What's new
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

There was a B-17 doing flights over Happy Valley a couple of weeks ago. I could see a sky full of them over Germany.

My soft spot is the Spitfire, arguably the best fighter of WW 2. Hey what can I say, I'm from a Commonwealth nation! ;)

What we frequently lose sight of is the enormous scale of WWII. As an example, we produced nearly 13,000 B-17s! That's a mind boggling number. And it's just for one type.
 
Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

I'm sure you guys have seen this? http://freebeacon.com/national-secu...ise-fears-of-suicide-airliner-attacks-on-911/

Between that news, the bulletin that went out last week Friday that said ISIS may be (or is?) in Mexico (Juarez) and planning IED attacks via vehicles, and Homeland Security stating the "chatter" is up significantly...to pre-9/11 levels evidently...I have to admit I'm unnerved by the seeming lack of a coherent response (or should I say plan) from the Admin and Congress.

People have been asking "what would YOU do?" on here...If the Mossad wasn't already busy with their own problems I'd love the admin to have them work w/DEVGRU, the CIA, MI5, and similar operators in France, Germany, Canada and (gasp) China and Russia (hell, ask Brazil as well...) this is a WORLD problem, and we're ALL apostates or infidels to these guys unless we submit so let's treat it like the world problem it is and get the prominent players around the globe to burn ISIS and similar groups to the ground, vacuum the ashes and shoot them into outer space. Where to start, DEVGRU and the CIA (maybe the Mossad if they've got time and space) can take aim at the leaders of these groups. Hunt them, pick them off as they're found and don't stop hunting until there are no ISIS/AQ/Hezbollah groups alive in any capacity.

But that's not the only answer...there must be more...MUCH more. For one, Imam's who preach hate and Jihad must be imprisoned, period. From Britain to the U.S. to Syria or wherever they preach, if they're encouraging jihad they've got to go away.
 
Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

You had me until that last paragraph.

that's fine. What would you suggest though? Aren't there a lot of IMAM's preaching hate and jihad? Isn't that how many are radicalized in Western countries? How would you counteract that? It would seem they'd be fostering new groups of potential terrorists ad infinitum if we don't find a way to stop them from preaching hate
 
Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Well, there's that pesky first amendment that kind of prevents us from locking people up because they preach a specific brand of hate we don't appreciate.

So, I would do nothing on that specific front.
 
Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Well, there's that pesky first amendment that kind of prevents us from locking people up because they preach a specific brand of hate we don't appreciate.

So, I would do nothing on that specific front.

fair enough
 
Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Well, there's that pesky first amendment that kind of prevents us from locking people up because they preach a specific brand of hate we don't appreciate.

So, I would do nothing on that specific front.

We should immediately invalidate the passports of Americans who join ISIS. As to domestic terrorists, the First Amendment protects their right to preach their insanity. It doesn't protect a "right" to advocate, plan or prepare for criminality.

Notwithstanding the manifest fecklessness of the Obama administration, I'm optimistic the adults in the CIA, the hated NSA and other agencies are working hard to protect us from these animals.
 
Last edited:
We should immediately invalidate the passports of Americans who join ISIS. As to domestic terrorists, the First Amendment protects their right to preach their insanity. It doesn't protect a "right" to advocate, plan or prepare for criminality.

Notwithstanding the manifest fecklessness of the Obama administration, I'm optimistic the adults in the CIA, the hated NSA and other agencies are working hard to protect us from these animals.

What's the process of passport invalidation? Do you have to be convicted of something? Or is this effectively a treason trial?
 
Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

We should immediately invalidate the passports of Americans who join ISIS. As to domestic terrorists, the First Amendment protects their right to preach their insanity. It doesn't protect a "right" to advocate, plan or prepare for criminality.

Notwithstanding the manifest fecklessness of the Obama administration, I'm optimistic the adults in the CIA, the hated NSA and other agencies are working hard to protect us from these animals.

Depends what you mean by advocating criminality. Making public statements that ISIL should behead all western colonialists would be protected if it was not found to promote imminent lawless action.

With the fear of Islamic terrorism, it really is interesting to compare present first amendment questions to the sedition cases in world war one, when anarchists and Bolsheviks were advocating an ill fate for our soldiers fighting the Germans on the eastern front.
 
Last edited:
Well, there's that pesky first amendment that kind of prevents us from locking people up because they preach a specific brand of hate we don't appreciate.

So, I would do nothing on that specific front.

That did not stop Woodrow Wilson. Nor did it give Abraham Lincoln pause; either.
 
Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

that's fine. What would you suggest though? Aren't there a lot of IMAM's preaching hate and jihad? Isn't that how many are radicalized in Western countries? How would you counteract that? It would seem they'd be fostering new groups of potential terrorists ad infinitum if we don't find a way to stop them from preaching hate

So if say, they were American citizens you would violate their right to free speech because you dont like what they say? How very McCarthy of you! Have you ever actually read the Constitution?

But hey, I m sure Obama doesnt like the crap internet tough guys like Sicatoka say about him so can he imprison them for it? Hell can he nuke North Dakota back to the stone age many of the residents already look like they belong there ;)

It is amazing to me the lengths people will go to violate the very rights they supposedly hold so dear. Kill innocent victims and arrest those that disagree with you...strong Republican ideals I guess. Talk about republican in name only...
 
Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

So if say, they were American citizens you would violate their right to free speech because you dont like what they say? How very McCarthy of you! Have you ever actually read the Constitution?

But hey, I m sure Obama doesnt like the crap internet tough guys like Sicatoka say about him so can he imprison them for it? Hell can he nuke North Dakota back to the stone age many of the residents already look like they belong there ;)

It is amazing to me the lengths people will go to violate the very rights they supposedly hold so dear. Kill innocent victims and arrest those that disagree with you...strong Republican ideals I guess. Talk about republican in name only...

I own a copy of the Declaration, the Constitution and The Articles. I've read them numerous times and try to re-read them annually.

By your third paragraph you infer you know something about me or my mindset which you do not. You don't know if I'm republican or democrat or lean toward neither or toward a mix of both. Who said anything about killing innocent victims? Me? I'm afraid you won't find that anywhere on the internet or in my head (if you have jedi mind**** powers).

So calm down and try to have a logical debate here.

The Imam's who incite violence and murder, Jihad etc., they must be dealt with. Instead of popping off and putting words into my mouth why don't you respond with what should be done about this problem. And it is a very real problem. So what's your solution to the problem of Imam's inciting violence and murder?
 
Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

I own a copy of the Declaration, the Constitution and The Articles. I've read them numerous times and try to re-read them annually.

By your third paragraph you infer you know something about me or my mindset which you do not. You don't know if I'm republican or democrat or lean toward neither or toward a mix of both. Who said anything about killing innocent victims? Me? I'm afraid you won't find that anywhere on the internet or in my head (if you have jedi mind**** powers).

So calm down and try to have a logical debate here.

The Imam's who incite violence and murder, Jihad etc., they must be dealt with. Instead of popping off and putting words into my mouth why don't you respond with what should be done about this problem. And it is a very real problem. So what's your solution to the problem of Imam's inciting violence and murder?

Nah. It's much easier to pontificate, especially if it affords an opportunity to drop the name "McCarthy" into the conversation. Those who scream the loudest about protecting the free speech rights of jihadists ironically find themselves advocating curtailment of those same rights in others with whom they disagree. Campus "speech codes" would be a good example of the phenomenon. In fact, the whole creaking pc edifice on many college campuses shows American liberals are constantly vigilant against the depredations of college guys (especially the ones in fraternities) but not so much for jihadists. Phony campus rape "crises" occupy their time while actual sexual outrages in the Muslim world hardly merit their attention. We'll be able to sort out the blowhards from the criminals when it comes to Muslim extremists, protecting the First Amendment rights of the former while jacking the latter into prison.
 
Last edited:
Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Nah. It's much easier to pontificate, especially if it affords an opportunity to drop the name "McCarthy" into the conversation. Those who scream the loudest about protecting the free speech rights of jihadists ironically find themselves advocating curtailment of those same rights in others with whom they disagree. Campus "speech codes" would be a good example of the phenomenon. In fact, the whole creaking pc edifice on many college campuses shows American liberals are constantly vigilant against the depredations of college guys (especially the ones in fraternities) but not so much for jihadists. Phony campus rape "crises" occupy their time while actual sexual outrages in the Muslim world hardly merit their attention. We'll be able to sort out the blowhards from the criminals when it comes to Muslim extremists, protecting the First Amendment rights of the former while jacking the latter into prison.

well put!
 
Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

What I AM in favor of is for President Feckless to grow a pair, stop trying to be a community organizer and act like the President of the United States and the "Leader of the Free World."

Hey what can I say, I'm from a Commonwealth nation! ;)

Soo...lemme get this straight. You're arguably the most baselessly critical poster on how we're doing our business. And you're NOT even American?

Funny how we don't hear about you hyperventilating over your inability to solve your own problems.
 
Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

That did not stop Woodrow Wilson. Nor did it give Abraham Lincoln pause; either.

It didn't stop John Adams or FDR, either. And there's a whole wonderful history of Constitutional law mapping how in each case the courts walked back those limits.

