Posted by tecwrg on 9/4/2014 1:28:00 PM (view original):
It's a moot point anyways.  I would have less than zero confidence in any kind of war run under the command of our current commander-in-chief.

Then why are you suggesting it?

Posted by tecwrg on 9/4/2014 12:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/4/2014 12:24:00 PM (view original):
How would you suggest we kill the terrorists?

Boots on the ground.  We go in after them.

I'm confused.

Posted by bad_luck on 9/4/2014 1:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 9/4/2014 12:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/4/2014 12:24:00 PM (view original):
How would you suggest we kill the terrorists?

Boots on the ground.  We go in after them.

I'm confused.

Clearly.  That's evident in every thread you participate in.

Posted by bad_luck on 9/4/2014 1:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 9/4/2014 1:28:00 PM (view original):
It's a moot point anyways.  I would have less than zero confidence in any kind of war run under the command of our current commander-in-chief.

Then why are you suggesting it?

No answer?

Posted by tecwrg on 9/4/2014 1:12:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/4/2014 1:02:00 PM (view original):
I don't have a good answer to that. And I don't think anyone does.

So we do nothing while they behead American citizens?

Awesome.  I'm surprised the Obama hasn't nominated you to be part of his Cabinet.

One of the few times I agree with BL.

There is no easy answer.   The extremists will find a reason, and a way, to be a thorn in America's side.  The problem is Obama started out by pushing our allies away in hopes, I guess, of drawing in others.    People who don't want to negotiate with, or have peace with, America.   Unless, of course, his master plan was to isolate America from everyone. 

The only halfass answer is to relentlessly pursue those who want to bring us harm.   And, if that means trampling on a couple of privacy "rights", so be it.   Unless the government is going to call my wife and say "Do you have any idea how much time Mike wastes on some site called WhatifSports?", they are free to monitor my internet usage.

Posted by bad_luck on 9/4/2014 1:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 9/4/2014 1:28:00 PM (view original):
It's a moot point anyways.  I would have less than zero confidence in any kind of war run under the command of our current commander-in-chief.

Then why are you suggesting it?

I know you're slow, so I'll explain it to you in short and simple sentences.

The way to handle the terrorist organization, like ISIS, is to go in after them, hunt them down, and eradicate them.

I don't have any faith that our current CIC has the will or the balls to do that effectively.

January, 2017 can't come soon enough.

And, if we have to "torture some folks", break out the damn waterboard technique without apology.

Posted by tecwrg on 9/4/2014 1:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/4/2014 1:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 9/4/2014 1:28:00 PM (view original):
It's a moot point anyways.  I would have less than zero confidence in any kind of war run under the command of our current commander-in-chief.

Then why are you suggesting it?

I know you're slow, so I'll explain it to you in short and simple sentences.

The way to handle the terrorist organization, like ISIS, is to go in after them, hunt them down, and eradicate them.

I don't have any faith that our current CIC has the will or the balls to do that effectively.

January, 2017 can't come soon enough.

So, just so we're clear--because I'm so slow--your suggested solution to possible terror attacks in the US is to fight a ground war in the middle east.

Awesome.

Posted by bad_luck on 9/4/2014 1:40:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 9/4/2014 1:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/4/2014 1:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 9/4/2014 1:28:00 PM (view original):
It's a moot point anyways.  I would have less than zero confidence in any kind of war run under the command of our current commander-in-chief.

Then why are you suggesting it?

I know you're slow, so I'll explain it to you in short and simple sentences.

The way to handle the terrorist organization, like ISIS, is to go in after them, hunt them down, and eradicate them.

I don't have any faith that our current CIC has the will or the balls to do that effectively.

January, 2017 can't come soon enough.

So, just so we're clear--because I'm so slow--your suggested solution to possible terror attacks in the US is to fight a ground war in the middle east.

Awesome.

It's not a full-fledged "ground war".  It's a very targeted war against the terrorist organizations that threaten us.  Primarily special forces and surgical air-strikes.

Did you think I was talking about this:

Yes, you failed to be specific enough.   Like how many troops and where they'd roll out the tanks. 

Posted by tecwrg on 9/4/2014 1:47:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/4/2014 1:40:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 9/4/2014 1:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/4/2014 1:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 9/4/2014 1:28:00 PM (view original):
It's a moot point anyways.  I would have less than zero confidence in any kind of war run under the command of our current commander-in-chief.

Then why are you suggesting it?

I know you're slow, so I'll explain it to you in short and simple sentences.

The way to handle the terrorist organization, like ISIS, is to go in after them, hunt them down, and eradicate them.

I don't have any faith that our current CIC has the will or the balls to do that effectively.

January, 2017 can't come soon enough.

So, just so we're clear--because I'm so slow--your suggested solution to possible terror attacks in the US is to fight a ground war in the middle east.

Awesome.

It's not a full-fledged "ground war".  It's a very targeted war against the terrorist organizations that threaten us.  Primarily special forces and surgical air-strikes.

Did you think I was talking about this:

Maybe I'm not the slow one today.

How does a "very targeted" war in the middle east prevent attacks at home? Unless you think all terrorists/possible future terrorists are currently living in Iraq/Syria and we will manage to kill them all. And we also manage to quash the general hatred of America at the same time, preventing anyone from deciding to become  a terrorist later.

I guess we can just let the planes start flying into the buildings again, throw our hands up in the air, and say "well gosh, what can we do?".

Isn't that Obama's policy right now?

Posted by tecwrg on 9/4/2014 1:59:00 PM (view original):
I guess we can just let the planes start flying into the buildings again, throw our hands up in the air, and say "well gosh, what can we do?".

You're still not getting it.

Not starting a ground war 6000 miles away does not mean that we can't take reasonable steps to stop terror attacks at home.

Reasonable steps?  Like a policeman asking to see ID?