# News & Current Events > World News & Affairs >  Should ISIS be an exception to nonintervention?

## Feeding the Abscess

> Depressing that even people on Ron Paul's page are saying, "Ron, you're great and everything, but 'we' need to intervene now."






Interview with Dan McAdams of RPI.

----------


## CaptUSA

In a free country, there would be nothing stopping someone if they wanted to intervene.  They just couldn't force the rest of the country to do it for them.

----------


## thoughtomator

Unless we're under direct attack, the only acceptable form of "intervention" is to open up the arms bazaar and let peoples defend themselves.

----------


## DamianTV

If we hadnt intervened to begin with 60 years ago, then 50 years ago, then 45 years ago, then 30 years ago, then 20 years ago, then 10 years ago, there would be NO need for us to intervene now.  By constantly intervening, funding their enemies when they wear different labels, undermining their currency, destroying their infrastructure, there would be no need for intervention.

The thing is, Stability is NOT the goal.  In fact, it is the exact opposite.  The US needs a threat in order to monger fear at home, and ISIS / ISIL is able to foot the bill once Iraq is unstable enough for long enough.  By maintaining a lack of stability in the entire Middle East, the US makes many countries, not just Iraq, completely dependant, and thus, controllable.  The control is used to manufacture terrorism at every turn.  The same way as Cops here killing innocents creates the need for even more Cops.  It validates the Govts excuse for endless wars by providing a constant supply of infinte undefeatable enemies because it always manufactures new enemies through its intervention.   That dependancy Iraq has on us is taken advantage of to maintain their instability.  It is no different than the numerous problems that a Welfare state causes at home.  

This is the Welfare / Warfare Tactic in action.

----------


## Lucille

The ME Christians have been being persecuted since Bush launched his Islamic-Theocracy building wars, and suddenly conservatives care?  What's so special about these particular Christians?  They're in Iraq.  It just sickens me how they're being used as an excuse to re-start that dumbass war which they refuse to call a huge mistake.




> However, Iraqi officials said that much of the US aid had been useless because it was dropped from 15,000ft without parachutes and exploded on impact.


SMH.

----------


## HOLLYWOOD

Mossad and CIA created, trained, and had their proxy tyrants, Turkey, Qatar, House of Saud, U.A.E. and Kuwait arm the terrorist groups. Accessory to murder, is still results in murder.


Nothing will ever change, when some elite person/group, some government(s) want to gain, profit, and control. It always happens at the expense of the taxpayers and innocent life.

BTW, listen to this Devious Devil of Deception... listen to every word, every emphasis, every dramatic line, and listen to what sociopathic multimillionaire 'Judge' Jeanine Pirro of US corporate media (FOX/NEWSCORP) inflicts on the unsuspecting viewers. Well scripted, well planned, and most importantly well timed, to prep the clueless viewers for the operations to commence. *(Jun 21, 2014*)

Joseph Goebbels would be absolutely delighted on how US media controls and desensatizes the public opinion to war, killing, and the inheritance of debt, insecurity, tyranny.

----------


## 69360

I have a slightly different perspective. I think it would have been best to just leave ISIS alone and maybe arm the Kurds at most.  But now since Obama poked at them with his bombs and got ISIS all pissed off at the US, I think we may have to wipe ISIS out before blowback happens.

----------


## kcchiefs6465

This place has really gone to hell.

----------


## Koz

> In a free country, there would be nothing stopping someone if they wanted to intervene.  They just couldn't force the rest of the country to do it for them.


I completely agree, raise money, hire mercenaries, buy arms. Nothing is stopping anyone from intervening. I don't understand why people expect the government to steal my money to hire soldiers and buy arms to do the same thing. Who wants to pony up the first dollar?

----------


## HOLLYWOOD

> If we hadnt intervened to begin with 60 years ago, then 50 years ago, then 45 years ago, then 30 years ago, then 20 years ago, then 10 years ago, there would be NO need for us to intervene now.  By constantly intervening, funding their enemies when they wear different labels, undermining their currency, destroying their infrastructure, there would be no need for intervention.
> 
> The thing is, Stability is NOT the goal.  In fact, it is the exact opposite.  The US needs a threat in order to monger fear at home, and ISIS / ISIL is able to foot the bill once Iraq is unstable enough for long enough.  By maintaining a lack of stability in the entire Middle East, the US makes many countries, not just Iraq, completely dependant, and thus, controllable.  The control is used to manufacture terrorism at every turn.  The same way as Cops here killing innocents creates the need for even more Cops.  It validates the Govts excuse for endless wars by providing a constant supply of infinite undefeatable enemies because it always manufactures new enemies through its intervention.   That dependency Iraq has on us is taken advantage of to maintain their instability.  It is no different than the numerous problems that a Welfare state causes at home.  
> 
> This is the Welfare / Warfare Tactic in action.


^^^^YEP... who stands to profit/gain? Keep the money flowing to those who already run the racket.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> Interview with Dan McAdams of RPI.


It was all pretty good until near the end when McAdams seemed to be against arms going to the Kurds. Don't the Kurds have the right to arm and defend themselves? Should the US continue to oppose the Kurds selling their own oil to raise money? Isn't opposing arms for the Kurds and preventing them from selling oil also "interventionism"?

----------


## vita3

If we didn't create it, I think a killing monster like "ISIS" would be reason for discusssin for military intervention. if legit foreign GOV asked us to help & $$ paid

----------


## bolil

> I have a slightly different perspective. I think it would have been best to just leave ISIS alone and maybe arm the Kurds at most.  But now since Obama poked at them with his bombs and got ISIS all pissed off at the US, I think we may have to wipe ISIS out before blowback happens.


You don't really understand the concept, do you?

There are regional powers that can handle ISIS (Iran, anyone?)  Maybe they would be more willing to if they were not in fear of the US and Israel $#@!ing em up if they take such a risk and weaken themselves.  You all are forgetting that it isn't your business, and if you feel like it is go get em tigers, don't send other people to do it for you.

Yeah, lets get reinvolved in Iraq because we did such a bang up $#@!ing job the first time.  Isis is killing less people than the US did, that is for goddamn sure.  So don't forget that little fact either.

----------


## 69360

> You don't really understand the concept, do you?
> 
> There are regional powers that can handle ISIS (Iran, anyone?)  Maybe they would be more willing to if they were not in fear of the US and Israel $#@!ing em up if they take such a risk and weaken themselves.  You all are forgetting that it isn't your business, and if you feel like it is go get em tigers, don't send other people to do it for you.
> 
> Yeah, lets get reinvolved in Iraq because we did such a bang up $#@!ing job the first time.  Isis is killing less people than the US did, that is for goddamn sure.  So don't forget that little fact either.


I'm actually totally fine with Iran taking out ISIS.

Obama made it my business. I don't like that, but it's the reality of the situation. ISIS is now wanting to fly their flag over the white house.

----------


## bolil

> I'm actually totally fine with Iran taking out ISIS.
> 
> Obama made it my business. I don't like that, but it's the reality of the situation. ISIS is now wanting to fly their flag over the white house.


Yeah, and unicorns are planning attacks on Gondor.  You honestly think that is a valid threat?  ISIS is going to invade the eastern seaboard?  Yeah?  They gonna commandeer some row boats?  Yeah, I know, "they might detonate a nuclear weapon."  

Blowback happens when the US gets involved.

If you want to stir it up with ISIS feel free.  Don't involve me or others that want no part.
I am going to fly my own flag over Beijing one day... I guess China should attack me.

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> I'm actually totally fine with Iran taking out ISIS.
> 
> Obama made it my business. I don't like that, but it's the reality of the situation. ISIS is now wanting to fly their flag over the white house.


My God, that is the dumbest thing I've read all week.

This is why we can't have nice things.

Go over there if you feel so strongly. We could start a RPF chip in for first class.

----------


## NIU Students for Liberty

> I'm actually totally fine with Iran taking out ISIS.
> 
> Obama made it my business. I don't like that, but it's the reality of the situation. ISIS is now wanting to fly their flag over the white house.


How is it your business?  Were you specifically targeted by ISIS?  $#@!, your post sounds like it's from 9/12/2001.

----------


## Feeding the Abscess

> It was all pretty good until near the end when McAdams seemed to be against arms going to the Kurds. Don't the Kurds have the right to arm and defend themselves? Should the US continue to oppose the Kurds selling their own oil to raise money? Isn't opposing arms for the Kurds and preventing them from selling oil also "interventionism"?

----------


## amy31416

> So if/when ISIS exacts their revenge upon the US because Obama bombed them, what do all of you think should happen?


Take the high ground for once in our history. Apologize for the massacres in the ME, for killing women and children, for looting and destruction and for all the puppet governments we've installed. And I'd get rid of any "security" company who allowed a terrorist through and work on having the best defensive systems the world ever had.

In tandem with those efforts, I'd work on educating warmongering nitwits.

I'm sure you'd find someone like me to be a giant weakling, although the opposite is true. Taking responsibility and fixing root problems is the more difficult path, but the only way to end this nonsense.

----------


## tod evans

> So if/when ISIS exacts their revenge upon the US because Obama bombed them, what do all of you think should happen?


Boogity-boogity....

----------


## Feeding the Abscess

> It was my understanding that private corporations are being prohibited from selling arms to the Kurds.
> 
> As an example, here's an article about Germany selling arms:


I'm seeing references to State transfer of weapons. Germany, France, etc aren't private entities. They're States.

----------


## NIU Students for Liberty

> I believe in non-intervention just like most of you.


No you don't.

----------


## NIU Students for Liberty

> So if/when ISIS exacts their revenge upon the US because Obama bombed them, what do all of you think should happen?


Hey everybody, apparently Sean Hannity is now a member of RPF!

----------


## 69360

> ISIS?
> 
> or some random brainless halfwit souped up by the FBI?
> 
> ISIS has no way to ship enough arms and equipment to the US to take over more than a beach house.
> 
> Not an Issue.


They have 2 billion dollars that they plundered from all the banks in the territory they captured. They can send anything anywhere they want. Nobody thinks they are going to take over anything in the US, more like they could mount a terror attack that makes 9/11 look like a playground fight.




