Stand and fight!

[Flopper]

I haven't seen anyone proposing negotiation

Then what was that we did with Iran?

Iran isn't ISIS.
Read a newspaper.

Iran said they would spend whatever it cost to defeat ISIS. They have also said they would join a coalition. The problem is there is no real coalition. There is the US helping the Kurds and Iraqis and groups of rebels fighting Assad. Russia is just trying to keep Assad in power by targeting those threatening his government. The Iraqis and Kurds don't want to fright ISIS in Syria. Many of the Syrian rebels are working with ISIS and others are fighting against ISIS. It seems there is little coordination and the various parties are working at cross purposes. That's not the way to defeat ISIS.

 

[idb]

I haven't seen anyone proposing negotiation

Then what was that we did with Iran?

Iran isn't ISIS.
Read a newspaper.

Iran said they would spend whatever it cost to defeat ISIS. They have also said they would join a coalition. The problem is there is no real coalition. There is the US helping the Kurds and Iraqis and groups of rebels fighting Assad. Russia is just trying to keep Assad in power by targeting those threatening his government. The Iraqis and Kurds don't want to fright ISIS in Syria. Many of the Syrian rebels are working with ISIS and others are fighting against ISIS. It seems there is little coordination and the various parties are working at cross purposes. That's not the way to defeat ISIS.

I think the ideal would be a coalition of everyone excluding ISIS.
Ditch the idea of kicking out Assad but get him to agree to rules on governing in the future and the presence of a peacekeeping/ monitoring force.
Get him to invite the coalition in.

Once ISIS is sorted we can all go back to our normal bombing and terrorising...aaah, the good old days!

Probably pie-in-the-sky but that would be the ideal situation.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I haven't seen anyone proposing negotiation

Then what was that we did with Iran?

Iran isn't ISIS.
Read a newspaper.

Iran said they would spend whatever it cost to defeat ISIS. They have also said they would join a coalition. The problem is there is no real coalition. There is the US helping the Kurds and Iraqis and groups of rebels fighting Assad. Russia is just trying to keep Assad in power by targeting those threatening his government. The Iraqis and Kurds don't want to fright ISIS in Syria. Many of the Syrian rebels are working with ISIS and others are fighting against ISIS. It seems there is little coordination and the various parties are working at cross purposes. That's not the way to defeat ISIS.

I think the ideal would be a coalition of everyone excluding ISIS.
Ditch the idea of kicking out Assad but get him to agree to rules on governing in the future and the presence of a peacekeeping/ monitoring force.
Get him to invite the coalition in.

Once ISIS is sorted we can all go back to our normal bombing and terrorising...aaah, the good old days!

Probably pie-in-the-sky but that would be the ideal situation.

an interesting idea, it might bring Russia into a coalition seeking to exterminate iSIS.

I think our leaders should have learned, once a dictator is removed, the likely certainty is chaos.

 

[idb]

I haven't seen anyone proposing negotiation

Then what was that we did with Iran?

Iran isn't ISIS.
Read a newspaper.

Iran said they would spend whatever it cost to defeat ISIS. They have also said they would join a coalition. The problem is there is no real coalition. There is the US helping the Kurds and Iraqis and groups of rebels fighting Assad. Russia is just trying to keep Assad in power by targeting those threatening his government. The Iraqis and Kurds don't want to fright ISIS in Syria. Many of the Syrian rebels are working with ISIS and others are fighting against ISIS. It seems there is little coordination and the various parties are working at cross purposes. That's not the way to defeat ISIS.

I think the ideal would be a coalition of everyone excluding ISIS.
Ditch the idea of kicking out Assad but get him to agree to rules on governing in the future and the presence of a peacekeeping/ monitoring force.
Get him to invite the coalition in.

Once ISIS is sorted we can all go back to our normal bombing and terrorising...aaah, the good old days!

Probably pie-in-the-sky but that would be the ideal situation.

an interesting idea, it might bring Russia into a coalition seeking to exterminate iSIS.

I think our leaders should have learned, once a dictator is removed, the likely certainty is chaos.

ISIS have stung Russia as well.

