Massive Russian blanket air bombardment is flattening Raqqa

[Siete]

Massive Russian blanket air bombardment is flattening Raqqa

never did happen ... like the OP never developed an IQ.

 

[Uncensored2008]

That's an excellent question to ask the rinos, blue dogs, libertarians and conservatives not fighting against progressivism

Which Libertarian here is not fighting the evil that is the democrats? (democratic - socialists)

 

[SwimExpert]

if you don't want your city obliterated don't be blowing up planes full of innocent people.

So, you're saying that the 200,000 people who aren't part of ISIS, blew up a plane?

Did you drop out of school before learning about WWII?

I see. You have no response. Only a red herring and hopes that you're lack of response won't be noticed. You fail.

 

[SwimExpert]

You're the Christian version of Al Qaeda.

Oh Sis... you didn't read the book, did ya?

The Middle East is toast... And no Muslim will survive.

You're bordering on genocidal dreams.

 

[BluesLegend]

if you don't want your city obliterated don't be blowing up planes full of innocent people.

So, you're saying that the 200,000 people who aren't part of ISIS, blew up a plane?

Did you drop out of school before learning about WWII?

I see. You have no response. Only a red herring and hopes that you're lack of response won't be noticed. You fail.

Its true I have no response to your ignorance on this topic, maybe your mom can help you with that.

 

[Liminal]

Simple minds need simple solutions.

Stupid minds ignore time tested solutions.

Not much of an historian.....are you. You don't seem to know anything about counter insurgency tactics or any kind of strategy at all. Why do bother posting when you obviously don't know anything?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Not much of an historian.....are you. You don't seem to know anything about counter insurgency tactics or any kind of strategy at all. Why do bother posting when you obviously don't know anything?

What happened after Dresden?

What happened after Hiroshima?

When civilian populations lose the will to fight, wars end. History bears this out 100% of the time.

The idea that we are a parent disciplining a child is insanity - war is not about punishment. Carpet bombing the support structures ends wars. There is a terrible price for it in human life, but it works 100% of the time.

 

[Liminal]

Not much of an historian.....are you. You don't seem to know anything about counter insurgency tactics or any kind of strategy at all. Why do bother posting when you obviously don't know anything?

What happened after Dresden?

What happened after Hiroshima?

When civilian populations lose the will to fight, wars end. History bears this out 100% of the time.

The idea that we are a parent disciplining a child is insanity - war is not about punishment. Carpet bombing the support structures ends wars. There is a terrible price for it in human life, but it works 100% of the time.

Maybe you just don't quite get the difference between fighting an actual nation and sorting out insurgents. Maybe we should bomb France too, plenty of terrorists there.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Maybe you just don't quite get the difference between fighting an actual nation and sorting out insurgents. Maybe we should bomb France too, plenty of terrorists there.

We are fighting a known enemy, Islam. That our corrupt leaders refuse to actually fight alters nothing,

Raqqa is a known stronghold. Reducing it to dust is the rational way to fight war. But the left has no intention of fighting war. Bush was a moron who thought wars are about building nations. Obama is simpering coward who fears offending his Muslim allies.

We continually lose because we refuse to approach this from a rational perspective.

 

[Liminal]

Maybe you just don't quite get the difference between fighting an actual nation and sorting out insurgents. Maybe we should bomb France too, plenty of terrorists there.

We are fighting a known enemy, Islam. That our corrupt leaders refuse to actually fight alters nothing,

Raqqa is a known stronghold. Reducing it to dust is the rational way to fight war. But the left has no intention of fighting war. Bush was a moron who thought wars are about building nations. Obama is simpering coward who fears offending his Muslim allies.

We continually lose because we refuse to approach this from a rational perspective.

You should be quiet now. You don't know anything about fighting any kind of war that you didn't see in a John Wayne movie. It really is obvious that you don't know anything about anything. You should stop embarrassing yourself.

 

[auditor0007]

ISIS has around 30,000 total heads. Russia is obliterating a city if 200,000 just to take out some ISIS personnel?

And people are applauding this?

Depending on how many innocent civilians are killed, this may well bite Russia in the ass. This is why Obama has been hesitant to go full scale into this mess.

Obama doesn't have a clue what he is doing. That's why he is hesitant.

While there are a lot of Americans screaming that we should have "boots on the ground", they all seem to forget how well that worked out for us when Bush put boots on the ground. Approximately 7000 of our best Americans came home in body bags. Another 50,000 or so have been handicapped for life. Now you might say all that was worth it if we had actually accomplished something, but we did not. We made things worse, so I'm not jumping up and down demanding that we put boots on the ground again, and make the same stupid mistake we made last time. On top of that, if we do put boots on the ground, we better damn well be prepared to keep them there for the next 100 years, because those people cannot govern themselves. That is why dictators like Saddam Hussein and Assad have ruled over them.

If you do away with rules of engagement. Our troops could fight to win.

We will not do away with rules of engagement because we do not deem it acceptable to kill tens of thousands of people and just call them collateral damage.

 

[jknowgood]

ISIS has around 30,000 total heads. Russia is obliterating a city if 200,000 just to take out some ISIS personnel?

And people are applauding this?

Depending on how many innocent civilians are killed, this may well bite Russia in the ass. This is why Obama has been hesitant to go full scale into this mess.

Obama doesn't have a clue what he is doing. That's why he is hesitant.

While there are a lot of Americans screaming that we should have "boots on the ground", they all seem to forget how well that worked out for us when Bush put boots on the ground. Approximately 7000 of our best Americans came home in body bags. Another 50,000 or so have been handicapped for life. Now you might say all that was worth it if we had actually accomplished something, but we did not. We made things worse, so I'm not jumping up and down demanding that we put boots on the ground again, and make the same stupid mistake we made last time. On top of that, if we do put boots on the ground, we better damn well be prepared to keep them there for the next 100 years, because those people cannot govern themselves. That is why dictators like Saddam Hussein and Assad have ruled over them.

If you do away with rules of engagement. Our troops could fight to win.

We will not do away with rules of engagement because we do not deem it acceptable to kill tens of thousands of people and just call them collateral damage.

Yeah just cost soldiers their lives. To make it fair. Right?

 

[bripat9643]

Simple minds need simple solutions.

Stupid minds ignore time tested solutions.

Not much of an historian.....are you. You don't seem to know anything about counter insurgency tactics or any kind of strategy at all. Why do bother posting when you obviously don't know anything?

So-called "insurgencies" only work when you aren't willing to go to the enemy's homeland, bomb it into rubble, occupy it, and put all the "insurgents" in concentration camps.

 

[bripat9643]

ISIS has around 30,000 total heads. Russia is obliterating a city if 200,000 just to take out some ISIS personnel?

And people are applauding this?

Depending on how many innocent civilians are killed, this may well bite Russia in the ass. This is why Obama has been hesitant to go full scale into this mess.

Obama doesn't have a clue what he is doing. That's why he is hesitant.

While there are a lot of Americans screaming that we should have "boots on the ground", they all seem to forget how well that worked out for us when Bush put boots on the ground. Approximately 7000 of our best Americans came home in body bags. Another 50,000 or so have been handicapped for life. Now you might say all that was worth it if we had actually accomplished something, but we did not. We made things worse, so I'm not jumping up and down demanding that we put boots on the ground again, and make the same stupid mistake we made last time. On top of that, if we do put boots on the ground, we better damn well be prepared to keep them there for the next 100 years, because those people cannot govern themselves. That is why dictators like Saddam Hussein and Assad have ruled over them.

If you do away with rules of engagement. Our troops could fight to win.

We will not do away with rules of engagement because we do not deem it acceptable to kill tens of thousands of people and just call them collateral damage.

In other words, we won't do it because we don't want to win.

 

[bripat9643]

Not much of an historian.....are you. You don't seem to know anything about counter insurgency tactics or any kind of strategy at all. Why do bother posting when you obviously don't know anything?

What happened after Dresden?

What happened after Hiroshima?

