Today's Terror Attacks

Musburger1

Musburger1

2,500+ Posts
Looks like possibly three: Turkey, Zurich, and Berlin

Political implications?

Assuming all three attacks were committed by radicalized Muslims, with one victim a Russian ambassador and the other victims innocent civilians, these events could be used by Trump to bolster his assertion that the US and Russia should work together to fight terrorism. The current narrative has been to not work with Russia and to even train jihadist factions to undermine Russian interests (Yugoslavia in the 90's under Clinton and Syria today). Also, Trump has advocated a Muslim registry, something that probably isn't Constitutional, but in light of a rash of attacks, will resonate more than it would have before today. At the least, a tighter immigration policy will have more support.
 
I know I'm not politically correct when it comes Islamic Terrorist. But playing nice with these people is just a sign of weakness in their eyes. Something dramatic has to happen.
 
The first "dramatic" policy I would introduce (were I king) would be to discontinue arms sale to the Saudis and Qatar. I know Lockheed-Martin wouldn't like that, but tough ****.
 
I35 said:
I know I'm not politically correct when it comes Islamic Terrorist. But playing nice with these people is just a sign of weakness in their eyes. Something dramatic has to happen.
Click to expand...

Yep. There's a reason why they attack countries like France and Germany rather than Poland and the Czech Republic. France and Germany are too politically correct and guilt-ridden to fight back or do anything meaningful. When these attacks happen, their top priority is not to offend Muslims. Even though they're much poorer and weaker, the Poles and Czechs would do a lot more and wouldn't care who they offended.
 
If the Russians were dropping bombs on my liberty seeking relatives, I'd hardly see them as an innocent party. I guess if we see it as terrorism to shoot one man, but "just business" to drop bombs on grandmothers and babies then it's easy to tell the good guys from the bad guys and feel very innocent.
 
Crockett said:
If the Russians were dropping bombs on my liberty seeking relatives, I'd hardly see them as an innocent party. I guess if we see it as terrorism to shoot one man, but "just business" to drop bombs on grandmothers and babies then it's easy to tell the good guys from the bad guys and feel very innocent.
Click to expand...
Sounds like you are justifying a state sponsored assassination. First of all, your characterization of Aleppo is based on propaganda. Secondly, if indeed this was a CIA sponsored hit, explain how this works toward peaceful resolution rather than escalation. Do you actually believe the Russians will exit support for Syria if the US is killing Russian ambassadors?
 
Musbuger1, Any US involvement would have been idiotic and no, I'm in no way suggesting/supporting state sponsored assassinations. I expect this is the act of one really angry man and suggesting something besides religious zealotry served as a motivation.

I'm sure grandmothers and babies haven't been the "intended" targets for Russian bombing of civilian areas ... just collateral damage as they destroy buildings and potential combatants. If you have access to information on the peaceful intent of the non-surgical attacks, by all means please link.
 
Modern warfare is now waged in urban areas. Yes, the Russian and Syrian AF bombed the hell out of East Aleppo. For years the "rebels" have been murdering citizens, using them as human shields, and withholding food and medicine. During the liberation of the past few months, corridors were opened so that citizens could flee. But the "rebels" shot people attempting to escape. They ignored cease fire agreements and launched attacks into the western portions of the city. But the Western controlled press chose not to emphasize or even report this portion of reality. The only way to end the occupation - and that's what it was as foreign fighters controlled the area - was to brutally attack the area that was under occupation. Had the US coalition chosen not to continue arming and financing these monsters perhaps the carnage could have been avoided; the exact opposite of the false narrative we are bombarded with on a daily basis.
 
What do CNN people see when they look in the mirror?

C0IqWMuVEAAFS6Q.jpg
 
Musburger1 said:
I guess CNN thinks Allahu Akbar is a prayer uttered by the Christian Right.
Click to expand...

Trump with a major faux pas here. He brought up Christians within the context of a statement on terrorism, and it wasn't even to scold them for the Crusades!

C0F7ErKVQAAj4u4.jpg
 
Last edited:
I think it remains ambiguous who said it first, but whoever coined the phrase "in war truth is always the first casualty" was onto something.
 
Last edited:
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