Obama bombs Muslims

[the_human_being]

What is weird is the only solution you offer is hurry up and wait. I assume you have never been in the military?

I'm retired military, and if you think "nuke Islam" is a solution, then you are even more retarded than I thought.

It's an idiot idea for people with the intellectual capacity of a bumper sticker.


I've pointed out many, many times on this forum that if we go after ISIS in Iraq and Syria, it will require a minimum ten year occupation.

Do you want Obama to commit the next two or three Presidents to an occupation?

None of you tards ever answer this question.

You know why? Because if you say no, that means just doing what we are doing while ISIS plots against us. "Hurry up and wait".

If you say yes, then you are committing to another long, long war that you know the American people have no stomach for.

ISIS knows that, too. That's why they are provoking us into one. They know if we come after them, we won't stay long enough to see the job through. They are willing to sacrifice tens of thousands of their lives. We turn and run if we lose a few thousand. So ISIS will win that war, and our defeat/leaving will validate their base territory as a legitimate entity.

And Trump and all his idiot rubes are playing right into their hands.

So...come up with a REAL plan, dispshit.

Well, I'm a veteran and I say give our military the authority and the backing of the Congress and the American people and let them go and win this thing quickly and in a way the terrorists will respect. With overwhelming force.

But you have no answer for who governs the damn place after "victory." And you simply rehash the clusterfuck inflicted by W.

Of course I do. We govern. We took over Japan and Germany for a while after we defeated them. We would need to take over Iraq and recoup our military expenses from their oil supply. This crap of fighting wars for other nations at our own expense has always been a stupid policy.

We already tried that in Iraq. It didn't work. The terrorists were prepared to wait as long as necessary, certainly longer than "a while".

Well, we have bases in Japan and in Germany today. I don't see your problem.

 

[the_human_being]

America has no stomach for loss of life and treasure.

ISIS does, and that is their huge advantage. They know they simply need to outwait us.

How are they outwaiting us? They have us involved everywhere.

 

[g5000]

The Arab kingdoms and fiefdoms won't do anything about ISIS as long as they think we will.

If we walk off the field, they will have to solve their own problem, or perish.

That's how you beat ISIS. By not playing by their rules.

We'll pay a huge cost at the gas pump, though.

 

[g5000]

Well, we have bases in Japan and in Germany today.

We shouldn't. We are subsidizing their defense, and thus we are indirectly subsidizing their social safety nets since money is fungible.

We're financing half the planet's economies.

 

[Davros]

I'm retired military, and if you think "nuke Islam" is a solution, then you are even more retarded than I thought.

It's an idiot idea for people with the intellectual capacity of a bumper sticker.


I've pointed out many, many times on this forum that if we go after ISIS in Iraq and Syria, it will require a minimum ten year occupation.

Do you want Obama to commit the next two or three Presidents to an occupation?

None of you tards ever answer this question.

You know why? Because if you say no, that means just doing what we are doing while ISIS plots against us. "Hurry up and wait".

If you say yes, then you are committing to another long, long war that you know the American people have no stomach for.

ISIS knows that, too. That's why they are provoking us into one. They know if we come after them, we won't stay long enough to see the job through. They are willing to sacrifice tens of thousands of their lives. We turn and run if we lose a few thousand. So ISIS will win that war, and our defeat/leaving will validate their base territory as a legitimate entity.

And Trump and all his idiot rubes are playing right into their hands.

So...come up with a REAL plan, dispshit.

Well, I'm a veteran and I say give our military the authority and the backing of the Congress and the American people and let them go and win this thing quickly and in a way the terrorists will respect. With overwhelming force.

But you have no answer for who governs the damn place after "victory." And you simply rehash the clusterfuck inflicted by W.

Of course I do. We govern. We took over Japan and Germany for a while after we defeated them. We would need to take over Iraq and recoup our military expenses from their oil supply. This crap of fighting wars for other nations at our own expense has always been a stupid policy.

We already tried that in Iraq. It didn't work. The terrorists were prepared to wait as long as necessary, certainly longer than "a while".

Well, we have bases in Japan and in Germany today. I don't see your problem.

