3 Cheers for our good ally Israel! Est. 1200 BC

Mr. Deez said:
In the Libertarian book, the West is always wrong. If we just left everything alone, the rest of the world would live in peace and harmony, and free trade sold thrive. Nobody would fight over land, natural resources, religion, race, etc. It's the John Lennon/Imagine mindset.
Click to expand...

The point isn't that the West was wrong. It is that both West and East acted immorally. The West has fallen my friend. Spengler wrote of the fall of the West before 1914. It has continued to fall for 100+ years.

The point isn't that humans won't fight over resources. The point is, when should humans fight? The answer is only when your home is in direct threat. That is according to Western views of war. But the the West departed from Western values in the 20th century. The West fell in the 20th Century and has been declining ever since. Today we are living right now in a world that is ruled by Marxist, atheists. Now even "conservatives" fight the battles important to Marxist, atheists. The battles actual conservatives or "The West" would want to fight are ignored.
 
Chop said:
Those simpletons are almost as bad as the woke crowd (notice, I say "almost"). To both of their ilk, the West is always at fault, especially the US. If these 2 sets of dipsh!ts would realize for one moment that 95% of the rest of the world would either kill, beat, shun, excessively tax, or impoverish them, they might be a bit more thankful of where they were fortunate enough to be born.

And if the US wasn't protecting them, they'd soon end up in a colony of Red China.
3da5146a7f0222e161f9a10a39e349203a84e50f_00.jpg

(doesn't look so bad, huh...? :confused::confused::confused:)
(looks like at least they get to listen to accordion music... :thumbup:)
Click to expand...

Neocons don't realize that the Left is in complete control of the US. If libertarians had any real power the economy, security, and morality in America would be in much better shape. The problem is leftists run both parties, D and R.
 
Monahorns said:
This is the opposite of rationality. "Every death in Gaza is on Hama's hands, not Israel". That is serious cognitive dissonance. Even though the bombs and bullets came from Israel, Hamas is to blame?

It is hard to understand because it completely and utterly wrong. Those who do the action are responsible for the action. This is how justice is described. This is a description of injustice and a justification for murder.
Click to expand...

No, it is not wrong. I hate to tell you but your ideas on this are no different than what a liberal would say. Your ideas are keeping Israel under a constant threat of Hamas' terrorism. Your thought process would have caused us to lose WWII if it had become the majority opinion back then.

Hamas is directly responsible for the blowback to Gaza. Their actions have caused Israel to say enough is enough.
 
Garmel said:
No, it is not wrong. I hate to tell you but your ideas on this are no different than what a liberal would say. Your ideas are keeping Israel under a constant threat of Hamas' terrorism. Your thought process would have caused us to lose WWII if it had become the majority opinion back then.
Click to expand...

Please refute the fact that justice is determined by punishing the guilty and protecting the innocent. The guilty are those who perform criminal acts. The innocent are those who don't perform criminal acts. But you claim that "good guys" can kill those who have performed no criminal act, i.e. innocents. That means you are supporting injustice yourself. Just be honest.

Israel is under threat for many reasons. I GUARANTEE you, I haven't put Israel under threat in any way. They are responsible for their own actions. Hamas and Palestine are responsible for their own actions as well.

I don't think you understand what happened in WW2 and why it happened. Look at what has happened in the US and Europe. We lost. The communists won. And "we" gave them everything they needed to beat us. You are so concerned about voting systems but you can't see who is controlling those systems. The answer is the group who won WW2.
 
Monahorns said:
The point isn't that humans won't fight over resources. The point is, when should humans fight? The answer is only when your home is in direct threat.
Click to expand...

The problem is that someone doesn't have to be on the Mexican or Canadian border to threaten the United States anymore. They can massively threaten our economy from almost anywhere in the world. (For example, if someone threatens the supply of oil from the Middle East, does that threaten the United States? Of course.) They can get on a plane, fly to the US, and murder people per easily. And of course, the most powerful nations can threaten the United States with intercontinental weapons.

Does that mean every battle is for us to engage? No. That's what the neocons often get wrong. But the reverse extreme is just as wrong and more dangerous. It should be a case-by-case basis where we get involved and to what extent (ranging from economic aid to direct military invasion, which would be the highest level of involvement). And of course, we should make sure the military is prepared and capable to fight anyone anywhere.

Monahorns said:
The battles actual conservatives or "The West" would want to fight are ignored.
Click to expand...

I've never seen you support any battle waged by the West or any battle you think it should be engaging but isn't. Is there such an example?
 
Last edited:
Some people seem to hate when the harsh reality of the world gets in the way of kum by yah.
I wonder if those people ever had to make difficult decisions in their own lives? Decisions that other people could look at and decry how awful.
Sometimes there are awful decisions made for the greater good.
People shouldn't try to moralize from hindsight.
 
Last edited:
Mr. Deez said:
The problem is that someone doesn't have to be on the Mexican or Canadian border to threaten the United States anymore. They can massively threaten our economy from almost anywhere in the world. (For example, if someone threatens the supply of oil from the Middle East, does that threaten the United States? Of course.) They can get on a plane, fly to the US, and murder people per easily. And of course, the most powerful nations can threaten the United States with intercontinental weapons.

