Sounds like a terror attack strikes France again

GrandePdre

New member
Jan 21, 2008
17,126
1,432
0
Last year, 14,000 Americans were killed by Americans in the US. We need to do something about Americans. How can we keep Americans out?

I'm amazed that people think that it is okay for Western nations to continue bombing other countries, inflicting a lot of collateral damage (women, children, etc), but then we act shocked when the people outraged by this return the violence through terrorism.

I hear you. You are condemning the drone strikes and the attacks on ISIS in Syria.

So let me ask you:

If we leave them alone, will they leave us alone?

If we make Israel fend for itself, can it?

If we appease Iran, will they play nice and not build nukes?

Do we stand by and watch while Britain, Germany, France, Belgium, Sweden, Norway, Greece, Finland, etc all get overrun by migrants and militant Muslims hellbent on beating and raping the western men and women and establishing their own nations and Sharia Law?

I'm not a fan of drone strikes, either. They make me damn uncomfortable. The problem is the Muslim world must rise up and take down the radical militant evil of its own and squash it. Until it does, we have to engage it the way we are. Nazis made up only a small part of the German populace, too.
 

.S&C.

New member
Jul 8, 2014
45,292
6,388
0
hey dumbass. Muslims have been murdering and committing atrocities long before the USA existed. But you just keep on swallowing your liberal BS.

It just proves what I said. The silver tails and their insane "intellectual" leftist ideology is not only going to bring America down (their own admission) but it's totally crazy. I swear using a certain standard of sense they could be found clinically insane.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mdlUK.1
May 25, 2002
36,812
397
0
I'm just saying it is a big circular equation. We go in and bomb and kill innocents, the crazies are going to kill in return. I didn't say I was opposed to drone attacks, or protecting American interests. I'm just saying there can be consequences. Of course, the typical xenophobes chirp in without thinking at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GrandePdre

mdlUK.1

New member
Dec 23, 2002
29,712
3,216
0
I'm just saying it is a big circular equation. We go in and bomb and kill innocents, the crazies are going to kill in return. I didn't say I was opposed to drone attacks, or protecting American interests. I'm just saying there can be consequences. Of course, the typical xenophobes chirp in without thinking at all.
They're going to kill regardless! Did all those children killed yesterday have anything to do with bombing?
 

TortElvisII

Active member
May 7, 2010
51,228
6,766
66
I'm just saying it is a big circular equation. We go in and bomb and kill innocents, the crazies are going to kill in return. I didn't say I was opposed to drone attacks, or protecting American interests. I'm just saying there can be consequences. Of course, the typical xenophobes chirp in without thinking at all.

Calling people names proves your point.

Did the Buddhist bomb Muslim women and children?
 

.S&C.

New member
Jul 8, 2014
45,292
6,388
0
I'm just saying it is a big circular equation. We go in and bomb and kill innocents, the crazies are going to kill in return. I didn't say I was opposed to drone attacks, or protecting American interests. I'm just saying there can be consequences. Of course, the typical xenophobes chirp in without thinking at all.

People have been conquering and fighting people since the beginning of time.

We live in 2016, and the west must be the stabilizing force, regardless.
 

Kaizer Sosay

New member
Nov 29, 2007
25,706
10,993
0
Did Osama not attack us in 93 after the Democrats basically trained al qaeda in the 70s?

Close. But not quite right.

Under the Reagan administration we provided CIA-intelligence and military training on the ground and provided weapons and weapons training to the Afghanistan rebels in their war against the invading Russians. Osama was fighting with one of the Afghanistan groups at the time.
 

Kaizer Sosay

New member
Nov 29, 2007
25,706
10,993
0
All of that was under the radar by the way. The weapons we provided for the Afghanistan rebels were Russian weapons that we bought mostly from Israel and Pakistan. That way, when weapons were retrieved by the Russians from dead Afghanistan rebels they couldn't tell that they came from the US.

Charlie Wilson's War.
 
Nov 7, 2008
13,888
3,651
0
Close. But not quite right.

Under the Reagan administration we provided CIA-intelligence and military training on the ground and provided weapons and weapons training to the Afghanistan rebels in their war against the invading Russians. Osama was fighting with one of the Afghanistan groups at the time.

I thought it was Carter, but before my time.


http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/03/blowback.html
 

MegaBlue05

New member
Mar 8, 2014
10,042
2,686
0
We as a nation, need to stop picking sides. Left / right. This is not a gd boxing match where you are told to go to your corner and come out fighting. We need to come together as one, fight these horrible monsters as a nation, not pick sides, place blame. In the end, if we as the greatest country on earth do not ban together and do WHATEVER it takes to end this foolish war on innocent people, then all of us are to blame, not left, not right, not down the middle, but ALL of America. It is time for America to take back what we have fought and stand for, freedom and a right to live in peace.

