Jordan 2, ISIS/L 1

[quote]magick wrote:

[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Yeah and who gives a crap if they hung these two terrorists or not? They were already on death row, the woman in particular for being part of an attack on a Jordanian hotel which killed 60 people. Shit, in my hometown there’s a guy who’s been on death row since the late 80’s and the crimes he committed against a small unarmed child would make for a good horror film but no one has the balls to end his life and he’s still alive almost thirty years later.

These ISIS terrorists are scum and should be treated as such. They cry when we bomb their “women and children” and yet showed a video of a little kid executing some Russians. If that’s the case, well your women and children are fair game. They burned this pilot alive and, as far as executing the two terrorists, sure it was an emotional response, sure it was a gut reaction and total revenge, but that’s the kind of thing ISIS understands, so I say go for it. After all Mohammad said attack your enemy the way they attack you, and finally, someone’s had the freaking balls to do it.[/quote]

The essence of democracy and Western idealism, universal freedom, is such that all lives are to be respected on a basic, fundamental level. This shouldn’t change even if the other guy commits something horrible.[/quote]

First, lets be clear about something: Jordan is not a Western democracy. They therefore do not need to play by these rules even if these were unbreakable rules (and in geo-politics they are not, quite frankly. It’s anarchy).

More to the point however, these executed prisoners were already guilty. They were in jail and guilty according to that nation’s laws (and frankly, nobody hear should be silly enough to argue that they weren’t guilty by any civilized laws anyway).

Hanging them is thus perfectly legal. By both their laws and ours (although we would use injection or chair, because hanging is considered “unusual” per our legal history now. But principle of capital punishment is same. We do this for deserters and traitors in our military as well).

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]Musashi92 wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:
And then our fearless leader throws christians under the bus.

- YouTube???�?�¯�??�?�»�??�?�¿

[/quote]

I heard him the other day talking about the Jordanian pilot and he wouldn’t say who had done it. He said “whoever did this…” as if it’s not known who was responsible.[/quote]

I think he meant whatever individuals. Obama is not my kind of president, but lets not condemn him by misappropriating his remarks.

[/quote]

Actually I misquoted him. I’m pretty certain he said “whichever group”. It’s all part of his game of pretending it has nothing to do with Islam or Muslims. I’m not misappropriating his remarks. He does this all the time. He’s been doing it for years.[/quote]

Well if that is the case then yeah simply a case of political correctness. But the first way you worded it did not sound that way.

[quote]Aragorn wrote:
First, lets be clear about something: Jordan is not a Western democracy. They therefore do not need to play by these rules even if these were unbreakable rules (and in geo-politics they are not, quite frankly. It’s anarchy).

More to the point however, these executed prisoners were already guilty. They were in jail and guilty according to that nation’s laws (and frankly, nobody hear should be silly enough to argue that they weren’t guilty by any civilized laws anyway).

Hanging them is thus perfectly legal. By both their laws and ours (although we would use injection or chair, because hanging is considered “unusual” per our legal history now. But principle of capital punishment is same. We do this for deserters and traitors in our military as well).[/quote]

I was responding more to this-

“These ISIS terrorists are scum and should be treated as such.” I felt that the entire post had that as the general sentiment- If you do horrible things, then we’ll do horrible things to you.

I know the difference between idealism and reality. Hell, I generally spout them off to idealists elsewhere. Yet I strongly believe in the ideals themselves and think that veering off them is nothing less than surrendering what is supposed to make the U.S. better.

It’s contradictory, but meh.

[quote]angry chicken wrote:

The reason we are the target of these animals is PRECISELY the idealistic bullshit you just vomited on to the forum: They know they can do WHATEVER the fuck they want, and we don’t have the spine to do SHIT about it…[/quote]

The fundamental backbone of Western idealism is “idealistic bullshit”?

Oh my.

[quote]angry chicken wrote:
But I don’t expect a peace-loving, tree-hugging liberal to understand that. Maybe if we sent our troops to go hand out more candy to the children they’d change their mind? /sarcasm[/quote]

… You let me know where I wrote that we shouldn’t be fighting wars.

Until other muslims stand up to the jihadist for making a mockery of the religion nothing will change. This is not a problem that can be bombed away by the west. It needs to come from within.

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
What’s all this about King Abdullah? The Hashemites are corpulent, corrupt despots just like most the other Arab monarchs today. Good that he’s relatively pro-Western though.[/quote]

This is important. Very important.

