TOTALLY GEEKED!

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

Mother was mutilated and murdered by ISIS for breastfeeding her baby in public

ed11563 · Guru

Tell me again why we're worried about collateral damage from bombing them in this war?

just Czech · Give Me Grand's!

Evil, evil, evil.

Lexxy · My dog name is Sasha, too!

This gets more & more terrifying. I really bothers me that it was an all female police force that did this.

Tinydancer · Guru

ed11563 wrote:
Tell me again why we're worried about collateral damage from bombing them in this war?

Because we are not them and I hope we never become like them.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

ed11563 wrote:
Tell me again why we're worried about collateral damage from bombing them in this war?

I suppose, to kill the Nazis, we could have just bombed all the concentration camps they were working in.

huskerbb · Guru

Lawyerlady wrote:
ed11563 wrote:
Tell me again why we're worried about collateral damage from bombing them in this war?

I suppose, to kill the Nazis, we could have just bombed all the concentration camps they were working in.

Not remotely the same thing.

We did bomb the hell out of many German cities.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
ed11563 wrote:
Tell me again why we're worried about collateral damage from bombing them in this war?

I suppose, to kill the Nazis, we could have just bombed all the concentration camps they were working in.
Not remotely the same thing.

We did bomb the hell out of many German cities.

How is it not the same thing? They are killing their own. To kill the bad ones, we'd have to bomb them all.

just Czech · Give Me Grand's!

Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
ed11563 wrote:
Tell me again why we're worried about collateral damage from bombing them in this war?

I suppose, to kill the Nazis, we could have just bombed all the concentration camps they were working in.
Not remotely the same thing.

We did bomb the hell out of many German cities.
How is it not the same thing? They are killing their own. To kill the bad ones, we'd have to bomb them all.

Killing their own is okay?

You have got to be kidding.

huskerbb · Guru

Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
ed11563 wrote:
Tell me again why we're worried about collateral damage from bombing them in this war?

I suppose, to kill the Nazis, we could have just bombed all the concentration camps they were working in.
Not remotely the same thing.

We did bomb the hell out of many German cities.
How is it not the same thing? They are killing their own. To kill the bad ones, we'd have to bomb them all.

Because it's not remotely comparable. Where are the concentration camps here?

Cities with civilian populations I'll give you--and we did bomb those.

Your grasp of history is almost nonexistent.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Lexxy wrote:
This gets more & more terrifying. I really bothers me that it was an all female police force that did this.

Exactly this!

It reminds me of the African woman who perform genital mutilation on young girls.

flan

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
ed11563 wrote:
Tell me again why we're worried about collateral damage from bombing them in this war?

I suppose, to kill the Nazis, we could have just bombed all the concentration camps they were working in.
Not remotely the same thing.

We did bomb the hell out of many German cities.
How is it not the same thing? They are killing their own. To kill the bad ones, we'd have to bomb them all.
Because it's not remotely comparable. Where are the concentration camps here?
Cities with civilian populations I'll give you--and we did bomb those.
Your grasp of history is almost nonexistent.

Husker, shut up. I'm damn sick and tired of you telling me I don't understand history when I have a degree with HONORS in it and am part of the National HIstorical Honor Society. We are not at war with a country, so comparing bombing ISIS and innocent civilians getting killed to WAR is just plain STUPID and shows a level of ignorance not normally found in educated people.

huskerbb · Guru

Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
ed11563 wrote:
Tell me again why we're worried about collateral damage from bombing them in this war?

I suppose, to kill the Nazis, we could have just bombed all the concentration camps they were working in.
Not remotely the same thing.

We did bomb the hell out of many German cities.
How is it not the same thing? They are killing their own. To kill the bad ones, we'd have to bomb them all.
Because it's not remotely comparable. Where are the concentration camps here?
Cities with civilian populations I'll give you--and we did bomb those.
Your grasp of history is almost nonexistent.
Husker, shut up. I'm damn sick and tired of you telling me I don't understand history when I have a degree with HONORS in it and am part of the National HIstorical Honor Society. We are not at war with a country, so comparing bombing ISIS and innocent civilians getting killed to WAR is just plain STUPID and shows a level of ignorance not normally found in educated people.

It must not have stuck. YOU brought up bmobbing concentration camps.

we ARE at war. Just because you have no skin in that doesn't mean no one does.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
ed11563 wrote:
Tell me again why we're worried about collateral damage from bombing them in this war?

I suppose, to kill the Nazis, we could have just bombed all the concentration camps they were working in.
Not remotely the same thing.

