Stand and fight!

[TemplarKormac]

You are pretending to not know what that means. Words and phrases....to you...are nothing more than opportunities to obfuscate and drag on the discussion until your "opponents" get bored and leave.

No, it's me making points while you sit there and call me names. Leave if you like. I don't care one way or the other if you do.

 

[Gracie]

Twitter users are asking why the refugees are mostly young able bodied men and less women and children. The ones that should be standing and fighting are running. Here.

 

[JoeB131]

We are all aware of the death and destruction radical Islamic terrorism has wrought all over the world. France is not the only victim. It is not the first, nor will it be the last.

I'm sure that the terrorists are living in mortal terror of your "Call of Duty" high score, buddy.

 

[TemplarKormac]

No boots on the ground = no full scale military invasion and occupation.

So, what about the 50 Special Ops troops Obama sent to Syria? Where are your sanctimonious protests? Hmm? What about when he launched the operation to take out Osama bin Laden? What about then?

Might it be that sending our sons and daughters to war is only justified when someone you support is in office calling the shots?

 

[TemplarKormac]

We are all aware of the death and destruction radical Islamic terrorism has wrought all over the world. France is not the only victim. It is not the first, nor will it be the last.

I'm sure that the terrorists are living in mortal terror of your "Call of Duty" high score, buddy.

And I'm sure they're just as afraid of your high score in Candy Crush.

 

[JoeB131]

Clayton would rather let more people die at the hands of radical Islam rather than to take more direct action. Talking is the only policy directive Democrats have.

No, he just realizes the stupidity of treating a criminal problem like a military one.

here's the thing. Terrorism IS bad. It's not an existential threat to the US or France.

And we aren't going to bomb our way to a solution.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Clayton would rather let more people die at the hands of radical Islam rather than to take more direct action. Talking is the only policy directive Democrats have.

You want to take direct action instead of talking?

Enlist.

Why? If all you liberals do is talk and negotiate, why don't you become a diplomat?

I'll tell you what I tell the other anti war freaks out there who oppose sending their sons and/or daughters off to war:

They chose to enlist. They chose to embrace the risk. Who are we to tell them not to? What good are they to America if they aren't allowed to defend her and her allies?

Enlist to prove that there's a difference between you and the people who don't want to fight and die for the shithole of the Middle East.

If you're willing to give up your life for the sake the Iraqis, or for the French for that matter, prove it.

I'm not about to do it, and in that sense, you're no different than I am.

Every time such a subject comes up, you liberals rant about those who support defense of this country or others to join the military themselves. Why doesn't that apply both ways?

You want cleaner air, then you pay the taxes and fees to have it done. You want a welfare state, then only liberals should be taxed to support it. You want to steal money from the wealthy, then steal it from wealthy Democrat supporters like Oprah, Buffet, Gates and the likes. If you want to disarm America, then make a law that no Democrat supporters are allowed to own or carry firearms. If you want Obama phones, then the phone companies should only charge Democrat voters to support the program.

Every American has the right to express their thoughts and solutions to the problems in this country. I know how liberals hate that idea, but that's the way it works in a free society such as ours.

 

[LoneLaugher]

No boots on the ground = no full scale military invasion and occupation.

So, what about the 50 Special Ops troops Obama sent to Syria? Where are your sanctimonious protests? Hmm? What about when he launched the operation to take out Osama bin Laden? What about then?

I'd prefer he did t send those 50. I'm not entirely certain that an adequate exit strategy exists.

The team that took out Bin Laden? That's what I favor. Intelligence....police work.......judicious action. That is NOT WHAT IS KNOWN AS BOOTS ON THE GROUND. BOOTS ON THE GROUND REFERS TO A MASSIVE MILITARY FORCE AND OCCUPATION.

Now.....be honest.

 

[JoeB131]

And I'm sure they're just as afraid of your high score in Candy Crush.

Guy, I'm an old person. Phones that don't plug into walls are sorcery.

But I do find it amusing some fat slug who never got off the couch is going to try to tell a veteran what good military policy is.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The liberal response to this thread is akin to a firefighter being afraid to put the fire out. All you have to do is point and shoot.

Rather simple concept.

This is true idiocy.