> Take the high ground for once in our history. Apologize for the massacres in the ME, for killing women and children, for looting and destruction and for all the puppet governments we've installed. And I'd get rid of any "security" company who allowed a terrorist through and work on having the best defensive systems the world ever had.
> 
> In tandem with those efforts, I'd work on educating warmongering nitwits.
> 
> I'm sure you'd find someone like me to be a giant weakling, although the opposite is true. Taking responsibility and fixing root problems is the more difficult path, but the only way to end this nonsense.


Should we bake them cookies too? 

I'm all for non-intervention and fixing the root problems, but unfortunately Obama messed with the bad guys yet again. I wish he hadn't and we didn't get involved. But we are and being an apologist just might get a lot of Americans killed. Or maybe it won't, terrorist militias aren't exactly predictable.




> Boogity-boogity....


Yeah real intelligent. This is probably the most successful terror group ever, I think it's worth discussing.

----------


## tod evans

> Yeah real intelligent. This is probably the most successful terror group ever, I think it's worth discussing.


Okay wiseguy, who exactly are these boogy men terrorising?

----------


## 69360

> No you don't.


Why because I don't want to sit in a drum circle and sing kubuya? 

I don't think we should be involved in Iraq. I don't think the US should have intervened. 

But Obama did and now I think it's worth discussing the potential blowback and how to prevent it. Islamic radicals don't usually accept "sorry" and forget about being bombed.

----------


## 69360

> Okay wiseguy, who exactly are these boogy men terrorising?



Anyone who isn't a Sunni muslim.

----------


## pcosmar

> Yeah real intelligent. This is probably the most successful terror group ever, I think it's worth discussing.


Screw the bull$#@! propaganda..
They are Iraqis taking back their own damn country.

$#@! it,, let them have it.

----------


## tod evans

> Anyone who isn't a Sunni muslim.


I don't know one person over here that this supposed group of badasses is terrorising and I can assure you that I only know people who are not "Sunni muslim"..

Are you trying to assert that it is the job of our military to "protect" foreigners from terrorism?

----------


## Feeding the Abscess

> This is probably the most successful terror group ever, I think it's worth discussing.


The US government has been far more successful, by any measurement, than ISIS.

----------


## 69360

> Screw the bull$#@! propaganda..
> They are Iraqis taking back their own damn country.
> 
> $#@! it,, let them have it.


I really don't care if ISIS takes Iraq. I care that Obama has now provoked ISIS into attacking the US. 





> I don't know one person over here that this supposed group of badasses is terrorising and I can assure you that I only know people who are not "Sunni muslim"..
> 
> Are you trying to assert that it is the job of our military to "protect" foreigners from terrorism?


Now that Obama bombed them, they have started to threaten the US. That's what I care about, not protecting anyone in Iraq.

By intervening, Obama put Americans at risk, not the other way around.

----------


## tod evans

> I really don't care if ISIS takes Iraq. I care that Obama has now provoked ISIS into attacking the US.


Nobody has "attacked the US" that's the "Boogity-boogity" $#@! I called you on.





> Now that Obama bombed them, they have started to threaten the US. That's what I care about, not protecting anyone in Iraq.
> 
> By intervening, Obama put Americans at risk, not the other way around.


Big deal. 

They're pissed because they got bombed, you or I would be too but that doesn't mean they can do anything about it other than spout off.

It's up to normal folks to *force* the politicians to bring our soldiers home, instead it sounds like you'd encourage their behavior...

----------


## pcosmar

> I really don't care if ISIS takes Iraq. I care that Obama has now provoked ISIS into attacking the US. 
> 
> .


Waaaa,,wa, wa

I hear throwing yourself down,,flailing your arms and kicking your legs while holding your breath works wonders.
You should try it.

what a friggin' tantrum.

----------


## NIU Students for Liberty

> Why because I don't want to sit in a drum circle and sing kubuya?


I'd rather sit in a hippie drum circle than rob tax payers in order to fund death and destruction carried out by the U.S. military.  Since you are in favor of the latter, yes, you are an interventionist and are no better than Obama.

----------


## heavenlyboy34

> Oh and lets not forget a small matter of ITS $#@!ING UNCONSTITUTIONAL!
> 
> //Rant really over this time


Meh.  That hasn't stopped Them.  EVARR. /shrugs

----------


## heavenlyboy34

> I don't know one person over here that this supposed group of badasses is terrorising and I can assure you that I only know people who are not "Sunni muslim"..
> *
> Are you trying to assert that it is the job of our military to "protect" foreigners from terrorism?*


When teh world is yer welfare State...

----------


## 69360

> I'd rather sit in a hippie drum circle than rob tax payers in order to fund death and destruction carried out by the U.S. military.  Since you are in favor of the latter, yes, you are an interventionist and are no better than Obama.


You conveniently didn't quote the entire post. Guess it doesn't fit in with your accusations that well.

If I was president I wouldn't have bombed ISIS. But I'm not, Obama is and he did. Welcome to reality.

How do you propose to keep ISIS from attacking the US as they stated they wish to? Ask really nice?

----------


## orenbus



----------


## TER

In general I am against intervention., but there are times when I believe it is necessary like in this instance.  Would Ron Paul agree?  No.  But that is fine.  We don't agree on everything.  I am not a libertarian purist like he is.  It is good to know that his son however would agree that this is a situation where the US can actually do some good apart from all the bad misadventures it has done.  Perhaps make some kind of amends for the $#@! storm this nation has created in that region.   

Defending these innocents who are being hunted down by savages with no regard for human life is something I can live with.   It is the closest justified military action this government has done in the past 20 years as far as I am concerned.  

 I stand with Obama in this decision, but I am completely against how he is doing it. 

He should:

-go to Congress first for approval.  Without Congresses approval, no operation should be done.
-get allied nations to participate as a joint operation
-and finally, those who are sent over to combat should be given the liberty to abstain from this fight and only allow those men and women who wish to do this mission on a voluntary basis. ( I think of all the military operations done in recent years, this would be one which a great deal of soldiers would be willing to serve in. )

I know this puts me in the minority in this discussion forum, but I am used to that. I also acknowledge that I am being partial in this instance knowing that many of these innocents are Christians.  I accept that as well.  When it is family which is being murdered, it tends to create a different reaction.

 Of all the many thousands upon thousands of tax dollars I have given this failing and corrupt nation, stopping this cancer called ISIS is money I would not miss.

----------


## Crashland

> In general I am against intervention., but there are times when I believe it is necessary like in this instance.  Would Ron Paul agree?  No.  But that is fine.  We don't agree on everything.  I am not a libertarian purist like he is.  It is good to know that his son however would agree that this is a situation where the US can actually do some good apart from all the bad misadventures it has done.  Perhaps make some kind of amends for the $#@! storm this nation has created in that region.   
> 
> Defending these innocents who are being hunted down by savages with no regard for human life is something I can live with.   It is the closest justified military action this government has done in the past 20 years as far as I am concerned.  
> 
>  I stand with Obama in this decision, but I am completely against how he is doing it. 
> 
> He should:
> 
> -go to Congress first for approval.  Without Congresses approval, no operation should be done.
> ...


Getting allies on board is key. When the US acts alone then we have to bear the full cost AND the blowback gets directed fully at us while our "allies" get to sit back and relax.

----------


## NIU Students for Liberty

> You conveniently didn't quote the entire post. Guess it doesn't fit in with your accusations that well.
> 
> If I was president I wouldn't have bombed ISIS. But I'm not, Obama is and he did. Welcome to reality.
> 
> How do you propose to keep ISIS from attacking the US as they stated they wish to? Ask really nice?


What did I leave out?  The fact that you supposedly didn't support going into Iraq but now we have to drop more bombs to solve the crisis?  

If you truly don't want U.S. citizens to be in danger, you don't drop a $#@!ing bomb and give extremists more excuses to recruit and spread terrorist cells.

But in hindsight, I was mistaken.  You actually sound more like Mike Huckabee since both of you share this idiotic "you break it, you buy it" foreign policy:

----------


## NIU Students for Liberty

> Of all the many thousands upon thousands of tax dollars I have given this failing and corrupt nation, stopping this cancer called ISIS is money I would not miss.


Good, then you, 69360, John McCain, and Lindsey Graham can launch a Kickstarter for you guys to go over to Iraq and take out ISIS yourselves.  Leave the rest of us out of it.

----------


## TER

> You actually sound more like Mike Huckabee since both of you share this idiotic "you break it, you buy it" foreign policy:


This is not Mike Huckabee's policy, this is the policy of righteousness which you apparently have forgotten.  Taking responsibility for our actions is a virtue.  Strive for it.

----------


## TER

> Good, then you, 69360, John McCain, and Lindsey Graham can launch a Kickstarter for you guys to go over to Iraq and take out ISIS yourselves.  Leave the rest of us out of it.


Alas, I am too sick and too fraught with the responsibilities of fatherhood to go pick up a gun and go fight (except of course if it was happening in my own nation).  I am also a coward.  If I was a young single man who is a Christian, I would volunteer my time and energy towards defending the defenseless. The best I can do now is donate my money to aid in the humanitarian effort and pray for Rand Paul to become President.

----------


## NIU Students for Liberty

> This is not Mike Huckabee's policy, this is the policy of righteousness which you apparently have forgotten.  Taking responsibility for our actions is a virtue.  Strive for it.


"Our" actions?  I did not drop a bomb nor did you.

----------


## NIU Students for Liberty

> Alas, I am too sick and too fraught with the responsibilities of fatherhood to go pick up a gun and go fight (except of course if it was happening in my own nation).  I am also a coward.  If I was a young single man who is a Christian, I would volunteer my time and energy towards defending the defenseless. The best I can do now is donate my money to aid in the humanitarian effort and pray for Rand Paul to become President.


If you were really a Christian, you would not endorse getting involved in an unjust and immoral war, not to mention forcing other people's young sons and daughters to do your bidding.

----------


## heavenlyboy34

> This is not Mike Huckabee's policy, this is the policy of righteousness which you apparently have forgotten.  Taking responsibility for our actions is a virtue.  Strive for it.


The problem here is that it's not "our" actions that are the problem.  It's the action of a very small part of the population that causes these sort of messes.  Congress and interested individuals/groups are well within their right to get involved using their own resources, of course.

----------


## amy31416

> Should we bake them cookies too? 
> 
> I'm all for non-intervention and fixing the root problems, but unfortunately Obama messed with the bad guys yet again. I wish he hadn't and we didn't get involved. But we are and being an apologist just might get a lot of Americans killed. Or maybe it won't, terrorist militias aren't exactly predictable.


