TOTALLY GEEKED!

Ohfour wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

FNW wrote:

---

I saw where he intends to bomb ISIS. The only innocents that are being killed are being killed by ISIS. I don't see where "bomb the hell out of ISIS" translates to carpet bombing.

---

 ISIS camps are located in well-populated areas.  You can't "bomb the hell out of ISIS" without bombing everyone around them.

---

So?

---

 So?  That's MURDER.  They are using innocents to shield themselves from bombing, and you are saying you don't care, kill them anyway.  That's against the Geneva convention, that's a war crime, and it is dishonorable. 

You can't defeat the evil in the enemy by becoming them.

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Ohfour wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

FNW wrote:

---

I saw where he intends to bomb ISIS. The only innocents that are being killed are being killed by ISIS. I don't see where "bomb the hell out of ISIS" translates to carpet bombing.

---

 ISIS camps are located in well-populated areas.  You can't "bomb the hell out of ISIS" without bombing everyone around them.

---

So?

---

 So?  That's MURDER.  They are using innocents to shield themselves from bombing, and you are saying you don't care, kill them anyway.  That's against the Geneva convention, that's a war crime, and it is dishonorable. 

You can't defeat the evil in the enemy by becoming them.

---

It worked in Japan... 

Ohfour wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Ohfour wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

FNW wrote:

---

I saw where he intends to bomb ISIS. The only innocents that are being killed are being killed by ISIS. I don't see where "bomb the hell out of ISIS" translates to carpet bombing.

---

 ISIS camps are located in well-populated areas.  You can't "bomb the hell out of ISIS" without bombing everyone around them.

---

So?

---

 So?  That's MURDER.  They are using innocents to shield themselves from bombing, and you are saying you don't care, kill them anyway.  That's against the Geneva convention, that's a war crime, and it is dishonorable. 

You can't defeat the evil in the enemy by becoming them.

---

It worked in Japan... 

---

 We were at war with Japan.  What COUNTRY are we at war with?

I understand that. Do you think WWII would have ended had it not been for the Enola Gay? I'm not saying it wasn't a horrific consequence. I've been to Hiroshima. I've been the museum, the tomb of the unknown victims, etc. It's horrible. But I've also been to Pearl Harbor. There were civilians killed there, too.

War is not pretty, but here we are in one.

Ohfour wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Ohfour wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Ohfour wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

FNW wrote:

---

I saw where he intends to bomb ISIS. The only innocents that are being killed are being killed by ISIS. I don't see where "bomb the hell out of ISIS" translates to carpet bombing.

---

 ISIS camps are located in well-populated areas.  You can't "bomb the hell out of ISIS" without bombing everyone around them.

---

So?

---

 So?  That's MURDER.  They are using innocents to shield themselves from bombing, and you are saying you don't care, kill them anyway.  That's against the Geneva convention, that's a war crime, and it is dishonorable. 

You can't defeat the evil in the enemy by becoming them.

---

It worked in Japan... 

---

 We were at war with Japan.  What COUNTRY are we at war with?

---

This is completely different.  We can't declare war on an ideology.  What do you suggest we do, just sit here and get blown up? 

---

Of course not.  But you have to be precise and you can't just go blowing up everyone everywhere.  We have the capability to strategically take out ISIS without carelessly killing thousands of people not involved in countries we are not at war with.

Knee - jerk reactions are not what we need in a President.

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Ohfour wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Ohfour wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Ohfour wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

FNW wrote:

---

I saw where he intends to bomb ISIS. The only innocents that are being killed are being killed by ISIS. I don't see where "bomb the hell out of ISIS" translates to carpet bombing.

---

 ISIS camps are located in well-populated areas.  You can't "bomb the hell out of ISIS" without bombing everyone around them.

---

So?

---

 So?  That's MURDER.  They are using innocents to shield themselves from bombing, and you are saying you don't care, kill them anyway.  That's against the Geneva convention, that's a war crime, and it is dishonorable. 

You can't defeat the evil in the enemy by becoming them.

---

It worked in Japan... 

---

 We were at war with Japan.  What COUNTRY are we at war with?

---

This is completely different.  We can't declare war on an ideology.  What do you suggest we do, just sit here and get blown up? 

