I've realized there is a shocking number of people that don't know what ISIS wants

[realmirage]

To understand why Obama still has us in this shitty mess Bush got us into, you need to understand this:

"ISIS makes no secret of its ultimate ambition: A global caliphate secured through a global war. To that end it speaks of "remaining and expanding" its existing hold over much of Iraq and Syria. It aims to replace existing, man-made borders, to overcome what it sees as the Shiite "crescent" that has emerged across the Middle East, to take its war -- Islam's war -- to Europe and America, and ultimately to lead Muslims toward an apocalyptic battle against the "disbelievers."

If we let ISIS get control of Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan, Orlando will be just a small beginning.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/11/middleeast/isis-syria-iraq-caliphate/

[stone space]

1. Obvious troll is being obvious.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512313712

[ConservativeDemocrat]

7. While you honestly believe "Peace in our time" appeasement, I see

He's not a troll. He's just not the from the Nevile Chamberlain wing of the Democratic Party. In other words, he's from the majority part of the party.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[anoNY42]

10. Start shouting that you want more war, then...

[FBaggins]

17. You didn't get the Chamberlain reference, did you?

They got more war because they didn't want more war.

These are the wars that need fighting... the ones where the other side is attacking and cannot be appeased by respecting what they're fighting for... because their goal is the end of anyone who isn't their version of a particular race or religion and/or conquering large swaths of the globe.

Decades of properly opposing wars for oil or profit have caused some to believe that there are no wars that must be fought.

[think]

18. You do realize ISIS is attacking other countries right? They have armies too.

Not every war is our war exclusively. Yet once again we are the ones spending the money and sending the troops. How many Saudi troops are in other countries fighting ISIS?

[FBaggins]

19. Who says we have to go it alone?

If you think that's what's happening then you haven't been paying attention.


How many Saudi troops are in other countries fighting ISIS?

Quite a few. Did you miss the war in Yemen? Several M.E. countries fighting led by the Saudis with logistical support from France/ US/UK/Canada

[anoNY42]

21. Yep

and the Saudis are taking few precautions in their war in Yemen, leading to some nice civilian death tolls. This is a war you apparently support...

[FBaggins]

23. Lol. So which is it?

Let "them" fight their own wars, or fight them correctly?

Of course, you're failure to note the manner in which ISIS was fighting on the other side is noted.

[anoNY42]

28. My answer is don't get involved

when your "allies" don't have the same inhibitions you have against killing civilians...

Edit: "Of course, you're failure to note the manner in which ISIS was fighting on the other side is noted."

Not sure what that means. Are you complaining, like the Republicans, that I somehow cannot bring myself to utter the name "ISIS"?

[think]

24. No. I haven't missed the civil war in Yemen that the Saudis have chosen to be in.

The one where they want to reinstall the Yemen dictator.

And yes. We are sending more troops to Iraq in preparation for a battle.

[FBaggins]

26. Sorry...did I miss the news...

...that ISIS was installing a liberal democracy in Yemen?

[think]

29. Apparently you miss a lot of news. It's the Hoothis not ISIS and YES it is a civil war

In a country that's been ruled by dictators for decades:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yemeni_Civil_War_(2015%E2%80%93present)

Alternate URL as parentheses don't work in urls here: https://goo.gl/3Dzbvc

And the Saudis have indiscriminately been hitting hospitals and schools:

https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2016/jun/08/saudi-arabia-has-been-given-a-free-pass-to-bomb-schools-and-hospitals-in-yemen

[awoke_in_2003]

41. Because we basically do

European countries toss in a few thousand troops each, while we bear the brunt. They spend 1 or 2% of GDP on defense, depending on US taxpayers to pay for the rest. That is why they have nice things and we don't.

[anoNY42]

20. Of course I got the Chamberlain reference, don't be insulting.

The problem is that you are looking at Munich from your vantage point of 20/20 hindsight.

If we were to apply your supposed lesson from Munich today, we would be at war with Russia over their annexation of Crimea.

Anyway, the Munich analogy doesn't hold in the case of ISIS. Germany was rapidly becoming an economic powerhouse and military threat to other nations in a way that ISIS is not doing and can really never do. ISIS attracts only the most foul Sunnis, the least civilized ones. This limits their growth, especially in areas dominated by Shiites (not to mention non-muslim areas like almost the entire rest of the globe).