We need to rethink Western Ideals and Middle East realism. We will not change hearts and minds in the ME. We will not promote tolerance, democracy and liberty. What we need are Zookeepers. These zookeepers are going to be corrupt, seedy folks. They will oppress their people, and they will rule with an iron fist. Like Iraq and Eqypt once were. Like Jordan, etc. We just need to get over the fact that they throw homosexuals and dissidents over cliffs.

[quote]Aggv wrote:
Until other muslims stand up to the jihadist for making a mockery of the religion nothing will change. This is not a problem that can be bombed away by the west. It needs to come from within. [/quote]

If the crazy minority within Islam is as small as they keep saying it is, it should be easy to crush.

I think far more muslims than we think might disagree with the methods, but do not condemn the end result.

[quote]Brett620 wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
What’s all this about King Abdullah? The Hashemites are corpulent, corrupt despots just like most the other Arab monarchs today. Good that he’s relatively pro-Western though.[/quote]

This is important. Very important.

We need to rethink Western Ideals and Middle East realism. We will not change hearts and minds in the ME. We will not promote tolerance, democracy and liberty. What we need are Zookeepers. These zookeepers are going to be corrupt, seedy folks. They will oppress their people, and they will rule with an iron fist. Like Iraq and Eqypt once were. Like Jordan, etc. We just need to get over the fact that they throw homosexuals and dissidents over cliffs.
[/quote]

I would rather have an all war between cultures than be allies with fascist and theocratic regimes. I would love to go to war with the monarchies and dictators and when ISIS or some other group pops up go to war with them too.
America and Europe in my opinion could morally advance society through war, not a popular opinion I understand. But if we went to war for the right reasons, used the colossal military might at our fingertips, we could do some real good. Problem is as you say, we do at some point have to decide what is realistic.

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Aggv wrote:
Until other muslims stand up to the jihadist for making a mockery of the religion nothing will change. This is not a problem that can be bombed away by the west. It needs to come from within. [/quote]

If the crazy minority within Islam is as small as they keep saying it is, it should be easy to crush.

I think far more muslims than we think might disagree with the methods, but do not condemn the end result.[/quote]

I think a vast majority of Muslims are ultra conservative but not jihadists, I refer to the concentric circles argument that lefties call “islamophobic”

[quote]magick wrote:

[quote]angry chicken wrote:

The reason we are the target of these animals is PRECISELY the idealistic bullshit you just vomited on to the forum: They know they can do WHATEVER the fuck they want, and we don’t have the spine to do SHIT about it…[/quote]

The fundamental backbone of Western idealism is “idealistic bullshit”?

Oh my.

[/quote]“Western idealism, universal freedom, is such that all lives are to be respected on a basic, fundamental level” is some SIXTIES hippie bullshit. The commanders in charge during WWII certainly didn’t have that bullshit holding them back when we nuked the shit out of Japan. And HOLY SHIT… IT WORKED! Took the will to fight right out of those imperialist bastards to the point where they GAVE UP THEIR ARMY… But I’m just talking out of my ass. We should just pretend that shit didn’t happen and that the Japanese DIDN’T completely and utterly STOP all aggressive activities when we wiped out two of their cities. I’m not saying it’s NICE. I’m saying it would WORK. And that it’s a strategy that we should consider.[quote]

[quote]angry chicken wrote:
But I don’t expect a peace-loving, tree-hugging liberal to understand that. Maybe if we sent our troops to go hand out more candy to the children they’d change their mind? /sarcasm[/quote]

… You let me know where I wrote that we shouldn’t be fighting wars.
[/quote]

You apparently had a problem with a country HANGING two convicted terrorists in response to their group BURNING A MAN ALIVE…

We aren’t dealing with a Western democracy. We are dealing with a pack of sub-human animals who are brainwashed by an evil religion. And that religion is spreading and putting ALL Western democracy in grave danger.

MY personal view is that we should stamp it out and turn the middle east into a sheet of glass - then we could look down and see where the oil is.

(that last sentence was a joke) But I still think we should bomb a few cities to let those fuckers know that if they want to act crazy, we’ll show them what crazy IS. Start with Mecca.

[quote]Brett620 wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
What’s all this about King Abdullah? The Hashemites are corpulent, corrupt despots just like most the other Arab monarchs today. Good that he’s relatively pro-Western though.[/quote]

This is important. Very important.

