150+ dead in Paris attacks

Status
Not open for further replies.
Gadaffi and saddam were bad people but I agree that they did handle the dirty work when dealing with the isis threats in their respective countries.

If that was the case what was the point of going after them? It seems like it did more bad then good the long run. Of course hindsight is 20/20 but having gadaffi and saddam was perhaps the lesser of 2 evils?

Neither was an ally by any stretch but you don't need to be an ally with someone who is already dealing with a major threat. It almost was like contract work except without the contact

Of course this has been going on for awhile. We've been messing in the middle east since at least WW2.

The point is, these "dictators" that we keep taking out are actually doing our dirty work for us.

We wont go and shouldnt go spend the time and money to pick out ISIS murderers and kill them...but Gadaffi and Saddam had NO problem doing such.

We completely upset the balance of power, put all these countries in chaos. Then with a power vacuum we helped ISIS come in and be able to fill it. Now we're trying to arm the Kurds to have someone back in power that will work to take out ISIS. Vicious cycle.
 
Of course hindsight is 20/20 but having gadaffi and saddam was perhaps the lesser of 2 evils?

I don't think it is a case of hindsight, not for everyone. I always agreed with George H W Bush during the "Gulf War" when he did not go after Saddam but instead left him in power. 41 was ex-CIA, he knew what would happen if he removed Saddam.
 
I read an article a year ago or so claiming the we have unofficially entered WWIII already. In 100 years, people will look back at the Gulf War as the pre-cursor and that WW3 lasted for 30-35 years with the worst/apex around the year 2020.

No idea where I found that but was interesting to say the least, whether you(we) agree or not.
 
It's a different kind of war. . It's not country vs. country, but a fight over core beliefs. The problem is, there are people of different religions and beliefs everywhere, they just get radicalized.It only takes a small percentage of that mindset to cause chaos. It's a slow escalation.
 
Doesn't mean you should go and poke it with a burning stick though.

I don't think there's any "good" answer.

At least no clear-cut "right" or "wrong".

If someone wants to believe leaving an aging dictator (who had a long history of mayhem) in charge then I won't try to dissuade you.

Also keep in mind this is a problem that has long roots in Syria, which wasn't the target of western influence.
 
I can't wrap my head around such evil. I just don't understand people like that. Such cruelty.
 
The only way to beat this evil, is to go at them with everything we have, not only us, but all other countries around the world. They are basically like drug dealers or gang bangers who move into an area and terrorize it, taking it over, and using fear to keep everyone from standing up to them. However, if we all unite, no matter our other differences, and go all out to crush these radical terrorists...on the ground, in the air, in the sea, and via the computer by attacking their propaganda with lethal computer viruses, then maybe we can all rid the world of these evil individuals.
 
I am not one for violence or even killing. However, these people have no soul apparently, and their persona is colder than a penguins backside. They are simply evil. So, I am all for anyone associated with assisting, aiding, being affiliated with Isis, Al Quaida, or any other radical Islam group......be assassinated on the spot. Take them out, before they take themselves out, while taking others with them.
 
I am not one for violence or even killing. However, these people have no soul apparently, and their persona is colder than a penguins backside. They are simply evil. So, I am all for anyone associated with assisting, aiding, being affiliated with Isis, Al Quaida, or any other radical Islam group......be assassinated on the spot. Take them out, before they take themselves out, while taking others with them.

What will the response be by the western nations and maybe even NATO?
 
I read an article a year ago or so claiming the we have unofficially entered WWIII already. In 100 years, people will look back at the Gulf War as the pre-cursor and that WW3 lasted for 30-35 years with the worst/apex around the year 2020.

No idea where I found that but was interesting to say the least, whether you(we) agree or not.

I could very easily see that.
 
those without the stomach to face reality should sit down and shut up.

The Islamic extremists are responsible for this. No one else. All this garbage about excuses is just that- GARBAGE.

The Islamic extremists want Power. Its ALWAYS about Power. Nothing else.

So like with rabid dogs except less sympathy (dogs do not choose to get rabies- these pieces of human garbage have CHOSEN)
you KILL THEM. And KEEP KILLING THEM WHERE EVER THEY ARE.

AND you also go after their supporters. And Kill them.

No it will never end but you can reduce the threat to a fraction of what it currently is by doing that.
 
I don't think there's any "good" answer.

At least no clear-cut "right" or "wrong".

If someone wants to believe leaving an aging dictator (who had a long history of mayhem) in charge then I won't try to dissuade you.

Also keep in mind this is a problem that has long roots in Syria, which wasn't the target of western influence.

Destablizing the Middle East with no clear contingency plans was not good strategic thinking.
 
those without the stomach to face reality should sit down and shut up.

The Islamic extremists are responsible for this. No one else. All this garbage about excuses is just that- GARBAGE.

The Islamic extremists want Power. Its ALWAYS about Power. Nothing else.

So like with rabid dogs except less sympathy (dogs do not choose to get rabies- these pieces of human garbage have CHOSEN)
you KILL THEM. And KEEP KILLING THEM WHERE EVER THEY ARE.

AND you also go after their supporters. And Kill them.

No it will never end but you can reduce the threat to a fraction of what it currently is by doing that.

It's rarely that easy, or that cut and dried. Though for many of these, I'd pull the trigger in a New York minute.
 
12234892_10205022653477139_7749642162929255967_n.jpg
 
Destablizing the Middle East with no clear contingency plans was not good strategic thinking.

It's always had degrees of destabilization... The powder keg was put in place with haphazard country-boundary-drawing after WWI and the fuse was lit by extreme religious beliefs.

You can strategically plan within the Middle East until the cows come home and it will always be on the edge of a melt-down.
 
It's a different kind of war. . It's not country vs. country, but a fight over core beliefs. The problem is, there are people of different religions and beliefs everywhere, they just get radicalized.It only takes a small percentage of that mindset to cause chaos. It's a slow escalation.

i dont buy this at all.Islam wants to convert ,they are doing it centuries.they get sufficient numbers in a country and they force conversions.ISIS is just a latest manifestation of their caliphate and Sharia ideology.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
465,613
Messages
13,886,432
Members
23,792
Latest member
Irvin_truther
Back
Top