1. grunt0300's Avatar
    Yep..... the one's that matter.

    Make no mistake... I personally would like every one of those ISIS bastds to have a belt sander taken to them until they are skinless. That is emotion... I don't want our leaders or military basing theirs decisions on emotion.

    Well, that's where we differ. Having served in combat, i know just how important good intel is. In order to defeat an enemy, one must think like him, and get down in the mud with him. After the Vietnam War was over, their military leader, Gen. Giap, said that the Viet Cong lost the war in Vietnam, but won the war in America! I see that happening here, and people like you are to blame. You want answers and info from the enemy, but you want to get those answers in a politically correct way. Belt sanders? That's kid stuff. Does the term "by any means necessary" harm your delicate sensibilities? You have no idea what it's like to see friends killed right along side of you, because of political correctness. Draw a mental picture of this(the right way to get intel). Two "VC's " with valuable intel are captured, but won't talk. They're put in a Huey and taken straight up about 1,000 ft. Again they refuse to talk. One gets kicked out, and the other sings like a canary. That's one way, but not the only way to get intel. If that way saves lives, and it did, i have no problem with it. The enemy wouldn't hesitate to do it to us, so why should we be any different? Why should we try to be "good guys" to people who have always hated us, and always will, no matter what we do for them? The lesson of Vietnam was clear. You must fight to win, not contain. In the intelligence community, the end justifies the means. The Prime Minister of Israel will be snubbed by our President, and all his "toadies". What does that say about our country, to the rest of the world. There's an emotional decision if i ever heard one. You've got to wake up and smell the coffee. This isn't a game. Our President said that the Crusades were unjustified, but in reality, the Crusades were in retaliation to Muslim atrocities perpetrated against Christian travelers going to Jerusalem. If not for the Muslim killings, there never would have been the famous Knights Templar. Without purposely offending anyone, i will say this...In the beginning, the Prophet preached love...then he turned to hate. It's the "hate part", that we're dealing with today. THINK ABOUT IT.
    Just_Me_D and Ledsteplin like this.
    02-09-2015 11:47 AM
  2. Just_Me_D's Avatar
    Yep..... the one's that matter.