 

[Flopper]

I haven't seen anyone proposing negotiation

Then what was that we did with Iran?

Iran isn't ISIS.
Read a newspaper.

Iran said they would spend whatever it cost to defeat ISIS. They have also said they would join a coalition. The problem is there is no real coalition. There is the US helping the Kurds and Iraqis and groups of rebels fighting Assad. Russia is just trying to keep Assad in power by targeting those threatening his government. The Iraqis and Kurds don't want to fright ISIS in Syria. Many of the Syrian rebels are working with ISIS and others are fighting against ISIS. It seems there is little coordination and the various parties are working at cross purposes. That's not the way to defeat ISIS.

I think the ideal would be a coalition of everyone excluding ISIS.
Ditch the idea of kicking out Assad but get him to agree to rules on governing in the future and the presence of a peacekeeping/ monitoring force.
Get him to invite the coalition in.

Once ISIS is sorted we can all go back to our normal bombing and terrorising...aaah, the good old days!

Probably pie-in-the-sky but that would be the ideal situation.

an interesting idea, it might bring Russia into a coalition seeking to exterminate iSIS.

I think our leaders should have learned, once a dictator is removed, the likely certainty is chaos.

I think Putin is far more interested in becoming a major player in the Middle East than becoming part of a coalition to destroy ISIS, particular if it's lead by NATO or the US.

You know if ISIS is defeated, the remains will morph into another terrorist group. Just as Al Qaeda became an offshoot of the Mujahideen and ISIS was formed from Al Qaeda, ISIS when defeated or seriously weaken will give rise to a new terrorist group.

 

[idb]

Then what was that we did with Iran?

Iran isn't ISIS.
Read a newspaper.

Iran said they would spend whatever it cost to defeat ISIS. They have also said they would join a coalition. The problem is there is no real coalition. There is the US helping the Kurds and Iraqis and groups of rebels fighting Assad. Russia is just trying to keep Assad in power by targeting those threatening his government. The Iraqis and Kurds don't want to fright ISIS in Syria. Many of the Syrian rebels are working with ISIS and others are fighting against ISIS. It seems there is little coordination and the various parties are working at cross purposes. That's not the way to defeat ISIS.

I think the ideal would be a coalition of everyone excluding ISIS.
Ditch the idea of kicking out Assad but get him to agree to rules on governing in the future and the presence of a peacekeeping/ monitoring force.
Get him to invite the coalition in.

Once ISIS is sorted we can all go back to our normal bombing and terrorising...aaah, the good old days!

Probably pie-in-the-sky but that would be the ideal situation.

an interesting idea, it might bring Russia into a coalition seeking to exterminate iSIS.

I think our leaders should have learned, once a dictator is removed, the likely certainty is chaos.

I think Putin is far more interested in becoming a major player in the Middle East than becoming part of a coalition to destroy ISIS, particular if it's lead by NATO or the US.

You know if ISIS is defeated, the remains will morph into another terrorist group. Just as Al Qaeda became an offshoot of the Mujahideen and ISIS was formed from Al Qaeda, ISIS when defeated or seriously weaken will give rise to a new terrorist group.

In which case, any coalition must not be a one-issue arrangement.
It must also not be purely focused on military solutions.
It needs to have the buy-in of ME countries.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Then what was that we did with Iran?

Iran isn't ISIS.
Read a newspaper.

Iran said they would spend whatever it cost to defeat ISIS. They have also said they would join a coalition. The problem is there is no real coalition. There is the US helping the Kurds and Iraqis and groups of rebels fighting Assad. Russia is just trying to keep Assad in power by targeting those threatening his government. The Iraqis and Kurds don't want to fright ISIS in Syria. Many of the Syrian rebels are working with ISIS and others are fighting against ISIS. It seems there is little coordination and the various parties are working at cross purposes. That's not the way to defeat ISIS.

I think the ideal would be a coalition of everyone excluding ISIS.
Ditch the idea of kicking out Assad but get him to agree to rules on governing in the future and the presence of a peacekeeping/ monitoring force.
Get him to invite the coalition in.

