so "war" makes it no longer terrorism when someone detonates a bomb in a city market because those people belong to a different sect of Islam?

6/8/2017 3:07:22 PM

Unless you are ready to call the US the biggest terrorist organisation of all time. (I kinda am)

Quote :

"The Boston bombers only killed 3 people, but hundreds were injured. There are plenty of efugees that are technically victims of terrorism also."

The same thing happens in gun violence and mass shootings. Bystanders get shot everyday.

http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/reports/mass-shooting

[Edited on June 8, 2017 at 3:24 PM. Reason : LINCOLN DID IT]

6/8/2017 3:20:49 PM

Quote :

"Why are you so much more comfortable with being murdered by homicide than "terrorism""

Because as already explained, most homicides involve:
-Violent People that know each other
-Disputes over drugs/gangs

Neither of which deliberately target uninvolved American citizens, let alone women and children.

Most Americans don't have to fear getting shot in a drive by if the stay away from gangs and drugs. However lots of Americans can fear a plane crashing into a large office building.

6/8/2017 3:59:02 PM

I'm more worried about being randomly murdered than being a victim of a terrorist attack. Most rational people are. You need to have your logic program serviced.

[Edited on June 8, 2017 at 4:04 PM. Reason : ]

6/8/2017 4:04:34 PM

I would assume the most common murders in the country are men killing their current or past significant other.

6/8/2017 4:13:31 PM

Quote :

"I'm more worried about being randomly murdered"

The keyword here is "random".

As I said, homicide isn't very "random". You have good indicators for being a murder victim... psychopathic exes, drug dealings, gang membership, past crimes, being in a high crime area...

Whereas the goal of terror attacks is purely random. That is what makes people "terrorized". You take previous places that are the last place you would expect to be targeted, and kill people.

6/8/2017 4:21:14 PM

Thats irrelevant. Around 3000 Americans have died from terrorism since 1975 and almost all of that happened in one event that can't happen again.

compared to 1.3 million gun deaths in a similar time period. Assuming more than .2% of gun deaths are random, you are more likely to die from a random gun death.

We killed 1500 civilians in Iraq and Syria in March alone. Muslims are much more likely to die from American terrorism than the other way around.

If you look at something like drunk driving, the US gets around 3000 deaths every three months. You are much more likely to die from a drunk driver hitting you than from a terrorist attack.

Quote :

"You take previous places that are the last place you would expect to be targeted and kill people."

You mean like schools? movie theatres?



Random medical errors kill 98,000 americans per year.

You should probably focus your attention on things that have a reasonable statistical chance at killing you.

[Edited on June 8, 2017 at 4:38 PM. Reason : hmm]

6/8/2017 4:36:58 PM

Yeah but that fucks up his narrative bruh.

6/8/2017 4:42:49 PM

Quote :

"You mean like schools? movie theatres? "

You mean gun free zones?

I'm fully aware that Islamic terrorism is not the number 1 cause of death for Americans. The difference is, we can't prevent Drunk driving from entering America, we can't prevent medical errors from entering America, we can prevent unvetted, military aged, male migrants from entering America. What percentage of these migrants would actually commit a terrorist act? Probably 0.0001%... but that is still going to result in many dead Americans.

6/9/2017 9:56:46 AM

will it though? what source do you have that says it will result in many dead Americans?

6/9/2017 10:00:59 AM

Quote :

"The difference is, we can't prevent Drunk driving from entering America, we can't prevent medical errors from entering America"

We could try and improve those things.

6/9/2017 10:15:04 AM

mandate breathalyzers with iris scanners to start your car.

6/9/2017 10:19:08 AM

Quote :

" we can prevent unvetted, military aged, male migrants from entering America"

We do. Its also worth noting that these aren't the only people capable of terrorism. National citizens on the internet can become radicalized without ever leaving and commit an attack. You want to keep the internet from entering america too?

Quote :

"we can't prevent Drunk driving from entering America,"

We let people drive with multiple DUIs in their history. That is even worse than letting people who have attempted multiple terror attacks back on the street.