    Make no mistake... I personally would like every one of those ISIS bastds to have a belt sander taken to them until they are skinless. That is emotion... I don't want our leaders or military basing theirs decisions on emotion.
    C'mon, that's talking big while simultaneously being a wuss. If you think that the reaction to the Pearl Harbor attacks, the reaction to the attacks that took place on September 11, 2001 or even BHO's reaction to the Trayvon Martin incident or even to the incident that led to the infamous beer summit were done without "emotion", you're delusional.
    grunt0300 and hydrogen3 like this.
    02-09-2015 12:02 PM
  3. Just_Me_D's Avatar
    Well, that's where we differ. Having served in combat, i know just how important good intel is. In order to defeat an enemy, one must think like him, and get down in the mud with him. After the Vietnam War was over, their military leader, Gen. Giap, said that the Viet Cong lost the war in Vietnam, but won the war in America! I see that happening here, and people like you are to blame. You want answers and info from the enemy, but you want to get those answers in a politically correct way. Belt sanders? That's kid stuff. Does the term "by any means necessary" harm your delicate sensibilities? You have no idea what it's like to see friends killed right along side of you, because of political correctness. Draw a mental picture of this(the right way to get intel). Two "VC's " with valuable intel are captured, but won't talk. They're put in a Huey and taken straight up about 1,000 ft. Again they refuse to talk. One gets kicked out, and the other sings like a canary. That's one way, but not the only way to get intel. If that way saves lives, and it did, i have no problem with it. The enemy wouldn't hesitate to do it to us, so why should we be any different? Why should we try to be "good guys" to people who have always hated us, and always will, no matter what we do for them? The lesson of Vietnam was clear. You must fight to win, not contain. In the intelligence community, the end justifies the means. The Prime Minister of Israel will be snubbed by our President, and all his "toadies". What does that say about our country, to the rest of the world. There's an emotional decision if i ever heard one. You've got to wake up and smell the coffee. This isn't a game. Our President said that the Crusades were unjustified, but in reality, the Crusades were in retaliation to Muslim atrocities perpetrated against Christian travelers going to Jerusalem. If not for the Muslim killings, there never would have been the famous Knights Templar. Without purposely offending anyone, i will say this...In the beginning, the Prophet preached love...then he turned to hate. It's the "hate part", that we're dealing with today. THINK ABOUT IT.
    Far too many of our fellow Americans underestimate our enemies' focus and the lengths to which they are willing to go to harm us. That, and our unwillingness to take these people seriously are the things that will do us in at some point. We have been warned repeatedly that our enemies "are coming" to this country. I believe them. Unfortunately, we appear to have a C-in-C that's unwilling to devote "real" efforts to defeating these people.
    kch50428 likes this.
    02-09-2015 12:13 PM
  4. HankAZ's Avatar
    Far too many of our fellow Americans underestimate our enemies' focus and the lengths to which they are willing to go to harm us. That, and our unwillingness to take these people seriously are the things that will do us in at some point. We have been warned repeatedly that our enemies "are coming" to this country. I believe them. Unfortunately, we appear to have a C-in-C that's unwilling to devote "real" efforts to defeating these people.
    Far too many believe that if we are just nice to them, that they will leave us alone.
    02-09-2015 01:13 PM
  5. Just_Me_D's Avatar
    Far too many believe that if we are just nice to them, that they will leave us alone.
    Yes sir, and those are the ones who fail to understand that the freedoms they currently enjoy comes at a great price of which a reoccurring payment in blood & sacrifice is part of the deal.
    02-09-2015 01:18 PM
  6. BobLobIaw's Avatar
    Well, that's where we differ. Having served in combat, i know just how important good intel is. In order to defeat an enemy, one must think like him, and get down in the mud with him. After the Vietnam War was over, their military leader, Gen. Giap, said that the Viet Cong lost the war in Vietnam, but won the war in America! I see that happening here, and people like you are to blame. You want answers and info from the enemy, but you want to get those answers in a politically correct way. Belt sanders? That's kid stuff. Does the term "by any means necessary" harm your delicate sensibilities? You have no idea what it's like to see friends killed right along side of you, because of political correctness. Draw a mental picture of this(the right way to get intel). Two "VC's " with valuable intel are captured, but won't talk. They're put in a Huey and taken straight up about 1,000 ft. Again they refuse to talk. One gets kicked out, and the other sings like a canary. That's one way, but not the only way to get intel. If that way saves lives, and it did, i have no problem with it. The enemy wouldn't hesitate to do it to us, so why should we be any different? Why should we try to be "good guys" to people who have always hated us, and always will, no matter what we do for them? The lesson of Vietnam was clear. You must fight to win, not contain. In the intelligence community, the end justifies the means. The Prime Minister of Israel will be snubbed by our President, and all his "toadies". What does that say about our country, to the rest of the world. There's an emotional decision if i ever heard one. You've got to wake up and smell the coffee. This isn't a game. Our President said that the Crusades were unjustified, but in reality, the Crusades were in retaliation to Muslim atrocities perpetrated against Christian travelers going to Jerusalem. If not for the Muslim killings, there never would have been the famous Knights Templar. Without purposely offending anyone, i will say this...In the beginning, the Prophet preached love...then he turned to hate. It's the "hate part", that we're dealing with today. THINK ABOUT IT.
    I'm not sure that Vietnam is the appropriate comparison to the current situation with IS, but since you brought it up, I thought I might note that the Vietnamese currently have one of the highest percentage of favorable views of the U.S.--76%. And why? Perhaps because the U.S. stopped fighting them on their home soil. That statistic stands in contradiction to your "enemies will always hate us" statement. I agree with your lesson learned in Vietnam--fight to win. However, that is a secondary lesson and you are ignoring the primary lesson. The primary lesson of Vietnam is consider carefully before engaging in military adventurism. Sadly, it is a lesson that the U.S. finds difficult to learn. The U.S. should never have committed ground forces in Vietnam and most agree on that viewpoint, including many vets.

    As I said, the Vietnam issue isn't very comparable to a religious fundamentalism-based terrorist threat that the U.S. faces today, but the premise that the world is full of "enemies" that will exterminate you unless you exterminate them is an unfortunate overexaggeration. The real question is how to adapt counter-terrorism measures in the face of a rapidly-evolving threat that has shown it can survive the effects of a conventional military response.
    02-09-2015 02:11 PM
  7. BobLobIaw's Avatar
    Far too many believe that if we are just nice to them, that they will leave us alone.
    I don't know a single person who thinks that we should be nice to terrorists. What exactly do you mean by that? Are you talking about foreign military policy or are you talking about treatment of captured terrorists? Maybe you can elaborate your comment. What does the U.S. need to be doing in addition to what it is doing right now?
    02-09-2015 02:19 PM
  8. HankAZ's Avatar
    I don't know a single person who thinks that we should be nice to terrorists. What exactly do you mean by that? Are you talking about foreign military policy or are you talking about treatment of captured terrorists? Maybe you can elaborate your comment. What does the U.S. need to be doing in addition to what it is doing right now?
    Society is all caught up in this "go along to get along" political correctness garbage. We're so worried about offending someone that we lose focus on the fact that our government has a right and an obligation to protect our nation and its Constitution for ALL enemies, foreign and domestic. But we're too busy trying to accept everyone that we don't see what is happening to our country.