Furthermore, attacking them with ground troops would just push more marginal ISIS recruits their way, since ISIS would make hay of their propaganda predictions of a war between the "West" vs. Islam. In that case, ISIS could claim they were right all along, and that the "West" wanted to eradicate Islam.

[Trust Buster]

27. Neville Chamberlain had no choice but to appease Hitler in Munich. Great Britain was totally

Unprepared for war on that scale. Later, all the help from the U.S. through Lend Lease barely saved the day for Great Britain. Had Chamberlain stood up to Hitler in Munich, Hitler would have easily invaded and captured Great Britain. History proves Chamberlain correct in his efforts to buy Great Britain time.

[Albertoo]

32. I quite doubt that, but it would take too long a discussion to sort it out

[Trust Buster]

34. It's a fact. Great Britain was woefully unprepared to go to war with Hiltler at the time of Munich.

[icymist]

39. I've found something that might clear this up.

I have always wondered about the Munich disaster and the role Chamberlain played. This little discussion got me looking around and I found this:

From 1936 to the outbreak of war in 1939, German aircraft production was not raised but averaged 425 planes a month of all types (including commercial planes). This gave Germany an air force of 1,000 bombers and 1,050 fighters of varying quality in September, 1939. In contrast with this, the British air program of March, 1934 provided for a first-line R.A.F. of 900 planes. This was later increased, at Chamberlain's urging, and the program at May, 1938 planned for a first line force of 2,370 planes. This was increased again in 1939. Under it, Britain produced almost 3,000 "military" planes in 1938 and about 8,000 in 1939. Because of differences in categories between "planes," "military planes," and "combat planes," it is not possible to make any exact comparison of air strength between Britain and Germany, but it is clear that Britain's planes in 1939 and 1940 were more recent and of superior quality than Germany's. It was this superiority which made it possible for Britain to defeat Germany in the "Battle of Britain" in September, 1940.

http://www.carrollquigley.net/misc/quigley_explains_how_germany_conquered_czechoslovakia.htm

[MicaelS]

71. Germany never had

The sealift capability to physically invade the UK. Neither did they have a Blue Water navy that could have fought the Royal Navy toe to toe. Their navy was oriented toward commerce raiding.

[melm00se]

77. Operation Sea Lion

(the planned Nazi invasion of Britain) was war gamed out in the mid 1970s and the umpires (half from from Britain and half from Germany) unanimously ruled that the invasion was a failure

[MicaelS]

78. Never knew that. Thanks!

[pinboy3niner]

16. The guy says "Obama still has us in this shitty mess"...

...but advocates stronger military action against ISIS (which Obama is doing)?

I'm sensing mixed messages here which seem to have one point, to disparage President Obama.

[realmirage]

43. Calm down, I said Bush got us into it. Obama is trying trying to clean up the mess

[Rex]

61. The first poster is correct.

IMO.

[Kingofalldems]

63. Yep. Same here.

[LanternWaste]

33. It's irrational to believe that -A = B. Not too reality based, either.

It's irrational to believe that -A = B. Not too reality based, either... regardless of the self-validating nomenclatures we assign to ourselves.

[realmirage]

45. I'm glad enough of us live in reality so that we aren't led to the slaughter by

people who would try to reason with or ignore the lion that is trying to eat us

[Kingofalldems]

64. So what would be your plan?

You started this thread, let's hear it.

[Rex]

60. Thanks for verifying the fact.

[realmirage]

44. You can't keep up with the discourse, I get it.

Unless you can explain how Obama puts an end to these wars without ISIS quickly terrorizing the fuck out of the world, maybe you should just not participate.

[still_one]

2. but the same shocking people believe the President isn't an American citizen. Gee, I wonder

where they get that from

[stone space]

4. This is not a serious OP. See my post above. It is simple trolling. (nt)

[Make7]

3. Their 5-year plan (from a two year old article):

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2674736/ISIS-militants-declare-formation-caliphate-Syria-Iraq-demand-Muslims-world-swear-allegiance.html


Their current territory as of a month ago:



http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/06/18/world/middleeast/isis-control-places-cities.html

[JHB]

9. Their industrial base...

[anoNY42]

11. I must not be able to view your picture,

I assume it is a picture of a group of crickets chirping?

[JHB]

13. Your eyes do not deceive you...

...but your assumption might. A group of crickets can do their own chirping, without needing outside funding or captured equipment to do it.