---

Of course not.  But you have to be precise and you can't just go blowing up everyone everywhere.  We have the capability to strategically take out ISIS without carelessly killing thousands of people not involved in countries we are not at war with.

Knee - jerk reactions are not what we need in a President.

---

No, we really don't.  And I still don't care. 

Ohfour wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

FNW wrote:

---

I understand that. Do you think WWII would have ended had it not been for the Enola Gay? I'm not saying it wasn't a horrific consequence. I've been to Hiroshima. I've been the museum, the tomb of the unknown victims, etc. It's horrible. But I've also been to Pearl Harbor. There were civilians killed there, too.

War is not pretty, but here we are in one.

---

 We are in a idealogical war with terrorists.  We are not in a declared war against a country and we have no right to be killing innocent civilians in other countries.  NONE. 

---

I'm gonna have to disagree with you there... 

---

 WTH?  You really think it's ok to just murder innocent bystanders?  That is so wrong on so many levels. 

And by the way - ohfour - it makes you no better than the Muslim sympathizers. They don't care about killing innocent people because they are Christian, and you don't care about killing innocent people becauase they are Muslim.

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

And by the way - ohfour - it makes you no better than the Muslim sympathizers. They don't care about killing innocent people because they are Christian, and you don't care about killing innocent people becauase they are Muslim.

---

Again, they are the aggressor.  If they stop, then this will end.  But they won't, so we have to finish it.  By any means necessary... 

I'm liking the turn this thread took. And thank you for making such an eloquent argument, LL.

flan

Ohfour wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Ohfour wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

And by the way - ohfour - it makes you no better than the Muslim sympathizers. They don't care about killing innocent people because they are Christian, and you don't care about killing innocent people becauase they are Muslim.

---

Again, they are the aggressor.  If they stop, then this will end.  But they won't, so we have to finish it.  By any means necessary... 

---

 The innocent bystanders are not the aggressors.  That is who you are saying you don't care if they die.  THAT is what makes you like them. 

---

Again, other than ideology vs country, how is this ANY different than Japan?  We obliterated a whole BUNCH of innocent babies, children, and women... 

---

 The Geneva Convention.  The Treaty we entered into in 1949 related to the treatment of civilians during wartime.  We agreed to that AFTER Japan, not to do it again.  Doing it again would be a war crime.

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Ohfour wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Ohfour wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

And by the way - ohfour - it makes you no better than the Muslim sympathizers. They don't care about killing innocent people because they are Christian, and you don't care about killing innocent people becauase they are Muslim.

---

Again, they are the aggressor.  If they stop, then this will end.  But they won't, so we have to finish it.  By any means necessary... 

---

 The innocent bystanders are not the aggressors.  That is who you are saying you don't care if they die.  THAT is what makes you like them. 

---

Again, other than ideology vs country, how is this ANY different than Japan?  We obliterated a whole BUNCH of innocent babies, children, and women... 

---

 The Geneva Convention.  The Treaty we entered into in 1949 related to the treatment of civilians during wartime.  We agreed to that AFTER Japan, not to do it again.  Doing it again would be a war crime.

---

 What are they going to do about it?  Pretty much the same thing they are doing now.  

There are no innocent by-standers

What's your solution LL?

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Ohfour wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Ohfour wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

And by the way - ohfour - it makes you no better than the Muslim sympathizers. They don't care about killing innocent people because they are Christian, and you don't care about killing innocent people becauase they are Muslim.

---

Again, they are the aggressor.  If they stop, then this will end.  But they won't, so we have to finish it.  By any means necessary... 

---

 The innocent bystanders are not the aggressors.  That is who you are saying you don't care if they die.  THAT is what makes you like them. 

---

Again, other than ideology vs country, how is this ANY different than Japan?  We obliterated a whole BUNCH of innocent babies, children, and women... 

---

 The Geneva Convention.  The Treaty we entered into in 1949 related to the treatment of civilians during wartime.  We agreed to that AFTER Japan, not to do it again.  Doing it again would be a war crime.

---

 What are they going to do about it?  Pretty much the same thing they are doing now.  

There are no innocent by-standers

---

 And that is the attitude that makes it dishonorable.  Babies are innocents.  If you say they don't matter, your stance on abortion is hypocritical. 

