US military commander in Iraq and Syria rejects GOP pledges to 'carpet-bomb' Isis

[McC]

(02-03-2016, 03:25 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: How is predicting the future reality?  And it does matter if you support it or not.  If you don't support it, you should clearly state as such when asked.  If you do support it, tell me why.  If you're afraid to comment, blink twice.


They can say whatever the **** they want to say.  That doesn't mean the have the necessary means to take the war to our soil.  How do they kill the same number of americans without us over there?  You have not answered that question.  You just say 'cuz they said so'.  WTF?  So you hate these people, think they are sub human, but believe their empty threats?    



why?  to protect isreal?  

First of all, we're not talking armies here.  There's no invasion.  It's killing fifty here, a hundred there.  All civilians, all non-combatants.  I'm not okay with that. 

I get it.  You have some hard on against Israel.  So be it.   That's just something you'll have to live with.  Give me Israel over Jihadists any day of the week.

If you don't think we need to keep a close eye on Iran for our own sake, that's just more of you being naive.

I never said I consider anyone sub human.  The fact that they've accomplished next to nothing in thousands of years doesn't make them less human.  It just makes them less accomplished. 

And only a fool would not take their threats seriously.  Even though their attacks are small potatoes, militarily speaking, it doesn't mean they aren't aiming higher.  They are out there chasing nukes and dirty bombs and anything they can get their hands on to inflict pain on us.

How can they get here?  They're already here.

You need to stop thinking of what should be and stat realizing what is.  Leaving the Middle East is not appeasing the enemy, it's just further enabling them.

[*bfine32*]

(02-03-2016, 10:52 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Because you are ignorant of the facts.

Outside of the south Democrats actually supported the Civil Rights Act more than Republicans.


Also, I know I making good points when someone tries to hijack the thread and run away from the argument.

So this thread was about MLK?

But you do make a great point. The Democrats were for Civil rights except for the ones that were against it. Hard to argue that great point

[Vas Deferens]

(02-03-2016, 03:49 PM)McC Wrote: First of all, we're not talking armies here.  There's no invasion.  It's killing fifty here, a hundred there.  All civilians, all non-combatants.  I'm not okay with that. 

Are we talking about killing 50 / 100 american civilians here and there?  On american soil?  What is keeping them from doing that today?  Wouldnt we be safer if we had our troops here to protect us from these threats that are apparently already present?

Quote:I get it.  You have some hard on against Israel.  So be it.   That's just something you'll have to live with.  Give me Israel over Jihadists any day of the week.

How is this a one or the other choice?  Currently we're supporting Isreal and it isn't helping the situation at all.  I'm not going to be quietly complicit as MY TAX DOLLARS go to contribute to a religiously motivated genocide.  You may be ok with illegitimate occupation and spraying of palestinian crops to control food supply, but I am not.

Quote:If you don't think we need to keep a close eye on Iran for our own sake, that's just more of you being naive.

I never said I consider anyone sub human.  The fact that they've accomplished next to nothing in thousands of years doesn't make them less human.  It just makes them less accomplished.  

If you did not say that, I apologize, that was unfair.

We can still keep an eye on Iran without the current military presence we have in the middle east.  And they were once a much more westernized state before our intervention.  To say they've accomplished nothing is a bit extreme.  If they haven't accomplished anything, why are we so afraid of them?
  

Quote:And only a fool would not take their threats seriously.  Even though their attacks are small potatoes, militarily speaking, it doesn't mean they aren't aiming higher.  They are out there chasing nukes and dirty bombs and anything they can get their hands on to inflict pain on us.

How can they get here?  They're already here.

You need to stop thinking of what should be and stat realizing what is.  Leaving the Middle East is not appeasing the enemy, it's just further enabling them.

If they are already here, what have our actions over there thus far accomplished?  It seems to me that we're only creating greater support for jihad / isis / AQ / general extremism by bombing the shit out of these people.  That's not an attempt at 'appeasing' the enemy, its a way to save american lives and reinvest in the betterment of our country rather than the destruction of another.  

I understand the reality.  The reality is the military industrial complex has made a lot of money in these endeavors and our soldiers and the US economy have been dealt the real blow.

[McC]

(02-03-2016, 05:00 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: Are we talking about killing 50 / 100 american civilians here and there?  On american soil?  What is keeping them from doing that today?  Wouldnt we be safer if we had our troops here to protect us from these threats that are apparently already present?


