you are. I'm talking hard core specifics. Iran has boots on the ground and Russia is supplying hardware.

Not "Oh he might as well be Iranian". Give me a freaking break Syn. AND to top it all off Maliki and the Iraqis feel betrayed by Obama. For a reason. Because they were betrayed by Obama.

We as a nation owe the Iraqis nothing, they wanted us out, they wanted no troops to stay behind, so they wanted to be the big man and carry their own weight and with that weight comes responsibility..they dropped the ball on responsibility and started the same sectarian strife that has existed for centuries.. But please don't blame the Iraqis blame the current president..It works better in the land of denial...

It's not just about the Iraqis. We spent blood and resources over there, and for what?

 

[Moonglow]

He is weak. He is too busy trying to please everybody all the time and he has no balls IMO. All of those Arab leaders are laughing at President Obama, and that makes our entire country look weak.

How many presidents since WWII has been able to control the ME? None....Even Reagan had his ass handed to him in Lebanon...and he legalized all the illegals, I believe that to be weaker than what Oblama has done...

With all due respect, Moonglow, you're probably a nice guy, but you think in overly simplistic terms. And the "racist" comment to Chris really dinged your cred, so you may want to change your approach a little.

I'll think about it when you and your buddy learn to communicate better than a 7th grader with your name calling and ad hominem....thank you very much..

 

[EconChick]

ISIS Now 'a Full-Blown Army,' State Department Official Says

This is akin to when Clinton let Osama get away. Only 10000 times worse because now they have our own military equipment to use against us.

Once they consolidate their power in Iraq we all know that the west will become their next target. It's only a matter of time.

Thanks Obama for turning some terrorist thugs into a full blown Army through your own inaction.

6,000 guys is an 'army' now? Mmkay. According to our terminology, they're just over the 3,000 to 5,000 for a 'regiment or brigade,' but still 4,000 short for a division.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Division_(military)

They'd need 80,000+ to be any sort of 'army.'

Before wetting yourselves because of political fearmongering or news sensationalism, remember the words everyone uses aren't accidental or incidental. They're by design to push an agenda. Someone wrote everything Presidents say unless they're speaking informally.

Delta4, while you make a good point from a very "technical" standpoint, from a figurative standpoint, when you compare a number of their characteristics compared to a terrorist group....their brazenness, their openness (as opposed to AQ's secretiveness about their targets), their unit sizes (as opposed to small cells), their discipline, type of weapons used, etc.....is closer to the concept of a more traditional military unit.

Now I DO agree with you that the numbers are not even close. Agree there.

A perfect word for them doesn't exist. Army the way you and I know it is not completely accurate but it's not that far off in comparison to AQ either when you see they've already established the caliphate.

 

[Moonglow]

Bullshit that he might as well be Iranian. He is a very proud and patriotic Iraqi.

Now to handing over Iraq to Iran. You are saying that it happened the day Maliki was elected are you? I'm praying you mean figuratively.

Because Iran is really really involved now. Tell me. Were Iranian troops deployed in 2006 to help Iraq when you say the hand over happened? Of course they weren't.

You do know that considering Obama wasn't doing jack shit that Iranian forces were accepted to help defend Baghdad correct?

And I said more than Iraq lost to Iran. Obama's administration weren't getting the purchased military planes ready for Iraq and so now Russia will supply the hardware.

I'm not talking in general terms like you are. I'm talking hard core specifics. Iran has boots on the ground and Russia is supplying hardware.

Not "Oh he might as well be Iranian". Give me a freaking break Syn. AND to top it all off Maliki and the Iraqis feel betrayed by Obama. For a reason. Because they were betrayed by Obama.

We as a nation owe the Iraqis nothing, they wanted us out, they wanted no troops to stay behind, so they wanted to be the big man and carry their own weight and with that weight comes responsibility..they dropped the ball on responsibility and started the same sectarian strife that has existed for centuries.. But please don't blame the Iraqis blame the current president..It works better in the land of denial...

