What's new
By:

Terror Attack in France, 84 Dead, 50 injured (so far)

Greens and some Democrats need to merge into a New Democrat Party or something. Current DNP needs to accept it's very centrist position in the political spectrum.
 
dalamon said:
Greens and some Democrats need to merge into a New Democrat Party or something. Current DNP needs to accept it's very centrist position in the political spectrum.
Click to expand...

or

Just throwing this out there

Having one branch of government(arguably the most powerful, even if not by design) be dependent upon the election of a single individual that will have dictatorial control of that branch is perhaps...just maybe... not a ****ing good idea.

I wish that Obama was the last POTUS
 
https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/f...ants-tests-all-u-s-muslims-after-nice-n609916

Newt Gingrich, the former Speaker of the House who had been muted as a potential Trump running mate, took his GOP colleague's proposal to ban Muslims from entering the U.S. a step further in an interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity.

"Every person here who is of a Muslim background" should be tested to determine whether he or she believes in Shariah, a legal code based on the Quran and other Islamic scriptures.

If they do, he said, they should be deported — even if they're U.S. citizens. Gingrich added that anyone who simply visits any website "favoring ISIS or al Qaeda or other terrorist groups" should be guilty of a felony, "and they should go to jail."

The Council on American-Islamic Relations condemned Gingrich's call to "test" Muslims in the U.S. as well as the truck attack.

"When former House Speaker Newt Gingrich suggests that American Muslims be subjected to an Inquisition-style religious test and then expelled from their homes and nation, he plays into the hands of terror recruiters and betrays the American values he purports to uphold," CAIR National Executive Director Nihad Awad said.

https://www.cnn.com/2016/07/15/politics/newt-gingrich-hannity-interview/
 
Red said:
https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/f...ants-tests-all-u-s-muslims-after-nice-n609916

Newt Gingrich, the former Speaker of the House who had been muted as a potential Trump running mate, took his GOP colleague's proposal to ban Muslims from entering the U.S. a step further in an interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity.

"Every person here who is of a Muslim background" should be tested to determine whether he or she believes in Shariah, a legal code based on the Quran and other Islamic scriptures.

If they do, he said, they should be deported — even if they're U.S. citizens. Gingrich added that anyone who simply visits any website "favoring ISIS or al Qaeda or other terrorist groups" should be guilty of a felony, "and they should go to jail."

The Council on American-Islamic Relations condemned Gingrich's call to "test" Muslims in the U.S. as well as the truck attack.

"When former House Speaker Newt Gingrich suggests that American Muslims be subjected to an Inquisition-style religious test and then expelled from their homes and nation, he plays into the hands of terror recruiters and betrays the American values he purports to uphold," CAIR National Executive Director Nihad Awad said.

https://www.cnn.com/2016/07/15/politics/newt-gingrich-hannity-interview/
Click to expand...

Yep.

Apparently the constitution is back to being a mere piece of paper for some republicans.
 
Siro said:
That's what created the problem in the first place. What we need is to do THE OPPOSITE. Complete military withdrawal from the Middle East. Ban on military sales for the countries spreading this cancerous ideology, like Saudi Arabia. And extending aid that comes with strings attached (reform and liberalization) as opposed to the current policy of supporting whichever dictator is most U.S. friendly (until we decide it's time to take them out).
Click to expand...

Exactly what I think our foreign policy should be like.
 
♪alt13 said:
This really is a silly hang up. Srsly I've heard that phrase like every day for the last decade. I don't think saying it more often is gunna change anything.

I think we need to stop playing the short game. Our foreign policy is focused on stability. We invest hundreds of billions of dollars every year in fundamentally backwards regimes for the sake of stability. For all of that we have gotten(surprise) a fundamentally backwards region. That money would be better spent investing in our values. If we want to see human rights in the middle east let's stop investing in those that violate it and start investing in those that uphold it.
Click to expand...
It seems to me that if Christian fundamentalists were terrorizing us we would name the enemy. Moderate Christians would decry those who were corrupting their religion and bringing such negative attention to something they love. If you're hearing this sort of language in regard to Islamic terrorism it's certainly not coming from our current commander in chief. I don't think you're hearing it from anyone in his administration. I know that they have specifically scrubbed the mention of this threat from many official documents. They even initially edited the Orlando shooter's 911 transcript to leave out references to ISIS, Allah, etc. And at least to me, one of the many results of this approach is that Muslim leaders are not taking a vocal leadership position against this terrorism. If key religious leaders are speaking out, I'm not hearing it. I wish I was.

All that said, there are a lot of people who understand this situation better than me. I'm not trying to suggest that I know what strategy/goals we should pursue, or even that I ever could understand the mindset of these terrorists (or maybe more importantly the mindsets of the people who are funding and directing them). I only mean to say that those who understand the situation need to come together and agree on a clear and cohesive strategy with measurable goals and then take decisive action.
 