Maybe it wouldn't hurt to bake them some damn cookies instead of killing their people for a change. I like baking cookies and it's a lot cheaper in human costs than plundering, maiming and blasting them back to the stone age.

I have never heard of a terrorist group attacking others because of delicious cookies. Just something to think about.

I'm thinking peanut butter is the way to go, thanks for the idea. I'm sure it'd be illegal for me to send them any though.

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> This is not Mike Huckabee's policy, this is the policy of righteousness which you apparently have forgotten.  Taking responsibility for our actions is a virtue.  Strive for it.


It's not my actions that have done anything to Iraq.

----------


## amy31416

> Why because I don't want to sit in a drum circle and sing kubuya? 
> 
> I don't think we should be involved in Iraq. I don't think the US should have intervened. 
> 
> But Obama did and now I think it's worth discussing the potential blowback and how to prevent it. Islamic radicals don't usually accept "sorry" and forget about being bombed.


If they don't forget being bombed, perhaps they won't forget people who show them kindness and humanity. I'd have a hell of a hard time forgetting someone who bombed my family.

----------


## TER

> "Our" actions?  I did not drop a bomb nor did you.


No, the government we pay did.  Now we have to fix our mistakes and get a new government.

----------


## TER

> If you were really a Christian, you would not endorse getting involved in an unjust and immoral war, not to mention forcing other people's young sons and daughters to do your bidding.


We have different definitions of unjust and immoral war.  All war is bad, but not all war is unjust.  We have a difference of opinion.  You vote your conscience and I'll vote mine.

And I wouldn't force anyone to go to war there, as I made clear only volunteering armed service members would go.  So your argument is lacking.

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> No, the government we pay did.  Now we have to fix our mistakes and get a new government.


You realize that the same people who sold you the last war are selling you this one, right?

It's always humanitarian reasons. They have studied the art of propaganda for decades. They hire PR firms to manipulate the public. They leak false information to foreign news broadcasters that is recycled here.

How can you be so naive?

----------


## TER

> If they don't forget being bombed, perhaps they won't forget people who show them kindness and humanity. I'd have a hell of a hard time forgetting someone who bombed my family.


You are correct.  And my family is being bombed right now.  Can you help?

----------


## TER

> You realize that the same people who sold you the last war are selling you this one, right?
> 
> It's always humanitarian reasons. They have studied the art of propaganda for decades. They hire PR firms to manipulate the public. They leak false information to foreign news broadcasters that is recycled here.
> 
> How can you be so naive?


The ones who are really selling it are the ISIS barbarians. How can you be so naive?

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> We have different definitions of unjust and immoral war.  All war is bad, but not all war is unjust.  We have a difference of opinion.  You vote your conscience and I'll vote mine.
> 
> And I wouldn't force anyone to go to war there, as I made clear only volunteering armed service members would go.  So your argument is lacking.


Who is to pay these armed service members?

And what good is a vote if the public can be propagandized in a matter of moments? The majority of the public would vote for 'free' healthcare. They'd vote to keep God forbidden from school. They'd vote to limit your freedom. They'd vote to take your earnings. All well and good though, right? A majority, that cannot be named and bares no responsibility for the actions of their 'representatives' has voted. And this is even accepting your premise that your vote matters. Which it doesn't, to be clear. They'd bomb there regardless. All they need is to continually beat the populace with a disingenuous and often times fabricated narrative and the people will believe they have a choice.

----------


## amy31416

> You are correct.  And my family is being bombed right now.  Can you help?


Yes. They are welcome to come here. I am not willing to live with "collateral damage" to help them though.

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> The ones who are really selling it are the ISIS barbarians. How can you be so naive?


I'm curious. What have you read on the matter of foreign policy, the art of propaganda, and general philosophy regarding social contract theory?

----------


## TER

> Who is to pay these armed service members?
> 
> And what good is a vote if the public can be propagandized in a matter of moments? The majority of the public would vote for 'free' healthcare. They'd vote to keep God forbidden from school. They'd vote to limit your freedom. They'd vote to take your earnings. All well and good though, right? A majority, that cannot be named and bares no responsibility for the actions of their 'representatives' has voted. And this is even accepting your premise that your vote matters. Which it doesn't, to be clear. They'd bomb there regardless. All they need is to continually beat the populace with a disingenuous and often times fabricated narrative and the people will believe they have a choice.


What are you babbling about?  You paid for those weapons those barbarians are using to commit genocide.  You paid for the bombs dropped on Iraqi homes which killed children.  Now you object when you have to pay for the stopping of a holocaust your money helped finance?  I'll pay to stop the holocaust and then we can make some great strides in restoring the Constitution governance in this failing and corrupted nation.

----------


## TER

> Yes. They are welcome to come here. I am not willing to live with "collateral damage" to help them though.


They are the collateral damage.

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> The ones who are really selling it are the ISIS barbarians. How can you be so naive?


You know they burn people alive in Nigeria?

They chop off breasts in Sudan?

They rape women by the scores across Africa?

Children lose arms to warlords?

Afghani generals pimp boys?

They hang people from bridges, their testicles castrated and forced into their mouth, messages carved on their bodies?

You know the United States murders babies? Tortures women and children? Trains, funds, and arms death squads?

Where were the humanitarians then! Sanctioning Iraq, probably, in all their Christian values. $#@!ing ridiculous.

----------


## TER

> You know they burn people alive in Nigeria?
> 
> They chop off breasts in Sudan?
> 
> They rape women by the scores across Africa?
> 
> Children lose arms to warlords?
> 
> Afghani generals pimp boys?
> ...


There are efforts in all those places to aid the suffering victims. Not enough, for sure.

Are you suggesting that because it is happening in so many places that we should ignore the hostile take-over and genocide of Christians in Iraq, a holocaust our tax money financed?

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> What are you babbling about?  You paid for those weapons those barbarians are using to commit genocide.  You paid for the bombs dropped on Iraqi homes which killed children.  Now you object when you have to pay for the stopping of a holocaust your money helped finance?  I'll pay to stop the holocaust and then we can make some great strides in restoring the Constitution governance in this failing and corrupted nation.


Stopping of a holocaust, huh?

Please, for the love of God, read. Not Guardian, or Huff Po or whatever the hell 400 word articles you are basing your opinions on.

It's almost as if people are predictable and easily manipulated creatures. There will never be legitimate governance. There will be a socialist despot until the world is clouded in uranium dust. Partially thanks to people like you. Though you are certainly not the worst of the worst of fools.

----------


## fr33

> There are efforts in all those places to aid the suffering victims. Not enough, for sure.
> 
> Are you suggesting that because it is happening in so many places that we should ignore the hostile take-over and genocide of Christians, a holocaust our tax money financed?


You can go do whatever you want. But stop making me do whatever you want.

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> There are efforts in all those places to aid the suffering victims. Not enough, for sure.
> 
> Are you suggesting that because it is happening in so many places that we should ignore the hostile take-over and genocide of Christians, a holocaust our tax money financed?


What do you think about the tens of thousands that died in Syria?

Have you seen Homs lately?

Time for a regime change, would you not figure?

And my bringing up the atrocities around the world is to say that there is evil. We cannot stop it. 'We' cannot even set a good example.

----------


## TER

> Stopping of a holocaust, huh?
> 
> Please, for the love of God, read. Not Guardian, or Huff Po or whatever the hell 400 word articles you are basing your opinions on.
> 
> It's almost as if people are predictable and easily manipulated creatures. There will never be legitimate governance. There will be a socialist despot until the world is clouded in uranium dust. Partially thanks to people like you.


I agree with you that the despotism will grow in magnitude and usher in the atomic end of this world. I don't see how defending innocent Christians in Iraq who I consider my brothers and sisters to play a major role.  But I guess YMMV.  And if defending them ushers in the end times, then 'Maranthana!'

----------


## TER

> You can go do whatever you want. But stop making me do whatever you want.


I am not making you do anything.  The Congress must approve, and it must be done by a volunteer army.  If you have a problem with your tax money going to finance it, then call up your Congressman.

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> I agree with you that the despotism will grow in magnitude and usher in the atomic end of this world. I don't see how defending innocent Christians in Iraq who I consider my brothers and sisters to play a major role.  But I guess YMMV.  And if defending them ushers in the end times, then 'Maranthana!'


Then defend them!

Voting, which doesn't even $#@!ing matter to the largest extent possible, is *not* defending them.

Poisoning their land for eternity is not defending them.

----------


## TER

> What do you think about the tens of thousands that died in Syria?
> 
> Have you seen Homs lately?
> 
> Time for a regime change, would you not figure?
> 
> And my bringing up the atrocities around the world is to say that there is evil. We cannot stop it. 'We' cannot even set a good example.


No, Assad protected the Christian minorities.  It was the regimes our tax dollars payed for who created the massacres and drove out the Christians.

----------


## amy31416

> They are the collateral damage.


Did someone hack your account?

----------


## PRB

> In a free country, there would be nothing stopping someone if they wanted to intervene.  They just couldn't force the rest of the country to do it for them.


actually, as unfree as this country is, who's stopping any American from attacking ISIS? 

Sorry, civilians simply don't have the ammo (literally). 

It's kind of like saying nobody's stopping a child from killing a rapist, but unless a child has access to weapons, what good is "allowing" him to do so?

let me guess, in this free society we have cheaper arms and anybody who wants fighter jets or drones can get them?

----------


## TER

> Then defend them!
> 
> Voting, which doesn't even $#@!ing matter to the largest extent possible, is *not* defending them.
> 
> Poisoning their land for eternity is not defending them.


I am trying to defend them.

Your are the one who could care less even though you paid for the weapons they are being killed with.

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> No, Assad protected the Christian minorities.  It was the regimes our tax dollars payed for who created the massacres and drove out the Christians.


There are other people in the world besides Christians.

That is why you weren't harping on bombing Sudan when children were being raped and macheted.

----------


## TER

> Did someone hack your account?


Why do you ask?

----------


## fr33

> I am not making you do anything.  The Congress must approve, and it must be done by a volunteer army.  *If you have a problem with your tax money going to finance it, then call up your Congressman.*




And after that?

----------


## TER

> There are other people in the world besides Christians.
> 
> That is why you weren't harping on bombing Sudan when children were being raped and macheted.