But it's more fun to argue about piss, Jesus, guns, gay people, wedding cakes, Phil Robertson, Beyonce and cops than it is to actually examine ourselves and stop being petty children over stupid ****.
 

rmattox

New member
Nov 26, 2014
6,786
886
0
I'm not surprised. The indoctrination of PC radical culture has enabled it and is right on par with stuff you'd see in a communist country back in the day with constant propaganda and threats. Fear of the government being instilled, forcing our schools to push agendas and have the media as mouthpieces for this movement.

Just think what we are hammered with on a daily basis from the media

- You're racist if you disagree with mass migration coming in.
- Muslims are peaceful, to think otherwise is xenophobic and Islamophobic. Let's make sure to celebrate Clock Boy to drive this home
- We need gun control
- There is a problem with racism from whites
- Pushing of white guilt
- Pushing of open borders
- Blacks are being targeted by cops
- Women are oppressed somehow
- Transgender is normal, get on board or you're a bigot.
- We need more diversity (only if there's too many whites) so insert x quota cause you don't want to be a bigot.

It's just a bunch of BS being fed to use to make a cultural shift and scare anyone who doesn't agree into submitting to this new insanity, create a self loathing group of soldiers to pander and advance the cause and to create division and let ourselves be destroyed.

No one can make a single case of why it's good to bring Muslims to your country when every single example shows it to be a horrible idea but with the media, politicians and universities to mold opinions and reality, you get this...

Tell me one thing, just one thing, the media takes the right, traditional American position on? For that matter, tell me one thing obammer has taken the right, traditional Amerian position on?
 

Kaizer Sosay

New member
Nov 29, 2007
25,706
10,993
0
I thought it was Carter, but before my time.


http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/03/blowback.html


The Russians invaded Afghanistan in 1979…when Carter was POTUS. And the first funds were secretly sent by the US to the Mujahadeen to fight against the Russian puppet regime in Kabul about 6 months before the invasion took place. But that was peanuts. Some money, a little training, rudimentary guns stuff. It wasn't until after 1980 and Reagan was POTUS that the $50 million (started as $5 million initially) in aid was appropriated over a period of time for the Mujahadeen to fight and eventually defeat the Russians. This $50 million included CIA boots on the ground and advanced training, surface-to-air weapons, etc…Up until that time…the Mujahadeen were getting their asses kicked and would have been over run easily.

So yeah, it started with Carter…but the bulk of the funds, training, and serious weapons, etc…were provided by the US under the Reagan administration.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AustinTXCat

AustinTXCat

Well-known member
Jan 7, 2003
51,736
30,549
113
The Russians invaded Afghanistan in 1979…when Carter was POTUS. And the first funds were secretly sent by the US to the Mujahadeen to fight against the Russian puppet regime in Kabul about 6 months before the invasion took place. But that was peanuts. Some money, a little training, rudimentary guns stuff. It wasn't until after 1980 and Reagan was POTUS that the $50 million (started as $5 million initially) in aid was appropriated over a period of time for the Mujahadeen to fight and eventually defeat the Russians. This $50 million included CIA boots on the ground and advanced training, surface-to-air weapons, etc…Up until that time…the Mujahadeen were getting their asses kicked and would have been over run easily.

So yeah, it started with Carter…but the bulk of the funds, training, and serious weapons, etc…were provided by the US under the Reagan administration.
Well, yes, but ya gotta also gotta take the former Carter National Security advisor into account -- Zbigniew Brzezinski. He. Hated. Ivan. HATED - period. A great, Harvard doctoral grad, Brzezinski set the framework for dealing with the feared bear during the Reagan era.
 

.S&C.

New member
Jul 8, 2014
45,292
6,388
0
Tell me one thing, just one thing, the media takes the right, traditional American position on? For that matter, tell me one thing obammer has taken the right, traditional Amerian position on?

One thing the media leans right on?

I'm not even going to waste my time. The sheer fact that anyone readily admits the media leans heavily in one direction is all I need to know. and whatever they might lean right on (can't think of anything really) it's not really conservative. Maybe some meaningless topic but it'll be the moderate position that I guarantee you.

Even fox, who most believe leans right, is more moderate than anything. Oreilly supports extreme (in my view) gun control. Megan Kelly is so down the middle it's almost ridiculous. I don't even agree with half of her semi-positions. Wallace tears into anyone in front of him. Past hannity, who's an opinion show, it's really lack luster for true conservatives.

