AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Dec 19, 2015 11:15:27 GMT -5
... To start with, Saudi Arabia and Iran could be targeted militarily ... There's your specificity. As I indicated, I appreciate that response of specificity of who. Now, "targeted militarily". Let's work on that one. What does that mean? It means that the President should convene a conference of Western nations threatened by islamist radicalism and present Saudi Arabia and Iran with an ultimatum: abandon your support for radical islamic ideology, and stop providing material support to extremist elements within your borders, or you will be destroyed. The United States will accept nothing less than the official renunciation of militant islam, and cessation of ideological and material support for these groups-- for Saudi Arabia, this means Wahabism no longer exists. It's done. Over. And for Iran, it means that they will cease and desist funding for terror, and surrender unconditionally to an international coalition for the inspection of any facility within Iran immediately. All official statements of "death to America" and/or official sanctioning of any group that has made any statements relating to the justification of murder of so-called 'infidels' STOPS. Failure to comply will mean that the government and all extremist elements within the borders of these two countries will be completely destroyed, disarmed, and occupied until such time as a peaceful government is accepted by the people there. If that means the two countries have to be annihilated- SO BE IT. Every muslim on earth must know that their nation's support for radical islam means their certain doom.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Dec 19, 2015 11:18:30 GMT -5
Here it is. Pay attention, conservatives! If you don't like Trump, but you're not voting for Ted Cruz, then you're actually voting for JEB BUSH. This is NOT opinion, it's a FACT.Interesting opinion. You seem to be one of the few people who think Jeb Bush has any shot at the nomination.
Believe me when I tell you- the GOP establishment would like nothing better than for the base to believe its over and we won. Jeb will rise from the ashes. One way or another, they're going to force their candidate on us-- they'll stop at nothing.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,463
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 19, 2015 13:26:57 GMT -5
If we carpet bomb cities we show we are indifferent to civilian lives and consider all of them equally guilty. If we target and track the main ISIL guys and deposit a strike right on the hood of their cars, or locate and destroy their training camps, and keep this up with a relentless fury, we achieve two ends - we get rid of the terrorists and we show the civilians we're making efforts to leave them alone. That makes them more likely to join forces with us. I liked the way the US was taking out the ISIL oil shipments - they flew over first with a warning that they were about to start bombing, so the hired-hand (non ISIL) truck drivers had a chance to clear out, and then they set the tanker trucks on fire. Achieved the desired end (cost ISIL money) and at the same time, protected the truck drivers just hired to do a job. Agree with that approach. Unfortunately they only get about 28% of their income from oil. The rest is from taxing the people that live in the area under their control link?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,463
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 19, 2015 13:29:16 GMT -5
The only way to win is for the non-radical Muslims to turn against the terrorists, root them out of their communities and destroy their means of getting money and weapons. They have to convince their citizens that ISIS is not the true Islamic way and will lead to the destruction of the region of they aren't brought down. If they do that and the Western world supplies military strength to clear out the ISIS encampments, we win. You sound like the CIA justifying its arms shipments to Al Qaeda "moderates" to fight ISIS. You realize they've been doing precisely what you're suggesting here for more than a decade, with predictably disastrous results? Let's suppose that the US doesn't have a disastrous legacy of foreign statecraft hanging over it, and we have some reason to believe that arming the "right" Muslims won't eventually blow up in our faces. What does the US have to offer that "non-radical Muslims" could possibly want? it didn't sound that way to me at all. happy never mentioned supplying moderates with weapons. nice red herring tho. pepper and lemon to taste.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,463
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 19, 2015 13:33:27 GMT -5
