We need to invest in jobs, education and infrastructure.
Where have you heard that before? That's right, you've heard it come out of every libs mouth when they talk about crime in the inner city. This administration is now using the same argument to defeat terrorism.
If you were on the fence before, you now know how much credibility their theory to invest in jobs, education and infrastructure has now.
We need to invest in jobs, education and infrastructure.
Where have you heard that before? That's right, you've heard it come out of every libs mouth when they talk about crime in the inner city. This administration is now using the same argument to defeat terrorism.
If you were on the fence before, you now know how much credibility their theory to invest in jobs, education and infrastructure has now.
Is the suggestion that Isis is a bigger priority than jobs, education, and infrastructure?
isis has killed, like, what, 4 americans already in some places you may never visit. but still, if you aren't waking up scared of isis every day, you aren't watching the right cable channels.
that being said, i think i agree with mathews and harf, to a great extent.
0
Quote Originally Posted by mattbrot:
Is the suggestion that Isis is a bigger priority than jobs, education, and infrastructure?
isis has killed, like, what, 4 americans already in some places you may never visit. but still, if you aren't waking up scared of isis every day, you aren't watching the right cable channels.
that being said, i think i agree with mathews and harf, to a great extent.
isis has killed, like, what, 4 americans already in some places you may never visit. but still, if you aren't waking up scared of isis every day, you aren't watching the right cable channels.
that being said, i think i agree with mathews and harf, to a great extent.
Club -- am I reading this right? Do you agree with both?
0
Quote Originally Posted by ClubDirt:
isis has killed, like, what, 4 americans already in some places you may never visit. but still, if you aren't waking up scared of isis every day, you aren't watching the right cable channels.
that being said, i think i agree with mathews and harf, to a great extent.
Club -- am I reading this right? Do you agree with both?
isis has killed, like, what, 4 americans already in some places you may never visit. but still, if you aren't waking up scared of isis every day, you aren't watching the right cable channels.
that being said, i think i agree with mathews and harf, to a great extent.
Is what you are saying is we should ignore ISIS?
Are you also saying we should have ignored Nazi Germany? They didn't kill any Americans pre-WWII
0
Quote Originally Posted by ClubDirt:
isis has killed, like, what, 4 americans already in some places you may never visit. but still, if you aren't waking up scared of isis every day, you aren't watching the right cable channels.
that being said, i think i agree with mathews and harf, to a great extent.
Is what you are saying is we should ignore ISIS?
Are you also saying we should have ignored Nazi Germany? They didn't kill any Americans pre-WWII
i didn't watch the video so i'm just going by the quotes.
But we cannot win this war by killing them,” Harf said
definitely agree with this. we've been "killing them" for how long and new ones just keep coming back. is there any sign of improvement? any sign the war on terror is about to be won or will end at any point in time? and i'm not sure just "killing them" is a a sufficient, detailed enough plan to win the war on terror that just goes on and on.
“We cannot kill our way out of this war. We need, medium to longer term,
to go after the root causes that leads people to join these groups,
whether it’s lack of opportunities for jobs, whether…”
i agree with this, for the most part. again, "killing them" is not a well thought out and detailed strategy. it's part of a strategy. the solution, if there is one, needs to be longer term and address the causes of terrorism. of course, at the end of the quote, he doesn't provide a strategy either so i wouldn't agree with the whole thing.
“We’re not going to be able to stop that in our lifetime or 50
lifetimes. There’s always going to be poor people. There’s always going
to be poor Muslims, and as long as there are poor Muslims, the trumpet’s
blowing and they’ll join. We can’t stop that, can we?” Mathews said.
this seems like an appropriate response. he's not really disagreeing with harf but just pointing out how difficult a real strategy would be, if harf was going to actually propose a real one.
Harf: “There is no easy solution in the long-term to preventing and combating
violent extremism. But if we can help countries work at the root causes
of this…”
i agree with this. but again, this is just a general statement with no specifics so it doesn't mean much.
0
yes.
i didn't watch the video so i'm just going by the quotes.
But we cannot win this war by killing them,” Harf said
definitely agree with this. we've been "killing them" for how long and new ones just keep coming back. is there any sign of improvement? any sign the war on terror is about to be won or will end at any point in time? and i'm not sure just "killing them" is a a sufficient, detailed enough plan to win the war on terror that just goes on and on.
“We cannot kill our way out of this war. We need, medium to longer term,
to go after the root causes that leads people to join these groups,
whether it’s lack of opportunities for jobs, whether…”
i agree with this, for the most part. again, "killing them" is not a well thought out and detailed strategy. it's part of a strategy. the solution, if there is one, needs to be longer term and address the causes of terrorism. of course, at the end of the quote, he doesn't provide a strategy either so i wouldn't agree with the whole thing.
“We’re not going to be able to stop that in our lifetime or 50
lifetimes. There’s always going to be poor people. There’s always going
to be poor Muslims, and as long as there are poor Muslims, the trumpet’s
blowing and they’ll join. We can’t stop that, can we?” Mathews said.
this seems like an appropriate response. he's not really disagreeing with harf but just pointing out how difficult a real strategy would be, if harf was going to actually propose a real one.
