It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

27 States and counting...

page: 11
54
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 03:40 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6




2. Start dropping bombs and don't let up until the enemy is completely broken, following them into neighboring countries if need be. None of this "kinder, gentler" war crap Bush embraced, either. You DO NOT let up until the job is completed and the enemy's resilience has been destroyed.


That didn't work to well in Vietnam.




posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 03:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: GeisterFahrer

originally posted by: alldaylong

originally posted by: GeisterFahrer

originally posted by: alldaylong
a reply to: Vroomfondel

It would be interesting to know how many on that list refused to take Jews who where fleeing Nazi Germany ?



It would be interesting to know how many liberals believe Jews were blowing #### up every single day, decapitating children and sticking their heads on poles, or burning people alive in cages.

Anyone?


It doesn't go into graphic detail but ........




The Polish-Jewish historian and the Warsaw Ghetto archivist Emanuel Ringelblum has described the cruelty of the ghetto police as "at times greater than that of the Germans, the Ukrainians and the Latvians."[4] The fate of many of the Jewish Policemen was eventually the same as all other ghetto Jews. Upon the liquidation of the ghettos (1942-1943) they were either murdered on site or sent to the extermination camps. However, some of the more active criminals, especially those associated with the Zagiew network, are known to have survived the War


en.wikipedia.org...



Are you saying we should have taken in German refugees during WWII? What about Japanese?


You did. Infact a number of high profile scientists like Einstein were from Germany



posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 03:42 PM
link   
I live in a state where they're still undecided I suppose, and quite honestly I want our state to be on that list. This world is getting crazy and we may have a potential terrorist attack here if we allow so many refugees into the U.S. Germany received a bomb threat at a football stadium today, and it's where I'm from and I don't want to feel threatened here too. Unfortunately, these attacks are only the beginning...



posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 03:44 PM
link   
I think it is very important that we all, each of us in our own countries, understand one very important aspect that is affecting everyone of us. We are all being adversely affected by ideological tyrannies that are running rampant around the world. We have to correctly identify each tyranny and resist it. Enough is enough, no more!

Throw out political correctness and stand up for your culture, stand up for who you are, and never more allow politicians to dictate the terms of you or your culture. You don't belong to them, nor does your culture. We can find our own way to compromise, and we do it firstly via the internet, the first communications system that has enabled differing cultures and differing mindsets to engage in dialogue without physical confrontation. Over many years, communicating in this way, we will reach a point of compromise, where multiculturalism (existing only on the internet right now) can come out from behind the digital curtain, and become a genuine and acceptable social meeting on the street.
edit on 17/11/15 by elysiumfire because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 03:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: Annee

Sorry, I thought you meant the American Indians. My bad.

The solution to this problem is simple, really. Choose one:
1. Adopt an American policy of isolationism and non-intervention in the Middle East. If Assad wants to kill rebels trying to kill him, let him do so... conversely, if the rebels take down Assad, oh well.
or
2. Start dropping bombs and don't let up until the enemy is completely broken, following them into neighboring countries if need be. None of this "kinder, gentler" war crap Bush embraced, either. You DO NOT let up until the job is completed and the enemy's resilience has been destroyed.

I personally like option 1.


I was thinking about this... I don't think there is a winning solution for the US.

If we take option 1 people around the world, and here at home, will yell at us. People are being oppressed! Why aren't you liberating them? People are suffering! Why aren't you helping them? But when we try, and granted our course to date hasn't been the best, we are vilified for interfering and accused of putting our own interests ahead of the indigenous people. True or not, we will be vilified either way.

Option 2 is viable but is going to make a lot of people very angry. Of course its never a good idea to start a war you wont or cant win. But even in winning at solution 2 there will still be a lot of angry people just waiting for a chance to get even.

Is there a winning solution or is this Wargames where the only winning move is not to play?
(an option no longer available to us)



posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 03:54 PM
link   
a reply to: InfamousJLZ

You do realize that it's possible for a Muslim who is a legal citizen of the U.S. to convert to extremism at any time? How would you stop that? Kick all Muslims out just to be safe?

You do realize that every time someone buys a gun, there is a chance they could shoot up a bunch of innocent people in a mall, movie theater or school? How do you stop that? Ban all gun sales, just to be safe?



posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 04:07 PM
link   
a reply to: alldaylong

Vietnam was a proxy war which the US failed to properly commit to. There was a reason the US toed the line of it being a "police action" instead of an actual war. Had America flat out declared war and set a line inside Cambodia, marching up the Ho Chi Minh through Laos, while leveling everything between their point of beginning and ending at Khe Sanh, the US would have won that war (but not cost the USSR nearly as much money as stretching the conflict out indefinitely did.)



posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 04:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vroomfondel
If we take option 1 people around the world, and here at home, will yell at us.


That differs from present reality how? The US government has an obligation to only one group of people in the world: Americans. Anything else, especially anything else which violates the will of the majority of American taxpayers, is probably action which they shouldn't even be considering, let alone acting on.



posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 04:13 PM
link   
a reply to: alldaylong

I have to agree w/Burdman on this. Vietnam wasn't the same as what he proposed. We took a lot of half measures and didn't really throw all we had into the situation from the start.



posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 04:15 PM
link   
a reply to: kaylaluv

You do realize it is easier to gain access to US soil through claiming amnesty, asylum, or refugee status than it is to import a firearm into the US, right? One of those things takes a license and requires strict post-import registration and tracking, the other does not.



posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 04:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: Vroomfondel
If we take option 1 people around the world, and here at home, will yell at us.


That differs from present reality how? The US government has an obligation to only one group of people in the world: Americans. Anything else, especially anything else which violates the will of the majority of American taxpayers, is probably action which they shouldn't even be considering, let alone acting on.


Its true they are yelling at us now, but not for exactly the same reasons. We will get yelled at no matter what we do. We have for a long time now. I doubt that will ever change.

I guess option 1 probably is the best, knowing we will be hated and yelled at either way, and we should be more concerned with taking care of home than we are about hurting the feelings of a bunch of people who would see us all dead in a heartbeat if they had the chance.



posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 04:20 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6




Vietnam was a proxy war


No way was it a proxy war.

I million North Vietnamese killed. !50,000 Cambodians killed ( in just 1 year ). Add to that the 1,000's killed in Laos and the hundreds of thousands of tons of bombs dropped by The U.S..

Whoever told you it was a " proxy war " is pulling your plonker.



posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 04:28 PM
link   
a reply to: alldaylong

Proxy wars have nothing to do with death tolls. Vietnam began as a war between the US (democracy) and the USSR (Communism). It was the same story, roles reversed, with the Soviet war in Afghanistan in which the US funded the Mujahideen. Most of the Cold War was marked by proxy wars. The argument can accurately be made that every US or Soviet involved conflict between the Iran-Azerbaijan conflict and the fall of the Berlin Wall was a proxy war between the USSR and the USA, and intrinsically tied to the Cold War.



posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 04:33 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Tell that to the parents of all the children killed at Sandy Hook. I'm sure that will make them feel much better.



posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 04:33 PM
link   
I'd love to have a conversation about just the issue and not bring in manipulated "historical FACTS" that do not fit this situation. Yes, they are facts, but they do not apply to this situation. It seems when no one can commit to a hard stance they have to justify their wishy washy stance by reviewing the almighty historical data and make square pegs fit round holes. The reality is that this issue is NOT like any other issue in our past other than the term "refugee" that is being used.

I hold an unpopular view, but I'll own it. IN this particular set of circumstances, we need a period of isolationism and scorched earth policy. I dont care if it was "our" fault or who's fault it was. Right now clean the decks and lock the doors... if we want a chance at viability as a country in the future. The majority of "refugees" are Muslim. WHy are they not fighting in their own country and establishing their own culture as dominant? Because that is not how a caliphate is born. Why are the "refugees" in Europe not acclimating? Because that is not how a caliphate is born. If they are so adamant about keeping their own culture, then fight for it in the land of your birth.

Blah blah blah.. makes no difference what my opinion is, its not the shrill high pitched annoying effed cry of the multicultural proponents.



posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 04:35 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Those Americans who don't like to admit it was a U.S. defeat call it a " proxy war "
However some are more realistic and know what the true outcome was.

Vietnam War. Result.......North Vietnamese Victory

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 04:40 PM
link   
a reply to: kaylaluv

Oh Jesus Christ, not this again!

MUST WE watch every argument devolve into emotional rhetoric and histrionics? WHat in the blue hell does Sandy Hook and the actions of one asshat whose elevator failed to stop on several floors have to do with refugees and America? Holy crap do you understand the differences between imported and domestic firearms? Are you trying to say that Sandy Hook was carried out with privately imported weapons? If not, then I'm failing to understand what relation any of what you just posted has to anything in this thread.



posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 04:46 PM
link   
a reply to: kaylaluv

Oh yes, I'm well aware of that. Anyone can turn out be an extremist/terrorist etc. What I'm trying to say is that all this craziness is happening now with a crap load of refugees entering many countries. Is it just a coincidence? I don't know... but I'd rather not find out. Personally, I don't want them here since some clearly show no respect to the host country, and we should all conform to their beliefs/ideas.



posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 04:47 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Most people who own guns don't go around shooting innocent people. You are much more likely to be killed in a car crash then shot by someone.

Most refugees aren't terrorists who go around killing innocent people. You are much more likely to be killed in a car crash then killed by a terrorist.

You don't advocate knee-jerk reactions of banning guns "just to be on the safe side", so why should you advocate knee-jerk reactions of refusing refugees life-saving sanctuary "just to be on the safe side"?



posted on Nov, 17 2015 @ 04:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Tell that to the parents of all the children killed at Sandy Hook. I'm sure that will make them feel much better.


What?? Case in point... what in hell does that have to do with the topic of conversation?? Im serious, I dont get it.




top topics



 
54
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join