As far as Obama, he's pretty terrible across the board. I'm sure if I took the time I could find some unimportant issue to agree, but that's about it.
 

Ukbrassowtipin

New member
Aug 12, 2011
82,110
3,051
0
I don't really watch any of the major news outlets...I generally read all my news. I will flip through to see what each is saying about a particular issue. The weird thing is MSNBC seems to generally see what Fox's take is then report the opposite or their news stories are about Fox. Weird what's considered news. I will say that Fox does report more actual news..meaning things outside politics. If there's a major fire or disaster somewhere they'll pick it up.

I do like Greg Gutfeld though and do watch The Five.
 

.S&C.

New member
Jul 8, 2014
45,292
6,388
0
I don't really watch any of the major news outlets...I generally read all my news. I will flip through to see what each is saying about a particular issue. The weird thing is MSNBC seems to generally see what Fox's take is then report the opposite or their news stories are about Fox. Weird what's considered news. I will say that Fox does report more actual news..meaning things outside politics. If there's a major fire or disaster somewhere they'll pick it up.

I do like Greg Gutfeld though and do watch The Five.

The 5 is a good show for traditionalist. I will give them that.

I can't hate on fox too much. They might be too moderate for me (considering it's supposed to be the more right leaning) but they are New Yorkers and the only sane network. I'm probably expecting too much. I just get irritated when the premise and starting point of news networks today begin at a moderate or far left POV. true right leaning conservatives have no voice at all.
 

Guess Who

New member
Jul 26, 2005
20,792
3,245
0
All of that was under the radar by the way. The weapons we provided for the Afghanistan rebels were Russian weapons that we bought mostly from Israel and Pakistan. That way, when weapons were retrieved by the Russians from dead Afghanistan rebels they couldn't tell that they came from the US.

Charlie Wilson's War.
Had read that OBL's AK was from a Rusky Colonel he killed and became of sentimental value to him through his days of skirmishes. Anyone else hear this and any truth to it? Just a curious trivia note
 

Stonewall12

Active member
Nov 15, 2009
24,258
1,920
66
I find it comical that so many of you just assume I'm some left wing nut job. In an ideal world I'd love to round up every Islamic extremist in the entire world and drive a GD stake threw their foreheads. But that's not practical, and I'm not willing to think or act as if every Muslim in the world is on a mission to murder me. The world is not black and white, it's filled almost entirely with gray.

What is so incredibly repulsive about some of you is that you don't stop for half a second to consider the loss of life, and appreciate the gravity of it. You just can't wait to get furious at liberals, to scream about your stance on gun control, to blame Obama. You offer zero solutions other than parroting whatever right wing talk show host you finger yourself to on your drive to work. It's nauseating and embarrassing as a fellow American.
Trump
 

-LEK-

New member
Mar 27, 2009
11,787
12,233
0
That picture is more disturbing/unsettling/whatever word you want to use than any of the pictures of the aftermath.
I skipped most of the fighting in this thread, but wow, that pic made my eyes water. I just dont understand how there can be so many bad people.
 

jockstrap_mcgee

New member
Jan 22, 2009
1,354
913
0
Re: media

This is the 21st century. If you're not taking in information from a variety of sources, you're doing it wrong. The truth is not going to be told to you by any one media outlet.
 

qwesley

New member
Feb 5, 2003
17,606
3,810
0
I don't really watch any of the major news outlets...I generally read all my news. I will flip through to see what each is saying about a particular issue. The weird thing is MSNBC seems to generally see what Fox's take is then report the opposite or their news stories are about Fox. Weird what's considered news. I will say that Fox does report more actual news..meaning things outside politics. If there's a major fire or disaster somewhere they'll pick it up.

I do like Greg Gutfeld though and do watch The Five.

MSNBC's anchor for the GOP convention (Maddow) says she is researching Hitler's rise to prep. Think about that.
 

warrior-cat

Well-known member
Oct 22, 2004
190,051
4,571
113
They're going to kill regardless! Did all those children killed yesterday have anything to do with bombing?
They have been fighting for thousands of years. It is not just because of us. It is Biblical.
 

KopiKat

New member
Nov 2, 2006
14,018
1,791
0
They have been fighting for thousands of years. It is not just because of us. It is Biblical.