I understand that, and I empathize.  I sadly must choose my battles, sometimes to pray and sometimes to fight.

I am not trying to belittle the evil done to innocent children in Sudan.  Rather you are trying to belittle what is being done in Iraq and Syria.

----------


## TER

> And after that?


You decide.  I am only expressing what the Constitutional process is.

----------


## amy31416

TER, you know I respect you, but I think you're being blinded by the fact that some of the victims of ISIS are Christian.

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> I am trying to defend them.
> 
> Your are the one who could care less even though you paid for the weapons they are using.


What makes you say that!?

I am annoyed to be robbed weekly. Why do you think I've read some ten thousand pages on the matter? So that I can explain to people what is actually happening. Because it is immoral, evil, and it should not be happening. And just when I foolishly thought the American people might have wised up, I get bombarded with this nonsense. 

They aren't humanitarians! They don't give two $#@!s about Christians! You know how many refugees they've created? You're thinking along the lines of, "Well, these interventions have truly damaged the region. They've been foolish, they've been shortsighted. This intervention, though, this one will bring about positive change." I've seen the facts. Children in Laos are still getting blown up playing with unexploded bomblets, hundreds of thousands still there. Do you really know what these things do? Do you know what depleted uranium does? What does it take to admit the abject failure that is US foreign policy and vow, never again? (when viewed from a certain lens... it wasn't a failure for everyone)

----------


## fr33

> You decide.  I am only expressing what the Constitutional process is.


There will be no declaration of war. You know that. Everyone knows that. Nobody in congress is even talking about it. Again, stop making me contribute to your holy war. Go fight it yourself. Stop being a collectivist theocrat.

----------


## PRB

> There are other people in the world besides Christians.
> 
> That is why you weren't harping on bombing Sudan when children were being raped and macheted.


Yeah, but as a Christian, only Christians are people to me, I mean, I feel most solidared with Christians.

----------


## TER

> TER, you know I respect you, but I think you're being blinded by the fact that some of the victims of ISIS are Christian.


If someone killed your family, would it mean less because they lived in another nation?  Of course not Amy.  How about if the guns you hired are the ones who killed them.  Should you ignore it because they live far away?  

 I am expressing what I believe and you feel that I am blinded.  I am sorry to hear that but I know we can still remain friends.

----------


## TER

> What makes you say that!?
> 
> I am annoyed to be robbed weekly. Why do you think I've read some ten thousand pages on the matter? So that I can explain to people what is actually happening. Because it is immoral, evil, and it should not be happening. And just when I foolishly thought the American people might have wised up, I get bombarded with this nonsense. 
> 
> They aren't humanitarians! They don't give two $#@!s about Christians! You know how many refugees they've created? You're thinking along the lines of, "Well, these interventions have truly damaged the region. They've been foolish, they've been shortsighted. This intervention, though, this one will bring about positive change." I've seen the facts. Children in Laos are still getting blown up playing with unexploded bomblets, hundreds of thousands still there. Do you really know what these things do? Do you know what depleted uranium does? What does it take to admit the abject failure that is US foreign policy and vow, never again? (when viewed from a certain lens... it wasn't a failure for everyone)


I am impressed by your proclaimed scholarship but I remain unconvinced.  Because we did great evil in the past does not relinquish us from the responsibilities we have in defending the defenseless against a monster all nations have outright condemned.  A monster we financed and aided and helped create.

----------


## TER

> There will be no declaration of war. You know that. Everyone knows that. Nobody in congress is even talking about it. Again, stop making me contribute to your holy war. Go fight it yourself. Stop being a collectivist theocrat.


I am not making you do anything.  You seem to be stuck in the head.

I am proposing a Constitutional method and you keep ignoring that.

----------


## heavenlyboy34

> I am impressed by your proclaimed scholarship but I remain unconvinced.  Because we did great evil in the past does not relinquish us from the responsibilities we have in defending the defenseless against a monster all nations have outright condemned.  A monster we financed and aided and helped create.


You again invoke the Royal We.  This simply isn't true.  A very small portion of the population bears the responsibility for the horrible decisions made and actions taken.

----------


## 56ktarget

Paulites in 1939:

"Who cares? It's not our problem. Let  them blow each other up. If some Americans want to intervene, go ahead. Just don't drag me along with them."

----------


## TER

> You again invoke the Royal We.  This simply isn't true.  A very small portion of the population bears the responsibility for the horrible decisions made and actions taken.


The reality is that we meaning you and me and everyone here helped financed it, either willingly or unwillingly.  I use it in that light.

As for the decisions, I agree it was actively done by a very small portion, but it is the people of the nation who must rise up and correct the wrongs and make the rights so that the actions and decisions are made by the loud cry of the nation- namely through the Congress and a willing coalition of fighters.

----------


## Feeding the Abscess

> You know they burn people alive in Nigeria?
> 
> They chop off breasts in Sudan?
> 
> They rape women by the scores across Africa?
> 
> Children lose arms to warlords?
> 
> Afghani generals pimp boys?
> ...


I blew my rep load before I saw this post.

----------


## amy31416

> If someone killed your family, would it mean less because they lived in another nation?  Of course not Amy.  How about if the guns you hired are the ones who killed them.  Should you ignore it because they live far away?  
> 
>  I am expressing what I believe and you feel that I am blinded.  I am sorry to hear that but I know we can still remain friends.


We are killing people, ISIS is responding to that. I don't think you're thinking straight on this issue. If we continue to aggress against people, even those who are doing bad things, this will never end. If I hire the guns, as you are promoting, then I only have myself to blame for whatever ill consequences come my way. Leave these people alone, there are peaceful solutions to help those in the crossfire, and more gov't intervention is certainly not it.

And of course we can remain friends despite a difference of opinion. I do understand where you're coming from. Enough violence already. Defense, not offense.

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> I am impressed by your proclaimed scholarship but I remain unconvinced.  Because we did great evil in the past does not relinquish us from the responsibilities we have in defending the defenseless against a monster all nations have outright condemned.


TER, I feel like we are at different levels here. Imagine me debating Deuteronomy, for instance.

It isn't that we did, it's that we are continuing to do so. They fund warlords, drug lords, pimps, pedophiles, human traffickers, torturers and thieves. They unleash murderous thugs upon practically every corner of this earth. They aren't humanitarians, they have no qualms about their affairs. They lie to you, sell you stories, and profit greatly on war. Not just monetarily but in gathering the people into a less cognizant mob state. It will be the downfall of this country. Not ISIS.

And when there is looting in the streets, and police in Bearcats gunning down the hungry, the people will clamor for change. There will be a populist candidate to arise to the occasion. It will be the downfall of humanity.

And if there is a God, and you are to be Judged, you'd be wise not to be on the side of incinerating children and poisoning the Earth (not to mention the proponent of theft). You claim to have, and speaking strictly how things are this is so, no responsibility for the theft that your representatives commit. I don't believe an all-knowing all-wise Being would particularly agree. Thou Shalt Not Kill. Thou Shalt Not Steal.

I don't know particularly what to tell you. I'd offer you the advice to start off with _War is a Racket_ by Smedley Butler, move onto _Blowback_ by Chalmers Johnson, _Killing Hope_ by William Blum, _Rogue State_ by William Blum, _Dirty Wars_ by Jeremy Scahill, _The Sorrows of Empire_ by Chalmers Johnson, _Propaganda_ by Edward Bernays and finally a recap of Ron Paul's House speeches in _A Foreign Policy of Freedom_. In that order. It really isn't as time consuming as it appears to be. Many of the books are quick reads.

----------


## TER

> I blew my rep load before I saw this post.


Aside from sharing in his misstatement regarding the definition of a humanitarian, do you have anything else to contribute?

----------


## Feeding the Abscess

> I am not making you do anything.  You seem to be stuck in the head.
> 
> I am proposing a Constitutional method and you keep ignoring that.


By advocating for State action, you are advocating for making fr33 contribute to more death and destruction. So yes, you are advocating forcing fr33 to contribute to your cause.

----------


## TER

> We are killing people, ISIS is responding to that. I don't think you're thinking straight on this issue. If we continue to aggress against people, even those who are doing bad things, this will never end. If I hire the guns, as you are promoting, then I only have myself to blame for whatever ill consequences come my way. Leave these people alone, there are peaceful solutions to help those in the crossfire, and more gov't intervention is certainly not it.
> 
> And of course we can remain friends despite a difference of opinion. I do understand where you're coming from. Enough violence already. Defense, not offense.


You must be under the impression that ISIS is getting loads of love and sympathy by the people of Iraq they have subjugated. 

They are doing what we criticized the US of doing in Iraq but with the savagery of Islamic fundamentalistic extremism.  This is not minimizing the crimes of this government (which are many), and in their calculation and coldness too vile to mention, but these barbarians are the ones we created and armed and who will not stop until they subjugate the entire world under a Caliphate and Sharia law.  I simply cannot be at peace knowing the Frankenstein we created will be free reign to devour my brothers and sisters in Christ.

----------


## amy31416

> TER, I feel like we are at different levels here. Imagine me debating Deuteronomy, for instance.
> 
> It isn't that we did, it's that we are continuing to do so. They fund warlords, drug lords, pimps, pedophiles, human traffickers, torturers and thieves. They unleash murderous thugs upon practically every corner of this earth. They aren't humanitarians, they have no qualms about their affairs. They lie to you, sell you stories, and profit greatly on war. Not just monetarily but in gathering the people into a less cognizant mob state. It will be the downfall of this country. Not ISIS.
> 
> And when there is looting in the streets, and police in Bearcats gunning down the hungry, the people will clamor for change. There will be a populist candidate to arise to the occasion. It will be the downfall of humanity.
> 
> And if there is a God, and you are to be Judged, you'd be wise not to be on the side of incinerating children and poisoning the Earth (not to mention the proponent of theft). You claim to have, and speaking strictly how things are this is so, no responsibility for the theft that your representatives commit. I don't believe an all-knowing all-wise Being would particularly agree. Thou Shalt Not Kill. Thou Shalt Not Steal.
> 
> I don't know particularly what to tell you. I'd offer you the advice to start off with _War is a Racket_ by Smedley Butler, move onto _Blowback_ by Chalmers Johnson, _Killing Hope_ by William Blum, _Rogue State_ by William Blum, _Dirty Wars_ by Jeremy Scahill, _The Sorrows of Empire_ by Chalmers Johnson, _Propaganda_ by Edward Bernays and finally a recap of Ron Paul's House speeches in _A Foreign Policy of Freedom_. In that order. It really isn't as time consuming as it appears to be. Many of the books are quick reads.