[anoNY42]

14. But if they were chirping from the back of a "technical"

you might listen more attentively!

[JHB]

15. Go take another look at their wet-dream map above...

...and sketch out how they take all that with armed pickup trucks.

[anoNY42]

22. Oh I was just joking

take a pill! I don't think ISIS can expand in non-Sunni areas. The Shiite militias will see to that, if nothing else.

[JHB]

30. No problem

[realmirage]

46. You haven't really been paying attention to the conflict if you think ISIS is that weak

[JHB]

55. So what's their plan to take over Spain?

[geardaddy]

36. I'd take that map purporting ISIS's plans from the Daily Hate Mail with a large grain of salt. n/t

[Cobalt Violet]

5. put down the keyboard and get your combat boots on then.

Why aren't you there fighting if you feel so strong about war?

[realmirage]

47. That old tired argument... Are you pro-adoption? Where's your adopted baby??

Are you pro interracial marriage? WHY IS YOUR WIFE WHITE THEN??

Use real arguments and not cliches.

[LeftyMom]

6. The YPG loves when Americans come fight ISIS with them. They'll meet you at the airport.

http://www.villagevoice.com/news/a-hello-to-arms-a-new-generation-of-steely-gazed-anarcho-communists-head-off-to-syria-8705087

Put up or shut up.

[Grey Lemercier]

42. really interesting article

thanks for sharing

[KG]

8. I lulz'd

[pinboy3niner]

12. What, you didn't think "Obama still has us in this shitty mess" was a good troll line?

[realmirage]

48. You don't read too well?

"that Bush got us into"

Then I explain why Obama can't just end these wars.

Reading is fundamental.

[underahedgerow]

25. First, and I'm not insulting you, but blaming Obama for ISIS is just mind-numbingly obscene. So

I'll disregard that portion of your statement.

Orlando had N.O.T.H.I.N.G. to do with ISIS. Nothing. Zilch. Zero. Nada. What you saw there was a mindless effing moron with serious mental and emotional psychosis. He chose very recently to use the ISIS bs as his excuse for his killing. If ISIS didn't exist, he would have found some other excuse.

ANYONE who aligns themselves with ISIS is seriously psychotic to begin, festering with rage from their own inner turmoil and confusion, and their alleged fidelity to ISIS is just a fomentation of their psychotic rage. It's an excuse, an outlet, it gives them the 'power' of a reason to commit the crimes they were going to eventually commit anyway.

ISIS is using their power and their 'war' to slake these psychotic mens' thirst for blood and violence and it comes in the form of imagined revenge and terrorism. Guys in the US that were borderline psychotic and angry used to join the military to vent that rage and anger. Now, with slightly better psychiatric evaluations, those guys are being rejected and left to float around with their violent psychosis. They join those neo-nazi groups, et al, to rationalize and manifest their inadequacies and rage. Being a violent racist or religious fanatic is a manifestation of psychosis; that's the bottom line that must be acknowledged.

ISIS is taking advantage of the same frailty in males of ME / Muslim origin throughout the world via land-based migration with consequences that are becoming a global epidemic.

That the bush regime enabled such psychotic azz*holes to rise to power to begin with is indeed globally tragic. I will say 'I told you so'. I wrote about this potential nearly 20 years ago, but a lone voice doesn't get a lot of attention, other than being called paranoid and delusional. Not so paranoid and delusional now, it seems.

What's the solution?

Well, this is going to piss off everyone. But here goes.

First the US needs to act on strong, armor-clad migration policies. Kill me now but Trump is right on this. Strict monitoring of any people with any potential tendencies towards the harm of others, in any threats, any facebook page, any twitter, whatever. These people don't keep their chit to themselves, they form groups, they talk, they boast, they broadcast. Social media has to be called to the carpet to be as responsible as any judiciary in reporting and self policing this 'freedom of speech'. IF you're going to say crap on a public forum then the judiciary must have the right to investigate and observe and report, and to take any action necessary to protect the public. (Not from Mexicans or South Americans mind you, at all. They are the least of your worries.)

Secondly, cut off the funding these guys in the ME have access to by any means possible. If it takes dark web do-gooders, then so be it. Whoever has the means has to take action. Destroy any monetary and communications schemes that they're using. It doesn't need a vote or a referendum, it just needs to be done.