A few bases wouldn't stop the terrorists from regrouping. So you would have to have cycle after cycle of massive warfare each time the terrorists re-emerged from the population. Your solution would be no less drawn out than what's currently going on, but with greater loss of American lives.

 

[bendog]

The Arab kingdoms and fiefdoms won't do anything about ISIS as long as they think we will.

If we walk off the field, they will have to solve their own problem, or perish.

That's how you beat ISIS. By not playing by their rules.

We'll pay a huge cost at the gas pump, though.

I don't know if it'd be such a huge price. Iran and the Saudis have little choice but to produce. Even if oil was at 2006 levels, TBoonePickens pretty much laid out the answer by mandating natl gas for the trucking industry. We wouldn't need ever corner gas station to buy in. Only the large truck stations what want to stay in the game. And, it wouldn't have to be done overnight. Plus, China's made solar much cheaper, so it's not like we'd be killing elec supply.

I'm still not convinced that Arab states would actually confront groups like ISIS. But absolutely they won't if they see the US as putting 10K boots on the ground.

I'm still back to seeing some form of the Baath party as the only Syrian solution. I'm sure there are still Iraqi sunni who'd prefer to not have ISIS or any similar group. But, there's no political/military presence left. A US occupation has failed twice. There has to be if not a reconcillation at least an agreement to co-exist between the sunni and shia. And, there we come full circle to W's folly.

 

[Syriusly]

delete

 

[the_human_being]

Well, we have bases in Japan and in Germany today.

We shouldn't. We are subsidizing their defense, and thus we are indirectly subsidizing their social safety nets since money is fungible.

We're financing half the planet's economies.

Yes, that is what Trump tried to get across. We should pay them zero rent and utilities for our bases since we are there for their benefit. That's what I said about Iraq should pay for our military assistance.

 

[jc456]

We haven't. Japan had to be toppled causing millions of fatalities no matter how it was done. The A-bomb saved Japanese lives, because these guys would fight to their own death so long as the Emperor told them to.

You are promoting killing all Muslims, because unlike Japan where the war was over when the Emperor surrendered, there would be no party to surrender. Terrorism would never end until every Muslim was dead.

You are promoting genocide on a scale far above what has ever been seen on this earth.

But of course we both know what you're really doing is trolling.

How long have we been in Iraq? How long in Afghanistan? What now about Syria, Yemen, Nigeria, Africa, and other areas. When will it end? Is it your solution to continue to fight radical Islam for two thousand years? That's not my idea of winning.

Your 'solution' would be like us bombing China in order to defeat Japan.

But- your "solution" would actually convince Muslims all around the world that ISIS was actually correct.

But it is a viable solution where you Liberals have failed to offer one. Ignoring is not a solution.

The only way it would be "viable" is if you killed them all, making you the worst mass murderer in world history 100 times over.

You know you would not kill all Muslims. You're being childish. No one killed all the Japanese. The Germans did not kill all the Jews. You hunt down and destroy radical Islamists and their supporters wherever they might be regardless to what nation's border they cross into. You put sanctions against any nation aiding and abetting the terrorists. You seize their assets worldwide. You watch the internet for recruiting and anyone supporting them and put those that do in prison. You actually have Congress declare a formal state of war against any and all radical Islamists. You actually actively engage the enemy 24/7 until he refuses to fight any longer and no one will join his lost cause.

But the libturds are childish. It is their complete nature. Over exaggerate most everything and cry the sky is falling.

 

[jc456]

Human being's final solution is not viable unless he's prepared to kill 700 million people or more, making the Nazis look like children.

ah, look at the little libturd showing off his lying skills. I love it when you libturds perpetrate a lie. It's funny.

Did you not see human being's post where he said the only cure to Islam is a nuclear bomb?

No you actually didn't. You say a photo of a nuclear explosion. You actually assumed the worst yourself.

You admit you were trolling then. The picture labeled that explosion as the "cure for Islam".

actually it said the 'only'

 

[Syriusly]

America has no stomach for loss of life and treasure.

ISIS does, and that is their huge advantage. They know they simply need to outwait us.