Spot-on, KC.

----------


## amy31416

> You must be under the impression that ISIS is getting loads of love and sympathy by the people of Iraq they have subjugated. 
> 
> They are doing what we criticized the US of doing in Iraq but with the savagery of Islamic fundamentalistic extremism.  This is not minimizing the crimes of this government (which are many), and in their calculation and coldness too vile to mention, but these barbarians are the ones we created and armed and who will stop until they subjugate the entire world under a Caliphate.  I resist.


So you are suggesting that others should send their children to die because there are bad people who've gained some power because of the horrors that our own gov't perpetuated with our money and blood? 

There are better solutions.

And no, I am not under the impression that ISIS is receiving any love whatsoever from anyone. But don't pretend that the US is not guilty of savagery as extreme, or moreso, than any Muslim.

If we created and armed these people, should we use arms and violence to destroy them? If so, why? If so, who should go do this? Do you want me to pay for and send my child to do it?

----------


## TER

> TER, I feel like we are at different levels here. Imagine me debating Deuteronomy, for instance.
> 
> It isn't that we did, it's that we are continuing to do so. They fund warlords, drug lords, pimps, pedophiles, human traffickers, torturers and thieves. They unleash murderous thugs upon practically every corner of this earth. They aren't humanitarians, they have no qualms about their affairs. They lie to you, sell you stories, and profit greatly on war. Not just monetarily but in gathering the people into a less cognizant mob state. It will be the downfall of this country. Not ISIS.
> 
> And when there is looting in the streets, and police in Bearcats gunning down the hungry, the people will clamor for change. There will be a populist candidate to arise to the occasion. It will be the downfall of humanity.
> 
> And if there is a God, and you are to be Judged, you'd be wise not to be on the side of incinerating children and poisoning the Earth (not to mention the proponent of theft). You claim to have, and speaking strictly how things are this is so, no responsibility for the theft that your representatives commit. I don't believe an all-knowing all-wise Being would particularly agree. Thou Shalt Not Kill. Thou Shalt Not Steal.
> 
> I don't know particularly what to tell you. I'd offer you the advice to start off with _War is a Racket_ by Smedley Butler, move onto _Blowback_ by Chalmers Johnson, _Killing Hope_ by William Blum, _Rogue State_ by William Blum, _Dirty Wars_ by Jeremy Scahill, _The Sorrows of Empire_ by Chalmers Johnson, _Propaganda_ by Edward Bernays and finally a recap of Ron Paul's House speeches in _A Foreign Policy of Freedom_. In that order. It really isn't as time consuming as it appears to be. Many of the books are quick reads.


My friend, thank you for the suggested readings. There is much to learn and so little time.  I am ashamed to admit there is much I am ignorant of.  I do understand about the MIC and about how there is (as always has been) war racketeering and profiting.  I am ready to turn the country back to a Constitutional nation, which is why I make it clear that only via Congressional approval should this nation send money and soldiers there to defend these victims of a holocaust.  Sort of like was done in WWII.

As for your comment about me being on the side of incinerating babies and poisoning the earth, that is neither my wish nor my desire.

As for God, I do not believe He is on the side of the war mongerers.  I also know that He said that there is no greater love than to give one's life for their brother.  You may think I am a war mongerer and I may think I am trying to defend my brothers.  ISIS thinks they are doing God's work.  We each pick our sides and will have to answer for it.  In the end we will learn.  LORD HAVE MERCY.

----------


## TER

> So you are suggesting that others should send their children to die because there are bad people who've gained some power because of the horrors that our own gov't perpetuated with our money and blood? 
> 
> There are better solutions.
> 
> And no, I am not under the impression that ISIS is receiving any love whatsoever from anyone. But don't pretend that the US is not guilty of savagery as extreme, or moreso, than any Muslim.
> 
> If we created and armed these people, should we use arms and violence to destroy them? If so, why? If so, who should go do this? Do you want me to pay for and send my child to do it?


No Amy, I am not suggesting others to send their children.  I am against that.  I said multiple times already that it should be a volunteer army with Congressional approval.

----------


## TER

> There are better solutions.


There are, I am sure.  I may be blinded by the fact that I feel guilty of feeding my money in taxes to a government which has played a hand in the holocaust and genocide of the Christians in the Middle East.  I have blood on my hands of not only Muslims which a great sin, but of my own family.

So that people do not mistake me for any kind of worthy representative for the Church, this is the statement by the spiritual leader of the Eastern Orthodox Church whose solutions are different from mine:



*Statement By His All-Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew on the Present Violence in Iraq*


The recent wave of violence against innocent families and children in Iraq has rendered the world shocked and horrified. We will not remain indifferent or silent before such irrational persecution, cultural intolerance and appalling loss of life, especially when it is caused by religious hatred and racial hostility.

The targeting of tens of thousands of Christians (including Arameans, Chaldeans, and Assyrians) and other religious minorities (including Turkmens, Yazidis, and Kurds) can never be justified in the name of any religious creed or conviction.

What we are witnessing before our eyes in Iraq is the uprooting not simply of a religious minority – in this case the Yazidis, whose very existence is being threatened – but of an entire civilization. The victimization and extermination of women and children, as well as of the elderly and disabled, for any reason whatsoever – much more so in the supposed name of religious conviction – is a repudiation of our own future. Such calamity and cruelty of adherents to one religion can never be defended by cowardly and falsely invoking another religion. Such brutal acts are categorically unacceptable and unjustifiable before both God and humankind.

Violence never is pacified by violence, and hatred is only overcome by tolerance. Knowing that true and lasting peace only comes to pass through genuine encounter and dialogue, we call upon religious leaders and political authorities in this wounded region to promote conversation to resolve dispute, and to support peaceful means to overcome conflict.

We implore the same of all leaders in other parts of the world, especially in Gaza and Israel, in order that those conflicts, too, may not further escalate at the expense of more human life. It is precisely for this reason that, at the invitation of Pope Francis, we gathered in Rome for an interfaith summit of peace with Presidents Peres and Abbas last June.

The situation in Iraq is especially critical. The humanitarian predicament is more urgent than ever. Our response must be immediate and tangible. Therefore, we appeal to every responsible organization and every person of good will – beyond any support through perpetual and persistent prayer – to assist with material and humanitarian resources so that these innocent victims may no longer endure hunger, suffering, and death.

It is our wholehearted hope and fervent prayer that the God of love – worshipped by Jews, Christians and Muslims alike – may prevail over the false idols of fanaticism and prejudice. May the compassionate Lord grant peace to all.

----------


## kcchiefs6465

TER, you are good people, I like your posts. I do not mean to be particularly abrasive or anything. A lot of it is my frustration and disappointment with others, most of whom aren't even members here or even politically active.

It does not change. They will not get it right. There will be civilian casualties. It will incite more violence and do more to promote ISIS than any of their current recruiting efforts.

The lies are everywhere, it's hard to tell what is truth and what is fiction, they've fabricated entire incidents in the past.

Certain people will profit greatly. They are who are selling this intervention. There is so much evil occurring in the world that they sponsor it is unreal. Nothing is usually said on those matters.

Setting a good example would be the best option. Voluntary aid of course would be acceptable. I don't particularly mind if one wishes to go over there to join the cause. It is the government of this country that has muddied the waters. Disinformation is purposely spread to foreign outlets for the purpose of it returning home. They hire PR teams and highly skilled propagandists to manipulate the public. The people are by and large unaware of what is going on.

War is the health of the state. Blind nationalism and misplaced patriotism has condemned many to death. This would even ignore the current militarization of the police forces, the TSA's molestations, the NSA spying apparatus, the rescinding of First Amendment guarantees, etc. It is all connected. If any good comes, it is for the wrong reasons. And there is little hope for any good to come once one truly understands the breadth of their meddling.

It is a travesty. An atrocity against humanity; immoral, evil, despicable. It should not be tolerated.

They've spent many millions of dollars on fine tuning propaganda techniques. I mean it's just really a $#@!ed up scenario.

Pray for those in harm's way. The United States cannot be everywhere. We are teetering on bankruptcy as it is.

----------


## TER

> It is a travesty. An atrocity against humanity; immoral, evil, despicable. It should not be tolerated.


I agree.  Especially when it is done against your family.  

I think the best approach is on the side of righteousness.  We may have a disagreement on what side that is, and I can accept that.  Then it must be deliberated upon by our elected representatives in Congress and then decided.  Will Congressional approval for military action breed more violence? I don't know.  Maybe I am deluded into thinking it will be a defensive act to protect innocent lives whom we have already done so much harm against.  But maybe you are right that this will lead to greater regional conflict and instability.  Know one knows really, no matter how many books they have read.  Good guesses, maybe, but that is about it.

 I respect your wisdom and appreciate your advice.  Nevertheless, while I objected to pretty much every foreign military attack this government has undertaken these past few decades, with this action I agree and vote to send my tax money and support to any soldier willing to go and protect these innocents who are being systematically massacred, not in mere books but in real life and right now.

----------


## tod evans

Government has abused its control of the military for my entire life and it's time to put an end to it.

This idea that the US military may be brought to bear for any reason other than national defense is contrary to the constitution and the premise used to fund it.

There are several groups of mercenaries that private citizens could hire (If they weren't forced to pay for the misapplied military) that could address these humanitarian issues around the globe.

Waging undeclared, unconstitutional war on the taxpayers dime has got to stop and those who authorize such actions must be held accountable.

The businesses and their pet politicians who profit from these actions have bankrupted this country yet its citizenry continues to lap up propaganda and cheer.

As long as there's wealth left to exploit there's going to be another boogy-man somewhere.......

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> I agree.  Especially when it is your family.  
> 
> I think the best approach is on the side of righteousness.  We may have a disagreement on what side that is, and I can accept that.  Then it must be deliberated upon by our elected representatives in Congress and then decided.  Will Congressional approval for military action breed more violence? I don't know.  Maybe I am deluded into thinking it will be a defensive act to protect innocent lives whom we have already done so much harm against.  But maybe you are right that this will lead to greater regional conflict and instability.  Know one knows really, no matter how many books they have read.  Good guesses, maybe, but that is about it.
> 
>  I respect your wisdom and appreciate your advice.  Nevertheless, while I objected to pretty much every foreign military attack this government has undertaken these past few decades, with this action I agree and vote to send my tax money and support to any soldier willing to go and protect these innocents who are being systematically massacred, not in mere books but in real life and right now.


