Paris under attack

[GodHatesBengals]

(11-15-2015, 04:31 PM)Arturo Bandini Wrote: It appears that the attacks have been planned in Belgium. Maybe we'll have to invade Belgium or get rid of all those belgian migrants that we have ...

Just sayin'

Lol.

I want to preemptively apologize for all of the right wingers in America who are now going to appoint themselves as an authority on what your country should do in response to this tragedy. We aren't all that way, I promise. And hopefully your fellow countrymen keep in mind that they're the same dolts who created this problem with their brilliant plan to export "democracy" to Iraq, so their recommendations should be taken with one huge grain of salt.

[*bfine32*]

(11-15-2015, 04:06 PM)GodHatesBengals Wrote: Had to laugh at you "never misrepresenting what someone said", considering you've been caught misrepresenting your own words as someone else's.

Was that the faulty assumption that got you banned?

You're right; it is laughable. 

[GodHatesBengals]

(11-15-2015, 04:42 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Was that the faulty assumption that got you banned?

No, but you doing it got your alt banned.

[*bfine32*]

(11-15-2015, 04:31 PM)Arturo Bandini Wrote: It appears that the attacks have been planned in Belgium. Maybe we'll have to invade Belgium or get rid of all those belgian migrants that we have ...

Just sayin'

Probably not necessary as it looks like Belgium is taking action on their own:

-- In Belgium, police arrested a number of people in raids Saturday in a Brussels suburb, Justice Ministry spokeswoman Sieghild Lacoere said. A car rented in Brussels was found near one of the sites of the Paris attacks, which prompted the raids, Lacoere said.


http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/13/europe/paris-attacks-at-a-glance/

[*bfine32*]

(11-15-2015, 04:48 PM)GodHatesBengals Wrote: No, but you doing it got your alt banned.

This has been discussed with a moderator and I accepted their answer.

It does appear you are still obsessed with it. Careful you don't get banned again conducting your "research".

WTS, I'm out of the gutter. 

[SunsetBengal]

(11-15-2015, 03:00 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Did we invade the US after 911?

WTS, if France asks for our assistance; I'd be down for a little trip. 

Well, sort of.  DHS was set up, TSA, etc.  Maybe not invade with troops in uniform, but most definitely a whole host of agencies keeping their eye out specifically to prevent terrorist acts in the US.

[*bfine32*]

(11-15-2015, 04:53 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Well, sort of.  DHS was set up, TSA, etc.  Maybe not invade with troops in uniform, but most definitely a whole host of agencies keeping their eye out specifically to prevent terrorist acts in the US.

Yes, we increased our vigilance stateside

[GodHatesBengals]

(11-15-2015, 04:52 PM)bfine32 Wrote: This has been discussed with a moderator and I accepted their answer.

It does appear you are still obsessed with it. Careful you don't get banned again conducting your "research".

WTS, I'm out of the gutter. 

LOL.

"I'll go tell on you for mentioning publicly available information!"

I'm gonna send you a PM so we don't derail the thread, but suffice it to say, your complaints about getting caught trolling had nothing whatsoever to do with my temporary suspension.

[SunsetBengal]

(11-15-2015, 03:55 PM)GodHatesBengals Wrote: I don't know who said that, but it wasn't me. I just said that a certain moronic presidential candidate should not be promoting more civilian deaths in response to the civilian deaths in Paris.

Even the wisest of shepherds know that sometimes a few sheep must be sacrificed, for the benefit of the herd.

[GodHatesBengals]

(11-15-2015, 04:57 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Even the wisest of shepherds know that sometimes a few sheep must be sacrificed, for the benefit of the herd.

Drop the allegories and outdated sayings. We're talking about human beings, not sheep. Real, living, innocent human beings, every bit as human as you and your family. Why on earth would a mentally stable person agree that we need more tolerance for killing them rather than do all we can to avoid it?

[*bfine32*]

(11-15-2015, 05:23 PM)GodHatesBengals Wrote: Drop the allegories and outdated sayings. We're talking about human beings, not sheep. Real, living, innocent human beings, every bit as human as you and your family. Why on earth would a mentally stable person agree that we need more tolerance for killing them rather than do all we can to avoid it?

Assuming you have never been deployed if you don't think we already do all we can to avoid the loss of innocent life. Unfortunately collateral damage has been around for as long as there as been conflict.

Perhaps those using such outdated sayings understand the killing of innocents will not stop simply by us and others just sitting on their hands.    

[GodHatesBengals]

(11-15-2015, 06:07 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Assuming you have never been deployed if you don't think we already do all we can to avoid the loss of innocent life. Unfortunately collateral damage has been around for as long as there as been conflict.

Perhaps those using such outdated sayings understand the killing of innocents will not stop simply by us and others just sitting on their hands.    

Good thing nobody here has recommended sitting on hands as far as I can see 

Again, we're discussing Cruz's comment. That zero tolerance for civilian casualties you're alleging we have? Yeah, he's against that. Do you agree or not?

[*bfine32*]

(11-15-2015, 06:13 PM)GodHatesBengals Wrote: Good thing nobody here has recommended sitting on hands as far as I can see 

Again, we're discussing Cruz's comment. That zero tolerance for civilian casualties you're alleging we have? Yeah, he's against that. Do you agree or not?

