lol ru kidding me

[nyclin]

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You don't see anything wrong with suggesting a people is only capable of terrorism?

conventional war isn't a viable option. diplomacy appears to be off the table. what other options are there? if you're an extremist faction looking to retaliate against the US, what options do you have?

when the most powerful military force in the world starts shitting on your country, there isn't much you can do except resort to guerrilla tactics

[maskedmelon]

Originally Posted by nyclin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

when the most powerful military force in the world starts shitting on your country, there isn't much you can do except resort to guerrilla tactics

Ok so we are back to extending the expectation of violent response to everyone. If nobody can be faulted for violent retaliation, then why fault the US government for a more robust response?

Originally Posted by nyclin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

diplomacy appears to be off the table.

Why is that?

[iruinedyourday]

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Why is that?

Because when we said we wanted to subjugate and control every element of their country in exchange for all of their natural resources, they said no.

[Pokesan]

we must defeat the irish menace

[Pokesan]

MM are you saying islamists should wage conventional war against the West?

[Lune]

Originally Posted by nyclin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

conventional war isn't a viable option. diplomacy appears to be off the table. what other options are there? if you're an extremist faction looking to retaliate against the US, what options do you have?

when the most powerful military force in the world starts shitting on your country, there isn't much you can do except resort to guerrilla tactics

What options do we have to fight ISIS? If we sent troops, they would simply put away their flags and their Toyota pickups and blend in with civilians and plant IED's. Then come out again once we were gone.

Conventional war isn't a viable option, diplomacy appears to be off the table. What other options are there? We might as well go to countries that harbor terrorists, round them up, and slaughter them, right?

Do you see how toxic this reasoning is? There is no excuse for terrorism or for warcrimes. When we beat the shit out of Japan and totally occupied their country and rewrote their Constitution, did they start blowing up American civilians? No, they accepted the reality of their position, and got to work building themselves a better life.

Human history is a litany of peoples being defeated and abused, but rebuilding and ultimately being okay. This was rarely if ever the result of terrorism. Even the American revolution and American Civil War were largely conventional conflicts against vastly superior, arguably oppressive powers with minimal guerrilla activity and very little killing of civilians.

The only way these people are going to be okay in the long run is by building a better life for themselves, not by killing American abusers.

[iruinedyourday]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

What options do we have to fight ISIS?

we dont.

we stop.

we let muslims in the region fight htem.

if they loose we care as much about what happens after as we did in Iran.

we stop pretending we are humanists, trying to help them from suffering when the truth is we are spending money to make money on war.

We fight the war at home, the war on poverty. Not people.

[apio]

The only way these people are going to be okay in the long run is by building a better life for themselves, not by killing American abusers.

Not an easy feat when your country lies in ruins and half the civil population has been wiped out as "collateral damage"

Let the middle east take care of their own problems. By making them our problems we have turned our people into targets

[Lune]

Originally Posted by iruinedyourday [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

we dont.

we stop.

we let muslims in the region fight htem.

if they loose we care as much about what happens after as we did in Iran.

we stop pretending we are humanists, trying to help them from suffering when the truth is we are spending money to make money on war.

We fight the war at home, the war on poverty. Not people.

Rhetorical question

Originally Posted by apio [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Not an easy feat when your country lies in ruins and half the civil population has been wiped out as "collateral damage"

Post-war American South, Germany, Russia, Eastern Byzantine empire etc etc etc all managed just fine rebuilding from the ravages of war and brutal invasion.

Originally Posted by apio [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Let the middle east take care of their own problems.

Yes

Originally Posted by apio [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

By making them our problems we have turned our people into targets

No. If you argue people should resort to murder and warcrimes when they feel no other alternative exists, you also argue for American genocide in countries harboring terrorists.

[apio]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Post-war American South, Germany, Russia, Eastern Byzantine empire etc etc etc all managed just fine rebuilding from the ravages of war and brutal invasion.

No. If you argue people should resort to murder and warcrimes when they feel no other alternative exists, you also argue for American genocide in countries harboring terrorists.

The only reason why the rebuilding of Europe was so successful is because of the money the US provided Europe to rebuild. Which was only done to further US American interests in Europe, strategically and economically.

It is the single worst example, because all the western world has left behind in the war torn middle east is political instability and a body count that is not attainable by means of terrorism. There is no plan to stabilize the region because US American interests are already met, resources are already under control. Bases to expand the invasion of the middle east are built and the countries themselves are no better off than they were before the western world "intervened".