Once ISIS is sorted we can all go back to our normal bombing and terrorising...aaah, the good old days!

Probably pie-in-the-sky but that would be the ideal situation.

an interesting idea, it might bring Russia into a coalition seeking to exterminate iSIS.

I think our leaders should have learned, once a dictator is removed, the likely certainty is chaos.

I think Putin is far more interested in becoming a major player in the Middle East than becoming part of a coalition to destroy ISIS, particular if it's lead by NATO or the US.

You know if ISIS is defeated, the remains will morph into another terrorist group. Just as Al Qaeda became an offshoot of the Mujahideen and ISIS was formed from Al Qaeda, ISIS when defeated or seriously weaken will give rise to a new terrorist group.

Correct.

The root causes of terrorism can't be defeated using conventional military tactics.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Iran isn't ISIS.
Read a newspaper.

Iran said they would spend whatever it cost to defeat ISIS. They have also said they would join a coalition. The problem is there is no real coalition. There is the US helping the Kurds and Iraqis and groups of rebels fighting Assad. Russia is just trying to keep Assad in power by targeting those threatening his government. The Iraqis and Kurds don't want to fright ISIS in Syria. Many of the Syrian rebels are working with ISIS and others are fighting against ISIS. It seems there is little coordination and the various parties are working at cross purposes. That's not the way to defeat ISIS.

I think the ideal would be a coalition of everyone excluding ISIS.
Ditch the idea of kicking out Assad but get him to agree to rules on governing in the future and the presence of a peacekeeping/ monitoring force.
Get him to invite the coalition in.

Once ISIS is sorted we can all go back to our normal bombing and terrorising...aaah, the good old days!

Probably pie-in-the-sky but that would be the ideal situation.

an interesting idea, it might bring Russia into a coalition seeking to exterminate iSIS.

I think our leaders should have learned, once a dictator is removed, the likely certainty is chaos.

I think Putin is far more interested in becoming a major player in the Middle East than becoming part of a coalition to destroy ISIS, particular if it's lead by NATO or the US.

You know if ISIS is defeated, the remains will morph into another terrorist group. Just as Al Qaeda became an offshoot of the Mujahideen and ISIS was formed from Al Qaeda, ISIS when defeated or seriously weaken will give rise to a new terrorist group.

In which case, any coalition must not be a one-issue arrangement.
It must also not be purely focused on military solutions.
It needs to have the buy-in of ME countries.

And it means that any real, actual, lasting solutions must come from the people of the Region itself, it can't be something compelled by the West, lest it would further justify continued terrorist activity.

 

[idb]

Iran said they would spend whatever it cost to defeat ISIS. They have also said they would join a coalition. The problem is there is no real coalition. There is the US helping the Kurds and Iraqis and groups of rebels fighting Assad. Russia is just trying to keep Assad in power by targeting those threatening his government. The Iraqis and Kurds don't want to fright ISIS in Syria. Many of the Syrian rebels are working with ISIS and others are fighting against ISIS. It seems there is little coordination and the various parties are working at cross purposes. That's not the way to defeat ISIS.

I think the ideal would be a coalition of everyone excluding ISIS.
Ditch the idea of kicking out Assad but get him to agree to rules on governing in the future and the presence of a peacekeeping/ monitoring force.
Get him to invite the coalition in.

Once ISIS is sorted we can all go back to our normal bombing and terrorising...aaah, the good old days!

Probably pie-in-the-sky but that would be the ideal situation.

an interesting idea, it might bring Russia into a coalition seeking to exterminate iSIS.

I think our leaders should have learned, once a dictator is removed, the likely certainty is chaos.

I think Putin is far more interested in becoming a major player in the Middle East than becoming part of a coalition to destroy ISIS, particular if it's lead by NATO or the US.

You know if ISIS is defeated, the remains will morph into another terrorist group. Just as Al Qaeda became an offshoot of the Mujahideen and ISIS was formed from Al Qaeda, ISIS when defeated or seriously weaken will give rise to a new terrorist group.

In which case, any coalition must not be a one-issue arrangement.
It must also not be purely focused on military solutions.
It needs to have the buy-in of ME countries.