IMHO, there two solutions that may be successful, One is the complete destruction of the countries, Like Europe and Japan in WWII. The other is Just get out, Pick up all of our marbles, go home! Let them sort of the solution. Don't pick sides, don't supply anything! Our limited warfare is solving nothing, The U.S. backed Arab Spring has done nothing but caused chaos and death in the Middle East. Do we also pull out of the Central Valley in southern CA, Minneapolis, MN, and Dearborn, MN while we're at it? There ARE countries where this originates. This complete and total mythology that militant islamists are just a rag tag band of freelancers in running around transcending national borders is frustratingly naive and absurd. To start with, Saudi Arabia and Iran could be targeted militarily unless or until they cease all state support for islamic militants. I doubt we'd ever have to get much beyond the first two, but if other muslim countries insist... actually, the idea that they are pretty much as you describe is well documented. Saudi Arabia's relationship with radical Islam is well documented in Sleeping With The Devil by Robert Baer. it is adversarial, not "supportive". if you don't know why, then you should find out why before you comment again.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,463
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 19, 2015 13:35:37 GMT -5
Oh, so you want a bombastic moderate? Has the establishment GOP got a candidate for you... The GOP establishment's "splitter strategy" evolves to focus on alliances...this seems plausible to me- but do you have any proof that this is happening? if not, i am going with Ockham's Razor on this one.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,463
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 19, 2015 13:37:45 GMT -5
As I indicated, I appreciate that response of specificity of who. Now, "targeted militarily". Let's work on that one. What does that mean? It means that the President should convene a conference of Western nations threatened by islamist radicalism and present Saudi Arabia and Iran with an ultimatum: abandon your support for radical islamic ideology, and stop providing material support to extremist elements within your borders, or you will be destroyed. that is never going to happen, Paul. our relationship with Saud has always been close, and under Obama, it is even closer than it was under Bush. DC is a corporate town for ARAMCO.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,221
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Dec 19, 2015 14:41:05 GMT -5
... It means that the President should convene a conference of Western nations threatened by islamist radicalism and present Saudi Arabia and Iran with an ultimatum: abandon your support for radical islamic ideology, and stop providing material support to extremist elements within your borders, or you will be destroyed. The United States will accept nothing less than the official renunciation of militant islam, and cessation of ideological and material support for these groups-- for Saudi Arabia, this means Wahabism no longer exists. It's done. Over. And for Iran, it means that they will cease and desist funding for terror, and surrender unconditionally to an international coalition for the inspection of any facility within Iran immediately. All official statements of "death to America" and/or official sanctioning of any group that has made any statements relating to the justification of murder of so-called 'infidels' STOPS. Failure to comply will mean that the government and all extremist elements within the borders of these two countries will be completely destroyed, disarmed, and occupied until such time as a peaceful government is accepted by the people there. If that means the two countries have to be annihilated- SO BE IT. Every muslim on earth must know that their nation's support for radical islam means their certain doom. This is an interesting statement. Important to note how it starts with an international conference then announces what the United States would not accept, then back to international, back to America, and no indication who will do the destroying/disarming/occupying. Would this be possible? I guess. Will it result in the victory against extremist elements? Less likely. Not sure how it is different than what we did in Afghanistan, how many years ago?
|
|
Robert not Bobby
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jan 29, 2013 17:45:55 GMT -5
Posts: 1,392
|
Post by Robert not Bobby on Dec 19, 2015 14:46:12 GMT -5
LOL
Guys, I don't have the time to read the whole thread...but President Trump, who knows...it could be the biggest reality show of all time.
But, to be fair, he is resonating with a big chunk of the population. And, "we the people", and all that jazz, is hugely important. We'll see what the people decide.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,221
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Dec 19, 2015 14:53:16 GMT -5
LOL ... it could be the biggest reality show of all time. ... But who is going to be in charge of the editing?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,463
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 19, 2015 14:57:12 GMT -5
LOL Guys, I don't have the time to read the whole thread...but President Trump, who knows...it could be the biggest reality show of all time. But, to be fair, he is resonating with a big chunk of the population. And, "we the people", and all that jazz, is hugely important. We'll see what the people decide. i am really not at all sure that "resonance" translates to votes. but as you said, we will see.