Harf: “There is no easy solution in the long-term to preventing and combating
violent extremism. But if we can help countries work at the root causes
of this…”
i agree with this. but again, this is just a general statement with no specifics so it doesn't mean much.
Are you also saying we should have ignored Nazi Germany? They didn't kill any Americans pre-WWII
i guess there were a few posts in between mine and mattbrot's. i was responding to post #4.
but to answer your question, yes, you should ignore isis. you'll be fine if you do. don't let the media scare you into believeing your chance of being affected by isis is even remotely close to any number of other things that can harm you.
as for our government, if there is some way to "kill isis" that makes sense, then they should do it. is it likely to get us closer to winning the war on terror? i don't see it.
0
Quote Originally Posted by canovsp:
Is what you are saying is we should ignore ISIS?
Are you also saying we should have ignored Nazi Germany? They didn't kill any Americans pre-WWII
i guess there were a few posts in between mine and mattbrot's. i was responding to post #4.
but to answer your question, yes, you should ignore isis. you'll be fine if you do. don't let the media scare you into believeing your chance of being affected by isis is even remotely close to any number of other things that can harm you.
as for our government, if there is some way to "kill isis" that makes sense, then they should do it. is it likely to get us closer to winning the war on terror? i don't see it.
i didn't watch the video so i'm just going by the quotes.
But we cannot win this war by killing them,” Harf said
definitely agree with this. we've been "killing them" for how long and new ones just keep coming back. is there any sign of improvement? any sign the war on terror is about to be won or will end at any point in time? and i'm not sure just "killing them" is a a sufficient, detailed enough plan to win the war on terror that just goes on and on.
“We cannot kill our way out of this war. We need, medium to longer term,
to go after the root causes that leads people to join these groups,
whether it’s lack of opportunities for jobs, whether…”
i agree with this, for the most part. again, "killing them" is not a well thought out and detailed strategy. it's part of a strategy. the solution, if there is one, needs to be longer term and address the causes of terrorism. of course, at the end of the quote, he doesn't provide a strategy either so i wouldn't agree with the whole thing.
“We’re not going to be able to stop that in our lifetime or 50
lifetimes. There’s always going to be poor people. There’s always going
to be poor Muslims, and as long as there are poor Muslims, the trumpet’s
blowing and they’ll join. We can’t stop that, can we?” Mathews said.
this seems like an appropriate response. he's not really disagreeing with harf but just pointing out how difficult a real strategy would be, if harf was going to actually propose a real one.
Harf: “There is no easy solution in the long-term to preventing and combating
violent extremism. But if we can help countries work at the root causes
of this…”
i agree with this. but again, this is just a general statement with no specifics so it doesn't mean much.
0
Quote Originally Posted by ClubDirt:
yes.
i didn't watch the video so i'm just going by the quotes.
But we cannot win this war by killing them,” Harf said
definitely agree with this. we've been "killing them" for how long and new ones just keep coming back. is there any sign of improvement? any sign the war on terror is about to be won or will end at any point in time? and i'm not sure just "killing them" is a a sufficient, detailed enough plan to win the war on terror that just goes on and on.
“We cannot kill our way out of this war. We need, medium to longer term,
to go after the root causes that leads people to join these groups,
whether it’s lack of opportunities for jobs, whether…”
i agree with this, for the most part. again, "killing them" is not a well thought out and detailed strategy. it's part of a strategy. the solution, if there is one, needs to be longer term and address the causes of terrorism. of course, at the end of the quote, he doesn't provide a strategy either so i wouldn't agree with the whole thing.
“We’re not going to be able to stop that in our lifetime or 50
lifetimes. There’s always going to be poor people. There’s always going
to be poor Muslims, and as long as there are poor Muslims, the trumpet’s
blowing and they’ll join. We can’t stop that, can we?” Mathews said.
this seems like an appropriate response. he's not really disagreeing with harf but just pointing out how difficult a real strategy would be, if harf was going to actually propose a real one.
Harf: “There is no easy solution in the long-term to preventing and combating
violent extremism. But if we can help countries work at the root causes
of this…”
i agree with this. but again, this is just a general statement with no specifics so it doesn't mean much.
Should we also get down to the root cause on why those white redneck trailer trash southerners burn crosses on people's front lawns? Or why those same white redneck trailer trash southerners hate g-a-y-s?
Maybe if we just talk to them, and maybe redistribute some wealth in their direction, then they'll come around.
0
Should we also get down to the root cause on why those white redneck trailer trash southerners burn crosses on people's front lawns? Or why those same white redneck trailer trash southerners hate g-a-y-s?
Maybe if we just talk to them, and maybe redistribute some wealth in their direction, then they'll come around.
i guess there were a few posts in between mine and mattbrot's. i was responding to post #4.
but to answer your question, yes, you should ignore isis. you'll be fine if you do. don't let the media scare you into believeing your chance of being affected by isis is even remotely close to any number of other things that can harm you.
as for our government, if there is some way to "kill isis" that makes sense, then they should do it. is it likely to get us closer to winning the war on terror? i don't see it.
