Does The President Using the Label "radical Islamic terrorism" Accomplish Anything? (1 Viewer)

[TheDemSocialist]

Does The President Using the Label "radical Islamic terrorism" Accomplish Anything?

 

[cpwill]

Re: Does The President Using the Label "radical Islamic terrorism" Accomplish Anythin

His refusal to say it is sort of immaterial. His refusal to recognize it is the problem.

 

[chuckiechan]

Re: Does The President Using the Label "radical Islamic terrorism" Accomplish Anythin

It lets our allies who are up to their necks in it understand that we are serious. Trump is right to point out that Obama was more angry him and the Republicans than the Orlando killer.

I see Obama's point. ISIL isn't trying to defeat the democrats in November, the Republicans are. In Obama's mind Republicans are the real threat!

 

[Beaudreaux]

Re: Does The President Using the Label "radical Islamic terrorism" Accomplish Anythin

Does The President Using the Label "radical Islamic terrorism" Accomplish Anything?

We've had this conversation in a number of threads so far. I will try to find the posts I made in those thread so I don't have to repeat myself.

I'll put them in with the link to the other thread so you can have context if you wish:

Before you can defend from and/or attack an enemy, you must recognize who that enemy is and what motivates them. That requires defining them, which includes using terminology that describes that definition - radical Islamic terrorism in this case. The goals, strategy, tactics, and methods of dealing with the threat flow from that basic point. Without it, failure is unavoidable.

We are at war. War can only be won if prosecuted with full force and effect to destroy the enemy and his ability to make war. Limited (or restricted) warfare is only preacceptance of defeat. Refusing to do those basic things such as defining the enemy and using the proper terminology is the first and most obvious step toward capitulation to the enemy - a conscious refusal to do what is required to win.

JMHO.

We cannot fight what we cannot identify. Identification gives us breadth and scale, cause and source. Since we're not dealing with national geographical boundaries of a sovereign state, we have to define the ideological boundaries of the mental state that originates the threat to our nation and people.

I had other posts as well, but I feel the above two sum up my thoughts. So, yes, it is important for the reasons stated above. Not to make him say the words, or to say something that sounds "Oooo, Scary" but again, the reasons above.

 

[Fledermaus]

Re: Does The President Using the Label "radical Islamic terrorism" Accomplish Anythin

Does The President Using the Label "radical Islamic terrorism" Accomplish Anything?

Truth is accomplished when the act is actually terrorism.

 

[radcen]

Re: Does The President Using the Label "radical Islamic terrorism" Accomplish Anythin

It lets everyone know that we recognize the threat for what it actually is, and that we're going to address it as such.

And it doesn't have to be this dumb ass hyperbolic "all Muslims are not terrorists" or "keep them all out" garbage. If we'd stop talking in :2mad: soundbites (or :kissy: soundbites) we could actually convey that we mean only the ones who are doing this stuff.

 

[MorrisDay]

Re: Does The President Using the Label "radical Islamic terrorism" Accomplish Anythin

Oh Please! There is a deeper meaning behind it and most people understand that.

 

[TheGoverness]

Re: Does The President Using the Label "radical Islamic terrorism" Accomplish Anythin

Does The President Using the Label "radical Islamic terrorism" Accomplish Anything?

Acknowledging and recognizing that Radical Islam is a problem is the first step towards solving it.

But it doesn't really matter if Obama uses the term or not, I really care more about him actually acknowledging the problem of radical Islam.

 

[Moot]

Re: Does The President Using the Label "radical Islamic terrorism" Accomplish Anythin

Acknowledging and recognizing that Radical Islam is a problem is the first step towards solving it.

But it doesn't really matter if Obama uses the term or not, I really care more about him actually acknowledging the problem of radical Islam.

Recognizing that radical Islam is the problem is the first step. The second step is not to feed it by demonizing the good Muslims along with the bad. The third step is to kill the bad Muslims so they don't infect and alienate the good ones. And that's what I think Obama is trying to do.

 

[TheDemSocialist]

Re: Does The President Using the Label "radical Islamic terrorism" Accomplish Anythin

His refusal to say it is sort of immaterial. His refusal to recognize it is the problem.

He doesnt recognize terrorism as a problem?

 

[Arjay81]

Re: Does The President Using the Label "radical Islamic terrorism" Accomplish Anythin

It would let people know that Obama actually understands what is actually happening and that the world is not rainbows and unicorns as he portrays it.

