Sending idiot director to Astan to show isis love

[Stomper]

Think of all the good people that would die with the removal of the terrorists. Before some smart idiot says " let God sort them out " ask yourself how you would feel if your family members lived where one of those parking lots were to be made. Also once we start letting the genie out of the bottle whst about others letting their genies out on us which would certainly happen.
I am 100% against the use of nuclear weapons because good people exist in bad situations.

JRuby, I love ya brother but your lack of recognizing tongue-in-cheek comments perplexes me at times!

 

[Stomper]

This has been an issue for a long time with me I admit to being a bit sensitive to the use of nuclear weapons and have paid a price for my position on this subject. It has been a subject I have devoted a lot of thought to in the last 30 years. I made a

This has been a hot topic for me for the last 25 years and I have given a lot of thought to it. Yes I am a bit sensitive to this topic..

I see your using both hemispheres of your brain simultaneously, but I get what you're sayin'.


Let's compromise then.... just one nuke, not five.

 

[JRuby]

Whose nuke gets used theirs or ours? How about neither.

 

[Stomper]

Whose nuke gets used theirs or ours? How about neither.

Tongue in cheek, brother.....

 

[DirectDrive]

The problem with this philosophy is that when we kicked Hitler's azz, there wasn't another group waiting to fill the void... how many times have we taken out terrorist groups only to have them rematerialize as a new group of wackos?

It's Jihadism that I refer to.
We're in a global war against Jihadism. We were in a global war with Nazism.
It is a similar situation, although this enemy is more widespread.
They haven't been taken out yet, as you know.

And yes, after the jihadis are defeated, some other religious or political terrorist group will probably rear its ugly head.
What would you recommend we do when that happens ?

 

[Crohnos01]

That's a great question. People in this region have been fighting for 3000 years and to think we are going to stop them now is rather conceited in my opinion. All we have managed to do is to create attention to ourselves and get them to focus on us an our way of life as something to be eliminated.... diplomatic solutions are lost on their mind set... we are trying to solve an ideological issue with logic and diplomatic solutions... that isn't working. Maybe we should have let the Russians go to town in the 80s and stayed out of their way. We all could have sat back, ate popcorn and watched.

 

[Diamondback]

OTOH, if we'd let the Russkies go to town rather than prop up the other team, without Their Own Nam bleedin' 'em out who knows how much more frisky the Damn Dirty Stinking Commie Bastards would have been about trying to push west?

 

[Crohnos01]

Maybe so... I don't know. I am told that the heat from an atomic blast will melt sand I to glass. If it weren't for the figurative and literal fallout of that option, I would seriously consider it.

 

[Gaucho Gringo]

Late in WW2 there was an unstated policy of bombing cities with little military value just to heighten the suffering and terror among the civilian population to try to cause the collapse of the Nazi regime sooner thus limiting American casualties and shortening the war. Today Germany has largely forgotten or chosen to ignore this even with a great number of civilian casualties and it is a non issue today. The French on the other hand still squawk loudly about our bombing of legitimate military targets in France when we were trying to liberate them from the Nazis. They would have rather seen Americans die over have their precious buildings bombed. I wish today we would really have the guts to go in and do what needs to be done and ignoring the hand wringers.

 

[EPS]

Whose nuke gets used theirs or ours? How about neither.

They all need to remember that we as in the USA are the only one who have ever used one yep it killed lots of people but how many lives did it save in the long run I'm with stomper turn that sand box into huge glass factory lol HIGH HEAT AND SAND =GLASS

 

[etrain16]

To me the biggest problem we have right now is that too many people don't recognize what true evil really is. The protesters that abounded after Trump's election nearly had their heads exploding believing the next "Hitler" had just been elected, many actually believing that he would have concentration camps for LGBTQ people, would use the Feds to ship out of country any person that wasn't a true white color, would immediately enact Jim Crow laws and would collapse the entire country in a matter of days. Of course, none of that has happened, because it wasn't truth, but hysteria and just hatred of those they disagree with.

Our society has spent a long time moving toward the ideals embodied by relativism - you choose what is truth for you, I choose what is truth for me. On the surface, it sounds like a great idea - kind of a live and let live approach. But the problem is that relativism removes the boundaries of right and wrong, it removes any factual definition of evil and replaces it with whatever YOU perceive to be evil, is evil. This is a dangerous shift in culture, around the world, and our schools and universities are leading the charge in programming multiple generations to believe this stuff. Fact is, we all know that murder (not necessarily killing, such as in self defense) is wrong. Why? Because we said so? Or is it because murder is something we already know to be wrong in our hearts and minds? Perhaps it's something that's innately programmed in us? Either way, we all know murder is wrong, and we don't seem to have a problem agreeing on that. Yet I would argue there are other 'natural' laws about right and wrong, good and evil, that are also implanted in each of us - but it seems our culture wants to try and re-write that natural law in order to make some things we know to be wrong, acceptable. And not only acceptable, but celebrated.