And it means that any real, actual, lasting solutions must come from the people of the Region itself, it can't be something compelled by the West, lest it would further justify continued terrorist activity.

Unfortunately, it isn't as satisfying as the immediate hit you get when you're sitting on your couch watching telly and see shit blow up from 5,000 feet.

 

[Brain357]

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.

That sounds nice and all but that is what we did after 9/11. See how that worked out? Now the problem is much worse. And we lost more lives in the wars than we did in 9/11. I would like to see the terrorists wiped out, but just attacking again won't work.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

Stand and Fight!

Send in the proxies so your hands don't get soiled! Let them make the sacrifices!

 

[Wry Catcher]

Then what was that we did with Iran?

Iran isn't ISIS.
Read a newspaper.

Iran said they would spend whatever it cost to defeat ISIS. They have also said they would join a coalition. The problem is there is no real coalition. There is the US helping the Kurds and Iraqis and groups of rebels fighting Assad. Russia is just trying to keep Assad in power by targeting those threatening his government. The Iraqis and Kurds don't want to fright ISIS in Syria. Many of the Syrian rebels are working with ISIS and others are fighting against ISIS. It seems there is little coordination and the various parties are working at cross purposes. That's not the way to defeat ISIS.

I think the ideal would be a coalition of everyone excluding ISIS.
Ditch the idea of kicking out Assad but get him to agree to rules on governing in the future and the presence of a peacekeeping/ monitoring force.
Get him to invite the coalition in.

Once ISIS is sorted we can all go back to our normal bombing and terrorising...aaah, the good old days!

Probably pie-in-the-sky but that would be the ideal situation.

an interesting idea, it might bring Russia into a coalition seeking to exterminate iSIS.

I think our leaders should have learned, once a dictator is removed, the likely certainty is chaos.

I think Putin is far more interested in becoming a major player in the Middle East than becoming part of a coalition to destroy ISIS, particular if it's lead by NATO or the US.

You know if ISIS is defeated, the remains will morph into another terrorist group. Just as Al Qaeda became an offshoot of the Mujahideen and ISIS was formed from Al Qaeda, ISIS when defeated or seriously weaken will give rise to a new terrorist group.

I'd not bet against your analysis. Until the majority in Islam takes responsibility for the criminal element in their religion, we can expect continued violence against innocent civilians of all faiths.

Civilization has been confronted by pure evil, If civilized Muslims don't take action, they will become the victims of pure evil, and that includes the civilian population in Iran.

 

[Flopper]

Iran isn't ISIS.
Read a newspaper.

Iran said they would spend whatever it cost to defeat ISIS. They have also said they would join a coalition. The problem is there is no real coalition. There is the US helping the Kurds and Iraqis and groups of rebels fighting Assad. Russia is just trying to keep Assad in power by targeting those threatening his government. The Iraqis and Kurds don't want to fright ISIS in Syria. Many of the Syrian rebels are working with ISIS and others are fighting against ISIS. It seems there is little coordination and the various parties are working at cross purposes. That's not the way to defeat ISIS.

I think the ideal would be a coalition of everyone excluding ISIS.
Ditch the idea of kicking out Assad but get him to agree to rules on governing in the future and the presence of a peacekeeping/ monitoring force.
Get him to invite the coalition in.

Once ISIS is sorted we can all go back to our normal bombing and terrorising...aaah, the good old days!

Probably pie-in-the-sky but that would be the ideal situation.

an interesting idea, it might bring Russia into a coalition seeking to exterminate iSIS.

I think our leaders should have learned, once a dictator is removed, the likely certainty is chaos.

I think Putin is far more interested in becoming a major player in the Middle East than becoming part of a coalition to destroy ISIS, particular if it's lead by NATO or the US.

You know if ISIS is defeated, the remains will morph into another terrorist group. Just as Al Qaeda became an offshoot of the Mujahideen and ISIS was formed from Al Qaeda, ISIS when defeated or seriously weaken will give rise to a new terrorist group.

Correct.

The root causes of terrorism can't be defeated using conventional military tactics.