We could actually phase out cars altogether if we really wanted to

6/9/2017 11:22:11 AM

Quote :

"We do. Its also worth noting that these aren't the only people capable of terrorism. National citizens on the internet can become radicalized without ever leaving and commit an attack. You want to keep the internet from entering america too?"

The tradeoff conservatives care about is: Does it infringe on American citizens in any way? If 1 out of 1000 migrants from Syria is a terrorist, I don't care about 999 Syrians... I care about the 1-50 Americans the terrorist will run over with a truck.

I can live with the inevitable bad guys that are home-grown, because the countermeasures (that wouldn't even be 100% effective) involve infringing on other citizens.

You can argue, as was done previously, that conservatives did the Patriot act and infringe on the privacy of Americans... I guess personally for me it is a tradeoff between effectiveness and severity of "infringement"... in which case the government knowing I don't sit at home and google "how to make a bomb" is fine with me, especially if it leads to foiled plots.

Quote :

"We let people drive with multiple DUIs in their history. That is even worse than letting people who have attempted multiple terror attacks back on the street. "

This is pretty damn stupid... not even gonna bother with this one.

6/9/2017 12:34:02 PM

You know, you're a lot more tolerable when you're actually trying to have a discussion instead of obviously trolling. I mostly don't agree with you, but at least you're not being an unreasonable jerk.

6/9/2017 12:44:18 PM

Thanks for that insightful contribution

6/9/2017 1:41:24 PM

^^^And an important point to add to that is the trade off between security and freedom. On paper, Republicans claim to cherish freedom over security but then when something like 9/11 happens they go nuclear and create things like the Patriot Act.

So in that context, Democrats appear to not want to give into fear. That is, let's not restrict personal freedoms and impose crazy security measures to chase something that is impossible to obtain - 100% security.

Whereas, Republicans appear to be all about individual freedom and rights such as privacy until either we are attacked or as it relates to personal life decisions like abortion and sexuality.

6/9/2017 2:04:42 PM

What are your thoughts on the US use of chemical weapons on heavily populated areas?

6/12/2017 10:28:07 PM

Example plz

6/12/2017 11:21:03 PM

https://www.google.com/search?q=white+phosphorus&oq=white+&aqs=chrome.0.69i59j69i57j69i61j69i59j0l2.2263j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#q=white+phosphorus&tbm=nws

6/12/2017 11:28:31 PM

Oh that literally just happened.

That's fucked.

6/12/2017 11:58:03 PM

f

[Edited on June 13, 2017 at 7:24 AM. Reason : fd]

6/13/2017 7:21:58 AM

That would be so fucked if it is true. What the hell.

Trump has basically given complete autonomy to make decisions outside of his command so it wouldn't terribly surprise me.

6/13/2017 8:51:16 AM

http://isis.liveuamap.com/en/2017/18-june-david-eubank-former-us-special-forces-soldierturned

Child saved by former US special forces member. You can see the child was in the middle of where ISIS killed multiple civilians. Trying to flee most likely. Or got caught in a bomb somehow.

6/19/2017 11:02:44 AM

Every brown child needs a white savior.

6/19/2017 11:10:39 AM

6/19/2017 1:22:37 PM

^^^^^^^

Quote :

" The spokesman for the American-led task force that is fighting the militants, Col. Ryan Dillon, said that as a matter of policy he could not discuss the use of specific munitions. But he added that “in accordance with the law of armed conflict, white phosphorus rounds are used for screening, obscuring and marking in a way that fully considers the possible incidental effects on civilians and civilian structures.” It has not been determined whether the shells that appeared to contain white phosphorus landed in populated areas, but tens of thousands of civilians are believed to still be in Raqqa, even as many Islamic State leaders have fled south to Mayadeen in Deir al-Zour Province. Unicef, the United Nations Children’s Fund, warned that 40,000 children are believed to be trapped in the city."

