What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Bob Gray said:
Naw. There's some liberal wack jobs around here on social issues, but you're a bit more reasonable than them. I just consider you to be significantly misguided. ;)
Click to expand...
I appreciate that.
 
Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Kepler said:
"Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute!" sounds manly but historically it's dumb. Bribery is entirely reasonable in situations where it's impractical to project force.
Click to expand...


and how do these sentiments apply when your implacable opponent says to you, "convert to Islam and submit to our rule, or we will kill you?" It doesn't seem like "bribery" in the conventional term will suffice. It's sort of like Lenin's sentiment: "capitalists will sell us the rope we use to hang them." ISIS will take the bribes we pay to purchase the weapons they will use to kill us.

Sooner or later, unless they are stopped, they definitely will try to kill us, somehow. How can any thoughtful person believe otherwise?
 
Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

FreshFish said:
and how do these sentiments apply when your implacable opponent says to you, "convert to Islam and submit to our rule, or we will kill you?" It doesn't seem like "bribery" in the conventional term will suffice. It's sort of like Lenin's sentiment: "capitalists will sell us the rope we use to hang them." ISIS will take the bribes we pay to purchase the weapons they will use to kill us.

Sooner or later, unless they are stopped, they definitely will try to kill us, somehow. How can any thoughtful person believe otherwise?
Click to expand...


100% pure knuckledragger logic right here. How about "other countries need to solve their own problems".
 
Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

FreshFish said:
and how do these sentiments apply when your implacable opponent says to you, "convert to Islam and submit to our rule, or we will kill you?" It doesn't seem like "bribery" in the conventional term will suffice. It's sort of like Lenin's sentiment: "capitalists will sell us the rope we use to hang them." ISIS will take the bribes we pay to purchase the weapons they will use to kill us.

Sooner or later, unless they are stopped, they definitely will try to kill us, somehow. How can any thoughtful person believe otherwise?
Click to expand...

This has zero to do with what I was talking about.
 
Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Rover said:
100% pure knuckledragger logic right here. How about "other countries need to solve their own problems".
Click to expand...

Bingo. I'm a pseudo-non-interventionalist.
1. Stay out of wars unless we're talking self-defense.
2. Where I depart is the use of missile/air strikes and spec ops. I think they can be used very effectively to help with #1.
 
Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

dxmnkd316 said:
Bingo. I'm a pseudo-non-interventionalist.
1. Stay out of wars unless we're talking self-defense.
2. Where I depart is the use of missile/air strikes and spec ops. I think they can be used very effectively to help with #1.
Click to expand...

I'm with you with one proviso -- if you use drones, missiles, and air strikes anywhere near a civilian population, assume they will hate you forever. "I was aiming for the bad man" means squat to the guy whose daughter you just killed.

There are going to be times when this might be the best thing to do, but you have to include in the calculations the worst case analysis that the general population of the country will never forgive you. When the British went after the colonial protesters they made up maybe about 10% of the colonial population. That quickly spun it up from a guerrilla movement to a popular insurrection.

The ISIS case doesn't seem to have that problem. We're able to strike their forces pretty far away from their civilian victims -- troops laying siege to a castle are usually highly vulnerable. We have total air superiority and there seems to be very little risk of effective anti-aircraft defense. And the civies near ISIS hate them so much they aren't collaborating, something that isn't true in Gaza and wasn't true in Fallujah. This is kind of a textbook example of where air harassment is most effective. There will have to be ground forces to mop up, but the Peshmerga and the Iraqi army are available and might even be effective (as long as they don't get within firing range of each other).
 
Last edited:
FreshFish said:
and how do these sentiments apply when your implacable opponent says to you, "convert to Islam and submit to our rule, or we will kill you?"
Click to expand...

That sounds familiar.

"We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity."
 
Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Priceless said:
That sounds familiar.

"We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity."
Click to expand...

"A religion is a cult with a navy."

Given that we're backing the aborigines in this case, that seems all the more reason to stop Cortez in his tracks.
 
Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

I can't keep these righties straight. First Opie was supposed to be Rambo. Now Fishy is? Has anybody checked to see if they're the same poster? :confused: :eek:
 
Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

FreshFish said:
and how do these sentiments apply when your implacable opponent says to you, "convert to Islam and submit to our rule, or we will kill you?" It doesn't seem like "bribery" in the conventional term will suffice. It's sort of like Lenin's sentiment: "capitalists will sell us the rope we use to hang them." ISIS will take the bribes we pay to purchase the weapons they will use to kill us.

Sooner or later, unless they are stopped, they definitely will try to kill us, somehow. How can any thoughtful person believe otherwise?
Click to expand...

*whack*
 
Priceless said:
That sounds familiar.

"We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity."
Click to expand...

You should realize that your inanity equals his. His proposed solution is off the charts irresponsible, but who is this "we" in current affairs of which you speak?
 
Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

dxmnkd316 said:
I listened to quite a bit of the President's speech on ISIS. I have to say, it almost felt personal. He's ****ed.

I don't think he's going to roll over on this.
Click to expand...
Yep, he's so ****ed he was on the first tee 20 minutes after his beheading speech. :mad:
 
Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

SteveP said:
Yep, he's so ****ed he was on the first tee 20 minutes after his beheading speech. :mad:
Click to expand...

That ****ing bastard.

Meanwhile, Rick Perry is convinced that ISIS is coming in from Mexico. Get the Marines down there, pronto.

The talking point seems to have faded, but it’s replaced by an equally foolish argument. Andrew Kaczynski reports on Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s (R) appearance in Washington, D.C., this morning, where the likely presidential candidate said ISIS terrorists may be – you guessed it – entering the United States through Mexico.

“Individuals from ISIS or other terrorist states could be, and I think it’s a very real possibility that they have already used that,” Perry said during a speech at the Heritage Foundation Thursday.

Perry said he didn’t have any “clear evidence” of that but said “common sense” tells you it could occur, citing crimes from undocumented immigrants.

The governor went on to say that he’s aware of “historic” levels of border crossings from “from countries with terrorist ties.” Which countries? Perry specifically referenced Ukraine – which isn’t at all known for its terrorist ties.
Click to expand...

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-...eal-possibility-isis-crossing-southern-border
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top