We need to rethink Western Ideals and Middle East realism. We will not change hearts and minds in the ME. We will not promote tolerance, democracy and liberty. What we need are Zookeepers. These zookeepers are going to be corrupt, seedy folks. They will oppress their people, and they will rule with an iron fist. Like Iraq and Eqypt once were. Like Jordan, etc. We just need to get over the fact that they throw homosexuals and dissidents over cliffs.
[/quote]

THIS x one hundred MILLION

[quote]angry chicken wrote:

[quote]Brett620 wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
What’s all this about King Abdullah? The Hashemites are corpulent, corrupt despots just like most the other Arab monarchs today. Good that he’s relatively pro-Western though.[/quote]

This is important. Very important.

We need to rethink Western Ideals and Middle East realism. We will not change hearts and minds in the ME. We will not promote tolerance, democracy and liberty. What we need are Zookeepers. These zookeepers are going to be corrupt, seedy folks. They will oppress their people, and they will rule with an iron fist. Like Iraq and Eqypt once were. Like Jordan, etc. We just need to get over the fact that they throw homosexuals and dissidents over cliffs.
[/quote]

THIS x one hundred MILLION
[/quote]

I always thought John Lennon’s strategy of booking in to a $1000 a night hotel and then shutting himself inside a bag for “peace” was a good idea. If we just give peace a chance? I’m sure if we sat down with IS and just talked about things we could work something out. /sarcasm

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]angry chicken wrote:

[quote]Brett620 wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:
What’s all this about King Abdullah? The Hashemites are corpulent, corrupt despots just like most the other Arab monarchs today. Good that he’s relatively pro-Western though.[/quote]

This is important. Very important.

We need to rethink Western Ideals and Middle East realism. We will not change hearts and minds in the ME. We will not promote tolerance, democracy and liberty. What we need are Zookeepers. These zookeepers are going to be corrupt, seedy folks. They will oppress their people, and they will rule with an iron fist. Like Iraq and Eqypt once were. Like Jordan, etc. We just need to get over the fact that they throw homosexuals and dissidents over cliffs.
[/quote]

THIS x one hundred MILLION
[/quote]

I always thought John Lennon’s strategy of booking in to a $1000 a night hotel and then shutting himself inside a bag for “peace” was a good idea. If we just give peace a chance? I’m sure if we sat down with IS and just talked about things we could work something out. /sarcasm[/quote]

[i]Imagine you’re a kooky twerp
It’s easy if you try
No logic below us
Above us only pie

[/i][/quote]

I’m.just sittin here watching the wheels go round and round :slight_smile:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Aggv wrote:
Until other muslims stand up to the jihadist for making a mockery of the religion nothing will change. This is not a problem that can be bombed away by the west. It needs to come from within. [/quote]

If the crazy minority within Islam is as small as they keep saying it is, it should be easy to crush.

I think far more muslims than we think might disagree with the methods, but do not condemn the end result.[/quote]

I dont think it’s small at all considering who ends up being elected in countries that actually hold elections.

Also the fact that the country seen as the moral authority (saudi arabia) still has people show up to watch women be public executed for essentially nothing more than being a woman.

Or sentencing people to be flogged for words.

How about the UAE stopping their fight against isis because they cant rescue downed pilots. Are they really that big of pussies, or do they just not care that much?

How is sharia law even considered in 2015?
but yet, Application of Sharia by country - Wikipedia

[quote]Aggv wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Aggv wrote:
Until other muslims stand up to the jihadist for making a mockery of the religion nothing will change. This is not a problem that can be bombed away by the west. It needs to come from within. [/quote]

If the crazy minority within Islam is as small as they keep saying it is, it should be easy to crush.

I think far more muslims than we think might disagree with the methods, but do not condemn the end result.[/quote]

I dont think it’s small at all considering who ends up being elected in countries that actually hold elections.

Also the fact that the country seen as the moral authority (saudi arabia) still has people show up to watch women be public executed for essentially nothing more than being a woman.

Or sentencing people to be flogged for words.

How about the UAE stopping their fight against isis because they cant rescue downed pilots. Are they really that big of pussies, or do they just not care that much?

How is sharia law even considered in 2015?
but yet, Application of Sharia by country - Wikipedia
[/quote]

Sharia means law, just say sharia or muslim law.

[quote]angry chicken wrote:
“Western idealism, universal freedom, is such that all lives are to be respected on a
basic, fundamental level” is some SIXTIES hippie bullshit.[/quote]

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

This is where I get that sense of idealism from, not the hippie movement.