Does that mean every battle is for us to engage? No. That's what the neocons often get wrong. But the reverse extreme is just as wrong and more dangerous. It should be a case-by-case basis where we get involved and to what extent (ranging from economic aid to direct military invasion, which would be the highest level of involvement). And of course, we should make sure the military is prepared and capable to fight anyone anywhere.
Click to expand...

Good points. I think the US military should protect US citizens and their property abroad. In general at least. I wouldn't want elites to use the military as their personal armies for their own personal aggrandizement.

Mr. Deez said:
I've never seen you support any battle waged by the West or any battle you think it should be engaging but isn't. Is there such an example?
Click to expand...

I was talking about political battles. Culture war stuff. Growth of government. Immigration. In terms of actual war I support defensive types of things. For example I think the Christians of Nigeria are justified in fighting a war against Boko Haram. It was fine to go after Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. IMO, the mistake was in attacking Afghanistan and Iraq as supposed supporters of them.
 
Horn2RunAgain said:
Thankfully you're not making decisions on foreign policy. I sleep good at night with that knowledge
Click to expand...

If I was the US would be the most peaceful, free, rich country in the world way beyond where we are today. I wouldn't siphon the wealth of citizens to send to Ukraine, Israel, etc.

Think about WW2. What was the end result of WW2 for the UK? They lost their empire. It was dwindling anyway but they could have held it together for quite a while longer if they had avoided that war. Maybe you think they couldn't have. Maybe, maybe not. But winning the war actually broke the UK in many ways. It was also how the socialists took over.
 
I think I heard Biden say that same thing MONahorns. So I guess you think Hitler would have just let them remain Neutral? What an absurd assumption.
 
Idk. No one knows what would have happened if things were different.

What we do know is that England entered the war on behalf of Poland.
 
Monahorns said:
If I was the US would be the most peaceful, free, rich country in the world way beyond where we are today. I wouldn't siphon the wealth of citizens to send to Ukraine, Israel, etc.

Think about WW2. What was the end result of WW2 for the UK? They lost their empire. It was dwindling anyway but they could have held it together for quite a while longer if they had avoided that war. Maybe you think they couldn't have. Maybe, maybe not. But winning the war actually broke the UK in many ways. It was also how the socialists took over.
Click to expand...

Battle of Britain. Yeah, avoid that war
 
Horn6721 said:
So Mona
So You think Britain and France should not have declared war on Germany?
Click to expand...

I don't know. It isn't something I have read much about. But I have read some short articles saying that England declared war on Germany to fight for Poland. That doesn't sound worth it to me, but I don't know all of the facts to say one way or the other. I don't know about France at all. I think Germany attacked them first for Alsace-Lorraine, but I don't know if that is even right.
 
Good thing Israel killed this baker. He was plotting to wreck Israel with gluten intolerance. :)

But he was a human shield! What justification can hornfans give? If Israel can't kill a baker in the street how could the US survive WW2? :e-face-tears:

 
Imagine this being you and people saying that your deserve it or your a terrorist. All the while you are just sad your children and wife are dead. But the source is a Muslim!

 
This is a PR/Media war. Whoever has the best sad videos and pics wins. That is why casualty scoreboard matters.
 
Monahorns said:
Good thing Israel killed this baker. He was plotting to wreck Israel with gluten intolerance. :)

But he was a human shield! What justification can hornfans give? If Israel can't kill a baker in the street how could the US survive WW2? :e-face-tears:

Click to expand...


Any proof this story is real? As I said you'll believe every Twitter story that's anti-Israel but you want absolute proof of anything that's against Hamas. I wonder why.
 
Who knew it was IDF snipers? Srsly you post a vid with absolutely no accreditation?
 
Last edited:
Garmel said:
Any proof this story is real? As I said you'll believe every Twitter story that's anti-Israel but you want absolute proof of anything that's against Hamas. I wonder why.
Click to expand...

First, is there proof?

Second, assuming it's real, is this a reason not to wage war? Because if it is, there has never been a justifiable war in the history of humanity, including the American Revolution. Every war has ****-ups and bad apples who do the wrong thing accidentally or intentionally. You deal with wrongdoers by punishing them according to law, but if you're willing to give up because of a screwup or even many screwups (and there will be when we're talking about operations involving thousands of millions of people), you'll never win a war.
 
Last edited:
Mr. Deez said:
First, is there proof?

Second, assuming it's real, is this a reason not to wage war? Because if it is, there has never been a justifiable war on the history of humanity, including the American Revolution. Every war has f**k-ups and bad apples who do the wrong thing accidentally or intentionally. You deal with wrongdoers by punishing them according to law, but if you're willing to give up because of a screwup or even many screwups (and there will be when we're talking about operations involving thousands of millions of people), you'll never win a war.
Click to expand...

Yep. Israel is in the right here.

All I know is if the world was listening to the Mona types during WWII we'd still be having to deal with Nazi and Japanese insurgents to this very day.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top