|
|
Robert not Bobby
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jan 29, 2013 17:45:55 GMT -5
Posts: 1,392
|
Post by Robert not Bobby on Dec 19, 2015 15:05:02 GMT -5
LOL ... it could be the biggest reality show of all time. ... But who is going to be in charge of the editing? Dick Cheney is right around the corner...looking for something to do. But I mean come on, let's be PC about this...Dick should be Richard.
|
|
Robert not Bobby
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jan 29, 2013 17:45:55 GMT -5
Posts: 1,392
|
Post by Robert not Bobby on Dec 19, 2015 15:20:13 GMT -5
LOL Guys, I don't have the time to read the whole thread...but President Trump, who knows...it could be the biggest reality show of all time. But, to be fair, he is resonating with a big chunk of the population. And, "we the people", and all that jazz, is hugely important. We'll see what the people decide. i am really not at all sure that "resonance" translates to votes. but as you said, we will see. We'll see. I like to think of myself as rather savvy in these things...but this is a whole new ball game...maybe a whole new sport. What I'm saying is "I don't know". But that is not necessarily a bad thing. Five months ago I thought Jeb would run away with it. I was so wrong.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,463
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 19, 2015 23:06:31 GMT -5
i am really not at all sure that "resonance" translates to votes. but as you said, we will see. We'll see. I like to think of myself as rather savvy in these things...but this is a whole new ball game...maybe a whole new sport. What I'm saying is "I don't know". But that is not necessarily a bad thing. Five months ago I thought Jeb would run away with it. I was so wrong. five months ago, i thought Jeb would be the front runner in a year where he had very serious disadvantages as a candidate. i still think that. well, minus the front runner part.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,221
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Dec 20, 2015 10:09:31 GMT -5
... That is an interesting proposal. Thanks for sharing your views. I know you are a Cruz supporter. Is this his foreign policy platform as well? Cruz's Flat Rate Tax Plan doesn't seem to account for buying the bombs nor paying for occupying forces in at least two additional countries. He does talk about job creation. Not sure I have heard him say it was government jobs in foreign places.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Dec 20, 2015 11:15:07 GMT -5
It means that the President should convene a conference of Western nations threatened by islamist radicalism and present Saudi Arabia and Iran with an ultimatum: abandon your support for radical islamic ideology, and stop providing material support to extremist elements within your borders, or you will be destroyed. that is never going to happen, Paul. our relationship with Saud has always been close, and under Obama, it is even closer than it was under Bush. DC is a corporate town for ARAMCO. We can do business with the Saudis. A state of war need not exist at all, or if it does come to pass- need not last forever. It has been a mistake to deal with radical islam the way we have so far. Remember: Japan initially refused to surrender. They proposed a conditional surrender after the first atomic bomb exploded over Nagasaki. They only finally agreed to the only acceptable outcome- the unconditional surrender and disarmament of the empire of Japan.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,463
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 20, 2015 11:22:22 GMT -5
that is never going to happen, Paul. our relationship with Saud has always been close, and under Obama, it is even closer than it was under Bush. DC is a corporate town for ARAMCO. We can do business with the Saudis. A state of war need not exist at all, or if it does come to pass- need not last forever. It has been a mistake to deal with radical islam the way we have so far. Remember: Japan initially refused to surrender. They proposed a conditional surrender after the first atomic bomb exploded over Nagasaki. They only finally agreed to the only acceptable outcome- the unconditional surrender and disarmament of the empire of Japan. of course we CAN. we won't. i have been watching this evolve since 911, and it has gone NOWHERE, Paul. what was it? 15 out of 19 hijackers were Saudi? what was done? did we even slap their wrists? was it even mentioned by our cowboy president? no. we put Saudi nationals on planes and sent them home without questioning them. i can't even express how depressed and angry this subject makes me. but i haven't the time or energy to vent today, either.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Dec 20, 2015 21:15:06 GMT -5