    You have ISIS running rampant in the middle east, forming terrorist cells elsewhere, including within our own country. But instead of taking them and their threats seriously, our C-in-C calls them "the JV squad". This is the same guy, who, after getting elected went on the apology tour, meeting with the leaders of Arab and muslim nations apologizing for the US' actions, and all the while snubbing our biggest ally in the region (Israel).

    He can't even bring himself to call them "terrorists". Fort Hood wasn't terrorism - it was "work place violence". Give me a break.

    I'm done here, my blood pressure can't take this.

    @kilofoxtrot: don't even bother. I'm not posting in this thread any more.
    grunt0300 likes this.
    02-09-2015 02:44 PM
  9. kch50428's Avatar
    I don't know a single person who thinks that we should be nice to terrorists.
    Let me introduce you to one... you might recognize her... we need to empathize with our enemies???

    grunt0300, Just_Me_D and hydrogen3 like this.
    02-09-2015 02:51 PM
  10. BobLobIaw's Avatar
    Society is all caught up in this "go along to get along" political correctness garbage. We're so worried about offending someone that we lose focus on the fact that our government has a right and an obligation to protect our nation and its Constitution for ALL enemies, foreign and domestic. But we're too busy trying to accept everyone that we don't see what is happening to our country.

    You have ISIS running rampant in the middle east, forming terrorist cells elsewhere, including within our own country. But instead of taking them and their threats seriously, our C-in-C calls them "the JV squad". This is the same guy, who, after getting elected went on the apology tour, meeting with the leaders of Arab and muslim nations apologizing for the US' actions, and all the while snubbing our biggest ally in the region (Israel).

    He can't even bring himself to call them "terrorists". Fort Hood wasn't terrorism - it was "work place violence". Give me a break.

    I'm done here, my blood pressure can't take this.

    @kilofoxtrot: don't even bother. I'm not posting in this thread any more.
    Fair enough. I'm a latecomer to this conversation so my BP is still in an acceptable range. You covered additional ground with your response to my questions and it looks to me like you are primarily discouraged by President Obama and his leadership (or lack thereof) on this issue. A more cynical interpretation is that you are hinting that domestic tolerance of the Muslim faith is misplaced. I think that is a dangerously slippery-slope argument and echoes a lot of what I hear and disagree with from Bill O'Reilly. I don't think we should be "nice" to any terrorist, but I also think it is important to not lump non-terrorist Muslims with terrorists just because they share the same faith.
    Last edited by BobLobIaw; 02-09-2015 at 03:14 PM.
    02-09-2015 03:00 PM
  11. BobLobIaw's Avatar
    I see your point, Keith, but empathy isn't sympathy. In addition, Clinton certainly isn't saying anyone should be "nice" to terrorists. The context is in applying a negotiated peaceful settlement between enemies. The U.S. has a long-standing policy of not negotiating with terrorists, so her comments are not applicable to terrorists. She's just talking about Mediation 101 principles applied to foreign policy and seems to be suggesting that females have more empathy than men. I don't know for sure without hearing more of her address.
    02-09-2015 03:14 PM
  12. grunt0300's Avatar
    I'm not sure that Vietnam is the appropriate comparison to the current situation with IS, but since you brought it up, I thought I might note that the Vietnamese currently have one of the highest percentage of favorable views of the U.S.--76%. And why? Perhaps because the U.S. stopped fighting them on their home soil. That statistic stands in contradiction to your "enemies will always hate us" statement. I agree with your lesson learned in Vietnam--fight to win. However, that is a secondary lesson and you are ignoring the primary lesson. The primary lesson of Vietnam is consider carefully before engaging in military adventurism. Sadly, it is a lesson that the U.S. finds difficult to learn. The U.S. should never have committed ground forces in Vietnam and most agree on that viewpoint, including many vets.

    As I said, the Vietnam issue isn't very comparable to a religious fundamentalism-based terrorist threat that the U.S. faces today, but the premise that the world is full of "enemies" that will exterminate you unless you exterminate them is an unfortunate overexaggeration. The real question is how to adapt counter-terrorism measures in the face of a rapidly-evolving threat that has shown it can survive the effects of a conventional military response.