Third, Global control of guns and weaponry would be nice, but the USA must act in her own defense and ban all guns. The US has the advantage of being somewhat isolated from land-based migration of the psychotic nuts from the ME bringing their idiocy to her shores, but.... that may not be enough. For now, the EU is in some deep chit, and I said this when I saw the hundreds of thousands of young males hurling themselves like zombies over fences to get into the EU. They're here. It's like a plague.... The US at least has the time to take their own measures, for now.

It's a start, it's going to piss people off, and I'm sorry in advance, but this is what has to happen to stop these psychotics from taking over.... And taking over, they are, and that's their intention.

Call me psychotic and delusional, go ahead, flame away, but like I said before to much derision, I'm always right. I've got new information about what's going on in the EU that is literally scaring the crap out of me. And I don't scare easily, but dayum, some chit is going down, and it will spread like the plague if serious actions aren't taken right now.

Please don't flame me or call me names, but I do indeed welcome candid debate and conversation. Be nice. I'm a good person with a unique view of the world. TIA.

[pinboy3niner]

31. I have to agree with your opening statement

And I can't help but note that the OP author has not deigned to participate in the discussion.

[realmirage]

49. Where in the hell did I say any of that?

Any jackass knows Bush is to blame when he destabilized Iraq. I am giving you the reason Obama can't just pull us out of there like these stupid "no more war" chanters seem to think he can.

It IS a shitty mess. And never did I say Obama caused it. READ MY ENTIRE OP

[Iggo]

35. Oh noes! Dominos!

[ronnie624]

37. ISIS is a threat to those in its immediate vicinity,

but it isn't possible for them to project power, out into the world, other than terrorist attacks, which are relatively rare, compared to other risks.

Smashing susceptible societies to oblivion, and then expecting a healthy society to arise from the rubble, is foolish in the extreme.

[realmirage]

50. They are doing plenty damage right now with the small resources they have

Now if we walk away and let them take control of 3 countries, and all those resources? Do you think we'd be safe?

[lindysalsagal]

38. I'm no troll, but the jihad premise has always been messianic end-times world destruction

Now, does every single terrorist agree with every bit of it all the time? Of course not. But if you pull the thread of the most extremist excuses for violence and read all the way to the end of their quoted scripture, it's in there.

They want everyone killing everyone until there are 5000 muslims left for their messiah to rescue to start the world over.

International Business Times
http://www.ibtimes.com/isis-apocalypse-armageddon-coming-islamic-state-group-doomsday-cult-says-expert-2115100

"ISIS Apocalypse: Armageddon Coming, Islamic State Group Is Doomsday Cult, Says Expert

In order to recruit and expand, the Islamic State group relies heavily on the idea that the end of the world is near. The extremist Sunni Muslim group uses Islamic scriptures and prophecies to support its apocalyptic claim, all the while ignoring another contradicting prophecy.

“How did the Islamic State attract so many followers and conquer so much land? By being more ruthless, more apocalyptic and more devoted to state-building than its competitors,” according to a new book called "The ISIS Apocalypse: The History, Strategy, and Doomsday Vision of the Islamic State," by William McCants, the ISIS director of the Project on U.S. Relations with the Islamic World at the Brookings Institution.

Emphases such as "on-state building now" and "don't put off the caliphate" because "we are waging the final battles of the apocalyptic" are attractive to young Islamic men across the world, McCants argued in his book, USNI News reported. ISIS reportedly advocates the idea that the apocalypse is imminent and that Islamic State fighters will battle the “infidels” of the West in Dabiq, a Syrian town now under ISIS control."

Is it rational? Of course not. But it is used as a handy excuse for many suicide bombings.

It's a destruction paradigm for hopeless, broken people. Very hard to fight against, when all they want is more death. The have nothing to lose. We're not ready to sink low enough to meet them where they already are.

Disclaimer: I DID NOT say all muslims believe this. The killers believe it. 99.99% of muslims are peaceful. Same goes for christians and jews.

Most people assume that others carry the same personal paradigms as themselves. That's why our style of representative democracy isn't breaking out all over the middle east by itself. It's not part of the middle eastern reality.

Unless and until the US and europe can grasp what really drives the killers, we're fooling ourselves into thinking we can stop them.

[flying rabbit]

70. +1 nt

[Avalux]

40. It's not a religious war.

It's a war of territory, power, resources...even though ISIS uses Islam to indoctrinate their members, it's really not about religion.

Those are Pope Francis's words, after a priest was killed in France by men claiming alliance to ISIS. I agree with him.