ISIS is essentially a death cult- that wants to provoke a 'final solution' every bit as much as HB does.

ISIS wants European boots on the ground so that they can frame the war as Christianity versus Islam- and want to be leading Muslims to the final battle against the Infidels.

I agree with the others that have mentioned it- the solution has to be solved by the Middle East themselves- only other Muslims can ultimately defeat ISIS. We can help- as we are now- but until Turkey is more interested in defeating ISIS than defeating the Kurds, and Iraq wants to defeat ISIS more than it wants to defeat it's political rivals in Iraq, and Saudi Arabia wants to defeat ISIS more than promoting Wahabism, etc, etc.

A coalition of Turkey, Egypt, Jordan, Iran and Kurds could defeat ISIS and dig them out with no real place to hide.

But they are willing to let the U.S. and Russia get bogged down in that crap instead.

 

[Syriusly]

How long have we been in Iraq? How long in Afghanistan? What now about Syria, Yemen, Nigeria, Africa, and other areas. When will it end? Is it your solution to continue to fight radical Islam for two thousand years? That's not my idea of winning.

Your 'solution' would be like us bombing China in order to defeat Japan.

But- your "solution" would actually convince Muslims all around the world that ISIS was actually correct.

But it is a viable solution where you Liberals have failed to offer one. Ignoring is not a solution.

The only way it would be "viable" is if you killed them all, making you the worst mass murderer in world history 100 times over.

You know you would not kill all Muslims. You're being childish. No one killed all the Japanese. The Germans did not kill all the Jews. You hunt down and destroy radical Islamists and their supporters wherever they might be regardless to what nation's border they cross into. You put sanctions against any nation aiding and abetting the terrorists. You seize their assets worldwide. You watch the internet for recruiting and anyone supporting them and put those that do in prison. You actually have Congress declare a formal state of war against any and all radical Islamists. You actually actively engage the enemy 24/7 until he refuses to fight any longer and no one will join his lost cause.

But the libturds are childish. It is their complete nature. Over exaggerate most everything and cry the sky is falling.

Yet is it is Conservatives calling for the nuking of Muslims

 

[jc456]

I'm already hearing how the left thinks bombing Muslims is trumps idea but we can see that Obama did it first.



Someone please add more videos to this thread documenting how many times Obama bombed Muslims during his administration.

Reagan Bombed the hell out of Muslim's in Lebanon after the attack against our Marines.

George H.W. Bush bombed the hell out of them during the first Iraq War.

Clinton also bombed them during his tenure as President.

George W. Bush bombed many during his time.

President Obama has done the same.

Now if you are saying no Liberal knew about the usage of Drones by President Obama, well then that is a lie because they knew.

Now the question I have for you should drone strikes be used against possible terrorist suspects on U.S. Soil?

Now the question I have for you should drone strikes be used against possible terrorist suspects on U.S. Soil?

why?

 

[Syriusly]

I'm already hearing how the left thinks bombing Muslims is trumps idea but we can see that Obama did it first.



Someone please add more videos to this thread documenting how many times Obama bombed Muslims during his administration.

Reagan Bombed the hell out of Muslim's in Lebanon after the attack against our Marines.

George H.W. Bush bombed the hell out of them during the first Iraq War.

Clinton also bombed them during his tenure as President.

George W. Bush bombed many during his time.

President Obama has done the same.

Now if you are saying no Liberal knew about the usage of Drones by President Obama, well then that is a lie because they knew.

Now the question I have for you should drone strikes be used against possible terrorist suspects on U.S. Soil?

Now the question I have for you should drone strikes be used against possible terrorist suspects on U.S. Soil?

why?

No- terrorist suspects on U.S. soil are within the jurisdiction of the United States and should be handled like the criminals that they are.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

I'm already hearing how the left thinks bombing Muslims is trumps idea but we can see that Obama did it first.



Someone please add more videos to this thread documenting how many times Obama bombed Muslims during his administration.

Reagan Bombed the hell out of Muslim's in Lebanon after the attack against our Marines.

George H.W. Bush bombed the hell out of them during the first Iraq War.

