Attacks in Paris a preclude of things to come in the U.S.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: SPECULUM

I notice it was managed with the Imperial Japanese post WWII. Their culture was refocused.

With Nukes and Shame..But Bushido is gone forever

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: introvert

I suggest that their history of being belligerent goes back far beyond the existence of the US, right back to the founding of their religion.

Perhaps, but the way we go about things in the US is rooted in the constitution and how we approach certain issues should be derived from there.

What we seem to be advocating is suppression of religion and genocide, if not a holocaust.

Now we have to choose what is more important. A vendetta against a religion for it's past atrocities (remember Christianity has it's hands dirty), or do we recognize the fallacy in our actions/thinking and approach this with a more level head?

a reply to: SPECULUM

Oh no, bushido is not dead. It merely went into business.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: introvert

I suggest that their history of being belligerent goes back far beyond the existence of the US, right back to the founding of their religion.

Perhaps, but the way we go about things in the US is rooted in the constitution and how we approach certain issues should be derived from there.

What we seem to be advocating is suppression of religion and genocide, if not a holocaust.

Now we have to choose what is more important. A vendetta against a religion for it's past atrocities (remember Christianity has it's hands dirty), or do we recognize the fallacy in our actions/thinking and approach this with a more level head?

When a level head holds a sword to your throat and tells you to convert or die, what's your solution?

That is how this ideology deals with you.

I know you simply don't believe they are that fanatic about it or that hard, but they are. That they pull of things like what went down in Paris tonight should prove it. If they were simply interested in leverage, they would have negotiated. Did they even try that? Oh no, they simply wanted to kill as many as they could before they all pulled the trigger on themselves.

They think they're in a privileged place in Paradise right now with 72 forever virgins. That's their reward. And they sent all those people they killed straight to Hell.

These people really are the very epitome of the horrible boogeyman the left accuses the right of being.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: SPECULUM

Oh no, bushido is not dead. It merely went into business.

Japan could never organize the citizenry back to the ways of Bushido..its an executives right of passage, like Shriners...Lol

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: introvert

I suggest that their history of being belligerent goes back far beyond the existence of the US, right back to the founding of their religion.

Perhaps, but the way we go about things in the US is rooted in the constitution and how we approach certain issues should be derived from there.

What we seem to be advocating is suppression of religion and genocide, if not a holocaust.

Now we have to choose what is more important. A vendetta against a religion for it's past atrocities (remember Christianity has it's hands dirty), or do we recognize the fallacy in our actions/thinking and approach this with a more level head?

When a level head holds a sword to your throat and tells you to convert or die, what's your solution?

That is how this ideology deals with you.

I know you simply don't believe they are that fanatic about it or that hard, but they are. That they pull of things like what went down in Paris tonight should prove it. If they were simply interested in leverage, they would have negotiated. Did they even try that? Oh no, they simply wanted to kill as many as they could before they all pulled the trigger on themselves.

They think they're in a privileged place in Paradise right now with 72 forever virgins. That's their reward. And they sent all those people they killed straight to Hell.

These people really are the very epitome of the horrible boogeyman the left accuses the right of being.

It's a bit scary, but slowly I think we are getting to the heart of the matter.

Here is how I see it....

There is nothing... NOTHING that the West can do to fix the Muslim Problem. It is the Middle Eastern/Muslim Nations and their people that HAVE TO fix this. THEY have to get their own issues sorted out. That is to say, we simply can NOT try to distinguish who is who...

This one will kill us.

This one won't kill us.

This one won't kill us but may support those that want to kill us.

It is definitely true that over many years of relative peace in the West, Europe and the Americas have gotten a bit soft and tend to see the world through rose-colored glasses. But how much can the West really do? I think it's (almost) admirable that the West takes compassion seriously... but it's not good when compassion turns into naiveté.