You didn't answer the part about Germany. Should we have ignored the Nazi's?
0
Quote Originally Posted by ClubDirt:
i guess there were a few posts in between mine and mattbrot's. i was responding to post #4.
but to answer your question, yes, you should ignore isis. you'll be fine if you do. don't let the media scare you into believeing your chance of being affected by isis is even remotely close to any number of other things that can harm you.
as for our government, if there is some way to "kill isis" that makes sense, then they should do it. is it likely to get us closer to winning the war on terror? i don't see it.
You didn't answer the part about Germany. Should we have ignored the Nazi's?
Should we also get down to the root cause on why those white redneck trailer trash southerners burn crosses on people's front lawns? Or why those same white redneck trailer trash southerners hate g-a-y-s?
Maybe if we just talk to them, and maybe redistribute some wealth in their direction, then they'll come around.
I know are being a little tongue and cheek here but isn't this mind frame really about ignorance / education? Teach these people that hating someone who is different is not healthy. Eventually the cycle will break. No different than how blacks used to be viewed by many.
0
Quote Originally Posted by canovsp:
Should we also get down to the root cause on why those white redneck trailer trash southerners burn crosses on people's front lawns? Or why those same white redneck trailer trash southerners hate g-a-y-s?
Maybe if we just talk to them, and maybe redistribute some wealth in their direction, then they'll come around.
I know are being a little tongue and cheek here but isn't this mind frame really about ignorance / education? Teach these people that hating someone who is different is not healthy. Eventually the cycle will break. No different than how blacks used to be viewed by many.
You didn't answer the part about Germany. Should we have ignored the Nazi's?
no, we shouldn't have for as long as we did. rounding up millions of people to kill them and invading other countries with the idea that they wanted to take over europe was something we shouldn't have ignored that long.
0
Quote Originally Posted by canovsp:
You didn't answer the part about Germany. Should we have ignored the Nazi's?
no, we shouldn't have for as long as we did. rounding up millions of people to kill them and invading other countries with the idea that they wanted to take over europe was something we shouldn't have ignored that long.
no, we shouldn't have for as long as we did. rounding up millions of people to kill them and invading other countries with the idea that they wanted to take over europe was something we shouldn't have ignored that long.
ISIS has killed more people and invaded more countries in it's infant stages then the Nazi's did in their infant stage.
We have the ability to use hindsight when it comes to the Nazis. They did eventually kill millions and invade numerous countries but that came years after they were established.
0
Quote Originally Posted by ClubDirt:
no, we shouldn't have for as long as we did. rounding up millions of people to kill them and invading other countries with the idea that they wanted to take over europe was something we shouldn't have ignored that long.
ISIS has killed more people and invaded more countries in it's infant stages then the Nazi's did in their infant stage.
We have the ability to use hindsight when it comes to the Nazis. They did eventually kill millions and invade numerous countries but that came years after they were established.
ISIS has killed more people and invaded more countries in it's infant stages then the Nazi's did in their infant stage.
We have the ability to use hindsight when it comes to the Nazis. They did eventually kill millions and invade numerous countries but that came years after they were established.
i'm sure we could say that about a few groups. and i'm not saying the US shouldn't try to kill them. or other countries in the area shouldn't. i said they should. i'm just not sure how the "killing them" strategy is a winning strategy in the war on terror in and of itself.
0
Quote Originally Posted by canovsp:
ISIS has killed more people and invaded more countries in it's infant stages then the Nazi's did in their infant stage.
We have the ability to use hindsight when it comes to the Nazis. They did eventually kill millions and invade numerous countries but that came years after they were established.
i'm sure we could say that about a few groups. and i'm not saying the US shouldn't try to kill them. or other countries in the area shouldn't. i said they should. i'm just not sure how the "killing them" strategy is a winning strategy in the war on terror in and of itself.
The United States currently has pathetic leadership. The Left gets wackier by the day. I just read that 71% of young adults who visit a recruiter are not qualified to join the US military because of obesity, tattoos, prescription drugs. They will have to start recruiting Viet Nam vets.
0
The United States currently has pathetic leadership. The Left gets wackier by the day. I just read that 71% of young adults who visit a recruiter are not qualified to join the US military because of obesity, tattoos, prescription drugs. They will have to start recruiting Viet Nam vets.
The United States currently has pathetic leadership. The Left gets wackier by the day. I just read that 71% of young adults who visit a recruiter are not qualified to join the US military because of obesity, tattoos, prescription drugs. They will have to start recruiting Viet Nam vets.
Is there anymore doubt, that the left has a lunatic base ?
0
Quote Originally Posted by sundance:
The United States currently has pathetic leadership. The Left gets wackier by the day. I just read that 71% of young adults who visit a recruiter are not qualified to join the US military because of obesity, tattoos, prescription drugs. They will have to start recruiting Viet Nam vets.
Is there anymore doubt, that the left has a lunatic base ?
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.