It's not just about the Iraqis. We spent blood and resources over there, and for what?

corporate profits and personal pride of the Bush family...We as a nation in our past are not pristine and all goodness. Our nation has chemical weapons and have used them in wars, so who are we to go around the world that anyone else that uses them is bad.The US refuses to sign the landmine ban, has large stockpiles of nukes, and we are the only nation to use nukes during war and in peacetime on other humans, how are we the ones to tell other nations that they can't have them because they are bad? Have we as a nation ever told the Ruskies to get rid of their stockpiles of WMD's or else we will invade your nation and take them from you, no, why? Because they are not a weak nation intimidated by the bully on the block.

 

[EconChick]

How many presidents since WWII has been able to control the ME? None....Even Reagan had his ass handed to him in Lebanon...and he legalized all the illegals, I believe that to be weaker than what Oblama has done...

With all due respect, Moonglow, you're probably a nice guy, but you think in overly simplistic terms. And the "racist" comment to Chris really dinged your cred, so you may want to change your approach a little.

I'll think about it when you and your buddy learn to communicate better than a 7th grader with your name calling and ad hominem....thank you very much..

I'll make that individual deal with you. It's a Deal.

Politeness is not rewarded by others on this board, so it will be on an individual basis, but it's a deal with you.

 

[EconChick]

Iraq was handed to the Shiite Iran on the day that Shiite Maliki became president, instead of a Sunni Iraqi.

You know that Maliki was persecuted by Saddam, right? And that he exiled himself to Iran until Saddam's overthrow, right?

24 years! 24 years of living in Iran and Syria, his fellow Shiites. In a part of the world with artificial boundaries. He may as well be an Iranian.

Now tell me, TD: do you think that George W. Bush considered any of this when he was endorsing al Maliki as Prime Minister? TWICE???

So stop with the "Obama lost Iraq to Iran" crap. It just makes you look ignorant.

Bullshit that he might as well be Iranian. He is a very proud and patriotic Iraqi.

Now to handing over Iraq to Iran. You are saying that it happened the day Maliki was elected are you? I'm praying you mean figuratively.

Because Iran is really really involved now. Tell me. Were Iranian troops deployed in 2006 to help Iraq when you say the hand over happened? Of course they weren't.

You do know that considering Obama wasn't doing jack shit that Iranian forces were accepted to help defend Baghdad correct?

And I said more than Iraq lost to Iran. Obama's administration weren't getting the purchased military planes ready for Iraq and so now Russia will supply the hardware.

I'm not talking in general terms like you are. I'm talking hard core specifics. Iran has boots on the ground and Russia is supplying hardware.

Not "Oh he might as well be Iranian". Give me a freaking break Syn. AND to top it all off Maliki and the Iraqis feel betrayed by Obama. For a reason. Because they were betrayed by Obama.

We as a nation owe the Iraqis nothing, they wanted us out, they wanted no troops to stay behind, so they wanted to be the big man and carry their own weight and with that weight comes responsibility..they dropped the ball on responsibility and started the same sectarian strife that has existed for centuries.. But please don't blame the Iraqis blame the current president..It works better in the land of denial...

The problem with this analysis is it fails to take the interconnectedness of the world into account. We are an interconnected global economy. The things in our homes come from other countries through sea lanes. Our energy comes from abroad. The financial system is global. Air travel is global. The list is long.

That doesn't mean we intervene in everything. I think we were wrong to do Libya for example. But we can't hide behind fortress America.

 

[ChrisL]

We as a nation owe the Iraqis nothing, they wanted us out, they wanted no troops to stay behind, so they wanted to be the big man and carry their own weight and with that weight comes responsibility..they dropped the ball on responsibility and started the same sectarian strife that has existed for centuries.. But please don't blame the Iraqis blame the current president..It works better in the land of denial...