    I'm looking at it from an infantryman's point of view. I had no hand in making Govt. policy in 1961. Whether or not we should have been there is not the point. Since we were sent there, we should have had the backing of the Govt. to win, not to just die.
    02-09-2015 03:15 PM
  13. grunt0300's Avatar
    Fair enough. I'm a latecomer to this conversation so my BP is still in an acceptable range. You covered additional ground with your response to my questions and it looks to me like you are primarily discouraged by President Obama and his leadership (or lack thereof) on this issue. A more cynical interpretation is that you are hinting that domestic tolerance of the Muslim faith is misplaced. I think that is a dangerously slippery-slope argument and echoes a lot of what I hear and disagree with from Bill O'Reilly. I don't think we should be "nice" to any terrorist, but I also think it is important to not lump non-terrorist Muslims with terrorists just because they share the same faith.


    I'm not a fan of O'Reilly, but i don't share your optimism about not lumping non-Muslim terrorists together with Muslim terrorists. SILENCE IS COMPLIANCE. I believe that a great many Muslim terrorist groups are financed by your so-called non-terrorist groups. The Jordanians are fighting the terror of ISIS, but why? Only because one of their own was set ablaze by fellow Muslims. I'm sure that they would be much happier fighting Israelis. Wasn't Jordan supporting ISIS in the beginning? If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck...you know the rest.
    02-09-2015 03:28 PM
  14. BobLobIaw's Avatar
    I'm looking at it from an infantryman's point of view. I had no hand in making Govt. policy in 1961. Whether or not we should have been there is not the point. Since we were sent there, we should have had the backing of the Govt. to win, not to just die.
    Yes, I'm sure I would have a different viewpoint as an infantryman. How much different, I'm not sure. I re-read the story of the Christmas Truce in WWI on its 100 year anniversary a couple months ago and it shows that even enemy combatants have an interesting form of human compassion. That is another reason why the Vietnam experience is dramatically different from a terrorist situation. I don't think you will ever see a terrorist and a targeted civilian break out a holiday football game.
    02-09-2015 03:43 PM
  15. BobLobIaw's Avatar
    I'm not a fan of O'Reilly, but i don't share your optimism about not lumping non-Muslim terrorists together with Muslim terrorists. SILENCE IS COMPLIANCE. I believe that a great many Muslim terrorist groups are financed by your so-called non-terrorist groups. The Jordanians are fighting the terror of ISIS, but why? Only because one of their own was set ablaze by fellow Muslims. I'm sure that they would be much happier fighting Israelis. Wasn't Jordan supporting ISIS in the beginning? If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck...you know the rest.
    Two billion Muslims and all but a tiny group (percentage-wise) would never entertain the thought of terrorism. I can't hold the rest accountable for the actions of the few, just like I don't hold your average Christian responsible for the nutjob that kills an abortion doctor.
    Les74 likes this.
    02-09-2015 03:47 PM
  16. grunt0300's Avatar
    Yes, I'm sure I would have a different viewpoint as an infantryman. How much different, I'm not sure. I re-read the story of the Christmas Truce in WWI on its 100 year anniversary a couple months ago and it shows that even enemy combatants have an interesting form of human compassion. That is another reason why the Vietnam experience is dramatically different from a terrorist situation. I don't think you will ever see a terrorist and a targeted civilian break out a holiday football game.

    I've heard of the Christmas Truce, in WW1. I don't know about the German side, but weren't the Brits who participated in that "truce" later disciplined by their own officers?
    02-09-2015 03:52 PM
  17. Just_Me_D's Avatar
    I don't know a single person who thinks that we should be nice to terrorists. What exactly do you mean by that? Are you talking about foreign military policy or are you talking about treatment of captured terrorists? Maybe you can elaborate your comment. What does the U.S. need to be doing in addition to what it is doing right now?
    I can't speak for Hank, but I sure as heck know of people who have flat told me that if we just show the terrorists that we understand their situation and sympathize with their plight, they will no longer hate us or want to attack us. Me being me, I just laughed and shook my head.
    grunt0300 and hydrogen3 like this.
    02-09-2015 04:47 PM
  18. BobLobIaw's Avatar
    I don't recall if anyone was disciplined but there were both Brits and Germans opposed to the truce, including a guy named Cpl. Adolf Hitler on the German side. Go figure!
    02-09-2015 04:47 PM
  19. grunt0300's Avatar
    Two billion Muslims and all but a tiny group (percentage-wise) would never entertain the thought of terrorism. I can't hold the rest accountable for the actions of the few, just like I don't hold your average Christian responsible for the nutjob that kills an abortion doctor.