Yes I know it will be expensive. Ya think? Madam, you're broke. What does your news tell you there? Where are you getting this idea that money exists to fight another war? Here's a non-US MSM newsflash: The reason China, Russia, the Middle East, now Saudi Arabia (with the coalition of Islamic nations they convened to give a giant "eff you" to the US just this past week), and who knows what nation next are flexing their muscle is because they can read the writing on the wall. You're financially and morally bankrupt. You're through fighting trillion-dollar wars. You had your last hurrah in Iraq and Afghanistan. The world is sick to death of taking US paper--debt on top of debt on top of debt--for real values and services. Not a week went by in 2015 where US influence in the world didn't decline. Nations want out of the petrodollar and now have ways of doing it. Nations want off the US exchanges and out of the US money markets and now have ways of doing it. Putin is done taking crap from the US government, which is why he's bombing the snot out of US-backed "moderate factions" in Syria and the US doesn't dare oppose him. He's done taking crap from the US (yes, the US) in the Ukraine, and the US backed down there too. China is done taking crap from the US in the South China sea. Europe would be done taking crap from the US if their own currency wasn't melting down so fast that even the USD is an attractive alternative, but that won't last forever. You're very rapidly running out of places that will tolerate US crap any more, and that includes the "moderate" Muslim nations. The world is sick of US crap. The CIA fomenting revolutions. The US military bombing the snot out of cities and infrastructure to defend the petrodollar. US companies coming in to play straw boss, looting resources and capital. Your Treasury saying "take this debt that will never be paid back, and like it". You're not completely toothless yet, but every week, every month, every year that creeps by, your 20th Century fangs are rotting straight out of your mouth. So no, you're not going to blow another trillion dollars on winning Muslims' hearts and minds, even if that was a realistic expectation. You want to know why Donald Trump is so popular, besides the fact that he's the "stick it to the establishment" candidate? It's because he's the guy that makes Americans feel like America can be great again. He's the guy that makes people think the party isn't over. Blue skies are on the horizon. Right the ship and make America great again. That's even his slogan. "Make America Great Again". Of course he doesn't give any details on how he'll accomplish that, because he doesn't have a blessed clue how to do it. I don't blame him. If I were up there, my message would be "We're so screwed it's not funny." and I doubt I'd win many hearts and minds. So why not jump on the Trump bandwagon? It's the new "Hope and Change". Complete BS, but at least we can all believe the party is just getting started, right? "Yes I know it will be expensive." Sure. We'll pay for it with hope and change. Throw some more porterhouse steaks on the barby. Keep the champagne coming.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,463
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 20, 2015 22:49:34 GMT -5
Virgil: define "broke".
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Dec 21, 2015 4:21:48 GMT -5
Broke: unable to afford one's daily necessities without borrowing large amounts of money that will never be repaid. Insolvent.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,539
|
Post by happyhoix on Dec 21, 2015 8:14:12 GMT -5
Saw an interesting thing on Morning Joe - a pollster said that when you call Republicans up and ask them who they will vote for, and then ask a bunch of Republicans to respond to a computer survey poll, Trump consistently gets 6% more on the online polling than he does through telephone polling.
It seems the more educated a Republican is, the less likely they are to admit that they will vote for Trump when you ask them over the phone.
But if you ask that same group to respond more anonymously through a computer poll, they are willing to admit it.
