[quote]NorCal916 wrote:
At this rate, we need to just take a look at the UK. Look what the fuzzy Muzzys have done. That will be us in 20 years. Then the slow creep of the Jihad. I just can’t wait the Liberals reaction!! It will be freakin priceless! These Jihadist aren’t very tolerant of transgenders, Hollywood and the like.
Will be pretty damn entertaining actually. [/quote]
What have they done?
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
So, we’d get all our gas from Venezuela? [/quote]
And, er, use less energy.
Lots of American extravagances will simply become completely unsustainable in the near future. Las Vegas is a pretty good example - it is just not environmentally sustainable to build a city on a desert.
Tell that to the Chinese. They have Macau. It’s seven times bigger than Las Vegas.
I don’t hear you bitching about China and their unsustainable environmental problems.
[quote]squatbenchhench wrote:
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
So, we’d get all our gas from Venezuela? [/quote]
And, er, use less energy.
Lots of American extravagances will simply become completely unsustainable in the near future. Las Vegas is a pretty good example - it is just not environmentally sustainable to build a city on a desert. [/quote]
I don’t think the US is going to let Las Vegas fall off the map. More likely, people/businesses/industry will become more and more water efficient through behavior and tech and/or better technologies for gathering and pulling water will be developed.
[quote]pat wrote:
I wasn’t singling out the U.S. as the sole tolerant of jihad, it is a global phenomenon. And wars alone are not the solution. One cannot just kill everybody nor would anybody save for the jihadist, want to. It does have to be a worldwide consistent effort by peace loving people fought on many fronts, socially, educationally, economically, academically, morally, etc.
You cannot fight an ideology with bullets and missiles alone. Dead bodies won’t end jihad, it may contain it for a bit, but it won’t end it.
In essence I agree with you. I think we are technically on the same page.[/quote]
Yea, I think we’re on the same page too. I was just elaborating on the difficulties of eliminating the jihadi movement and mindset. There does need to be a world-wide intolerance of it. I’m surprised the Muslim countries who are in danger of being overthrown by Islamists haven’t done more to combat them.
[quote]BPCorso wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
I wasn’t singling out the U.S. as the sole tolerant of jihad, it is a global phenomenon. And wars alone are not the solution. One cannot just kill everybody nor would anybody save for the jihadist, want to. It does have to be a worldwide consistent effort by peace loving people fought on many fronts, socially, educationally, economically, academically, morally, etc.
You cannot fight an ideology with bullets and missiles alone. Dead bodies won’t end jihad, it may contain it for a bit, but it won’t end it.
In essence I agree with you. I think we are technically on the same page.[/quote]
Yea, I think we’re on the same page too. I was just elaborating on the difficulties of eliminating the jihadi movement and mindset. There does need to be a world-wide intolerance of it. I’m surprised the Muslim countries who are in danger of being overthrown by Islamists haven’t done more to combat them. [/quote]
Especially so given that 85% of casualties from post 9/11 terror attacks have been Muslims.
wow, bad news for the Kurds.
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
wow, bad news for the Kurds.[/quote]
Not necessarily bad news. From the article:
“A Kurdish colonel has stressed that the withdrawal from Sinjar and Tal Afar was tactical. Within the next 48 to 72 hours, the colonel told Reuters, the Kurds would press back against ISIS and retake the lost territory.”
If you have the strategic depth get out of their way when they’re advancing and then swoop in when they’re overextended.
yes, a great Mongol tactic, btw.
Ok now that the Us has committed to airstrikes, I think it’s a piss poor way to stop the ISIS terror group. I mean, it had no success in Pakistan against the Al-Qaeda element in the Tribal areas. I doubt the Kurds will do no more than hold their ground against ISIS. The Baghdad army is too weak to strike. I don’t think Sadr’s men will make much of a difference.
We could have stuck a deal with Iran, but that idea was struck down. We could strike a deal with Assad, as I voiced on another thread, but I doubt it will happen. So, what’s the solution? A sustained bombing campaign, which will give them the chance to dig in, and gain support from Iraqi citizens who are sitting on the fence now? An armed attack, which could end up like the Israeli’s last foray against Hezbollah.
Some country needs to actually attack these bastards and soundly defeat them with boots on the ground. Who’s got the balls to do it? How do you think it will go down if it happens? And if it does not happen? What do we do about the folks who are financing and arming Isis?