It's not just about the Iraqis. We spent blood and resources over there, and for what?

corporate profits and personal pride of the Bush family...We as a nation in our past are not pristine and all goodness. Our nation has chemical weapons and have used them in wars, so who are we to go around the world that anyone else that uses them is bad.The US refuses to sign the landmine ban, has large stockpiles of nukes, and we are the only nation to use nukes during war and in peacetime on other humans, how are we the ones to tell other nations that they can't have them because they are bad? Have we as a nation ever told the Ruskies to get rid of their stockpiles of WMD's or else we will invade your nation and take them from you, no, why? Because they are not a weak nation intimidated by the bully on the block.

Goodness, going back a bit far, aren't you? We are also FAR from the only country to do "bad." Just about every single country on this planet has a "history" in THAT regard. Sorry, but that is war. You do what you have to do to win it, or you just never go to war and let other countries take over your country. We could be like the Iraqi military I suppose and just run away? Would that make you happy?

Who are we? Only the most powerful nation on earth at this moment! You might not like that, but that is the case. We are the world's sugar daddy. We give ALL of those nations big money every single year. We try to "buy" their friendship.

 

[Moonglow]

ISIS Now 'a Full-Blown Army,' State Department Official Says

This is akin to when Clinton let Osama get away. Only 10000 times worse because now they have our own military equipment to use against us.

Once they consolidate their power in Iraq we all know that the west will become their next target. It's only a matter of time.

Thanks Obama for turning some terrorist thugs into a full blown Army through your own inaction.

6,000 guys is an 'army' now? Mmkay. According to our terminology, they're just over the 3,000 to 5,000 for a 'regiment or brigade,' but still 4,000 short for a division.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Division_(military)

They'd need 80,000+ to be any sort of 'army.'

Before wetting yourselves because of political fearmongering or news sensationalism, remember the words everyone uses aren't accidental or incidental. They're by design to push an agenda. Someone wrote everything Presidents say unless they're speaking informally.

Delta4, while you make a good point from a very "technical" standpoint, from a figurative standpoint, when you compare a number of their characteristics compared to a terrorist group....their brazenness, their openness (as opposed to AQ's secretiveness about their targets), their unit sizes (as opposed to small cells), their discipline, type of weapons used, etc.....is closer to the concept of a more traditional military unit.

Now I DO agree with you that the numbers are not even close. Agree there.

A perfect word for them doesn't exist. Army the way you and I know it is not completely accurate but it's not that far off in comparison to AQ either when you see they've already established the caliphate.

So what that they have avered to themselves as a caliphate, what terror does this word bring to the uninitiated that do not understand. Turkey was the last caliphate and yet things were not that bad as in the way the empires rise and fall...
ISIS obtained their momentum by the sheer fact that Muslim fight each other over a simple process of who will govern an Islamic state, nation or empire. It has nothing to do with the USA, Oblama, Congress or ice cream vendors during the summer...it's been going on since Muhammad died...in the 7th century A.D.
Our interference will never change the way that people in the ME have existed since the Arab conquest by the Muslims..
Add to add when the revolutionary war was raging in the colonies, we didn't have an Army that could beat the British for several years, we used tactics that were learned by fighting Indians,or guerrilla warfare..we too used what you call terrorist actions.
If the Iraqis would fight and die for their country with a little more hutspah, ISIS would melt away, but as we have seen, many of them run and act like cowards, why is it our responsibility to take sides when both Sunnis and Shias don't want us in the nations running them..
saddam was a better head of state than the current ones that replaced him..

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

As the world descends into kaos Obama is mia at a party or golf course somewhere.

 

[ChrisL]

6,000 guys is an 'army' now? Mmkay. According to our terminology, they're just over the 3,000 to 5,000 for a 'regiment or brigade,' but still 4,000 short for a division.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Division_(military)

They'd need 80,000+ to be any sort of 'army.'

Before wetting yourselves because of political fearmongering or news sensationalism, remember the words everyone uses aren't accidental or incidental. They're by design to push an agenda. Someone wrote everything Presidents say unless they're speaking informally.