[quote]angry chicken wrote:
The commanders in charge during WWII certainly didn’t have that bullshit holding them back when we nuked the shit out of Japan. And HOLY SHIT… IT WORKED! Took the will to fight right out of those imperialist bastards to the point where they GAVE UP THEIR ARMY… [/quote]

Current historical thought holds that the U.S. destroying the shit out of the Japanese forces, to the point that the homelands themselves were threatened, essentially removed any legitimacy that militarist had. The Japanese people saw that their armies were not, after all, invincible. This paved the way for the more moderate factions to speak out.

On top of this came the fact that the Russians invaded Manchuria, and the U.S. dropped the atom bombs and claimed that they had more and would continue dropping them until the Japanese surrendered. Since the atom bombs clearly invalidated whatever strategy the Japanese had, along with the fact that they couldn’t draw forces out of Manchuria to reinforce mainland Japan, meant that they had absolutely no way to win at this point. Combine this with the fact that the militarists, who were quite literally suicidal, were out of power, and we have the Japanese suing for peace.

Keep in mind though, this still wouldn’t have happened if the U.S. didn’t back down from their unconditional victory claim. The Japanese WOULD have continued to fight on if the U.S. didn’t allow the Emperor to hold his status. This is something that people forget. The Germans surrendered unconditionally. The Japanese did not.

Furthermore, we hung a lot of German war criminals. We didn’t touch any of the Japanese war criminals, and I will personally go and hunt you down if you claim the Japanese didn’t commit worse war crimes than the Germans did. Why did we do this? Because we determined the Japanese were assets in the Cold War and we couldn’t aggravate them.

In short… You’re wrong. You are speaking out of your ass.

[quote]angry chicken wrote:
But I’m just talking out of my ass. We should just pretend that shit didn’t happen and that the Japanese DIDN’T completely and utterly STOP all aggressive activities when we wiped out two of their cities. I’m not saying it’s NICE. I’m saying it would WORK. And that it’s a strategy that we should consider.

You apparently had a problem with a country HANGING two convicted terrorists in response to their group BURNING A MAN ALIVE… [/quote]

No, I have a problem with responding to brutality with brutality. Declaring war and beating a country to submission after they attacked us is fine. What the U.S. did to Japan is perfectly fine, and in my honest opinion the U.S. should have destroyed Japan and completely rewritten them in the manner we did with Germany. The Japanese should have been humbled to the point that they are forever apologetic to the East Asian countries they brutalized as does the Germans to the Jews. None of this happened, and it still pisses me off.

As I mentioned to Aragorn, I was responding more to this “These ISIS terrorists are scum and should be treated as such.” portion of Gkhan’s posts. Fighting and killing people is fine, but when we descend to being as brutal as they are, then what moral ground do we have? It becomes a pointless exercise and we lose any justification we had in destroying them.

[quote]angry chicken wrote:
We aren’t dealing with a Western democracy. We are dealing with a pack of sub-human animals who are brainwashed by an evil religion. And that religion is spreading and putting ALL Western democracy in grave danger.[/quote]

BULLSHIT. The Germans killing off 6 million people and forcibly murdering and sterilizing anyone they don’t like doesn’t qualify them as “sub-human animals?” What of the Japanese murdering tens of millions of East Asian peoples? Doesn’t that qualify them as “sub-human animals”?

I am currently drinking a Weihenstephaner Hefeweissbier. What better way to wage war on those who want to ban bacon and wheat beer? Just like the Poles got back at the regime by wearing denim jeans, I offer my Teuton blood tribute to the gods and drink the sweet nectar of the motherland.

Fuck you Allah.

[quote]Musashi92 wrote:
I am currently drinking a Weihenstephaner Hefeweissbier. What better way to wage war on those who want to ban bacon and wheat beer? Just like the Poles got back at the regime by wearing denim jeans, I offer my Teuton blood tribute to the gods and drink the sweet nectar of the motherland.
[/quote]

If the beer is German, then I believe it would be the sweet nectar of the fatherland

[quote]Varqanir wrote:

[quote]Musashi92 wrote:
I am currently drinking a Weihenstephaner Hefeweissbier. What better way to wage war on those who want to ban bacon and wheat beer? Just like the Poles got back at the regime by wearing denim jeans, I offer my Teuton blood tribute to the gods and drink the sweet nectar of the motherland.
[/quote]

If the beer is German, then I believe it would be the sweet nectar of the fatherland[/quote]

Fatherland is for Germans, not for those of us with German blood elsewhere. Although unless we are talking of specific German history, or Russia for the opposite, I suppose I should of said Homeland!

You bloody bugger ruining my riff! :slight_smile: