If you sift through all this left wing nonsense, you' see the soultion that is espoused by the left. Be nicer!
Frightening like people like this are in charge of national security.
What happens is that attacks by the enemy are seen as a gun control problem.( Groan)
Scarey stupid.
I wouldn't say that I agree with everything the fellow says (the claim of 500 children killed by Israel in a single summer sounds pretty dubious!). On the other hand, this kind of "But they started it!" response seems rather lazy and childish, and more importantly, it's precisely what groups like ISIS themselves say.
I mean let's face facts here: One of the biggest catalysts for the rise of ISIS came from the aftermath of events in 2003, the unprovoked, illegal invasion by the US and allies of a sovereign nation on the opposite side of the world! Even if we pretend (stretching credulity to the limit) that Bush, Blair and Howard really believed in their hearts that Iraq had WMDs, it wouldn't change the fact that they ignored international protocol and invaded against the wishes of the United Nations Security Council and General Assembly and even of most of Iraq's neighbours.
So who started the violence? Throughout the 12 years before that, economic sanctions maintained by US and UK veto resulted in excess deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi people, half of them children, due largely to lack of medical supplies and poorer water quality. Who are the good guys here? Before that, there was an invasion because - get this - Iraq made an unprovoked illegal attack on another sovereign nation! But before that, Saddam Hussein was considered one of the West's important allies in the region... all while he was invading Iran and using WMDs on his own population.
How far back do you go with the "They started it" game?
Some evidence of that would be nice. Regardless, I'd bet you a shiny dollar that US weapons are used in 100% of those conflicts, since it is the #1 arms dealer in the world. As the video suggested, the private manufacturers of those arms do inevitablybribe'donate' to government officials, and they certainly are not throwing money away out of the goodness of their hearts. Do you need see any kind of problem here?
Other governments are similarly culpable, of course: The five permanent UN Security Council members - the countries which have arrogated to themselves the role of arbitrating world peace - all rank within the top seven arms dealing nations.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_industry#World.27s_largest_arms_exporters
If you know or believe that someone is a violent killer, would you sell them an automatic rifle with a clear conscience? Surely on this point at least you must agree that the video raises an important issue? The worse you think that Muslims are, so much the worse America and other countries are for providing a ready supply of cheap, quality weapons!
I think the point of this video went right over the heads of many of the posters who have already posted in this thread.
I think videos points are (which I think are valid):
1.)The "war on terror" has only created more and more terrorists
2.)The "war on terror" has created more terrorists because our tactics have been playing right into the terrorists propaganda goals. We have and continue to kill many innocent civilians, lock individuals up in CIA black sites and GITMO and torture them, invade and occupy other countries lands. And in return terrorist organizations use this for propaganda purposes and recruitment purposes, all of which is very well documented.
3.)Just because there is terrorism done in the name of Islam does not mean all Muslims are to blame
Ahhh yes. How could I be so silly?You appear to use this "over the heads" trope every time you don't have a good response. No, homeslice. We understand, we just don't agree.
How does one "win" a war on a tactic?I don't think you can make that conclusion about the war until we have actually tried to win it.
Going with this one eh? But hey, as I stated earlier, It's a lot easier to simply blame "the left" and or "progressives" and instead just keep going down the road of the status quo.Islamists are good at making their propaganda points mesh with Western "progressive" propaganda.
Also, simply "Islamism" is not to blame. Islamism is a political sect. Almost all political organizations/parties/leaders who can be described or they describe themselves as "Islamists" are against ISIS and many other terrorist organizations, hell many of them are openly fighting against ISIS. And hell, many countries governed by "Islamist" parties or regimes are our allies in the fight against ISIS.Yes, I think most of us agree with that. It's why I use the term "Islamist" rather than "Muslim". "Islamist" points to the violent radicals.
Possibly, depends. It is accurate however. Haven't you seen leftist rioters lately hurting people? You really ought to be yelling at leftists for being violent.
I wouldn't say that I agree with everything the fellow says (the claim of 500 children killed by Israel in a single summer sounds pretty dubious!). On the other hand, this kind of "But they started it!" response seems rather lazy and childish, and more importantly it's precisely what groups like ISIS themselves say.
I mean let's face facts here: One of the biggest catalysts for the rise of ISIS came from the aftermath of events in 2003, the unprovoked, illegal invasion by the US and allies of a sovereign nation on the opposite side of the world! Even if we pretend (stretching credulity to the limit) that Bush, Blair and Howard really believed in their hearts that Iraq had WMDs, it wouldn't change the fact that they ignored international protocol and invaded against the wishes of the United Nations Security Council and General Assembly and even of most of Iraq's neighbours.
(Wikipedia).one way or another, Iraq will be disarmed. If the Security Council fails to act decisively in the event of further Iraqi violations, this resolution does not constrain any Member State from acting to defend itself against the threat posed by Iraq or to enforce relevant United Nations resolutions and protect world peace and security.
So who started the violence? Throughout the 12 years before that, economic sanctions maintained by US and UK veto resulted in excess deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi people, half of them children, due largely to lack of medical supplies and poorer water quality. Who are the good guys here? Before that, there was an invasion because - get this - Iraq made an unprovoked illegal attack on another sovereign nation! But before that, Saddam Hussein was considered one of the West's important allies in the region... all while he was invading Iran and using WMDs on his own population.
How far back do you go with the "They started it" game?
Some evidence of that would be nice. Regardless, I'd bet you a shiny dollar that US weapons are used in 100% of those conflicts, since it is the #1 arms dealer in the world. As the video suggested, the private manufacturers of those arms do inevitablybribe'donate' to government officials, and they certainly are not throwing money away out of the goodness of their hearts. Do you really not see any kind of problem here?
Other governments are similarly culpable, of course: The five permanent UN Security Council members - the countries which have arrogated to themselves the role of arbitrating world peace - all rank within the top seven arms dealing nations.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_industry#World.27s_largest_arms_exporters
If you know or believe that someone is a violent killer, would you sell them an automatic rifle with a clear conscience? Surely on this point at least you must agree that the video raises an important issue? The worse you think that Muslims are, so much the worse America and other countries are for providing a ready supply of cheap, quality weapons!
It's not accurate at all. It's garbage.
Post #3 is an example of the worst sort of brainless partisan bilge. The kind of crapola that usually comes from vapid, emptyheaded sources who haven't had an original thought in this century.
Lulz. Please educate yourself and spare yourself further embarrassment.
I'm not a leftist rioter. Nice try tho.
In August of 1990 Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. A broad coalition of European and Middle Eastern joined with the US to restore Kuwait to its own people and drive Iraq back within its own borders. The coalition didn't occupy anything and didn't even oust Saddam. For the next 10+ years Iraq violated damned near every international sanction imposed on it due to its prior belligerence. By the time 2003 rolled around it was well past time to take Saddam to task whether WMDs were involved or not.
That guy isn't an "artist" he's the enemy, and needs a bullet to the head.
It's OK that you can't accept reality. I hope your safe space is comfy w/no sharp edges.
Bush invaded on the authority of several UN resolutions, especially 1441, which stated that Iraq had to be disarmed. (Wikipedia).
Not so much anti-corporate or anti-American as just on the other side. Or so it seems.
Whatever floats your boat, you people are hilarious!
Lulz. Please educate yourself and spare yourself further embarrassment.
Homegrown Extremism: Deadly Attacks Since 9/11 | The International Security Program
Ironically - and very disturbingly - that Muslim's call towards peace and the sanctity of all life, not just American or Western life, has made at least one poster on the forum express a desire for his death!
Now just omit the word "Islamist," and replace it with leftist. You'll notice it essentially the same thing.
I'm beginning to wonder if someone omitted your brain and replaced it with a bowl of oatmeal. When you respond to Low Down's ignorant post and say that the words "Islamist" and "leftist" are interchangeable, you must mean except for the fact that Israel, Palestine, Syria and most of the middle east are dominated by religious extremists who happen to be CONSERVATIVE, not at all liberal.
Do you even know what a leftist is? How do you conflate liberalism with what is happening in all of these middle eastern theocracies and authoritarian "republics"? Maybe you could get a ventriloquist gig, only instead of using a dummy, you can talk out your ass.
What is it about being conservative that you feel entitled to redefine the world according to your own bigotries? I'm beginning to think that American conservatives no longer care about facts and just spew invective and bigotry as a response to any question.
Post #3 is an example of the worst sort of brainless partisan bilge. The kind of crapola that usually comes from vapid, emptyheaded sources who haven't had an original thought in this century.
Possibly, depends. It is accurate however. Haven't you seen leftist rioters lately hurting people? You really ought to be yelling at leftists for being violent.
You mean like this......
This kind of radicalizing bull**** is why conflicted homosexuals are becoming Islamic terrorists.
That guy isn't an "artist" he's the enemy, and needs a bullet to the head.
| Moderator's Warning: |
To the rest of you, the topic is not each other. The baiting/flaming/trolling needs to stop now, including telling other posters they've been reported. Please refocus and return to discussing the OP. |
Partisan bilge? This is a political forum, is it not? BTW, you've been reported. No need to get nasty.
Donald Trump says Muslims are bad, don't ya know? DamnYankee and the others are merely his disciples, spreading the word of The Donald to the infidels.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?