My next suggested reading would be_ No Treason_ by Lysander Spooner followed by his _Letter to Grover Cleveland_. 

I'll let it go. They're going to do what they're going to do. I don't even know why I get frustrated anymore.

Best of luck to you and best of luck to the innocents caught up in that mess. The world's $#@!ed up. Has been and will be. No matter what particularly poli-tick holds the reins.

----------


## TER

Dup

----------


## TER

> My next suggested reading would be_ No Treason_ by Lysander Spooner followed by his _Letter to Grover Cleveland_. 
> 
> I'll let it go. They're going to do what they're going to do. I don't even know why I get frustrated anymore.
> 
> Best of luck to you and best of luck to the innocents caught up in that mess. The world's $#@!ed up. Has been and will be. No matter what particularly poli-tick holds the reins.


That list is going to take me some time to read!  

The world is messed up.  With all the mess ups we do, sending a willing international force to defend a  group of innocent people hiding in a mountain from fear of genocide (a position we have directly played a large role in creating for them) seems to me like something I could support.  Of course, YMMV.  Either way, prayers are very welcomed.

----------


## TER

Dup

----------


## TER

Trip

----------


## 56ktarget

And now we see the unraveling of the entire foreign policy ideology of the Paulites.

----------


## juleswin

> And now we see the unraveling of the entire foreign policy ideology of the Paulites.


Because somehow destroying Libya and using their advanced weapon to fund an Islamic Jihadists uprising in Syria which then spirals out into what we see now in ISIS and Iraq instability is all about non interventionism. 

$#@! you for the complete garbage you post on this site and now I know you are not any kind of recent immigrant. An immigrant who cannot see the destructive effects of American interventionist policy. Which country did your folks come from again?

----------


## 56ktarget

South Korea, in fact. The entire country would be living in a communist dictatorship if the US hadn't intervened. What's that? Nothing to say about the "destructive effects of American interventionist policy"? Lol, you need to stop seeing the world in black and white. Interventionism is neither all bad nor all good. Obviously it was good in Korea/Kuwait. It was bad in Vietnam/Afghanistan. I suspect it will be good here in Iraq, as long as mission creep doesn't happen.

----------


## 56ktarget

> Oh and lets not forget a small matter of ITS $#@!ING UNCONSTITUTIONAL!
> 
> //Rant really over this time


Yes it is. War powers act. Next.

----------


## CaptUSA

> South Korea, in fact. The entire country would be living in a communist dictatorship if the US hadn't intervened. What's that? Nothing to say about the "destructive effects of American interventionist policy"? Lol, you need to stop seeing the world in black and white. Interventionism is neither all bad nor all good. Obviously it was good in Korea/Kuwait. It was bad in Vietnam/Afghanistan. I suspect it will be good here in Iraq, as long as mission creep doesn't happen.


Hmmm.... so by your logic, intervention is only good when we never leave?  Doesn't that tell you something?

----------


## Christian Liberty

Neocons always want to paint the guy they want to go after as the next Hitler.  Its sad that some people here are falling for it.

I mean, I know ISIS is awful, but they aren't in the same league as Hitler.  And even Hitler most likely would never have attacked the US.

----------


## acptulsa

> South Korea, in fact. The entire country would be living in a communist dictatorship if the US hadn't intervened. What's that? Nothing to say about the "destructive effects of American interventionist policy"? Lol, you need to stop seeing the world in black and white. Interventionism is neither all bad nor all good. Obviously it was good in Korea/Kuwait. It was bad in Vietnam/Afghanistan. I suspect it will be good here in Iraq, as long as mission creep doesn't happen.


We cut a country in half and divided countless Korean families.  Now who's seeing things as 'all black or all white'?  Physician, heal thyself.

And get over your God complex, too.  Only the good Lord knows for sure what would have happened in Korea over the last fifty years if we hadn't.  If the Communist regime (and here I thought you _like_ overbearing governments) had to keep a larger area and populace under its thumb, and hadn't had a boogeyman so close, could it have maintained itself?  Would it have remained as reactionary?  The two big communist neighbors that helped it out did _not_.

As for Kuwait, we fooled Saddam Hussein into attacking with a promise by the George H.W. Bush administration that we didn't care if he took it over or not.  Not saying he didn't want to attack, just saying he probably wouldn't have if old man Bush hadn't given him permission.  Now we're on our third war there and millions have died, countless irreplaceable antiquities have been destroyed, and the cost has left us in more than half a decade of Great Depression.  How the hell is that good?  You need to brush up on your history; it might keep you from making an ass of yourself.

Death, destruction and debt can be good.  Right.  So we should go off half cocked every time the Military Industrial Complex says BOOGITY BOOGITY without ever pausing to ask if it's good or bad.  Never give peace a chance.  Never assume the little nation would be better off if we respected their rights and their sovereignty.  Never miss an opportunity to try to make all the world pure and good like us.  Even if we're just going to set up another one of our puppet dictators like Papa Doc Duvalier, Saddam Hussein, The Marcos', Idi Amin Dada, and the rest of the bloodthirsty tyrants that we have set up so they can soak the ground with the blood of the natives.

Excuse us for being too well educated in history to buy your platitudes, dude.  But when you're _supposed_ to be the ultimate authority in the most war hungry, killingest empire the world has ever seen, a little ignorance spills one hell of a lot of blood.




> Yes it is. War powers act. Next.


All right child.  Now tell us, firstly, how that makes imperialism Constitutional, and tell us where in the Constitution that resides.  Article and section, please, or at least tell us which Amendment it is.  We will be waiting...

----------


## NIU Students for Liberty

> No, the government we pay did.  Now we have to fix our mistakes and get a new government.


So once again, your answer is to force everyone to pay the government to repeat the same mistake that you supposedly opposed initially?

----------


## NIU Students for Liberty

> We have different definitions of unjust and immoral war.  All war is bad, but not all war is unjust.  We have a difference of opinion.  You vote your conscience and I'll vote mine.
> 
> And I wouldn't force anyone to go to war there, as I made clear only volunteering armed service members would go.  So your argument is lacking.


Ok so in your Expendables scenario, who is still paying for that?

----------


## NIU Students for Liberty

> What are you babbling about?  You paid for those weapons those barbarians are using to commit genocide.  You paid for the bombs dropped on Iraqi homes which killed children.  Now you object when you have to pay for the stopping of a holocaust your money helped finance?  I'll pay to stop the holocaust and then we can make some great strides in restoring the Constitution governance in this failing and corrupted nation.


Did KC consent to that money being used to fund those groups?  No, so since some of us are actually consistent with our principles, we do not consent to having our money being spent to create bloodshed in order to stop bloodshed, or as you called it, a "holocaust".

And if you really cared about restoring this nation, you wouldn't continue ruining it by forcing it to get involved in another war that further destroys another nation.

----------


## NIU Students for Liberty

> I am not making you do anything.  The Congress must approve, and it must be done by a volunteer army.  If you have a problem with your tax money going to finance it, then call up your Congressman.


But you are making us go along with it if Congress approves of your war.  Who's going to fund it?  How are they going to fund it?  Oh, that's right, through involuntary taxation!

And this volunteer army you keep bringing up (as if that is going to justify your argument), why don't you get up off of your ass, make a sacrifice, and join since you care so much about this cause?  You are no better than scumbags like Bush, Gingrich, Santorum, and Obama, guys that want to use force in order to gain support for their wars but yet don't actually want to get blood on their hands.

----------


## Madison320

We're too broke to even have this interventionist argument.

----------


## Cutlerzzz

> Because somehow destroying Libya and using their advanced weapon to fund an Islamic Jihadists uprising in Syria which then spirals out into what we see now in ISIS and Iraq instability is all about non interventionism. 
> 
> $#@! you for the complete garbage you post on this site and now I know you are not any kind of recent immigrant. An immigrant who cannot see the destructive effects of American interventionist policy. Which country did your folks come from again?


Clearly, this shows the limits of Libertarianism. Us novices need to sit back and let the experts from the White House, Pentagon, CIA, American Enterprise Institute, AIPAC, Congress (especially people with lots of foreign policy experience, like John McCain), and experts with experience handling wars (the people who started the Iraq, Afghan, and Libyan wars especially, but also the people behind the Drone program and support for ISIS last year).

This demonstrates that the world needs the US government to keep military bases in dozens of countries and fight a war every few years to keep peace, because absent American occupation and war in Iraq other groups will move in and occupy/war there. We really need an interventionist government after all.

----------


## jllundqu

> Maybe it wouldn't hurt to bake them some damn cookies instead of killing their people for a change. I like baking cookies and it's a lot cheaper in human costs than plundering, maiming and blasting them back to the stone age.
> 
> I have never heard of a terrorist group attacking others because of delicious cookies. Just something to think about.
> 
> I'm thinking peanut butter is the way to go, thanks for the idea. I'm sure it'd be illegal for me to send them any though.


Do baked goods count as 'material support' under Sec. 215 of the NDAA??



I see rendition in your future!

----------


## jllundqu

> Yes it is. War powers act. Next.


Um..... What the hell are you talking about?  The WPA has nothing to do with the current situtaion.  And don't pull the AUMF crap, either.

Is this a congressional decision or did the Fuhrer make the decision on his own for more bombs and war?

----------


## 69360

> What did I leave out?  The fact that you supposedly didn't support going into Iraq but now we have to drop more bombs to solve the crisis?  
> 
> If you truly don't want U.S. citizens to be in danger, you don't drop a $#@!ing bomb and give extremists more excuses to recruit and spread terrorist cells.
> 
> But in hindsight, I was mistaken.  You actually sound more like Mike Huckabee since both of you share this idiotic "you break it, you buy it" foreign policy:


You still haven't answered. How do you propose to keep the US from being attacked now that Obama picked a fight with ISIS? 

You don't want to bomb them. Fine, how do you neutralize the threat?