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/10/world/middleeast/raqqa-syria-white-phosphorus.html

[Edited on June 19, 2017 at 2:49 PM. Reason : z]

6/19/2017 2:48:33 PM

http://www.newsweek.com/world-record-sniper-kill-isis-iraq-canada-628156

Sniper record broken. 2.2 miles. 10 seconds travel time.

Why are 3 out of the top 4 sniper distance record holders Canadians? Do they have a Sniper School?

6/23/2017 12:45:43 AM

Most militaries do.

I always like to think it comes back to hunting. The more of a population hunts the more likely you are to generate a remarkable person focused on long rifles. People hunt in Canada. Have to..

6/23/2017 6:46:24 AM

So there is a US logistical base up and running south of Kobani in YPG controlled Syria. How much of that alleviates the need for the base in Turkey?

For the US to maintain influence in the region the YPG is its best bet.

How far will the US go to put its troops and will behind the YPG/Syria people. I would hope its used for a long time until the Assad question is resolved. Or there is some form of government ready to take over.

But for the most part I imagine the local populations are self organizing and leading themselves. It might be that YPG controlled Syrian populations want to break free of Assad enough to declare independence. Would US back that?

The US NEEDS to be on the ground to have any say. We have thousands of Marines and special forces already. Enough to call in air strikes. We've shown the will to shoot down Iranian drones, a Syrian jet, bomb Syrian convoys attacking our allies/special forces. Very good to establish our resolve. How far will we need to go?

[Edited on June 29, 2017 at 10:30 AM. Reason : fds]

6/29/2017 10:29:44 AM

With pressure in ISIS in Syria, Egypt, and Lybia they are finding the most maneuvering room in Afghanistan. And then there is this.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2017/08/08/war-afghanistan-trump-white-house-weighs-bold-plan-privatize/548004001/

Afghanistan could end up being the center of gravity for ISIS in the near future. I cant see this being an actual solution.

8/8/2017 11:42:05 AM

ISIS is already here.

Did you not see the crazies on the alt-left/antifa ripping down statues of people who have been dead for 150+ years?

Wait...maybe that was in Syria and Lebanon and Iraq.

I can't tell.

8/15/2017 9:08:17 PM

8/15/2017 9:21:32 PM

^^ lol which geocities site did you read that on?

8/15/2017 11:08:05 PM

Kdogg is one of those people who think the gay pride flag is basically the confederate battle flag. I bet he reads Breitbart and talks about the Gaystapo to his kids.

8/16/2017 7:42:35 AM

ISIS uses American boy to threaten Trump

http://www.thedailybeast.com/isis-uses-american-boy-to-threaten-trump-in-new-video

And he identifies himself as the son of a US soldier.

8/24/2017 12:08:09 PM

Apparently, Russia has solid evidence that the US is colluding with ISIS like we believed all along.

https://www.rt.com/news/404365-us-special-forces-isis/

Quote :

"US special ops forces & hardware spotted at ISIS positions north of Deir ez-Zor – Russian MoD"

I had no idea ISIS was already on Mars

10/1/2017 8:13:53 PM

^Those are bases occupied by the US after ousting ISIS fighters. RT is not a reputable source for news...

10/1/2017 10:03:19 PM

The US government is not a reputable source either. All information on the battlefield is coming from one side or another so you have to think about the claims being made and try to see if they make sense. We know that ISIS has been fighting with US weapons. We also know that the US has knowingly armed other terror groups against the regime so its not a stretch to believe they would arm these guys.

The US has been trying to defeat ISIS in Iraq but simultaneously working on the same side as ISIS to destabilize Syria. That much is fact. I don't think these claims coming from Russia are much of a stretch when you consider all of the events that have taken place.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/12/russia-turkey-syria-161228050019245.html

Quote :

"Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said on Tuesday that he had evidence that US-led coalition forces give support to the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant "

Remember this? Is Turkey a reputable source? al jazeera?