[realmirage]

51. Ok, please tell the victims of the attacks in France that the bombers did it for territory. Also,

tell the world that the 9/11 terrorists were doing this for power, and not jihad. ISIS are even bigger religious fanatics than Bin Laden's movement, which resulted in 9/11

[kristopher]

53. +1

Neither is religion the primary recruitment tool; inequality and economic injustice are the primary sources of discontent fueling anger and hate.

[muriel_volestrangler]

56. Yes, of course, I'm sure the Yazidi appreciate that they're being massacred

because of the inequality and economic injustice they have nothing at all to do with. And it's pure coincidence that the people signing up with ISIS are all fundamentalist Muslims, rather than people who object to inequality and economic injustice such as communists or socialists. And the official ISIS statements that it's all about religion are what, in your reality? A false flag or something?

[kristopher]

57. Religion is more of an organizing principle than a causal motivator

If you remove wide scale social and economic discrimination and provide secure access to life's basic needs, it is rather difficult to motivate people to fight for a cause such as Daesh.

Fundamentalism of all stripes is a symptom not a disease.

[muriel_volestrangler]

58. Try reading this - page after page of how religion is the only motivator for ISIS

http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Research/Files/Papers/2015/03/ideology-of-islamic-state-bunzel/The-ideology-of-the-Islamic-State.pdf?la=en

From page 38 onwards, you get their own words. It's all about religion, and none of it is about economics, or inequality. As far as social discrimination goes, they are, of course, highly in favour of it, telling women they must veil their faces and be subservient. And they're in favour of killing those they regard as apostates.

[kristopher]

59. I know of no social theory which accepts that premise.

[muriel_volestrangler]

72. Maybe you should think about the real world, rather than a theoretical one, then

It's no use saying "I don't know of any social theorists who predicted the appearance of ISIS, therefore ISIS's stated reason for existence and its ideology - fundamentalist religion - can't be real".

[kristopher]

73. If you have to create a straw man, it means you're wrong...

And your post is nothing but a straw man, in no sense can you extract that meaning from my remarks.

Religion is not a cause of war, it is a means of organizing people into (among other things) a force to fight a war. But first, they have to be predisposed to want to fight. Anger and fear are the most powerful motivators. Happy, contented people don't fight; and they don't care what a religious leader wants in that regard.

If you want to stop war in the ME, then fair distribution of the regions wealth is a prerequisite.

[muriel_volestrangler]

76. Your whole post was about the non-existence of a social theory that fits with the reality

so why do you think it was a strawman to refer to it?

You assert "religion is not a cause of war", without actually considering the explicit reasons ISIS give. Fundamentalist Muslims have travelled to the Middle East from outside the area - not because they fear anything, but because they support the religious stance that ISIS is all about.

Perhaps you could say "religion is not often a cause of war". But sometimes it is. The Crusades, for instance.

Did you read the paper on ISIS's ideology?

[kristopher]

79. I don't need to consider their ideology

That's like saying someone buys a car because of a car company's advertising. They may choose a Chevy because of the advertising, but need propels them to the action of buying a car.

You're usually a rational person, I'm disappointed that you seem to be having trouble stepping into the etic mode of analysis on this issue. War is a well researched area of study and, though it's been a while since I covered the topic, I'm pretty certain there is strong consensus that the underlying cause of war isn't found in cultural belief systems such as religion.

You are clearly intent on hating rather than expanding your understanding, so I'll give you the last word and sign off.

PS I recommend to you 'Cultural Materialism' by Marvin Harris.

ETA link to another instance revealing the same sort of problem that lies in this thread:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10028053562

[muriel_volestrangler]

80. If you haven't covered it recently, that would explain why you don't know about ISIS

because they only started their war recently. I'm pretty certain that you can point to a cultural belief system of bigoted nationalism as the cause of World War 2 (for both German and Japanese expansionism). And in this case, it's a cultural belief system of Islamic fundamentalism. It even condones slavery, so there's no way you can say it's about inequality.

How ironic you say "you are clearly intent on hating rather than expanding your understanding", when you blithely say "I don't need to consider their ideology". You are proud of keeping yourself uninformed, but pontificating on what you imagine their motives to be, based on your understanding of different people from years ago.

And yes, I do hate ISIS. Don't you? They're genocidal, homophobic, misogynist slave-owners who want to convert the world to their particular cult of religion by force. What's not to hate?