Delta4, while you make a good point from a very "technical" standpoint, from a figurative standpoint, when you compare a number of their characteristics compared to a terrorist group....their brazenness, their openness (as opposed to AQ's secretiveness about their targets), their unit sizes (as opposed to small cells), their discipline, type of weapons used, etc.....is closer to the concept of a more traditional military unit.

Now I DO agree with you that the numbers are not even close. Agree there.

A perfect word for them doesn't exist. Army the way you and I know it is not completely accurate but it's not that far off in comparison to AQ either when you see they've already established the caliphate.

So what that they have avered to themselves as a caliphate, what terror does this word bring to the uninitiated that do not understand. Turkey was the last caliphate and yet things were not that bad as in the way the empires rise and fall...
These people obtained their momentum by the sheer fact that Muslim fight each other over a simple process of who will govern an Islamic state, nation or empire. It has nothing to do with the USA, Oblama, Congress or ice cream vendors during the summer...it's been going on since Muhammad died...in the 7th century A.D.
Our interference will never change the way that people in the ME have existed since the Arab conquest by the Muslims..
Ad to add when the revolutionary war was raging in the colonies, we didn't have an Army that could beat the British for several years, we used tactics that were learned by fighting Indians,or guerrilla warfare..we too used what you call terrorist actions.

That is how ALL civilizations were at one time or another. It is the year 2014 now! Those people need to grow up and join us here in the modern world!

Let's not forget about their fanatical Imams over there, who brainwash these people to hate Americans and other westerners. It has nothing to do with what happened in the past.

What the people over there need in order to make some significant changes is exposure to the modern world and education.

 

[Moonglow]

It's not just about the Iraqis. We spent blood and resources over there, and for what?

corporate profits and personal pride of the Bush family...We as a nation in our past are not pristine and all goodness. Our nation has chemical weapons and have used them in wars, so who are we to go around the world that anyone else that uses them is bad.The US refuses to sign the landmine ban, has large stockpiles of nukes, and we are the only nation to use nukes during war and in peacetime on other humans, how are we the ones to tell other nations that they can't have them because they are bad? Have we as a nation ever told the Ruskies to get rid of their stockpiles of WMD's or else we will invade your nation and take them from you, no, why? Because they are not a weak nation intimidated by the bully on the block.

Goodness, going back a bit far, aren't you? We are also FAR from the only country to do "bad." Just about every single country on this planet has a "history" in THAT regard. Sorry, but that is war. You do what you have to do to win it, or you just never go to war and let other countries take over your country. We could be like the Iraqi military I suppose and just run away? Would that make you happy?

Who are we? Only the most powerful nation on earth at this moment! You might not like that, but that is the case. We are the world's sugar daddy. We give ALL of those nations big money every single year. We try to "buy" their friendship.

Roman did the same as did many other empires that were super military powers, and yet, none have succeeded in changing the ME, the traditions or the fact that they want to be left alone, and leaving them alone means that they must learn how to defend themselves, if not, it's not our problem..

 

[Moonglow]

Delta4, while you make a good point from a very "technical" standpoint, from a figurative standpoint, when you compare a number of their characteristics compared to a terrorist group....their brazenness, their openness (as opposed to AQ's secretiveness about their targets), their unit sizes (as opposed to small cells), their discipline, type of weapons used, etc.....is closer to the concept of a more traditional military unit.

Now I DO agree with you that the numbers are not even close. Agree there.

A perfect word for them doesn't exist. Army the way you and I know it is not completely accurate but it's not that far off in comparison to AQ either when you see they've already established the caliphate.

So what that they have avered to themselves as a caliphate, what terror does this word bring to the uninitiated that do not understand. Turkey was the last caliphate and yet things were not that bad as in the way the empires rise and fall...
These people obtained their momentum by the sheer fact that Muslim fight each other over a simple process of who will govern an Islamic state, nation or empire. It has nothing to do with the USA, Oblama, Congress or ice cream vendors during the summer...it's been going on since Muhammad died...in the 7th century A.D.
Our interference will never change the way that people in the ME have existed since the Arab conquest by the Muslims..
Ad to add when the revolutionary war was raging in the colonies, we didn't have an Army that could beat the British for several years, we used tactics that were learned by fighting Indians,or guerrilla warfare..we too used what you call terrorist actions.