We are treating the symptoms of a problem that goes back over half century. I think the only cure is time, time for better education and economic opportunities to develop in poorer countries. The one thing we must do is treat terrorist acts as crimes committed by small groups of very sick, evil people. When they form military forces such as ISIS and attack nations, then they should dealt with by military force.

 

[Flopper]

Iran isn't ISIS.
Read a newspaper.

Iran said they would spend whatever it cost to defeat ISIS. They have also said they would join a coalition. The problem is there is no real coalition. There is the US helping the Kurds and Iraqis and groups of rebels fighting Assad. Russia is just trying to keep Assad in power by targeting those threatening his government. The Iraqis and Kurds don't want to fright ISIS in Syria. Many of the Syrian rebels are working with ISIS and others are fighting against ISIS. It seems there is little coordination and the various parties are working at cross purposes. That's not the way to defeat ISIS.

I think the ideal would be a coalition of everyone excluding ISIS.
Ditch the idea of kicking out Assad but get him to agree to rules on governing in the future and the presence of a peacekeeping/ monitoring force.
Get him to invite the coalition in.

Once ISIS is sorted we can all go back to our normal bombing and terrorising...aaah, the good old days!

Probably pie-in-the-sky but that would be the ideal situation.

an interesting idea, it might bring Russia into a coalition seeking to exterminate iSIS.

I think our leaders should have learned, once a dictator is removed, the likely certainty is chaos.

I think Putin is far more interested in becoming a major player in the Middle East than becoming part of a coalition to destroy ISIS, particular if it's lead by NATO or the US.

You know if ISIS is defeated, the remains will morph into another terrorist group. Just as Al Qaeda became an offshoot of the Mujahideen and ISIS was formed from Al Qaeda, ISIS when defeated or seriously weaken will give rise to a new terrorist group.

I'd not bet against your analysis. Until the majority in Islam takes responsibility for the criminal element in their religion, we can expect continued violence against innocent civilians of all faiths.

Civilization has been confronted by pure evil, If civilized Muslims don't take action, they will become the victims of pure evil, and that includes the civilian population in Iran.

I had a conversation with a friend who happens to be a Muslim and is pretty devout. When asked the question that you pose, why don't you take action against these terrorist, I can't remember his exact reply but it went something like this. Why don't you do something? I'm a 3rd generation American who's family came from Iran. I've never been there. I can't speak language. I have a wife and 3 kids to support. If you want to wage war on terrorism in some shit hole have at it. Like you, I have my own life to live.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Iran said they would spend whatever it cost to defeat ISIS. They have also said they would join a coalition. The problem is there is no real coalition. There is the US helping the Kurds and Iraqis and groups of rebels fighting Assad. Russia is just trying to keep Assad in power by targeting those threatening his government. The Iraqis and Kurds don't want to fright ISIS in Syria. Many of the Syrian rebels are working with ISIS and others are fighting against ISIS. It seems there is little coordination and the various parties are working at cross purposes. That's not the way to defeat ISIS.

I think the ideal would be a coalition of everyone excluding ISIS.
Ditch the idea of kicking out Assad but get him to agree to rules on governing in the future and the presence of a peacekeeping/ monitoring force.
Get him to invite the coalition in.

Once ISIS is sorted we can all go back to our normal bombing and terrorising...aaah, the good old days!

Probably pie-in-the-sky but that would be the ideal situation.

an interesting idea, it might bring Russia into a coalition seeking to exterminate iSIS.

I think our leaders should have learned, once a dictator is removed, the likely certainty is chaos.

I think Putin is far more interested in becoming a major player in the Middle East than becoming part of a coalition to destroy ISIS, particular if it's lead by NATO or the US.

You know if ISIS is defeated, the remains will morph into another terrorist group. Just as Al Qaeda became an offshoot of the Mujahideen and ISIS was formed from Al Qaeda, ISIS when defeated or seriously weaken will give rise to a new terrorist group.

I'd not bet against your analysis. Until the majority in Islam takes responsibility for the criminal element in their religion, we can expect continued violence against innocent civilians of all faiths.