When civilian populations lose the will to fight, wars end. History bears this out 100% of the time.

The idea that we are a parent disciplining a child is insanity - war is not about punishment. Carpet bombing the support structures ends wars. There is a terrible price for it in human life, but it works 100% of the time.

Maybe you just don't quite get the difference between fighting an actual nation and sorting out insurgents. Maybe we should bomb France too, plenty of terrorists there.

ISIS is an actual nation for all practical purposes.

 

[bripat9643]

Maybe you just don't quite get the difference between fighting an actual nation and sorting out insurgents. Maybe we should bomb France too, plenty of terrorists there.

We are fighting a known enemy, Islam. That our corrupt leaders refuse to actually fight alters nothing,

Raqqa is a known stronghold. Reducing it to dust is the rational way to fight war. But the left has no intention of fighting war. Bush was a moron who thought wars are about building nations. Obama is simpering coward who fears offending his Muslim allies.

We continually lose because we refuse to approach this from a rational perspective.

You should be quiet now. You don't know anything about fighting any kind of war that you didn't see in a John Wayne movie. It really is obvious that you don't know anything about anything. You should stop embarrassing yourself.

Obviously you've never watched any footage from WW II or the Korean war.

 

[auditor0007]

Depending on how many innocent civilians are killed, this may well bite Russia in the ass. This is why Obama has been hesitant to go full scale into this mess.

Obama doesn't have a clue what he is doing. That's why he is hesitant.

While there are a lot of Americans screaming that we should have "boots on the ground", they all seem to forget how well that worked out for us when Bush put boots on the ground. Approximately 7000 of our best Americans came home in body bags. Another 50,000 or so have been handicapped for life. Now you might say all that was worth it if we had actually accomplished something, but we did not. We made things worse, so I'm not jumping up and down demanding that we put boots on the ground again, and make the same stupid mistake we made last time. On top of that, if we do put boots on the ground, we better damn well be prepared to keep them there for the next 100 years, because those people cannot govern themselves. That is why dictators like Saddam Hussein and Assad have ruled over them.

If you do away with rules of engagement. Our troops could fight to win.

We will not do away with rules of engagement because we do not deem it acceptable to kill tens of thousands of people and just call them collateral damage.

Yeah just cost soldiers their lives. To make it fair. Right?

So your solution is to exterminate the Muslims. This is the type of thinking that helped Hitler kill 6 million Jews. We better get started soon if we plan on killing 1.5 billion Muslims.

 

[Vastator]

Exactly.

 

[theliq]

Not much of an historian.....are you. You don't seem to know anything about counter insurgency tactics or any kind of strategy at all. Why do bother posting when you obviously don't know anything?

What happened after Dresden?

What happened after Hiroshima?

When civilian populations lose the will to fight, wars end. History bears this out 100% of the time.

The idea that we are a parent disciplining a child is insanity - war is not about punishment. Carpet bombing the support structures ends wars. There is a terrible price for it in human life, but it works 100% of the time.

Maybe you just don't quite get the difference between fighting an actual nation and sorting out insurgents. Maybe we should bomb France too, plenty of terrorists there.

ISIS is an actual nation for all practical purposes.

All your comments above really need NO RESPONSE BECAUSE THEY ARE ALL REDNECK SHIT

 

[bripat9643]

Not much of an historian.....are you. You don't seem to know anything about counter insurgency tactics or any kind of strategy at all. Why do bother posting when you obviously don't know anything?

What happened after Dresden?

What happened after Hiroshima?

When civilian populations lose the will to fight, wars end. History bears this out 100% of the time.

The idea that we are a parent disciplining a child is insanity - war is not about punishment. Carpet bombing the support structures ends wars. There is a terrible price for it in human life, but it works 100% of the time.

Maybe you just don't quite get the difference between fighting an actual nation and sorting out insurgents. Maybe we should bomb France too, plenty of terrorists there.

ISIS is an actual nation for all practical purposes.

All your comments above really need NO RESPONSE BECAUSE THEY ARE ALL REDNECK SHIT

Your comments are all lying commie propaganda.