That is how ALL civilizations were at one time or another. It is the year 2014 now! Those people need to grow up and join us here in the modern world!

Let's not forget about their fanatical Imams over there, who brainwash these people to hate Americans and other westerners. It has nothing to do with what happened in the past.

What the people over there need in order to make some significant changes is exposure to the modern world and education.

So you want to force people to subjugate to your ideology, that doesn't work...Russia hates the US and many other nations do, but yet we can't force them to change. Just like you can't force a drunk to stop drinking, the drunk must decide for himself to stop...and throwing money and lives away is not working and never has in the long term..

 

[ChrisL]

So what that they have avered to themselves as a caliphate, what terror does this word bring to the uninitiated that do not understand. Turkey was the last caliphate and yet things were not that bad as in the way the empires rise and fall...
These people obtained their momentum by the sheer fact that Muslim fight each other over a simple process of who will govern an Islamic state, nation or empire. It has nothing to do with the USA, Oblama, Congress or ice cream vendors during the summer...it's been going on since Muhammad died...in the 7th century A.D.
Our interference will never change the way that people in the ME have existed since the Arab conquest by the Muslims..
Ad to add when the revolutionary war was raging in the colonies, we didn't have an Army that could beat the British for several years, we used tactics that were learned by fighting Indians,or guerrilla warfare..we too used what you call terrorist actions.

That is how ALL civilizations were at one time or another. It is the year 2014 now! Those people need to grow up and join us here in the modern world!

Let's not forget about their fanatical Imams over there, who brainwash these people to hate Americans and other westerners. It has nothing to do with what happened in the past.

What the people over there need in order to make some significant changes is exposure to the modern world and education.

So you want to force people to subjugate to your ideology, that doesn't work...Russia hates the US and many other nations do, but yet we can't force them to change. Just like you can't force a drunk to stop drinking, the drunk must decide for himself to stop...and throwing money and lives away is not working and never has in the long term..

Well, we can agree on the point I put in bold at least.

As to the rest, I said nothing about pushing any ideologies onto anyone, that is what their imams and leaders do to them. They brainwash them to hate, hate, hate and kill, kill, kill from the time they are babies.

Yes, exposure to the modern world and education is the key here, not bombs and force.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

You two are smokin crack. Education would only be the answer if their minds were open, which they will never be until they are a conquered people. Bomb them savages into the stone ages, rule them or breed them out. You aren't gonna change thousands of years of inbred bullshit with some "outreach" program.

 

[Plasmaball]

I think you need to take another look at the Congressional vote. Many Democrats begged for a second vote so they could be on record for voting FOR, including the glorious Hillary Rodham.

i love this talking point. You guys love using it as if the left are all lock in step and if these tards voted for it, then it must mean the left also agrees with them. Its a typical hack argument used by bottom of the barrel people.

The reality is they were wrong, you've also been told this numerous times in these type of debates, but as per usual repeat the meme, it must be real.

Good for you, two lazy posts in a row!

We already have a fake wannabe intellectual in Political Chic.

You're down in the weeds, I'm up at the big picture. I'm not surprised your lightweight tactical brain missed the profundity of my second point.

As to the first point, the only people who can directly vote for or against a war are in Congress, and he used the word, "voted." But you already knew that, didn't you?

As for "you've been told this numerous times"....what a numb nut that can't distinguish between a personality that basically just started posting this week and well known personalities posting on here for months or years. In other words, you just told yet another obvious fucking lie. Go climb back into your snake skin, slurp up some protein, and get lots of sleep. Maybe it will help your small brain work better.

Sigh....the point that flew over your head is you bring nothing new to stand out from the rest..

Dipshit..

 

[Moonglow]

As the world descends into kaos Obama is mia at a party or golf course somewhere.

Didn't stop any other president from doing the same during a so called crisis...