> You know they burn people alive in Nigeria?
> 
> They chop off breasts in Sudan?
> 
> They rape women by the scores across Africa?
> 
> Children lose arms to warlords?
> 
> Afghani generals pimp boys?
> ...


Yes that's all horrible but in the end what happens overseas is not the concern of our government. But in this case Obama already got involved with a particularly nasty terror group. We can't take the bombs back. 



I think the biggest problem in this thread and with RPF and liberterians in general is that all of you are great in dealing with principles and philosophy, but not so good at dealing with practical reality. 

We shouldn't intervene in other countries, great I agree. But Obama did. Now it has to be taken to a conclusion or we are at risk.

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> South Korea, in fact. The entire country would be living in a communist dictatorship if the US hadn't intervened. What's that? Nothing to say about the "destructive effects of American interventionist policy"? Lol, you need to stop seeing the world in black and white. Interventionism is neither all bad nor all good. Obviously it was good in Korea/Kuwait. It was bad in Vietnam/Afghanistan. I suspect it will be good here in Iraq, as long as mission creep doesn't happen.


If I could throw a book at you and you'd retain even the title, I would.

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> Yes that's all horrible but in the end what happens overseas is not the concern of our government. But in this case Obama already got involved with a particularly nasty terror group. We can't take the bombs back. 
> 
> 
> 
> I think the biggest problem in this thread and with RPF and liberterians in general is that all of you are great in dealing with principles and philosophy, but not so good at dealing with practical reality. 
> 
> *We shouldn't intervene in other countries, great I agree. But Obama did. Now it has to be taken to a conclusion or we are at risk.*


We need a final solution?

----------


## NorthCarolinaLiberty

> Obviously it was good in Korea/Kuwait.


Obviously.





> I suspect it will be good here in Iraq, as long as mission creep doesn't happen.



That never happens.

----------


## heavenlyboy34

> Clearly, this shows the limits of Libertarianism. Us novices need to sit back and let the experts from the White House, Pentagon, CIA, American Enterprise Institute, AIPAC, Congress (especially people with lots of foreign policy experience, like John McCain), and experts with experience handling wars (the people who started the Iraq, Afghan, and Libyan wars especially, but also the people behind the Drone program and support for ISIS last year).
> 
> This demonstrates that the world needs the US government to keep military bases in dozens of countries and fight a war every few years to keep peace, because absent American occupation and war in Iraq other groups will move in and occupy/war there. We really need an interventionist government after all.


Bull$#@!.  Libertarianism allows for mental midgets and war pigs to go fight wars of conquest/intervention and run clandestine ops themselves.  You just have to accept the consequences instead of shifting them to everyone else.  

I've seen very few war hawks who actually spent time in a fox hole.  Coincidence?  I reckon not.  Tell me, Cutlerzzz, where will you be stationed?

----------


## pcosmar

> You still haven't answered. How do you propose to keep the US from being attacked now that Obama picked a fight with ISIS? 
> 
> You don't want to bomb them. Fine, how do you neutralize the threat?


I don't.. I am not threatened by them at all.
And our government has no intention of doing anything about them,, or they  would have and could have long ago.

We knew exactly where they were when they attacked military bases.. and those bases could have been leveled at that time destroying all the equipment and fighters present.
And when all that equipment was moved,, the convoys could have been hit,, with little or no collateral damage.

It was not.

----------


## kcchiefs6465

http://www.schiffradio.com/pg/jsp/ve...=310&pid=66497

Tom Woods interviews Ron Paul on the matter.

----------


## jllundqu

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to kcchiefs6465 again.

THanks, listening to it now

----------


## pcosmar

> I don't.. I am not threatened by them at all.
> And our government has no intention of doing anything about them,, or they  would have and could have long ago.
> 
> We knew exactly where they were when they attacked military bases.. and those bases could have been leveled at that time destroying all the equipment and fighters present.
> And when all that equipment was moved,, the convoys could have been hit,, with little or no collateral damage.
> 
> It was not.


Ok,, I need to add this too..
Non-interventionism is a fantasy. it is a fantasy I like,, but a fantasy just the same. 

As far as ISIS.. We just handed them the country on a Silver Platter. They Just got their very best PH Recruiting tool,, at the cost of one HumV and one mortar crew. (our very limited strikes were not meant to hurt them)

The Great Satan came to save the devil worshipers,,, 

Watch their numbers grow,, and the New Government of Iraq embrace them.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> I'm seeing references to State transfer of weapons. Germany, France, etc aren't private entities. They're States.


Private companies make and sell arms. Government regulates the sales of those arms.

----------


## orenbus



----------


## robert68

> Private companies make and sell arms. Government regulates the sales of those arms.


If half or more of a company's income is from the government, it's not private.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

"American cities on fire! Boogity boogity!"




> Is ISIS An Existential Threat?
> By Patrick J. Buchanan
> 
> U.S. air strikes since Friday have opened a corridor through which tens of thousands of Yazidis, trapped and starving on a mountain in Iraq, have escaped to safety in Kurdistan.
> 
> The Kurds, whose peshmerga fighters were sent reeling by the Islamic State last week, bolstered now by the arrival of U.S. air power, recaptured two towns. But the peshmerga have apparently lost the strategically important town of Jalawla, 20 miles from Iran, the furthest east that ISIS forces have penetrated.
> 
> Last weeks gains by the Islamic State caused Republican hawks to flock to the Sunday talk shows.
> 
> ...

----------


## heavenlyboy34

> Ok,, I need to add this too..
> *Non-interventionism is a fantasy*. it is a fantasy I like,, but a fantasy just the same. 
> 
> As far as ISIS.. We just handed them the country on a Silver Platter. They Just got their very best PH Recruiting tool,, at the cost of one HumV and one mortar crew. (our very limited strikes were not meant to hurt them)
> 
> The Great Satan came to save the devil worshipers,,, 
> 
> Watch their numbers grow,, and the New Government of Iraq embrace them.


Non-interventionism is not at all fantasy.  It's a matter of minding one's own damn business.  Interventionist philosophy is just a type of White Knight Syndrome.  All fantasy.  Even if you wanted to butt into every petty conflict around the world, it would be an exercise in futility.  People have to work out conflicts for themselves.  It's just a fact of nature.  The best you can get from forcing people (intervening) to "get along" is armistice-which is not at all "peace"-and definitely not a lasting ("durable" in diplomat-speak) solution.

----------


## Cutlerzzz

> Bull$#@!.  Libertarianism allows for mental midgets and war pigs to go fight wars of conquest/intervention and run clandestine ops themselves.  You just have to accept the consequences instead of shifting them to everyone else.  
> 
> I've seen very few war hawks who actually spent time in a fox hole.  Coincidence?  I reckon not.  Tell me, Cutlerzzz, where will you be stationed?


Ill be paying my taxes like a Patriotic American to support the war for our great heros. The fact is that America needs to save the day again and Libertarians can't do it. It's time to allow the experts in Washington to handle it. They already have lots of experience in Iraq, they know what they're doing.

----------


## pcosmar

> Non-interventionism is not at all fantasy.  It's a matter of minding one's own damn business.  Interventionist philosophy is just a type of White Knight Syndrome.  All fantasy.  Even if you wanted to butt into every petty conflict around the world, it would be an exercise in futility.  People have to work out conflicts for themselves.  It's just a fact of nature.  The best you can get from forcing people (intervening) to "get along" is armistice-which is not at all "peace"-and definitely not a lasting ("durable" in diplomat-speak) solution.


My point is that intervention is the present, and foreseeable reality. It has been policy for over 100 years.
*It is reality*,, the desire for non interventionism is fine,, but *it is not* a reality.

----------


## heavenlyboy34

> Ill be paying my taxes like a Patriotic American to support the war for our great heros. The fact is that America needs to save the day again and Libertarians can't do it. It's time to allow the experts in Washington to handle it. They already have lots of experience in Iraq, they know what they're doing.


Ah, White Knight Syndrome with tinges of Chicken Hawk fever.  I suspected as much.

----------


## pcosmar

> , they know what they're doing.


That is what truly concerns me.

----------


## heavenlyboy34

> My point is that intervention is the present, and foreseeable reality. It has been policy for over 100 years.
> It is reality,, the desire for non interventionism is fine,, but *it is not* a reality.


Ah, natch.  Thanks for clarifying. ~hugs~

----------


## Pericles

> Maybe it wouldn't hurt to bake them some damn cookies instead of killing their people for a change. I like baking cookies and it's a lot cheaper in human costs than plundering, maiming and blasting them back to the stone age.
> 
> I have never heard of a terrorist group attacking others because of delicious cookies. Just something to think about.
> 
> I'm thinking peanut butter is the way to go, thanks for the idea. I'm sure it'd be illegal for me to send them any though.


I'd suggest avoiding bacon flavored cookies.

----------


## orenbus



----------


## juleswin

> Ok,, I need to add this too..
> Non-interventionism is a fantasy. it is a fantasy I like,, but a fantasy just the same. 
> 
> As far as ISIS.. We just handed them the country on a Silver Platter. They Just got their very best PH Recruiting tool,, at the cost of one HumV and one mortar crew. (our very limited strikes were not meant to hurt them)
> 
> The Great Satan came to save the devil worshipers,,, 
> 
> Watch their numbers grow,, and the New Government of Iraq embrace them.


I think you got it wrong on this. The enemy of my enemy being my friend doesn't always apply and in this case it definitely doesn't apply. The US and the Sunni monarchies of the Gulf states helped build up ISIS and if those same folks help dismantle it, I doubt the people of Iraq and Syria would mind. I have seen these animals execute 12 yr old boys because they accused them of making fun of Islam and Syrians are not even that religious. The ISIS make the taliban look like JV squad. These people's beliefs are not in line with the population they are trying to occupy. They are hyper religious and the people in that population are not.

It would be welcomed in large areas of Syria and Iraq if the US genuinely decided to turn on ISIS. If u really want to know a bit more about ISIS, you only need to watch the videos their supporters upload to liveleak.com. You have to know how barbaric these people are to see how its impossible for what you said above to happen. Well, I guess if the US uses its heavy handed approach where they start killing more civilians that the ISIS were killing originally, then I can see that happen. Otherwise, it aint gonna happen.

It's like saying, if the US started bombing Boko Haram, Nigerians would all of a sudden start loving them. I mean, its not like football crazy Nigeria hold a grudge on them for bombing world cup watching parties and killing 100s of innocent civilians.