Of course I'm over-simplifying here... but at some point enough is enough. Either the good people of the Middle East want to join the rest of the world and do whatever it is they have to do to rid themselves of these throwback barbarians (which may include asking the West for help) or they don't do it. If they don't do it, then it is their problem and they will be on their own. It's not fair or right or just for "regular people" to kiss their wives, sons, daughters, husbands, fathers goodbye in the morning before going to work or school and never seeing them again because they get killed by some throwbacks.

I apologize if my language is a bit harsh... but I don't apologize for the sentiment behind the language.

a reply to: vjr1113

Because over throwing a regime had worked out so well in Iran, Iraq, and Libya...

And let's stop pretending we invade these countries to give these people freedom.

I read through all 6 pages of replies and posts.

Thank you to all of you for chiming in.

However, I did not expect this thread to blow up as it did, therefore I cannot reply directly to each individual, though in the future should I create another thread like this, I will at least attempt to give the respect to those who I am replying to by wrting down their Handles and ScreenNames for mention. Again, my apologies.

For clarification - no, I am not talking about black-water, nor mercenaries. Just private security. Security that still follows the same rules and laws. I think this would be a great job for veterans that still want to serve this country.

I thought of this idea due to a problem that my own city was facing - in one of the local grocery stores, the shoplifting is so rampant and so high that there is nothing that can be done to stop it. When the police are notified, of course it takes them minutes to get there, by that time the shoplifters are gone. I suggested that they hire private security because the police response is too slow. Having security on site and/or within the facility would be much more effective, if not eventually stop the shoplifting altogether.

So, when I say the Feds should reallocate their funding into business, both public and private, for the purpose of security and improving the economy, I don't mean black-water mercenaries. This can also be funded by local taxes.

I enjoyed reading all the responses. It was very intriguing to see all the copious ideas being brainstormed, vetted, refined and argued.

For the woman - you are not alone. Very few, if none of us, enjoy being over-powered, without some form of mutual consent, by another person in the way that we feel physically violated and vitally threatened. Barring some few excepted scenarios, especially twisted individuals.

a reply to: sirlancelot

Obama moved too many troops out of Iraq? It was Bush who moved those troops out in a signed agreement between the U.S. and Iraq. Obama takes credit for it but he had nothing to do with it. We also have worlds biggest embassy in Bagdhad and constant air/drone strikes. The U.S. military industrial complex is strong in Iraq, all over the Middle East.

The U.S. should have nothing to do with Syria.

a reply to: introvert
Maybe you should do a little research on who created ISIS...

a reply to: IlTuoFratello

Turning this tragedy into your personal "predict the future skillz" is disgusting.
Shame on you.

If you really are so infreakingsightful into the damned future, look into one that isn't freaking insane and report back how they freaking did it. Oh master of the "FUTURE". This whole agenda of hate and turning the world into prisons is disgusting. We need jobs, farms, land management and some freaking sanity in this world restored to the disaffected. Not a constant warzone for the End of Days again.

I've spoken my peace.
I'm so done with this thread.

Flame on, oh ye "peace bringer".

Is there a way to identify people in the community who are members of ISIS? I don't think they all look Arabic, or look suspicious.

What if we find out that the France terrorists were factory workers, teachers, etc.. who just happened to belong to ISIS? Should all people who belong to ISIS now be jailed (in a huge GITMO) as a potential threat? It might be the only way to get rid of those time-bombs who are living and working in modern areas of the world.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: introvert

I suggest that their history of being belligerent goes back far beyond the existence of the US, right back to the founding of their religion.

Perhaps, but the way we go about things in the US is rooted in the constitution and how we approach certain issues should be derived from there.

What we seem to be advocating is suppression of religion and genocide, if not a holocaust.

Now we have to choose what is more important. A vendetta against a religion for it's past atrocities (remember Christianity has it's hands dirty), or do we recognize the fallacy in our actions/thinking and approach this with a more level head?

My I suggest you take a look a bit farther back into history than the US.
Look back all the way to Columbus---why do you think he was trying to find a water route to India?
Because trade was dangerous through the Middle East because of the constant warfare going on there! He and his crew were willing to risk a very dangerous sea voyage rather than face the hordes of Muslims.
While it is true that we've done nothing good there and I'd very much like to see us out of the area, it isn't the US that is to blame for the war in that region. They were warring long before the US was born. It was US arrogance that got us involved.

originally posted by: IlTuoFratello
Good evening ATS, From America.

Approximately 2 years ago I predicted that the type of attack that we saw carried out today in Paris would eventually occur in the U.S. and around the world. Turns out that I was, sadly, correct again.

Within the U.S. it is not a matter of stopping it anymore, but a question of when, how large, how promptly can we respond and what can we do to mitigate deaths?

[snipped]

I think you are being overly dramatic, sensationalistic and naive... Your troubles will not come from the outside, it will come from the inside.

Also, you can't really compare Europe to the US in terms of terrorism, since those who are inclined to do things like this, without problems can migrate across land from fx. Syria to France.

I don't see that happening just as easily from the middleeast to the US, since you are almost limited to go there by air, and that means hefty security checks.

Your adversaries will be the poor, the lower class and the working class once it dawns on them that the "land of opportunity" simply means "take as much from everyone else you can to berich yourself at the expense of everyone else!".

a reply to: SPECULUM

Necessary evil, huh?

I'm sure many atrocities throughout history have said much the same sort of thing.

Kill 'em all, let God sort 'em out.

Odd, how those terrorists say much the same sort of thing. I thought we were different?

The curse of Muhammad strikes again. He could have created spiritual teaching that enforces the universal golden rule for all but choose not to. Instead his teachings became a reinforcement of the followers against others. He is not alone in his failing since both Judaism and Paul share the same insanity when you critically/logically measure the words on a duality/nonduality scale. When the religious doctrine goes political it becomes movements like Salafi/Wahabbi, Zionism and Crusaders.

This curse will not end as long as people refuse to see the flaws in Muhammad teaching and create a new Islam/culture free of insanity. Listening to Rumi or another truth speaker of peace over Muhammad would be a good start.

If this insanity continues in the end Islam will find themselves in a situation where it is them vs everyone who is not them and when empathy is lost to the constant insanity from within Islam, we will have a dualistic catastrophe again where genocide, war and relocation becomes acceptable to a large part of humanity.

originally posted by: introvert

This is truly a sad day. Not only have people been killed by terrorists for no good reason, it appears we are going to begin the next holocaust at the same time.

This may very well become one of the worst stains on our history as a species.

All humanity need to change to prevent these happenings. Not cleaning up the flaws of own doctrine and just pointing out other doctrines flaws to make your own flaw seem less, do not fix anything and only continues the curses.

a reply to: IlTuoFratello

Maybe you're right, but I remain sceptical of the same sorts of events happening in the US.

The mass shootings and stuff that you guys have there are not "ISIS" usually (or Daesh, as we call them), they seem to be mostly troubled youth that are white, of christian origin, and not at all Muslim. The Americans have their own internal threat - it is not outside, it is the huge divide between American political extremists that I'd be more concerned with....

Is that a false impression?

a reply to: ketsuko

To a Wahabbi or Salafi adding Sufism is becoming a heretic since Sufism tempers Muhammad words with reason towards an universal golden rule.

Even if all call themselves Islam I agree with the Wahabbi and Salafi that Sufi do not follow Muhammad:s teaching. Especially the parts that goes towards violence. Sufism is a good start towards a reformation of Islam.

If Rumi was the prophet of the middle east then the middle east would have been a blessing on all humans.

a reply to: eluryh22

If you look at the flows of people into Europe the plan probably was to slowly evolve the middle east one soul at a time so that they would learn tempering themselves when provoked. Saying Islam is better than this to positive reinforce Muslim to raise above their doctrine.

Have not worked out that well has it.

Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them."