I agree that collateral damage is a result of war. Unfortunately, it is sometimes necessary especially when terrorists use human shields. War is not pretty.  Most  likely Ted Cruz recognizes this and just tried to open a few eyes. 

[SunsetBengal]

(11-15-2015, 05:23 PM)GodHatesBengals Wrote: Drop the allegories and outdated sayings. We're talking about human beings, not sheep. Real, living, innocent human beings, every bit as human as you and your family. Why on earth would a mentally stable person agree that we need more tolerance for killing them rather than do all we can to avoid it?

Because the Islamic people have the power to stop it, from within.  These groups are killing in the name of Islam, not of their own motivation.  True, we have killers in the US that happen to be part of whatever religion.  However, we do not have killers that are killing in the name of Christianity.  I've yet to hear of any group that kills, and names itself after Christianity, here in the US. 

The peaceful Muslims are fully aware of who does these atrocities, they need to act from within themselves, create some differential between Muslim and Radical Muslim. 

[GodHatesBengals]

(11-15-2015, 06:19 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I agree that collateral damage is a result of war. Unfortunately, it is sometimes necessary especially when terrorists use human shields. War is not pretty.  Most  likely Ted Cruz recognizes this and just tried to open a few eyes. 

That isn't what he said, though. You're offering your own loose interpretation of his words and saying you agree with that. I'm taking what he said at face value--he is a presidential candidate, not a blowhard on talk radio. Somebody who publicly endorses more tolerance for civilian casualties is not fit to run the country, and frankly, even as a candidate, he's making us look bad.

[Arturo Bandini]

(11-15-2015, 04:50 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Probably not necessary as it looks like Belgium is taking action on their own:

-- In Belgium, police arrested a number of people in raids Saturday in a Brussels suburb, Justice Ministry spokeswoman Sieghild Lacoere said. A car rented in Brussels was found near one of the sites of the Paris attacks, which prompted the raids, Lacoere said.


http://www.cnn.com/2015/11/13/europe/paris-attacks-at-a-glance/

I was joking.

[*bfine32*]

(11-15-2015, 06:44 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Because the Islamic people have the power to stop it, from within.  These groups are killing in the name of Islam, not of their own motivation.  True, we have killers in the US that happen to be part of whatever religion.  However, we do not have killers that are killing in the name of Christianity.  I've yet to hear of any group that kills, and names itself after Christianity, here in the US. 

The peaceful Muslims are fully aware of who does these atrocities, they need to act from within themselves, create some differential between Muslim and Radical Muslim. 

Well at least some that many consider Radical are speaking out against it:

http://news.yahoo.com/hezbollah-chief-lebanon-denounces-paris-attacks-184742949.html

Quote:"We, Hezbollah, express our strong condemnation and denunciation of the terrorist attack by the criminals of Daesh in Paris," he said in a televised address, using the Arabic acronym for the jihadist group.
Expressing his solidarity with the French people, he said the Middle East was also suffering "the earthquake" of jihadist groups.

[GodHatesBengals]

(11-15-2015, 06:44 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Because the Islamic people have the power to stop it, from within.  These groups are killing in the name of Islam, not of their own motivation.  True, we have killers in the US that happen to be part of whatever religion.  However, we do not have killers that are killing in the name of Christianity.  I've yet to hear of any group that kills, and names itself after Christianity, here in the US. 

The peaceful Muslims are fully aware of who does these atrocities, they need to act from within themselves, create some differential between Muslim and Radical Muslim. 

First off you're wrong about no Christians killing in the name of Christianity, but I'll ignore that digression and simply say that I agree that the people of the Islamic world are ultimately the ones who must act and take their society from the grip of the fundamentalists.

The problem is I'm not sure how you make them do that. Are you?

[*bfine32*]

(11-15-2015, 06:44 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Because the Islamic people have the power to stop it, from within.  These groups are killing in the name of Islam, not of their own motivation.  True, we have killers in the US that happen to be part of whatever religion.  However, we do not have killers that are killing in the name of Christianity.  I've yet to hear of any group that kills, and names itself after Christianity, here in the US. 

The peaceful Muslims are fully aware of who does these atrocities, they need to act from within themselves, create some differential between Muslim and Radical Muslim. 

Well at least some that many consider Radical are speaking out against it:

http://news.yahoo.com/hezbollah-chief-lebanon-denounces-paris-attacks-184742949.html

Quote:"We, Hezbollah, express our strong condemnation and denunciation of the terrorist attack by the criminals of Daesh in Paris," he said in a televised address, using the Arabic acronym for the jihadist group.
Expressing his solidarity with the French people, he said the Middle East was also suffering "the earthquake" of jihadist groups.

[GodHatesBengals]

(11-15-2015, 06:52 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Well at least some that many consider Radical are speaking out against it:

http://news.yahoo.com/hezbollah-chief-lebanon-denounces-paris-attacks-184742949.html

They aren't the only ones. Even the brutish, misogynistic Saudi religious leadership has been condemning ISIS for a while now.

ISIS is no joke. They are the worst of the worst. To make matters worse, their ascendancy was predictable--and preventable.