----------


## Pericles

> That list is going to take me some time to read!  
> 
> The world is messed up.  With all the mess ups we do, sending a willing international force to defend a  group of innocent people hiding in a mountain from fear of genocide (a position we have directly played a large role in creating for them) seems to me like something I could support.  Of course, YMMV.  Either way, prayers are very welcomed.


Why the section about letters of marque and reprisal is in the Constitution - let a willing militia deal with it.

----------


## pcosmar

> I think you got it wrong on this. The enemy of my enemy being my friend doesn't always apply and in this case it definitely doesn't apply. The US and the Sunni monarchies of the Gulf states helped build up ISIS and if those same folks help dismantle it, I doubt the people of Iraq and Syria would mind. I have seen these animals execute 12 yr old boys because they accused them of making fun of Islam and Syrians are not even that religious. The ISIS make the taliban look like JV squad. These people's beliefs are not in line with the population they are trying to occupy. They are hyper religious and the people in that population are not.
> 
> It would be welcomed in large areas of Syria and Iraq if the US genuinely decided to turn on ISIS. If u really want to know a bit more about ISIS, you only need to watch the videos their supporters upload to liveleak.com. You have to know how barbaric these people are to see how its impossible for what you said above to happen. Well, I guess if the US uses its heavy handed approach where they start killing more civilians that the ISIS were killing originally, then I can see that happen. Otherwise, it aint gonna happen.
> 
> It's like saying, if the US started bombing Boko Haram, Nigerians would all of a sudden start loving them. I mean, its not like football crazy Nigeria hold a grudge on them for bombing world cup watching parties and killing 100s of innocent civilians.


You have see it? You have been there personally in the last few months since they became...something. They did not even exist till very recently...

They aren't religious. Their leaders use some bastardized religion to soup them up,, but mostly they use drugs.. 
They were recruited out of the mercenaries in Syria,, and the Army of Iraq. They spout a lot of religious rhetoric and munch superman pills.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...ll-pill-567366
http://www.voltairenet.org/article183125.html
http://www.theguardian.com/world/sho...ar-middle-east

As far as people joining them,,
*Arab neighbors joined ISIS slaughter, escaped Yazidi says*
http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/13/world/...ees/index.html






> Jamir said after ISIS arrived in his town, Arab neighbors of his turned on the minorities and helped ISIS kill. "They join them, and actually they kill us."
> 
> "People you know?" CNN asked.
> 
> "Yes," he responded. "People -- our neighbors!"


the Yazidi are not liked by anyone.

*edit*

and I could be wrong,, these are my observations.. and just that.
*Watch and see* though. Iraq is in flux. and what our government says is not often anything near the truth.

----------


## 69360

> We need a final solution?


Yes gas chambers. 

No, but doing something half assed like Obama dropping a few bombs puts us at risk. It served no purpose. 




> You have see it? You have been there personally in the last few months since they became...something. They did not even exist till very recently...
> 
> They aren't religious. Their leaders use some bastardized religion to soup them up,, but mostly they use drugs.. 
> They were recruited out of the mercenaries in Syria,, and the Army of Iraq. They spout a lot of religious rhetoric and munch superman pills.
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...ll-pill-567366
> http://www.voltairenet.org/article183125.html
> http://www.theguardian.com/world/sho...ar-middle-east
> 
> As far as people joining them,,
> ...


ISIS has been around for 10 years, they changed names many times, they used to be Al Queada in Iraq. They don't even call themselves ISIS anymore, it's now just Islamic State, since they declared a caliphate. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic...and_the_Levant

----------


## Brian4Liberty



----------


## amy31416

> I think we might as well go now tbh.


Go where?

----------


## Christian Liberty

> Rand should have said that in June, when Obama sent in boots on the ground.
> 
> 
> Instead, Rand supported Obama's actions.


Rand is trying to win over the type of morons who think Obama is a pacifist.

----------


## fr33

> I think we might as well go now tbh.


Pack your bags. Don't wait for me.

----------


## NIU Students for Liberty

> Pack your bags. Don't wait for me.

----------


## pcosmar

Operation Cyclone
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Cyclone

Operation Hornets Nest

Non intervention (nice dream)

----------


## kcchiefs6465

> Yes gas chambers. 
> 
> No, but doing something half assed like Obama dropping a few bombs puts us at risk. It served no purpose.


It served a great purpose.

Do you know what these bombs cost? The public being nationalistically gathered together? The further burying of Constitutional processes?

It isn't all for naught and it isn't for the Christians. There is a reason. One that might be counterproductive to the average but productive to the few and regardless, it would happen irrespective of the public's feelings. Obama didn't do $#@! besides what is expected of him.

You are speaking as if killing 'them' (as not even the ever incompetent intelligence agencies can reliably document who is part of a given group) is going to work.

Short of vitrifying the region, they will still be around. Vitrifying the region will create a world wide opposition group larger than they. 

And quite frankly, it is never you, the bravehearts, laying down word that you'll lead the charge. Regardless of reasoning, quit hiding behind other's children sorting out your propagandized failures.

I could sentence for sentence debunk anything you claim. I doubt it will matter. Regardless, it doesn't matter to those that call a shot or two.

Best of luck. You aren't at risk of going somewhere are you?

----------


## amy31416

> It served a great purpose.
> 
> Do you know what these bombs cost? The public being nationalistically gathered together? The further burying of Constitutional processes?
> 
> It isn't all for naught and it isn't for the Christians. There is a reason. One that might be counterproductive to the average but productive to the few and regardless, it would happen irrespective of the public's feelings. Obama didn't do $#@! besides what is expected of him.
> 
> You are speaking as if killing 'them' (as not even the ever incompetent intelligence agencies can reliably document who is part of a given group) is going to work.
> 
> Short of vitrifying the region, they will still be around. Vitrifying the region will create a world wide opposition group larger than they. 
> ...


You know what's a sliver of a silver lining? People like me know that if people like him try to get my kid to fight his battles for him, I know who to go after...and it ain't some random shopping mall--it's him. $#@!s who want other people to fight their battles ought to realize that they should and may well be the targets of those who they would put in harm's way.

Wise up, cowards.

----------


## heavenlyboy34

> You know what's a sliver of a silver lining? People like me know that if people like him try to get my kid to fight his battles for him, I know who to go after...and it ain't some random shopping mall--it's him. $#@!s who want other people to fight their battles ought to realize that they should and may well be the targets of those who they would put in harm's way.
> 
> Wise up, cowards.





> You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to amy31416 again.




God bless ya, purdy lady.  ~hugs~

----------


## Brett85

> Screw the bull$#@! propaganda..
> They are Iraqis taking back their own damn country.
> 
> $#@! it,, let them have it.


I'm not for further military action in Iraq, but I don't think your statement is true.  Most of the ISIS fighters are from Syria, not Iraq.  It's not an example of Iraqis taking back their own country.

----------


## enhanced_deficit

> If there's innocent people around the world  getting terrorized we have a duty to stop it, because this is  America


First we got to stop our own tax payers funding and arming of those who terrorize and bomb innocent people  in Palestine.  




> Well you could ask,, 
> Don't hold your breath.
> 
> *These radical and twisted mercenaries that we trained and armed were allowed to slaughter Christian Communities in Syria and Iraq,, with no action from the US.  But now that Satan worshipers are threatened,, we start bombing*.
> 
> It is a sick world we live in.


Bold mine.  
I don't think current regime has any special sympathy for Satan worshipers (not that above post suggesed that)  despite past fluff linkage like below.  It is driven by other factors, neocons geopolitical calculations etc.


*Satan CUT from Son of God film for looking too much like BARACK OBAMA*


  Feb 19, 2014 16:32 By Chris Bradley 
*Producers of The Bible said the likeness between the actor  and the US president was a "false connection" after pictures of the pair  went viral*


    Getty / Channel 5  
  Double take: President Barack Obama and Satan from the hit mini-series The Bible      Satan has had his scenes cut from a big screen version of hit  mini-series The Bible after rumours spread over his likeness to Barack  Obama.
Makers of History Channel show have left "the devil on the cutting room floor" for the 20th Century Fox's 'Son of God'.

She  said: "Someone made a comment that the actor who played the devil  vaguely resembled our president, and suddenly the media went nuts.

"The next day, when I was sure everyone would only be talking about Jesus, they were talking about Satan instead."
For  the re-imagined Son of God, which will be released in the UK on March  5, Downey said she wanted "all of the focus" to be on Jesus Christ.
The producer added: "I want his name to be on the lips of everyone who sees this movie, so we cast Satan out.
"It gives me great pleasure to tell you that the devil is on the cutting-room floor."
The 10 part miniseries The Bible was a smash-hit in the US and attracted an average of 11 million viewers.

 http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/son-god-barack-obama-look-a-like-3162168

----------


## THX 1138

Remove our troops from the Middle East. 

Put a moratorium on ALL immigration, so they can no longer come here. 

Inform all Middle Eastern nations that from this point on, any attack against the US by either their military OR by Middle Eastern nationals living in the US (ie, 9/11) will result in a nuclear response from us.

----------


## pcosmar

> Remove our troops from the Middle East. 
> 
> Put a moratorium on ALL immigration, so they can no longer come here. 
> 
> Inform all Middle Eastern nations that from this point on, any attack against the US by either their military OR by Middle Eastern nationals living in the US (ie, 9/11) will result in a nuclear response from us.


You would Nuke a million people for the actions of a few criminals,,?
Or for a few folks with a legitimate reason ? (and there are lots of reasons)

I don't think I could get behind that.
Just get out of the ME,, disengage entirely.

----------


## orenbus

> 


continued

----------


## orenbus



----------


## extortion17

> Unless we're under direct attack, the only acceptable form of "intervention" is to open up the arms bazaar and let peoples defend themselves.


Or as the U.S. Constitution provides for :  A Letter of Marque.

----------


## Raginfridus

> In a free country, there would be nothing stopping someone if they wanted to intervene.  They just couldn't force the rest of the country to do it for them.


There's nothing stopping keyboard commandos from enlisting with the French Foreign Legion. I think two of their best divisions are constantly in Africa, no doubt taking blowback from the CIA's vassalage campaign in Libya. They've been to Afghanistan too, so who knows where to next? There are plenty of opportunities for the concerned to ante their own skins in the game.

----------