Perhaps . . . biblical, if you mean that figuratively and maybe somewhat literally. The fact of the matter is that their warring, methods of living, methods of interacting with the balance of mankind are because they are the most tribal sects of people on earth. That will never change. This is solidified through religions, biblically characterized even through more than just one religious cornerstone document. Their own allows them to tolerate the existence of no other belief systems. Know that ye infidel. But it is their tribal nature which makes them perfect for it, as they understand the rule of power over the rule of law, the rule of cultures over defined borders, the rule of blood over peace. Never shall this change, no mater where they spread, no matter who attempts to say I care for you to them.
 

Ukbrassowtipin

New member
Aug 12, 2011
82,110
3,051
0
The whole basis of their religion is on War. Muhammad was a warrior who basically used religion as a way to gain followers and take over lands. Probably no surprise one of the caliphates were defeated when they got to France, if I remember the history correctly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KingOfBBN

KingOfBBN

New member
Sep 14, 2013
39,077
3,295
0
I find the people that take up for Islam know the least about it. It's an evil death cult. Oh, you know ole Abdul that works at 7-Eleven and he's so nice? Well, in Islam you are allowed to lie and blend in if it advances the cause of Islam.

Even if you exclude terrorists, Islam is so disgusting and evil. They imprison and tax non-Muslims, they will not allow women to drive in Islamic nations, women can't be seen with a male she's not related to or married to, they can kill you for leaving the religion, they have honor killings (even in the west), still have child brides, female genital mutilation, and if you have the unfortunate experience of being raped, you better have four male eyewitnesses. If you don't, you'll be tried for adultery and be stoned to death.


Some examples of Sharia that a lot of Muslims favor.
1- Jihad, defined as "to war against non-Muslims to establish the religion," is the duty of every Muslim and Muslim head of state (Caliph). Muslim Caliphs who refuse jihad are in violation of Sharia and unfit to rule.

2- A Caliph can hold office through seizure of power meaning through force.

3- A Caliph is exempt from being charged with serious crimes such as murder, adultery, robbery, theft, drinking and in some cases of rape.

4- A percentage of Zakat (charity money) must go towards jihad.

5- It is obligatory to obey the commands of the Caliph, even if he is unjust
6- A caliph must be a Muslim, a non-slave and a male.

7- The Muslim public must remove the Caliph if he rejects Islam.

8- A Muslim who leaves Islam must be killed immediately.

9- A Muslim will be forgiven for murder of: 1) an apostate 2) an adulterer 3) a highway robber. Vigilante street justice and honor killing is acceptable.

10- A Muslim will not get the death penalty if he kills a non-Muslim, but will get it for killing a Muslim.

11- Sharia never abolished slavery, sexual slavery and highly regulates it. A master will not be punished for killing his slave.

12- Sharia dictates death by stoning, beheading, amputation of limbs, flogging even for crimes of sin such as adultery.

13- Non-Muslims are not equal to Muslims under the law. They must comply to Islamic law if they are to remain safe. They are forbidden to marry Muslim women, publicly display wine or pork, recite their scriptures or openly celebrate their religious holidays or funerals. They are forbidden from building new churches or building them higher than mosques. They may not enter a mosque without permission. A non-Muslim is no longer protected if he leads a Muslim away from Islam.

14- It is a crime for a non-Muslim to sell weapons to someone who will use them against Muslims. Non-Muslims cannot curse a Muslim, say anything derogatory about Allah, the Prophet, or Islam, or expose the weak points of Muslims. But Muslims can curse non-Muslims.

15- A non-Muslim cannot inherit from a Muslim.

16- Banks must be Sharia compliant and interest is not allowed.

17- No testimony in court is acceptable from people of low-level jobs, such as street sweepers or bathhouse attendants. Women in low level jobs such as professional funeral mourners cannot keep custody of their children in case of divorce.

18- A non-Muslim cannot rule -- even over a non-Muslim minority.

19- Homosexuality is punishable by death.

20- There is no age limit for marriage of girls. The marriage contract can take place anytime after birth and can be consummated at age 8 or 9.

21- Rebelliousness on the part of the wife nullifies the husband's obligation to support her, gives him permission to beat her and keep her from leaving the home.


22- Divorce is only in the hands of the husband and is as easy as saying: "I divorce you" and becomes effective even if the husband did not intend it.

23- There is no community property between husband and wife and the husband's property does not automatically go to the wife after his death.

24- A woman inherits half what a man inherits.

25- A man has the right to have up to 4 wives and none of them have a right to divorce him -- even if he is polygamous.

26- The dowry is given in exchange for the woman's sexual organs.

27- A man is allowed to have sex with slave women and women captured in battle, and if the enslaved woman is married her marriage is annulled.

28- The testimony of a woman in court is half the value of a man.

29- A woman loses custody if she remarries.

30- To prove rape, a woman must have 4 male witnesses.