The 'liberal' response to this thread is appropriate and accurate: a conventional military ground force campaign would be an unmitigated disaster, as would a bombing campaign similar to that conducted against North Vietnam and Hanoi.

Terrorist are criminals, they're not 'soldiers,' they don't constitute a 'military,' treating them as such is doomed to failure.

 

[JoeB131]

Every time such a subject comes up, you liberals rant about those who support defense of this country or others to join the military themselves. Why doesn't that apply both ways?

Because you guys wouldn't be so keen to fight if your asses were on the line.

 

[JoeB131]

So, what about the 50 Special Ops troops Obama sent to Syria? Where are your sanctimonious protests? Hmm? What about when he launched the operation to take out Osama bin Laden? What about then?

I think getting any more involved in Syria is a mistake, and I've been saying that since 2013.

The mission to get Bin Laden I'm good with, as that was a specific mission with a specific target.

 

[leftwinger]

Why did big mouth BHO publicly "announce" sending 50 special OPs troops? they were not in enough danger already? Got to move the to top of Muslim hit list?

 

[LoneLaugher]

Why did big mouth BHO publicly "announce" sending 50 special OPs troops? they were not in enough danger already? Got to move the to top of Muslim hit list?

^^^That's a joke, right?^^^

 

[leftwinger]

^^^That's a joke, right?^^^

No that is not a joke? why announce troop movements anytime anywhere? Tell Putin in secret?

 

[LoneLaugher]

^^^That's a joke, right?^^^

No that is not a joke? why announce troop movements anytime anywhere? Tell Putin in secret?

Man.....you are unaware. Think politics. Ask yourself who wanted to tell the American people that Obama was sending those advisers. Answer honestly.

 

[Flopper]

We are all aware of the death and destruction radical Islamic terrorism has wrought all over the world. France is not the only victim. It is not the first, nor will it be the last.

But today, still, we all mourn the loss of life in Paris. It is just yet another reminder that not even the greatest nations on Earth are immune to the effects of terrorism. We Americans discovered that for ourselves on September 11th, 2001.

Also, let us us not forget the deaths of those in Iraq, Syria, Israel, and Lebanon by those same hands. Terrorism is a scourge that needs to be exterminated, a cancer that infests all of humankind. We must all strive for a cure.

Pray for them all. For peace. But praying for peace will still not be enough. To gain peace, one must prepare to take action, even if it means doing so through violent means.

Speak softly, carry a big stick. The time for speaking softly has passed, it's time to start swinging the stick. Hard. Don't let politics stand in the way.

I think any boots on the ground should come from the nations that have suffered the most from Islamic terrorism and are in the most immediate danger from ISIS which are the middle eastern countries followed by the EU countries.

Despite all the media coverage of terrorism, there have been very few Islamic terrorist attacks in the US. By actual count their have been 76 people in US die in terrorist attacks since 9-11. That's about 1/10 the number that die from lightning strikes.

IMHO, middle eastern countries should be heavily involved in any fight against ISIS backed up by a coalition of NATO countries. The US should provide only logistical support. We have got to stop fighting the battles other nations should be fighting.

List of Islamic Terror Attacks in America

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So, what about the 50 Special Ops troops Obama sent to Syria? Where are your sanctimonious protests? Hmm? What about when he launched the operation to take out Osama bin Laden? What about then?

I think getting any more involved in Syria is a mistake, and I've been saying that since 2013.

The mission to get Bin Laden I'm good with, as that was a specific mission with a specific target.

So were you also good when DumBama announced to the world that it was Seal Team 6 that took out Bin Laden, and then had their helicopter shot down by terrorists killing many of it's members?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Every time such a subject comes up, you liberals rant about those who support defense of this country or others to join the military themselves. Why doesn't that apply both ways?

Because you guys wouldn't be so keen to fight if your asses were on the line.

And you guys wouldn't be so keen on all these social programs if you had to pay for them exclusively.

 

[idb]

There is no support for your claim that inaction is causing terrorist attacks.

There is nothing to support your claim that taking no action averts terrorist attacks either. Want to explain that little gem?

When did he make that claim?

"No boots on the ground!"

That's not the same as taking no action.