Obama war against US Christianity more effective than his war on ISIS

Armoured said:

So, pray tell, what would you have Obama do to be more effective against ISIS?

Click to expand...

Step up the effort. When NATO decided to launch an unprovoked war against Yugoslavia in 1999, it rained bombs over the country day and night for several nights, being none too picky with targets either....at one point even attacking the Chinese embassy. Luckily, the Chinese were magnanimous enough to not retaliate in full force as was their right.

If Obama WANTED to, he COULD go all-in against ISIS. But he doesn't. Because he prefers ISIS over Assad, for the sake of his own personal pride.

RhaegarTargaryen said:

Just as it isn't yours to decide if someone claims to be a socialist, but then start speaking and acting like Ayn Rand
Rhaegar Targaryen(just thought that should be pointed out too)

Click to expand...

...uhmm...I honestly don't remember ever doing that. Do you have evidence that I did?
tulc(thinks it's unlikely he did but will apologize if he finds he's guilty)

RhaegarTargaryen said:

Step up the effort. When NATO decided to launch an unprovoked war against Yugoslavia in 1999, it rained bombs over the country day and night for several nights, being none too picky with targets either....at one point even attacking the Chinese embassy. Luckily, the Chinese were magnanimous enough to not retaliate in full force as was their right.

If Obama WANTED to, he COULD go all-in against ISIS. But he doesn't. Because he prefers ISIS over Assad, for the sake of his own personal pride.

Click to expand...

Uh-huh. Just "step up the effort" huh?

Yep, that'd do it. Never mind the differences between aerial bombardment of a static, uniformed nation state's forces compared to a highly mobile, non-uniformed insurgent force.

Never mind that aerial bombardment has never been decisive in the history of warfare, let alone able to destroy an OPFOR.

Never mind that Assad is at least as bad as ISIS.

They're the boogeyman of the moment! They're terrorists, donchaknow?!

tulc said:

...uhmm...I honestly don't remember ever doing that. Do you have evidence that I did?
tulc(thinks it's unlikely he did but will apologize if he finds he's guilty)

Click to expand...

Nope - but I'm betting you WOULD say that such a person is not a socialist, am I right?
Rhaegar Targaryen(was making a point - and he's pretty sure you got what the point was )

Armoured said:

Uh-huh. Just "step up the effort" huh?

Yep, that'd do it. Never mind the differences between aerial bombardment of a static, uniformed nation state's forces compared to a highly mobile, non-uniformed insurgent force.

Click to expand...

I didn't say never mind that. Did I?
There's a difference, certainly. But this difference does NOT mean that escalation is impossible.

Armoured said:

Never mind that aerial bombardment has never been decisive in the history of warfare, let alone able to destroy an OPFOR.

Click to expand...

It broke Yugoslavia (after NATO had murdered thousands and ensured the ethnic cleansing of hundreds of thousands).

Armoured said:

Never mind that Assad is at least as bad as ISIS.

Click to expand...

.....no.
Just...no.
Assad is a *censored*. No question there. But as bad as ISIS? Just fiddlesticking no. And those who claim otherwise deserve to live under ISIS' rule.


There are two evils who will realistically end up running Syria. Of those two, Assad is the lesser. Syria under his rule was a harsh dictatorship, but it was MUCH better than the present situation, and INFINITELY better than life under ISIS rule.

And yes, they ARE terrorists. Or maybe you don't think so? In which case, I have nothing more to say to you, except the words Gowron said to Worf unjustly: "I do not hear the words of traitors"

RhaegarTargaryen said:

There are two evils who will realistically end up running Syria. Of those two, Assad is the lesser. Syria under his rule was a harsh dictatorship, but it was MUCH better than the present situation, and INFINITELY better than life under ISIS rule.

Click to expand...

How do you figure? Which has killed a greater number of people? Which has killed a greater number of their own citizen non-combatants? Hey, ISIS is as cartoonishly villanous as anyone since Hitler, but in the greater scale of things, I'm not convinced they're the biggest problem.