How is this a one or the other choice?  Currently we're supporting Isreal and it isn't helping the situation at all.  I'm not going to be quietly complicit as MY TAX DOLLARS go to contribute to a religiously motivated genocide.  You may be ok with illegitimate occupation and spraying of palestinian crops to control food supply, but I am not.



If you did not say that, I apologize, that was unfair.

We can still keep an eye on Iran without the current military presence we have in the middle east.  And they were once a much more westernized state before our intervention.  To say they've accomplished nothing is a bit extreme.  If they haven't accomplished anything, why are we so afraid of them?
  


If they are already here, what have our actions over there thus far accomplished?  It seems to me that we're only creating greater support for jihad / isis / AQ / general extremism by bombing the shit out of these people.  That's not an attempt at 'appeasing' the enemy, its a way to save american lives and reinvest in the betterment of our country rather than the destruction of another.  

I understand the reality.  The reality is the military industrial complex has made a lot of money in these endeavors and our soldiers and the US economy have been dealt the real blow.

You don't even recognize the everything we do is bad tone to everything you say, do you?

One thing I wonder is while we're chasing the leaders and the trainers and recruiters, are we chasing the money too?

And that's all I have to say on the matter.  Good luck.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(02-03-2016, 01:57 PM)McC Wrote: Yes I do.  It's an industry now.  And we're NEVER abandoning Israel, so stop with that, please.  If Obama wouldn't do it, no one ever will.  I get a kick out of the "all we have to do is leave" philosophy.  That is just not real world thinking at all.

And I also don't remember any Zionists killing American civilians.    

No one has suggested "all we have to do is leave" philosophy and all the terrorism will just stop.  No wonder you get a kick out of it; it is a figment of your imagination.  But, it will reduce the number of military service members dying and will reduce the tit-for-tat justifications for terror attacks.  Not to mention it will save billions of tax payer dollars increasing an ever growing debt.

I find it funny you told me American imperialism is a damn lie and Americans don't endorse it, but here you are endorsing American imperialism.  Additionally, you stated Americans don't want to send our sons and daughters overseas, but you are endorsing that as well.

Quote:Guess I just can't comprehend the notion of Americans sticking up for Muslim extremists.  Just can't get my mind around that at all.  They want you and yours dead too, you know.

The reason you can't comprehend that notion is because on one here has defended Muslim extremists; it is another figment of your imagination.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(02-03-2016, 03:14 PM)McC Wrote: It doesn't matter if i support it or not.  You're talking ideals, I'm talking reality.  And the reality is we will never stop supporting Israel.  So, forget about that notion.

Have the extremists said if you leave, it will stop.  No, they've declared that it will never stop.  Thinking all we have to do is leave is beyond naive.

Now, if you have a sworn enemy, which is the better way to hunt them down?  From across the desert or from across an ocean and halfway around the world. 

Also, don't you thing we need to be near Iran and those crazy bastards?


 

More calls for imperialism and military deployments of American sons and daughters.  You are on a roll!

[Vas Deferens]

(02-03-2016, 06:21 PM)McC Wrote: You don't even recognize the everything we do is bad tone to everything you say, do you?

What kind of rose colored glasses are you wearing?  Do I appreciate the individual effort put forth by our troops?  Absolutely.  Do I believe there have been small positive advances in public utilities through the corps of engineers for a sub set of the population.  Sure.  ....  Bottom line though is we're over there on false pretenses, we're now stuck in an endless religious war.  Remember when this things was going to cost us $200 Billion?  You think we've gotten our $4.4 TRILLION out of it?

Quote:Watson Institute - Costs Of War

The United States federal government has spent or obligated 4.4 trillion dollars on the wars in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq. This figure includes: direct Congressional war appropriations; war-related increases to the Pentagon base budget; veterans care and disability; increases in the homeland security budget; interest payments on direct war borrowing; foreign assistance spending; and estimated future obligations for veterans’ care.

This total omits many other expenses, such as the macroeconomic costs to the US economy; the opportunity costs of not investing war dollars in alternative sectors; future interest on war borrowing; and local government and private war costs.
The current wars have been paid for almost entirely by borrowing. This borrowing has raised the US budget deficit, increased the national debt, and had other macroeconomic effects, such as raising consumer interest rates. Unless the US immediately repays the money borrowed for war, there will also be future interest payments. We estimate that interest payments could total over $7 trillion by 2053.
Spending on the wars has involved opportunity costs for the US economy. Although military spending does produce jobs, spending in other areas such as health care could produce more jobs. Additionally, while investment in military infrastructure grew, investment in other, nonmilitary, public infrastructure such as roads and schools did not grow at the same rate. 
Finally, federal war costs exclude billions of dollars of state, municipal, and private war costs across the country – dollars spent on services for returned veterans and their families, in addition to local homeland security efforts.