Clinton also bombed them during his tenure as President.

George W. Bush bombed many during his time.

President Obama has done the same.

Now if you are saying no Liberal knew about the usage of Drones by President Obama, well then that is a lie because they knew.

Now the question I have for you should drone strikes be used against possible terrorist suspects on U.S. Soil?

Now the question I have for you should drone strikes be used against possible terrorist suspects on U.S. Soil?

why?

Answer a question with a question make me want to give you a Bud Dry!

 

[jc456]

Now the question I have for you should drone strikes be used against possible terrorist suspects on U.S. Soil?

The tards announce Obama has been bombing Muslims as if they just heard about it.

As for drone strikes in the US, they are completely unnecessary. I'll allow you ten seconds to figure out why.

false and false and false.

The irony is what you miss. The mere fact that Obama is bombing them and killing innocent people and did when he sent troops in to kill Bin Laden. But you cry because Trump said he would do the very same thing. That's ironic

 

[jc456]

I'm already hearing how the left thinks bombing Muslims is trumps idea but we can see that Obama did it first.



Someone please add more videos to this thread documenting how many times Obama bombed Muslims during his administration.

Reagan Bombed the hell out of Muslim's in Lebanon after the attack against our Marines.

George H.W. Bush bombed the hell out of them during the first Iraq War.

Clinton also bombed them during his tenure as President.

George W. Bush bombed many during his time.

President Obama has done the same.

Now if you are saying no Liberal knew about the usage of Drones by President Obama, well then that is a lie because they knew.

Now the question I have for you should drone strikes be used against possible terrorist suspects on U.S. Soil?

Now the question I have for you should drone strikes be used against possible terrorist suspects on U.S. Soil?

why?

No- terrorist suspects on U.S. soil are within the jurisdiction of the United States and should be handled like the criminals that they are.

that's all that can happen. The military is not allowed to go after criminals in the US. That's why I asked why.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

Now the question I have for you should drone strikes be used against possible terrorist suspects on U.S. Soil?

The tards announce Obama has been bombing Muslims as if they just heard about it.

As for drone strikes in the US, they are completely unnecessary. I'll allow you ten seconds to figure out why.

false and false and false.

The irony is what you miss. The mere fact that Obama is bombing them and killing innocent people and did when he sent troops in to kill Bin Laden. But you cry because Trump said he would do the very same thing. That's ironic

Would you support drone usage on terrorist suspects within the U.S. border?

 

[koshergrl]

Obama has been bombing Muslims since his first day in office, but don't tell Ds or the mainstream media. They don't want to know.

Nonsense, it has been widely covered in great detail by all the media. In fact, the White House has promoted the story of how Obama expanded the Drone program. Every time a leader is taken out the WH and military brags about it. The early strikes in Pakistan got immense publicity.
Who are these mainstream media sources that you claim have not covered the Drone strikes?

Here is an NY Times article about the CIA increasing operations in Pakistan from early December 2009, six weeks before Obama's inauguration.

nytimes.com/2009/12/04/world/asia/04drones.html

Yes but where is the criticism and condemnation by the left media that was very prevalent during W's reign of terror?

hahahaha...reign of terror...

 

[jc456]

I'm already hearing how the left thinks bombing Muslims is trumps idea but we can see that Obama did it first.



Someone please add more videos to this thread documenting how many times Obama bombed Muslims during his administration.

Reagan Bombed the hell out of Muslim's in Lebanon after the attack against our Marines.

George H.W. Bush bombed the hell out of them during the first Iraq War.

Clinton also bombed them during his tenure as President.

George W. Bush bombed many during his time.

President Obama has done the same.

Now if you are saying no Liberal knew about the usage of Drones by President Obama, well then that is a lie because they knew.

Now the question I have for you should drone strikes be used against possible terrorist suspects on U.S. Soil?

Now the question I have for you should drone strikes be used against possible terrorist suspects on U.S. Soil?

why?

Answer a question with a question make me want to give you a Bud Dry!

it was my answer. Why should we do the same thing here? The military isn't allowed to function in the homeland. So why would he do that when he can't? It was a stupid question.