RhaegarTargaryen said:

Nope - but I'm betting you WOULD say that such a person is not a socialist, am I right?

Click to expand...

on line I actually tend to go with people's definitions of themselves even if I'm pretty sure their understanding of what they claim is a little off.

Rhaegar Targaryen(was making a point - and he's pretty sure you got what the point was )

Click to expand...

No, what I thought was you had been in a discussion with someone where that happened and you had me and the person you had the discussion with confused.
tulc(couldn't remember ever doing that but knew sometimes things happen and then are forgotten)

Armoured said:

How do you figure? Which has killed a greater number of people? Which has killed a greater number of their own citizen non-combatants? Hey, ISIS is as cartoonishly villanous as anyone since Hitler, but in the greater scale of things, I'm not convinced they're the biggest problem.

Click to expand...

It is NOT simply a numbers game. If it was, then the USSR would be seen as just as villainous as Nazi Germany because it killed so many of its own people.

RhaegarTargaryen said:

It is NOT simply a numbers game. If it was, then the USSR would be seen as just as villainous as Nazi Germany because it killed so many of its own people.

Click to expand...

And China as well

RhaegarTargaryen said:

And yes, they ARE terrorists. Or maybe you don't think so? In which case, I have nothing more to say to you, except the words Gowron said to Worf unjustly: "I do not hear the words of traitors"

Click to expand...

Sure they're terrorists. But Americans really need to uncouple from the baggage of that word. There's lots of terrorists in the world. You guys really need to get away from the idea that "Terrorist"= "existential threat that must immediately be eliminated at all costs!"

Not to mention the fact that Assad is, by any conceivable measure, a terrorist as well.

RhaegarTargaryen said:

It is NOT simply a numbers game. If it was, then the USSR would be seen as just as villainous as Nazi Germany because it killed so many of its own people.

Click to expand...

Interesting you should say so. Were it no for the fact that we'v been conditioned to think of Hitler s a monster for 70 years, and the fact that Stalin was technically "on our side", I think people would indeed regard the USSR of the '30s and '40s as one of the most monstrous in history.

When someone points out a monster to you to hate, be aware there is sometimes an agenda. Even if the agenda i selling advertising space.

Again, not saying ISIS aren't horrible. They are. No question. Merely suggesting that the Western media's treatment of them is perhaps a touch out of proportion.

Anyway. All that's really neither here nor there. You think Obama could destroy ISIS with increased bombing, is that a fair statement?

Armoured said:

Sure they're terrorists. But Americans really need to uncouple from the baggage of that word. There's lots of terrorists in the world. You guys really need to get away from the idea that "Terrorist"= "existential threat that must immediately be eliminated at all costs!"

Not to mention the fact that Assad is, by any conceivable measure, a terrorist as well.

Click to expand...

1: Why are you grouping me in with Americans? Not that I mind terribly, mind you, because Americans are some of friendliest, most inquisitive, open and curious people I've met. But I'm not one of them.

2: ....If Assad is a terrorist, then so is Bill Clinton, Winston Churchill, Gerhard Schröder, and pretty much any Western leader from the mid-90s forward.

Armoured said:

Again, not saying ISIS aren't horrible. They are. No question. Merely suggesting that the Western media's treatment of them is perhaps a touch out of proportion.

Click to expand...

....no. It really isn't. This is a terrorist group that has essentially made a country. The only thing missing is UN recognition, and knowing Obama, that might've happened a few years down the road if he'd still been in charge at that point, because he'd push it as part of a "deal". Also, the UN is as irrelevant and illegitimate as its predecessor.
These people are so utterly horrible that even FREAKING AL-QAIDA has distanced themselves from their brutality!

Armoured said:

Anyway. All that's really neither here nor there. You think Obama could destroy ISIS with increased bombing, is that a fair statement?

Click to expand...

I'm saying he could weaken them enough for Syria and Iraq (and the Peshmerga) to crush them on the ground. Not just bombing, though. We both know that the US armed forces have more than bombers up their sleeves. Special forces, cyberwarfare, hit-squads, etc.

I'm happy that Russia has joined the fight against ISIS now.

These guys give absolutely zero fiddlesticks!

RhaegarTargaryen said:

I'm saying he could weaken them enough for Syria and Iraq (and the Peshmerga) to crush them on the ground. Not just bombing, though. We both know that the US armed forces have more than bombers up their sleeves. Special forces, cyberwarfare, hit-squads, etc.

Click to expand...

Uh-huh. So, let's say this is true, and Obam pressed the special "destroy ISIS" button he allegedly has... what then?

Who fills the power vacuum? ISIS only exists because we toppled the last power that was keeping sectarianism in check. What do you propose to stop the next ISIS from arising?

Armoured said:

Uh-huh. So, let's say this is true, and Obam pressed the special "destroy ISIS" button he allegedly has... what then?

Click to expand...

Are you able to read at all? Where did I say that he has such a button?

Armoured said:

Who fills the power vacuum?

Click to expand...

In Syria? Syria's government. Yes, that means Assad. He's the only realistic alternative to ISIS, and anyone who thinks that he isn't the better alternative in that choice, I have nothing more to say to.
In Iraq? Iraq's government. Yes, that means Masum and al-Abadi.

Armoured said:

What do you propose to stop the next ISIS from arising?

Click to expand...

Prop up Syria's and Iraq's government, giving them whatever help they need to stabilize the country and cement their rule.
Yes, that means helping these countries curbstomp "rebels" (except for the Peshmerga, who have proved capable and brave allies). Because what the region needs most now is STABILITY...and then help to rebuild.

Those who mock the persecution of Christians living in America hope to dismiss the impact of Christianity being impacted more and more by law in America.

Click to expand...

Those who confuse the United States with the Kingdom of God have done more damage to Christianity than anyone else. There was a time when "Evangelical Christian" meant those who carry out the Great Commission, sharing the gospel of Jesus Christ. Today, the term refers to people who seek to impose their moral code on others by using political power.

RhaegarTargaryen said:

Prop up Syria's and Iraq's government, giving them whatever help they need to stabilize the country and cement their rule.
Yes, that means helping these countries curbstomp "rebels" (except for the Peshmerga, who have proved capable and brave allies). Because what the region needs most now is STABILITY...and then help to rebuild.

Click to expand...

So, like, exactly what we've been trying to do there since '03? But this time for sure, right?

RhaegarTargaryen said:

I'm happy that Russia has joined the fight against ISIS now.

Click to expand...

What makes you think Russia is fighting ISIS? The only reason they are in Syria is to destroy the anti-Assad forces and bolster that evil tyrant. One tyrant supporting another. Obama had no intention of destroying ISIS. If anything he would love to see them destroy America. The Europeans have no intention of standing up to Russia or destroying ISIS either. So in the end the evildoers are prospering while millions of innocents are slaughtered, or tortured, or violated, while the world looks on.

Job8 said:

If anything he would love to see them destroy America.

Click to expand...

See, this is what I'm talking about. ISIS has neither the will nor the ability to "destroy America".

Armoured said:

So, like, exactly what we've been trying to do there since '03? But this time for sure, right?

Click to expand...

I don't remember any Western attempts to try to t stabilize Syria's government? If you're from a parallel universe where that happened, please let us know how it went, how you went about it, and how you f'ed it up?

Job8 said:

What makes you think Russia is fighting ISIS?.

Click to expand...

The fact that they're bombing ISIS is a pretty good indicator.

Job8 said:

The only reason they are in Syria is to destroy the anti-Assad forces

Click to expand...

Of which ISIS is a part. But yes, there are others as well.

Job8 said:

and bolster that evil tyrant.

Click to expand...

Is Assad a *censored*? Yes. But he's the lesser of the realistic evils. And thus the only option.

Job8 said:

One tyrant supporting another.

Click to expand...

I don't remember anything about Obama supporting Assad?