Quote:One thing I wonder is while we're chasing the leaders and the trainers and recruiters, are we chasing the money too?

Oddly enough, I did like the recent bombings of ISIS cash depositories.  Although a short lived strategy, I do like giant FU in those guys pocket books when we can get it.  Then again, doesn't seem like that strategy could be handled from a carrier in the persian gulf...

Quote:And that's all I have to say on the matter.  Good luck.

And peace be with you.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(02-03-2016, 03:49 PM)McC Wrote: First of all, we're not talking armies here.  There's no invasion.  It's killing fifty here, a hundred there.  All civilians, all non-combatants.  I'm not okay with that. 

I get it.  You have some hard on against Israel.  So be it.   That's just something you'll have to live with.  Give me Israel over Jihadists any day of the week.

Siding with Israel is one of the reasons why the Jihadists attack us.  You yourself wrote you can't win a war against terrorism, but you disagree with every proposed change to a failing strategy while you promote continuing the failed strategy.

Quote:If you don't think we need to keep a close eye on Iran for our own sake, that's just more of you being naïve.

Again you're promoting imperialism after you told me it is a damn lie and the American people don't promote it, but you have repeatedly.
 

Quote:And only a fool would not take their threats seriously.

Then why are you taking their threats seriously?

Quote:How can they get here?  They're already here.

Do terror attacks occur at the same rate as they do in the Middle East?  No. Because what some people want you to believe our borders aren't completely open and getting here and plotting an attack does present a problem.  (That doesn't mean I think it is impossible or attacks will just stop.)

Quote: You need to stop thinking of what should be and stat realizing what is.  Leaving the Middle East is not appeasing the enemy, it's just further enabling them.

We created the damn ISIS problem in Iraq when we invaded in 2003.  Foreign nationals and Al Qaeda moved into Iraq and joined the insurgency.  They have been gaining real world experience to improve their tactics for over a decade.  We are making the problem worse just by being there.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(02-03-2016, 06:21 PM)McC Wrote: You don't even recognize the everything we do is bad tone to everything you say, do you?

One thing I wonder is while we're chasing the leaders and the trainers and recruiters, are we chasing the money too?

And that's all I have to say on the matter.  Good luck.

Really?  Are we chasing the money, too?  Do you really believe we may not be chasing the money?

The answer to you question is in the first post on the first page of this thread . . .

Quote:MacFarlane rejected criticism that recent attacks on Mosul facilities where Isis keeps its cash risked targeting civilians.

“Is an enemy banker a combatant or not? Just because he doesn’t have an AK[-47] leaned up against a teller window, he’s still a bad guy, right?” MacFarland said, stating that the US airstrikes occur during times the US assesses will minimize loss of life.

FFS

[fredtoast]

(02-03-2016, 04:52 PM)bfine32 Wrote: But you do make a great point. The Democrats were for Civil rights except for the ones that were against it. Hard to argue that great point

This is getting silly.  Why is it that you NEVER mention the Republicans that opposed the Civil Rights Act?

[fredtoast]

(02-03-2016, 03:49 PM)McC Wrote: First of all, we're not talking armies here.  There's no invasion.  It's killing fifty here, a hundred there.  All civilians, all non-combatants.  I'm not okay with that. 

And if we killed every single member of ISIS that threat would still exist.  

This is the point you are not getting.  We can take steps to protect ourself from attacks here in the United States without killing hundreds of thousands of extremists in the middle east.  In fact the more we kill in the middle east the more propaganda we provide to turn more Muslims against us.
No one is okay with terror attacks on US soil, but the best way to reduce that threat is to stop killing more Muslims in the middle east.

[fredtoast]

(02-03-2016, 08:24 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Siding with Israel is one of the reasons why the Jihadists attack us.  You yourself wrote you can't win a war against terrorism, but you disagree with every proposed change to a failing strategy while you promote continuing the failed strategy.

Rep.

[fredtoast]

McC, if somone in congress proposed that we abandon our support for Israel would you agree with that proposal.

Not asking if it will happen (I don't claim to be omniscient about the future like you) just asking if you would support the proposal.