Joe Bagadonuts said:
It seems to me that if Christian fundamentalists were terrorizing us we would name the enemy. Moderate Christians would decry those who were corrupting their religion and bringing such negative attention to something they love. If you're hearing this sort of language in regard to Islamic terrorism it's certainly not coming from our current commander in chief. I don't think you're hearing it from anyone in his administration. I know that they have specifically scrubbed the mention of this threat from many official documents. They even initially edited the Orlando shooter's 911 transcript to leave out references to ISIS, Allah, etc. And at least to me, one of the many results of this approach is that Muslim leaders are not taking a vocal leadership position against this terrorism. If key religious leaders are speaking out, I'm not hearing it. I wish I was.

All that said, there are a lot of people who understand this situation better than me. I'm not trying to suggest that I know what strategy/goals we should pursue, or even that I ever could understand the mindset of these terrorists (or maybe more importantly the mindsets of the people who are funding and directing them). I only mean to say that those who understand the situation need to come together and agree on a clear and cohesive strategy with measurable goals and then take decisive action.
Click to expand...

Just want to point out that this happens frequently from Muslims. With increasing frequency and tempo.
 
Whether it's ISIS or Al Quaeda, they all refer to themselves as jihadis or jihadists. So I don't see why we can't say we are at war against jihadism. Western Civilization vs. Jihadism. That's what they call themselves, so there fine with the name. Why can't we be fine with describing it in those terms?
In Iraq and Syria, we are at war with the specific branch of Jihadism that calls itself ISIS, or ISIL, or just IS, so it's a war against ISIS. How hard is that. The West vs. ISIS, part of the general war West vs. Jihadism.
 
Joe Bagadonuts said:
It seems to me that if Christian fundamentalists were terrorizing us we would name the enemy. Moderate Christians would decry those who were corrupting their religion and bringing such negative attention to something they love. If you're hearing this sort of language in regard to Islamic terrorism it's certainly not coming from our current commander in chief. I don't think you're hearing it from anyone in his administration. I know that they have specifically scrubbed the mention of this threat from many official documents. They even initially edited the Orlando shooter's 911 transcript to leave out references to ISIS, Allah, etc. And at least to me, one of the many results of this approach is that Muslim leaders are not taking a vocal leadership position against this terrorism. If key religious leaders are speaking out, I'm not hearing it. I wish I was.

All that said, there are a lot of people who understand this situation better than me. I'm not trying to suggest that I know what strategy/goals we should pursue, or even that I ever could understand the mindset of these terrorists (or maybe more importantly the mindsets of the people who are funding and directing them). I only mean to say that those who understand the situation need to come together and agree on a clear and cohesive strategy with measurable goals and then take decisive action.
Click to expand...

Why do people like to pretend that Obama is a terrorist sympathizer?
 
Hack said:
Oh no!!

Liberals going to ban trucks now.

First to say it.

See, does it really matter if you take guns from people. A truck just killed way more people than most gun attacks.

Big blow to the gun control debate. Sorry libs. This will be used forver as an example.
Click to expand...

You are right an you are wrong. What this proves time an again is when you ban guns like France they will find more deadly ways to kill.

What do you want, 12 dead from convenient guns or 100 dead from explosion? Libs refuse to learn from history.
 
♪alt13 said:
I'm tired of a 2 party system where it doesn't matter which party is in power they will be always find a war and the opposition will always be tepidly supportive, at least until campaign season.
Click to expand...

An I am tired of the babies that benefit from the world peace we are creating an complain about it. WE ARE CREATING WORLD PEACE! Stop acting like a spoiled child.
 
very good podcast from this past March - KCRW "To The Point" - episode titled "Can The West Destroy ISIS?"

https://www.kcrw.com/news-culture/shows/to-the-point/can-the-west-destroy-isis

Anne Speckhard (professor at Georgetown University) comes on around the 27 minute mark, among other things, she talks a bit about the shariah training that ISIS recruits go though - definitely worth a listen.

(I havent' had a chance to read through the last page or so of posts, but I intend to)
 
♪alt13 said:
Why do people like to pretend that Obama is a terrorist sympathizer?
Click to expand...
I don't think he is a terrorist sympathizer and I'm not sure how you got that from my post. That said, I honestly don't understand his approach. It feels like, for some reason, he is afraid to call this threat what it is. Instead he wants to pivot to lecturing Americans against racism toward their Muslim neighbors, or call for gun control, etc.
 
Joe Bagadonuts said:
I don't think he is a terrorist sympathizer and I'm not sure how you got that from my post. That said, I honestly don't understand his approach. It feels like, for some reason, he is afraid to call this threat what it is. Instead he wants to pivot to lecturing Americans against racism toward their Muslim neighbors, or call for gun control, etc.
Click to expand...

lmao
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top