---

 in war there are no innocents.  We aren't at war with people going into PP.

huskerbb wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Ohfour wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Ohfour wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Ohfour wrote:

---

Collateral damage. it happens...

---

 Um, not when you are not at war.  That's murder.  Makes us no better than the Nazi's.

---

That's ridiculous.  We are protecting ourselves.  ISIS are the Nazis...not us... 

---

 When you start not caring about killing innocents, that is what you become.

---

Again, collateral damage.  Its a fact of war... 

---

 What war?  What country?

---

 You dont think we are at war????  Just because it's not a specific country does not mean we aren't at war.  I'm sure our troops in harms way and fighting every day will be glad to know that you don't even think we are in a war.

---

 We are not at war with innocent civilians. 

huskerbb wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Ohfour wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Ohfour wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

And by the way - ohfour - it makes you no better than the Muslim sympathizers. They don't care about killing innocent people because they are Christian, and you don't care about killing innocent people becauase they are Muslim.

---

Again, they are the aggressor.  If they stop, then this will end.  But they won't, so we have to finish it.  By any means necessary... 

---

 The innocent bystanders are not the aggressors.  That is who you are saying you don't care if they die.  THAT is what makes you like them. 

---

Again, other than ideology vs country, how is this ANY different than Japan?  We obliterated a whole BUNCH of innocent babies, children, and women... 

---

 The Geneva Convention.  The Treaty we entered into in 1949 related to the treatment of civilians during wartime.  We agreed to that AFTER Japan, not to do it again.  Doing it again would be a war crime.

---

 What are they going to do about it?  Pretty much the same thing they are doing now.  

There are no innocent by-standers

---

 And that is the attitude that makes it dishonorable.  Babies are innocents.  If you say they don't matter, your stance on abortion is hypocritical. 

---

 in war there are no innocents.  We aren't at war with people going into PP.

---

 You don't get to just call something a war to justify killing anyone you want to. 

Yes. We are in a religious war.

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

You people can try to justify murder all you want.

But if you want to kill people just because they are Muslim - what makes you any different than them?

---

it's not just because they are Muslim.  its because they want to kill us.

huskerbb wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

You people can try to justify murder all you want.

But if you want to kill people just because they are Muslim - what makes you any different than them?

---

it's not just because they are Muslim.  its because they want to kill us.

---

Thank you. 

huskerbb wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

You people can try to justify murder all you want.

But if you want to kill people just because they are Muslim - what makes you any different than them?

---

it's not just because they are Muslim.  its because they want to kill us.

---

 No, Joe Shmoe Muslim minding his own business who has never been a terrorist and never even talked to a terrorist that he knows of does not want to kill us. 

 

You have become them.  Congratulations. 

 

-- Edited by Lawyerlady on Wednesday 16th of December 2015 02:47:20 PM

We have the abilty to take out a building and leave the ones right next to them untouched. I think it's our duty as an honorable nation to try and minimize civilian casualties. We won't be able to avoid all civilian casualties but it should be our objective to at least try don't you think?

Tinydancer wrote:

---

We have the abilty to take out a building and leave the ones right next to them untouched. I think it's our duty as an honorable nation to try and minimize civilian casualties. We won't be able to avoid all civilian casualties but it should be our objective to at least try don't you think?

---

 Sure--but--let's say we found out that couple in San bernadino was going to carry out the attack before they did it.  Police go to the house and they die in a fiery shoutout, and their baby also died.  What is the greater evil?  Letting 14 people die because we did nothing, or having one "innocent" get killed?

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

You people can try to justify murder all you want.

But if you want to kill people just because they are Muslim - what makes you any different than them?

---

 There is a difference between murder and self protection.

No one is suggesting killing a whole people other than those of the "radical islam".

But there will be casualties. 

With war, it is inevitable. 

Israel has gone to great lengths to not kill innocents. They make announcements about bombings. They try not to target civilian areas, but what do the Palestinians do? They start storing weapons and ammo in schools and hospitals and daycares, and then cry Boo Freaking Hoo when those places get bombed. Yes, of course nobody wants to kill innocents. Well, actually Isis and Muslim extremists do want to and that is who they target. But, we have to destroy this organization and bring it to it's knees otherwise far, far MORE people will die.