What appears to happen is this: as a threat is seen as real and significant, the public freaks out, the politicians forget the Constitution and shred the target's rights, the courts turn a blind eye until the hysteria passes and then reassert civil liberties. Basically, those First Amendment protections we all think make the US special and America free? Turns out they're very elastic.

Now this doesn't sound like a very solid protection for our liberties, but it's worked OK up until now. For one thing, if the Court ever went up against the other two branches in a time of perceived national emergency, the public would turn against the court. Fear turns any public into a mass of gibbering idiots, so the only way for the system not to seize up is to let the demagogues have their way for a time. If we ever see another major terrorist attack on US soil American Muslims are going to wish they were 40's Japanese Americans. We already saw a wave of blind madness roll over the country after 9/11 which was shocking but, by standards of real destruction, nothing.

We have been a free people mostly because we have been lucky. Whenever civil liberties have been tested against fear, civil liberties have lost until the fear has ebbed. The only consolation is I can't think of a country that has protected the bulk of its citizens' liberties for a larger proportion of the time. But then again I also can't think of a country that has had it so easy up till now.
 
Last edited:
Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

I think some of you want to live in a black and white world like you imagine the Cold War era was like. Even though it wasn't, but that's not stopping several people from re-imagining it. Fact is, the world is messy. Its been messy for a long time. Get used to it.

What people need more of for military action is skin in the game. Its real easy to say "bomb everybody" and then feel good about yourself. Problem is that doesn't work, as "Shock and Awe" should have taught you the hard way. Simply put, other countries need to learn to solve their own problems and stop expecting US troops and tax dollars to bail them out. People advocating that we fight wars for other people need to have themselves or their own kids volunteering to fight for their own cause. Iraq has to be the biggest, worst, most poorly planned, foolhardy war in US history. Why then would we take ANY advice from the people who pushed there in the first place, or their cheerleaders now who still can't admit their mistake?

Every time an ISIS type groups gets out of hand, find some allies on the ground as long as they're less odious, and then bombs away with air power and drones. But that's it: the govt of those countries then needs to get a handle on things. No troops, no nation building, no long term US presence. Just the threat that if things ever get out of hand, we'll be there to eliminate the problem. Over the long run however, as Israel has painfully learned, you can't bomb your way to security. Eventually the people in the conflict area be it Ukraine, Somalia, Libya, Iraq, Syria, etc need to get it together much like what happened in the former Yugoslavia. The US can't do that for them.
 
Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

The Imam's who incite violence and murder, Jihad etc., they must be dealt with. Instead of popping off and putting words into my mouth why don't you respond with what should be done about this problem. And it is a very real problem. So what's your solution to the problem of Imam's inciting violence and murder?

Why? You're just playing whack a mole. There are a lot of countries in the world these guys can find safe haven and spout their filth and capture Americans. Until the countries who insist on living in the dark ages in the 21st century start moving on it's going to stay like this no matter what we do.

We never seem to learn from history.

The film, including an unusual interview with former Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger and rare footage of courageous rescues — some conducted as “black operations” against the orders of American officials — carries lessons on Iraq and Afghanistan, she said. “You need to think, when you get involved in wars, how you’re going to get out of them.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/31/m...am-in-rory-kennedy8217s-documentary.html?_r=0
 
Last edited:
It didn't stop John Adams or FDR, either. And there's a whole wonderful history of Constitutional law mapping how in each case the courts walked back those limits.

What appears to happen is this: as a threat is seen as real and significant, the public freaks out, the politicians forget the Constitution and shred the target's rights, the courts turn a blind eye until the hysteria passes and then reassert civil liberties. Basically, those First Amendment protections we all think make the US special and America free? Turns out they're very elastic.

Now this doesn't sound like a very solid protection for our liberties, but it's worked OK up until now. For one thing, if the Court ever went up against the other two branches in a time of perceived national emergency, the public would turn against the court. Fear turns any public into a mass of gibbering idiots, so the only way for the system not to seize up is to let the demagogues have their way for a time. If we ever see another major terrorist attack on US soil American Muslims are going to wish they were 40's Japanese Americans. We already saw a wave of blind madness roll over the country after 9/11 which was shocking but, by standards of real destruction, nothing.

We have been a free people mostly because we have been lucky. Whenever civil liberties have been tested against fear, civil liberties have lost until the fear has ebbed. The only consolation is I can't think of a country that has protected the bulk of its citizens' liberties for a larger proportion of the time. But then again I also can't think of a country that has had it so easy up till now.
Want to add the Patriot Act and Homeland Security to the list? I would.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top