Civilization has been confronted by pure evil, If civilized Muslims don't take action, they will become the victims of pure evil, and that includes the civilian population in Iran.

I had a conversation with a friend who happens to be a Muslim and is pretty devout. When asked the question that you pose, why don't you take action against these terrorist, I can't remember his exact reply but it went something like this. Why don't you do something? I'm a 3rd generation American who's family came from Iran. I've never been there. I can't speak language. I have a wife and 3 kids to support. If you want to wage war on terrorism in some shit hole have at it. Like you, I have my own life to live.

I understand why this individual might respond in that matter. I don't understand why Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan don't protect the image of Islam and fellow Muslims being murdered by ISIS,

 

[candycorn]

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.

Well, why haven't you enlisted in the Army yet?

If that's your standard, why haven't you?

That isn't my standard. It is his though. While he (and you) are happy to send other people's kids to die in unwinnable wars, I notice you develop a case of alligator arms when they are asking for volunteers to serve.

Man up and go. Oh wait, let me guess, you have something better to do....right?

You're such a douchebag.

I'm against the wars, dumb ass. Always have been, always said so. Pull your head out of the partisan punch and pay attention

Then your argument should be with the OP then douchnozzle.

 

[candycorn]

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.

That sounds nice and all but that is what we did after 9/11. See how that worked out? Now the problem is much worse. And we lost more lives in the wars than we did in 9/11. I would like to see the terrorists wiped out, but just attacking again won't work.

I'm sure the military strategic genius of the OP is far greater than ours or the Generals at the Pentagon. Let's wait around to see how he is going to sign up for Army and what strategy he would employ.

 

[kaz]

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.

Well, why haven't you enlisted in the Army yet?

If that's your standard, why haven't you?

That isn't my standard. It is his though. While he (and you) are happy to send other people's kids to die in unwinnable wars, I notice you develop a case of alligator arms when they are asking for volunteers to serve.

Man up and go. Oh wait, let me guess, you have something better to do....right?

You're such a douchebag.

I'm against the wars, dumb ass. Always have been, always said so. Pull your head out of the partisan punch and pay attention

Then your argument should be with the OP then douchnozzle.

Why would I do that when I was responding to your point?

I'm curious how at this point after all these threads you haven't retained that I am against he wars. Do you have a learning disability?

 

[candycorn]

Well, why haven't you enlisted in the Army yet?

If that's your standard, why haven't you?

That isn't my standard. It is his though. While he (and you) are happy to send other people's kids to die in unwinnable wars, I notice you develop a case of alligator arms when they are asking for volunteers to serve.

Man up and go. Oh wait, let me guess, you have something better to do....right?

You're such a douchebag.

I'm against the wars, dumb ass. Always have been, always said so. Pull your head out of the partisan punch and pay attention

Then your argument should be with the OP then douchnozzle.

Why would I do that when I was responding to your point?

I'm curious how at this point after all these threads you haven't retained that I am against he wars. Do you have a learning disability?

No but you're calling out some one who agrees with you douchnozzle.

 

[kaz]

If that's your standard, why haven't you?

That isn't my standard. It is his though. While he (and you) are happy to send other people's kids to die in unwinnable wars, I notice you develop a case of alligator arms when they are asking for volunteers to serve.

Man up and go. Oh wait, let me guess, you have something better to do....right?

You're such a douchebag.

I'm against the wars, dumb ass. Always have been, always said so. Pull your head out of the partisan punch and pay attention

Then your argument should be with the OP then douchnozzle.

Why would I do that when I was responding to your point?

I'm curious how at this point after all these threads you haven't retained that I am against he wars. Do you have a learning disability?

No but you're calling out some one who agrees with you douchnozzle.

Telling people to join the military if they disagree with you isn't agreeing with me. It has nothing to do with anything. It's just being snotty. If al Qaeda rose to the level you support fighting them, you would not join the military, you would just support it. Make real arguments.

Iraq was bad policy, bad for this country. We should not be fixing other people's problems for them. We should not be fighting non-defensive wars. I didn't have to tell anyone to join the military to say that