    I'm talking about the funding. There are Muslim countries who fund organizations like ISIS, Hezbollah, The Muslim Brotherhood, etc. Hundreds of millions of dollars are given to these terrorists from countries who "claim" to be our friends. Some of these countries are getting aid from us, in one form or another. Cut the aid, cut the b.s rhetoric. No matter what they say, they are NOT our friends. Carpet bomb every terrorist hideout, encampment, and training facility. Too flipping bad about the collateral damage. Get intel from any source you can, any way you can. When are people going to realize that we are at war.
    02-09-2015 05:30 PM
  20. kilofoxtrot's Avatar
    "What does the U.S. need to be doing in addition to what it is doing right now?"

    I can't speak for Hank, but I sure as heck know of people who have flat told me that if we just show the terrorists that we understand their situation and sympathize with their plight, they will no longer hate us or want to attack us. Me being me, I just laughed and shook my head.
    I'd like you to answer Bob's question. So far you haven't.

    We are bombing ISIS pretty much everyday.

    Do you want us to send troops back to the theatre???
    02-09-2015 09:02 PM
  21. pappy53's Avatar
    Do you want us to send troops back to the theatre???
    If everyone, including the U.S., would send in troops, this thing could be over fairly quick.
    grunt0300 likes this.
    02-09-2015 09:06 PM
  22. kilofoxtrot's Avatar
    If everyone, including the U.S., would send in troops, this thing could be over fairly quick.
    I am afraid that as soon as we leave... its back to square one again. Then repeat over and over.

    Remember, many Iraqi units deserted and fled when ISIS came at them. I don't like the idea of our troops paying in blood for countries who won't do the same for themselves.
    02-09-2015 09:16 PM
  23. pappy53's Avatar
    I am afraid that as soon as we leave... its back to square one again. Then repeat over and over.

    Remember, many Iraqi units deserted and fled when ISIS came at them. I don't like the idea of our troops paying in blood for countries who won't do the same for themselves.
    That is something to consider.
    02-09-2015 09:18 PM
  24. Just_Me_D's Avatar
    "What does the U.S. need to be doing in addition to what it is doing right now?"



    I'd like you to answer Bob's question. So far you haven't.

    We are bombing ISIS pretty much everyday.

    Do you want us to send troops back to the theatre???
    I'm assuming you mean " What does the U.S. need to be doing in addition to what it is doing right now?" If so, I'll answer it this way. Weak leaders tend to act in a manner that gives the impression that something is being done. They blow up targets that have little to no impact on our enemy's logistics primarily for show purposes. The terrorists, are heavily outmanned and outgunned militarily, and they know it, so they adapt in ways that our leaders and political minded commanders are hesitant to deal with in regard to force. For example, hiding in plain sight among the civilian population, in mosques, in people's homes, hiding behind women and children, in schools, etcetera. They've been known to attack us from the aforementioned areas, and we're hesitant to retaliate. Now before you go out and claim that I'm all for killing innocent people, just know that I'm simply one of those people who puts the blame where it belongs - on the terrorists who intentionally put the innocents in harm's way.
    Last edited by JustMe'D; 02-10-2015 at 08:36 AM.
    02-09-2015 09:25 PM
  25. kilofoxtrot's Avatar
    I'm assuming you mean " What does the U.S. need to be doing in addition to what it is doing right now?" If so, I'll answer it this way. Weak leaders tend to act in a manner that gives the impression that something is being done. They blow up targets that have little to no impact on our enemy's logistics for show purposes. These terrorists, are heavily outmanned and outgunned militarily, and they know it, so they adapt in ways that our leaders and political minded commanders are hesitant to deal with in regard to force. For example, hiding in plain sight among the civilian population, in mosques, in people's homes, hiding behind women and children, in schools, etcetera. They've been known to attack us from the aforementioned areas, and we're hesitant to retaliate. Now before you go out and claim that I'm all for killing innocent people, I'm just one of those people who puts the blame where it belongs - on the terrorists who intentionally put the innocents in harm's way.
    In no way would I think that you are for killing innocent people.

    However you still haven't answered Bob's question..... all you offered is criticism and blame.
    02-09-2015 09:40 PM
117 1234 ...

Similar Threads

  1. When does the resurgence case come out for iPhone 6 plus?
    By iMore Question in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-03-2015, 05:07 PM
  2. 15 more banks jump on the Apple Pay bandwagon
    By iMore.com in forum iMore.com News Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-03-2015, 02:19 PM
  3. How do you change sound alerts on the notification lock screen?
    By iMore Question in forum Ask a Question
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-03-2015, 01:45 PM
  4. How to use Google Hangouts with the Messages app on your Mac
    By iMore.com in forum iMore.com News Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-03-2015, 01:40 PM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-03-2015, 12:49 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD