They Are Coming

WorsterMan

10,000+ Posts
Obama could have done something to stop this situation long before now. He sqaundered precious time and resources. Along the way he dithered & ignored the strategic, military & intelligence advice he got. He has alway lead from behind - he is completely feckless. He has been undoing and slowly killing this country one brick at a time. OK, I know "HE" got OBL... yeah.

Before I say this, I hope I am wrong - I hope that those that are supposed to protect us, somehow do and none of this ever happens.

On the other hand, I fear ISIS or ISIL is already in the US thanks to our porous borders (especially Texas) and due to Internet recruiting. They will continue to grow and strengthen on our soil due to social media and the sieve borders. On the Internet ISIS will start showing beheadings on our soil, hostage situations, killing of innocents, mass explosions and general mayhem I cannot begin to think of.

Cyber, power grid, food storage, mass transit attacks, etc. are certainly possible targets.

You remember the school in Beslan Russia where the Chechnya radicals killed hundreds of school kids, teachers, admin, etc? Use your imagination....

Hotels / resorts, restaurants, sporting events, entertainment venues, higher education, state & local government, etc.

Some of you will not like my solution. Some of you will want wait and play nice, say we don't do things that way, give Obama's limited airstrikes, arming ISIS rebels and a handful of "advisors" on the ground more time. Some of you don't we are at 11:55 PM today and what is at stake. I say we roll up our sleeves and go full WWII on their asses - NOW!
 
"I say we roll up our sleeves and go full WWII on their asses - NOW!"

I think I've heard this a couple of times now. Not really on this board (maybe once), but in general from people in real life and not just on the Internet.

We rallied to defeat fascism and ultranationalism, etc. etc. blah blah.

I don't think this is a comparable situation. The atrocities of ISIS are not the same as the atrocities of the Nazis. The government support that they're getting pales in comparison to the actual governments that fought against the U.S. and its allies in WW2.

If people are implying that going "WWII" on someone says that we're going to reinstate the draft, send Muslims to internment camps, and send 12 million troops (and nukes) to go fight an enemy who's easy to spot, then I think that's a bit of an overstatement.
 
True Musburger, we helped create Isis over the years. Nonetheless, that fact doesn't diminish the danger they pose. The Middle East is a difficult region to understand, especially when attempting to make a determination on who's "good" and who's "bad." I think that's gonna change with some frequency depending on what is most beneficial to us based upon whatever geopolitical objective we are setting our sights on. That's not easy for some to accept and/or recognize, but that's the way the game is played. Still, like I stated earlier, regardless of the origin of Isis, I still believe that they, and other Islamic organizations with similar long term objectives do pose a definite danger and, for the most part, need to be completely destroyed. What would your preferred course of action be regarding the handling of the current situation as it now stands? Do we offer aid to Assad? He was the bad guy last year. Do we choose to support the lesser of two (or three, or four) evils? I don't think there's any solution that will be lasting. But, I do think we need to deal with the entities that presently pose the biggest threats.

In general, imagine a world without radical Islam. I'm not sure how that could be achieved short of turning the Mid East into a giant oil slick.
 
Worster Man,

Go ahead and sign up to fight them rather than typing ineffective words here on Hornfans. I'm sure the forces already fighting ISIS would love to have some volunteers.
 
I think the salient point of worster is as CPF pointed out there will be groups of exetremists here, if they are not already.
A UT congressman questioned Johnson, head of HLS about 4 known terrorists with ties to radical groups that were caught in the texas border on sept 10.
Johnson said he has " heard" that " report" ( report, not rumor) but he couldn't verify it?

WTC if the head of Homeland security can't find a way to verify a report how can?

If any of you watched Johnson's testimony you saw the Sgt Shultz syndrome in full action# If they don't acknowledge they know or see anything they can deny deny deny#
and keep on saying ISIS is not a threat to USA here#

here is Fox's coverage of the congressman and part of Johnson's testimony# See if you feel comforted
The Link


Edit to add this
"And you pointed out to him that the GAO has estimated there's only a six percent operational control of this border. Only six percent. And we've got the Homeland Security secretary sitting there talking about how he may or may not be familiar with the report you have in hand about these four terrorists.

CHAFFETZ: And I asked him. I asked him what is the operational control right now on the border? What is the operational control? And he said I don't know. How could he not know? He's the Homeland Security secretary."


does that alone concern anyone?
 
Isis is a direct threat and we need to react the same way W/Cheney did to al quaeda: we need to attack Isis by attacking and destroying Iceland.
 
I am still waiting for that ISIS car bomb that Judicial Watch promised me. Maybe next week.

laugh.gif
 
Paso
You could help matters along by putting a poster of Muhammed wearing a bikini.

do you truly think there have not been any islamists cross our border?
do you doubt congressman Chaffetz?
does it concern you that the GAO estimates we only have 6% operational control of the border?
and Johnson says he does into even know what the operational control is?
I am glad it is such a joke to you.
 
Going WWII on them was probably the wrong term to use. Hearings, talk and half measures are not fully protecting the country in a timely way. My point was to use all means necessary to aggressively go after ISIS before this goes any further. I did not mean internment camps or dropping a nuke on Damascus or any other city.

As was stated the Middle East is not easy to understand, it is complicated - it is a mess. The British have a long history of meddling in the region. They screwed it up even more pre & post WWI, by breaking up the former Ottoman Empire and then creating new countries post WWI. Those changes will continue to have a negative impact on the region for years to come.

See the red flag story on the thwarted ISIS plot in Australia? I hope I am wrong, but my fear is we are on the cusp of seeing terrorism on our soil from this group.
 
We can go after them, but most of them will blend in with society until the threat passes. In places like afghanistan, they will go into their caves until americans are gone, then resume their horrific acts. If it was as simple as just going over there and fighting, we would have beat their *** a long time ago. This **** has been going on in that part of the world for thousands of years and we arent going to be the ones to stop it. The best case scenario for us is dictators keeping a tight grip on their volatile population. Extremists can still exist in that situation but its about the best we can do.
 
Do I doubt what a Republican congressman from Utah says about the border particularly when it is at odds with what my congressman says?

Absolutely.

The efforts to conflate immigration and terrorism are both pathetic and laughable.
 
Paso, now I see where you get your talking points. Or maybe where Beto gets his. No wonder you don't like Judicial Watch.
laugh.gif
 
I know him but not very well. We have a good friend in common and have both lived here pretty much our entire lives. It is not an unusual view here. We laugh about ISIS. The Cartel guys would behead them in a second. ISIS would be bad for business and business is good.
 

Weekly Prediction Contest

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

Recent Threads

Back
Top