This country was founded on the principles that there are some things that are simply universally known to be true - that there is good and there is bad and when the bad rises up, the good must put it back down, even at a great cost. There was little or no relativism then, people knew right from wrong, they either chose to act to fight against it, or to conform with it. Our Constitution and Declaration very clearly point to those natural laws, the inwardly known right and wrong, and use that as a framework for the very existence of our country.

People like this director seem to have a worldview that is distorted. He seems to think that their really is no true evil, just misunderstanding, and that's something we can work out. And while I agree with @AndyinEverson and others that peace first is the best option, when it's available to us. But as he pointed out, there are simply going to be people in this world where peace will never be an option, because they are evil. Once people can admit there are truly evil people in this world, and that we can define what evil is, the moral choices to act and how to act against that evil, suddenly become more easily discerned. From everything I can see, ISIS has no interest in peace, they have interest in pushing their agenda and no other, no matter the cost in lives not only to themselves but to everyone else. They have no interest in learning more about us so we can coexist. They have no interest in sharing our spaces, our governments, our beliefs. They want certain ideals crushed in favor of their own. That is evil, and it needs to be stopped.

Part of this battle for right and wrong needs to go back to the basics. What defines right and wrong for us? Is it a sense of God and God's law? Or is it a natural law? Or do we continue down the path of letting each individual decide that for themselves?

Sorry for the long ramble, just waxing a bit philosophical this morning - must have been some good coffee

 

[EPS]

To me the biggest problem we have right now is that too many people don't recognize what true evil really is. The protesters that abounded after Trump's election nearly had their heads exploding believing the next "Hitler" had just been elected, many actually believing that he would have concentration camps for LGBTQ people, would use the Feds to ship out of country any person that wasn't a true white color, would immediately enact Jim Crow laws and would collapse the entire country in a matter of days. Of course, none of that has happened, because it wasn't truth, but hysteria and just hatred of those they disagree with.

Our society has spent a long time moving toward the ideals embodied by relativism - you choose what is truth for you, I choose what is truth for me. On the surface, it sounds like a great idea - kind of a live and let live approach. But the problem is that relativism removes the boundaries of right and wrong, it removes any factual definition of evil and replaces it with whatever YOU perceive to be evil, is evil. This is a dangerous shift in culture, around the world, and our schools and universities are leading the charge in programming multiple generations to believe this stuff. Fact is, we all know that murder (not necessarily killing, such as in self defense) is wrong. Why? Because we said so? Or is it because murder is something we already know to be wrong in our hearts and minds? Perhaps it's something that's innately programmed in us? Either way, we all know murder is wrong, and we don't seem to have a problem agreeing on that. Yet I would argue there are other 'natural' laws about right and wrong, good and evil, that are also implanted in each of us - but it seems our culture wants to try and re-write that natural law in order to make some things we know to be wrong, acceptable. And not only acceptable, but celebrated.

This country was founded on the principles that there are some things that are simply universally known to be true - that there is good and there is bad and when the bad rises up, the good must put it back down, even at a great cost. There was little or no relativism then, people knew right from wrong, they either chose to act to fight against it, or to conform with it. Our Constitution and Declaration very clearly point to those natural laws, the inwardly known right and wrong, and use that as a framework for the very existence of our country.

People like this director seem to have a worldview that is distorted. He seems to think that their really is no true evil, just misunderstanding, and that's something we can work out. And while I agree with @AndyinEverson and others that peace first is the best option, when it's available to us. But as he pointed out, there are simply going to be people in this world where peace will never be an option, because they are evil. Once people can admit there are truly evil people in this world, and that we can define what evil is, the moral choices to act and how to act against that evil, suddenly become more easily discerned. From everything I can see, ISIS has no interest in peace, they have interest in pushing their agenda and no other, no matter the cost in lives not only to themselves but to everyone else. They have no interest in learning more about us so we can coexist. They have no interest in sharing our spaces, our governments, our beliefs. They want certain ideals crushed in favor of their own. That is evil, and it needs to be stopped.

Part of this battle for right and wrong needs to go back to the basics. What defines right and wrong for us? Is it a sense of God and God's law? Or is it a natural law? Or do we continue down the path of letting each individual decide that for themselves?

Sorry for the long ramble, just waxing a bit philosophical this morning - must have been some good coffee

I hope it wasn't from Starbucks because as you know they are evil lol

 

[etrain16]

I hope it wasn't from Starbucks because as you know they are evil lol

I knew my coffee tasted evil this morning...

 

[EPS]

 

[EPS]

 

[teflon6string]

Love can defeat isis? Only when we start booby trapping goats with bombs.