 

[Tanngrisnir]

Re: Does The President Using the Label "radical Islamic terrorism" Accomplish Anythin

It would let people know that Obama actually understands what is actually happening and that the world is not rainbows and unicorns as he portrays it.

When did Obama portray the world as being made of unicorns and rainbows?

Please be very specific.

 

[cpwill]

Re: Does The President Using the Label "radical Islamic terrorism" Accomplish Anythin

He doesnt recognize terrorism as a problem?

Islamism. Although I would say he sees terrorism more as an irritation than a problem.

Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk

 

[Manc Skipper]

Re: Does The President Using the Label "radical Islamic terrorism" Accomplish Anythin

It would let people know that Obama actually understands what is actually happening and that the world is not rainbows and unicorns as he portrays it.

It would let people know he can be bullied into using a GoP meaningless magic mantra.

 

[Kobie]

Re: Does The President Using the Label "radical Islamic terrorism" Accomplish Anythin

Oh Please! There is a deeper meaning behind it and most people understand that.

No, there really isn't.

 

[Van Basten]

Re: Does The President Using the Label "radical Islamic terrorism" Accomplish Anythin

Yes, it's good to be specific and fact-driven.

It's just calling a spade a spade.

I don't like that Obama avoids it, it's just dishonest.

Extremism should be called by the name that drives it as it's how you understand it better. Those motivations can be religion, racism, nationalism, etc.

Don't duck it, call a duck a duck.

The terrorist attack in Orlando was driven by Islamic extremism and militant homophobia.

 

[Arjay81]

Re: Does The President Using the Label "radical Islamic terrorism" Accomplish Anythin

When did Obama portray the world as being made of unicorns and rainbows?

Please be very specific.

His entire strategy of appeasement and refusal to indict actions taken by ISIS in any action while blaming anyone else he can think of. Read his remarks.

 

[Arjay81]

Re: Does The President Using the Label "radical Islamic terrorism" Accomplish Anythin

It would let people know he can be bullied into using a GoP meaningless magic mantra.

It is only "meaningless" as long as he continues to avoid the truth. Something he does at every opportunity.

 

[Tanngrisnir]

Re: Does The President Using the Label "radical Islamic terrorism" Accomplish Anythin

His entire strategy of appeasement and refusal to indict actions taken by ISIS in any action while blaming anyone else he can think of. Read his remarks.

A. There is no such strategy of appeasement. Why spout such nonsense?
B. He's indicting actions of ISIS by killing them wholesale.

You should try this thing known as 'reality' one day. It might scare you at first, but you might also come to really like it!

 

[MorrisDay]

Re: Does The President Using the Label "radical Islamic terrorism" Accomplish Anythin

No, there really isn't.

The deeper meaning is no secret. With him it is a matter of sentiment for the culture - he identifies with it certainly more so than the average conservative American "culture".

 

[Manc Skipper]

Re: Does The President Using the Label "radical Islamic terrorism" Accomplish Anythin

It is only "meaningless" as long as he continues to avoid the truth. Something he does at every opportunity.

It's a meme, a dogwhistle phrase for the disenchanted loser. Why would anyone expect their President to stoop so low?

 

[Bodi]

Re: Does The President Using the Label "radical Islamic terrorism" Accomplish Anythin

When whacky jack asses like the Westboro Baptist Church spew hate we call them Christians that are assholes. The Left is the first to call them Christians so why, when it is Muslims using aspects of their religion to do far more harm that the Westboro idiots could ever do, does the Left not call them Muslims? I don't normally see Left v Right issues but on this one I 100% do.

 

[Bodi]

Re: Does The President Using the Label "radical Islamic terrorism" Accomplish Anythin

It would let people know that Obama actually understands what is actually happening and that the world is not rainbows and unicorns as he portrays it.

Oh please... :lol:

What hogwash...

 

[Bodi]

Re: Does The President Using the Label "radical Islamic terrorism" Accomplish Anythin

The deeper meaning is no secret.

What is the deeper meaning...?

 

[Arjay81]

Re: Does The President Using the Label "radical Islamic terrorism" Accomplish Anythin

A. There is no such strategy of appeasement. Why spout such nonsense?
B. He's indicting actions of ISIS by killing them wholesale.

You should try this thing known as 'reality' one day. It might scare you at first, but you might also come to really like it!

Since you obviously have never visited this "reality" of yours perhaps you can explain what exactly Obama is doing to fight terrorism. It certainly isn't his vaunted bombing or protecting this nation.

Why do YOU spout such nonsense?