Seems some people are embarrassed to admit they are pro-Trump - it will be interesting to see if that continues in the primaries.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Dec 21, 2015 11:17:53 GMT -5
Saw an interesting thing on Morning Joe - a pollster said that when you call Republicans up and ask them who they will vote for, and then ask a bunch of Republicans to respond to a computer survey poll, Trump consistently gets 6% more on the online polling than he does through telephone polling. It seems the more educated a Republican is, the less likely they are to admit that they will vote for Trump when you ask them over the phone. But if you ask that same group to respond more anonymously through a computer poll, they are willing to admit it. Seems some people are embarrassed to admit they are pro-Trump - it will be interesting to see if that continues in the primaries. Confirms my suspicion that there are a whole bunch of closet Trump supporters ready to pounce at the polls.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Dec 21, 2015 11:22:02 GMT -5
Good. We're not broke then. We would be wise to listen to Rand Paul's foreign policy and War Department points though. Call up Dave Ramsey. Give him these numbers, and then tell him you're not broke, you still have credit left. Annual family income: $21,700 Money the family spent: $38,200 New debt on the credit card: $16,500 Outstanding balance on the credit card: $142,710 And btw- these are 2011 numbers. Read more at: www.nationalreview.com/corner/277873/bringing-budget-numbers-down-size-carrie-lukas
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 3, 2024 14:28:37 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2015 12:12:54 GMT -5
... They already finance their war machine (ISIL) by taxing the area they occupy. ... Sweet. There is a clarification of the pronoun "they". I agree we can militarily defeat those who are calling themselves "ISIL" and are within specific geographical boundaries. If that is the sole goal, I can see carpet bombing of that area as effective in meeting that very limited goal. I do think that satisfying that goal in that way will create other problems. I don't think that your "they" is the same as Paul's "they". But I am not positive of that. I would like to have him clarify. The reason I think it is different is that he has called for a nuclear attack on Mecca if there is no surrender by "they". It's what I meant all along. When they use the human shield approach by putting their women and children (non-combatants) in the line of fire we might have to start waging war through their shield. It's what they do. When it is seen that it no longer works, it will end. I never suggested sterilizing the entire area with thermal nuclear weapons. There is no need for that. War is hell.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 3, 2024 14:28:37 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2015 12:24:35 GMT -5
Agree with that approach. Unfortunately they only get about 28% of their income from oil. The rest is from taxing the people that live in the area under their control link? Newspaper article. I think it was USA Today as they put a section of it in our regional paper every day. It was last week, or the week before.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Dec 21, 2015 12:47:27 GMT -5
Newspaper article. I think it was USA Today as they put a section of it in our regional paper every day. It was last week, or the week before. The problem with numbers like this is that it's like saying the Mafia gets no money from extortion, drugs, and prostitution because as you know, it all comes from legitimate casinos, hotels, pizzerias, and nail salons. I doubt the source has had an opportunity to open the books and really look.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 3, 2024 14:28:37 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2015 12:53:45 GMT -5
Newspaper article. I think it was USA Today as they put a section of it in our regional paper every day. It was last week, or the week before. The problem with numbers like this is that it's like saying the Mafia gets no money from extortion, drugs, and prostitution because as you know, it all comes from legitimate casinos, hotels, pizzerias, and nail salons. I doubt the source has had an opportunity to open the books and really look. Agree with you on that. There will never be a financial report of any accuracy coming from that area. The whole gist of the article was that that they are operating like a small country and should be treated as one on a war footing basis. Not as wandering terrorists.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Dec 21, 2015 12:57:38 GMT -5
The problem with numbers like this is that it's like saying the Mafia gets no money from extortion, drugs, and prostitution because as you know, it all comes from legitimate casinos, hotels, pizzerias, and nail salons. I doubt the source has had an opportunity to open the books and really look. Agree with you on that. There will never be a financial report of any accuracy coming from that area. The whole gist of the article was that that they are operating like a small country and should be treated as one on a war footing basis. Not as wandering terrorists. On that, I agree completely. Territory held by ISIS ought to be treated as a war zone- fair game for whatever means of destroying ISIS members who won't surrender, and their ability to wage war. Additionally, when you find money flowing to ISIS, those individuals- be they politicians from Qatar (or Belgium), and all of their assets should be subject to arrest and seizure.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,463
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 21, 2015 14:27:57 GMT -5
Good. We're not broke then. We would be wise to listen to Rand Paul's foreign policy and War Department points though. i am liking him enough to vote for him in the primary, if he makes it that far.
|
|
Robert not Bobby
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jan 29, 2013 17:45:55 GMT -5
Posts: 1,392
|
Post by Robert not Bobby on Dec 21, 2015 20:50:54 GMT -5
I am starting to get jealous that the Republicans have all these nutjobs...but at least they have a choice, as bizarre as it is.
This is going to be one interesting election.
|
|