10/1/2017 10:27:45 PM

Lol

10/2/2017 7:21:45 AM

Lol

10/2/2017 7:37:22 AM

Quote :

"RT [and Al Jazeera are]is not a reputable source for news..."

10/2/2017 9:57:55 AM

so did erdogan not say the quoted statement?

10/2/2017 12:21:45 PM

You mean the guy jailing journalists and citizens at will who is moving his country closer to Russia and away from NATO? The guy whose security detail was indicted for attacking US citizens on US soil?

Not surprised at all he'd say something like that. Doesn't mean it's true. A good press department doesn't just take someone's quote, they try to corroborate it before reporting it.

Not reputable.

10/2/2017 12:36:19 PM

"I'm skeptical of everything the US says"

"Look at all this factual info from Russia and Turkey"

At least keep your skepticism consistent bruh.

10/2/2017 4:25:25 PM

Quote :

" A good press department doesn't just take someone's quote, they try to corroborate it before reporting it. Not reputable."

So then there are no reputable sources and we know nothing about anything because no media outlet can corroborate government intel. Its almost like you forgot how the Iraq war started.

And please be clear about what you are accusing al jazeera of. Are you implying that Erdogan and Russia control/influence al Jazeera or that they should not report what any world leader says because they are all secretly working for Russia.

Quote :

""I'm skeptical of everything the US says" "Look at all this factual info from Russia and Turkey" At least keep your skepticism consistent bruh."

Thats disingenuous because I said "apparently" because the US has not commented but the US has long admitted its mission in Syria was to take Assad out of power. That position literally allies the US with ISIS. When you accept the information being reported by all sides (US attacking Syria, ISIS attacking Syria with US weapons, US opposing Russia, Russia propping up Syria), then its not much of a stretch.

[Edited on October 3, 2017 at 2:10 AM. Reason : Russia must be badass if they are controlling the US and Turkey.]

10/3/2017 2:08:19 AM

http://isis.liveuamap.com/

10/3/2017 8:55:00 AM

http://isis.liveuamap.com/en/2017/4-october-black-flag-down-footage-of-iraqs-hashd-storming

Pretty good footage.

10/4/2017 1:05:47 PM

when capture the flag gets real

10/4/2017 5:07:27 PM

Quote :

"So then there are no reputable sources and we know nothing about anything because no media outlet can corroborate government intel. Its almost like you forgot how the Iraq war started. And please be clear about what you are accusing al jazeera of. Are you implying that Erdogan and Russia control/influence al Jazeera or that they should not report what any world leader says because they are all secretly working for Russia. "

Let me take a step back because you're right.

Al Jazeera did, in fact, report what Russian/Turkish intelligence told them. The Russian and Turkish governments are not reputable. The fact that Al Jazeera simply reported what they said. They provided no context and made no attempt to verify by interviewing any US or NATO officials.

Quote :

"Apparently, Russia has solid evidence that the US is colluding with ISIS like we believed all along."

The fact that you made this statement after referencing that article is what made me strictly go to the "not reputable" side of things. Russia does not have solid evidence of anything. They sent a couple satellite photos of US equipment sitting in fortifications previously occupied by ISIS (maybe) and then flat out, multiple times in the article say things like "maybe" or "could indicate" or "might show."

So, you believe the US is colluding with ISIS and your "solid evidence" comes from Russian and Turkish officials (both adversaries of our government, one of which attacked (in a manner of speaking) us recently, the other of which attacked (via proxies in the form of diplomatic security) our citizens directly, reported via Al Jazeera, a news organization based in Qatar, a country that operates under Sharia Law and and supports its spread throughout the middle east.

Not reputable.

As for how the Iraq war got started, it got started because nearly 535 members of our nation's governing body did not do the job they were charged with because they cared more about being elected based on the whims of our ignorant population than they did about faithfully discharging the responsibilities of their office. Irrespective of what the public thought at the time, that body had all the information (and standing based on their constitutional mandates) they needed to keep us out of that war.

There were plenty of media articles and arguments back then against this war too.

10/4/2017 8:59:48 PM