[kristopher]

81. Those are perfect examples disproving your belief.

Both Japan and Germany were engaged in fighting resource wars. In that case their organizing principle wasn't religion, it was corporatism that had taken control of government; coopting the authority of the state to take a hungry populace down th road of militarism and war.

It's a lot like what is happening here right now.

[muriel_volestrangler]

82. Neither Germany nor Japan were 'hungry'

Japan was the most advanced economy in Asia, and far less hungry than China which it attacked. The Japanese army's behaviour in Nanking and elsewhere make it clear they saw the Chinese as inferior. Germany was no worse off than Czechoslovakia or Poland, but it invaded them - Hitler had made his idea of 'Lebensraum' clear, and he saw Slavs as inferior to Germans, and many Germans went along with it, willingly.

I'm getting tired of hearing your excuses for a bigoted group of hate-filled psychopaths like ISIS. Don't you realise how offensive you are when you claim they are committing genocide because of "inequality and economic injustice"? It's like hearing a Free Republican claim that the American Civil War wasn't about slavery, but "states' rights". Just step back and look at the moral stance you've decided to take.

[kristopher]

83. I don't use my moral preferences as a guide to determining the facts of a matter

And the fact of this matter is that in order to ensure access to oil, the West has been sowing discord and social chaos in the ME (and other places) since before WWII. The current crop if angry fighters are a direct result of that foreign policy based on expropriation of their wealth.

What is truly abhorrent is the demonization and warmongering that characterizes DU of late. BTW, your understanding of what happened leading to WWII is abysmal.

[muriel_volestrangler]

84. "Facts"? You didn't need no stinkin' facts

Remember, you're the one who proudly said you didn't need to find about anything about ISIS's ideology, because your out-of-date reading on war told you everything you needed to know, forever.

Fuck me, you are defending genocidal slaveholders as "angry fighters" against the expropriation of "their" wealth. Your similarity to Jefferson Davis is growing by the minute.

[muriel_volestrangler]

86. I've never said anything about 'my country', let alone 'right or wrong'

This is about ISIS. You are denying that they are driven by religion, despite their explicit and frequent statements that they are, despite the analysis by anyone who examines them which agrees they are, despite their declaration of a caliphate, despite their genocide of the Yazidis for being a different religion, despite their warfare against Shia Muslims for being, in their eyes, 'apostates', despite their destruction of ancient monuments purely for belonging to dead, but non-Muslim, religions. Despite their use of religious texts to justify their oppression of all women, and their literal enslavement of non-Muslim women, despite their mass murder of LGBT people for explicitly religious reasons, despite their stoning of women for explicitly religious reasons, you say it's not about religion, but about "inequality and economic injustice".

But, instead, you accuse me, for giving you all this evidence that they are religious fanatics, of talking about 'my country'. I have not mentioned the United Kingdom once in this thread. How the hell do you think I'm saying "my country right or wrong"? And how do you think that someone British pointing out that ISIS are fundamentalist Muslims has anything at all to do with what your country did in Vietnam - a conflict I freely admit had nothing to do with religion at all, but which has got nothing to do with ISIS, and which no one has brought up in this thread until now?

[hatrack]

52. They're in my fridge! They're in my closet!! AAAAAAAAIIIIIIIIIIIEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!

.

[dubyadiprecession]

54. We should be refering to Isis in our own way...

by calling them Shameless Miserable Cowards.

[tenderfoot]

62. ISIS wants what defense contractors want - Perpetual War

They all work for one another.

[realmirage]

65. ridiculous, propagandist view of reality, but whatever

[tenderfoot]

66. "ridiculous, propagandist view of reality" That's your OP in a nutshell.

Happy FEARING!!!

Bugga Bugga Bugga!!!!!

[realmirage]

67. you should have just said "i know you are but what am i"

[tenderfoot]

68. I know you'll sit this war out like the others...

fear mongering wrathful scaredy cat.

[Kingofalldems]

69. I'll ask again, since you started this OP--

What is your plan for terrorism?

[kristopher]

74. What is your plan for negotiation?

Or what about cooperation? How about obfuscation; surely you have a plan for dealing with the obfuscationists?

Terrorism is a tactic that is used in asymmetrical conflict.

That's an extremely important point that a lot of people seem incapable of grasping.

[lonestarnot]

75. Why does truth hurt folks like you? What war machine contract are you in on?