We did bomb the hell out of many German cities.
How is it not the same thing? They are killing their own. To kill the bad ones, we'd have to bomb them all.
Because it's not remotely comparable. Where are the concentration camps here?
Cities with civilian populations I'll give you--and we did bomb those.
Your grasp of history is almost nonexistent.
Husker, shut up. I'm damn sick and tired of you telling me I don't understand history when I have a degree with HONORS in it and am part of the National HIstorical Honor Society. We are not at war with a country, so comparing bombing ISIS and innocent civilians getting killed to WAR is just plain STUPID and shows a level of ignorance not normally found in educated people.
It must not have stuck. YOU brought up bmobbing concentration camps.

we ARE at war. Just because you have no skin in that doesn't mean no one does.

What country have we declared war on?

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

And I brought up the concentration camps b/c I was talking to ed and he doesn't seem to care about innocent people being killed in the name of this "war", so I wanted to drive home people he cared about vs. the unknown.

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

Ok.

So what do you propose we do?

I mean, our president said we shouldn't worry about women and children.

But here we have women killing in the street.

So? What do we do?

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

lilyofcourse wrote:
Ok.

So what do you propose we do?

I mean, our president said we shouldn't worry about women and children.

But here we have women killing in the street.

So? What do we do?

I'm confused by the logic, here? You are concerned about them killing their own people, so you'd just rather do it for them?

Tinydancer · Guru

We strategically bomb trying to avoid killing civilians if possible. To propose just bombing the crap out of everyone will just create more future terrorist.

huskerbb · Guru

Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
ed11563 wrote:
Tell me again why we're worried about collateral damage from bombing them in this war?

I suppose, to kill the Nazis, we could have just bombed all the concentration camps they were working in.
Not remotely the same thing.

We did bomb the hell out of many German cities.
How is it not the same thing? They are killing their own. To kill the bad ones, we'd have to bomb them all.
Because it's not remotely comparable. Where are the concentration camps here?
Cities with civilian populations I'll give you--and we did bomb those.
Your grasp of history is almost nonexistent.
Husker, shut up. I'm damn sick and tired of you telling me I don't understand history when I have a degree with HONORS in it and am part of the National HIstorical Honor Society. We are not at war with a country, so comparing bombing ISIS and innocent civilians getting killed to WAR is just plain STUPID and shows a level of ignorance not normally found in educated people.
It must not have stuck. YOU brought up bmobbing concentration camps.

we ARE at war. Just because you have no skin in that doesn't mean no one does.
What country have we declared war on?

Irrelevant. One does not have to have a declaration of war to be at war. the minute Japan dropped the first bimb on Pearl Harbor, we were at war even though none had been declared. Vietnam was a war--ask any vet who was there.

but then, we know you don't give a crap about those who serve.

huskerbb · Guru

Lawyerlady wrote:
And I brought up the concentration camps b/c I was talking to ed and he doesn't seem to care about innocent people being killed in the name of this "war", so I wanted to drive home people he cared about vs. the unknown.

And that's a ridiculous comparison. The appropriate comparison would be civilians in cities and villages.

Tinydancer · Guru

Putting words in peoples mouth again husker?

huskerbb · Guru

Tinydancer wrote:
Putting words in peoples mouth again husker?

No.

Tinydancer · Guru

Yes. LL has never said she doesn't give a crap about veterans. That's just you putting words in her mouth to support your argument.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
ed11563 wrote:
Tell me again why we're worried about collateral damage from bombing them in this war?

I suppose, to kill the Nazis, we could have just bombed all the concentration camps they were working in.
Not remotely the same thing.

We did bomb the hell out of many German cities.
How is it not the same thing? They are killing their own. To kill the bad ones, we'd have to bomb them all.
Because it's not remotely comparable. Where are the concentration camps here?
Cities with civilian populations I'll give you--and we did bomb those.
Your grasp of history is almost nonexistent.
Husker, shut up. I'm damn sick and tired of you telling me I don't understand history when I have a degree with HONORS in it and am part of the National HIstorical Honor Society. We are not at war with a country, so comparing bombing ISIS and innocent civilians getting killed to WAR is just plain STUPID and shows a level of ignorance not normally found in educated people.
It must not have stuck. YOU brought up bmobbing concentration camps.

we ARE at war. Just because you have no skin in that doesn't mean no one does.
What country have we declared war on?
Irrelevant. One does not have to have a declaration of war to be at war. the minute Japan dropped the first bimb on Pearl Harbor, we were at war even though none had been declared. Vietnam was a war--ask any vet who was there.
but then, we know you don't give a crap about those who serve.

LOL! It is not irrelevant if you are going to kill innocent people in a country we haven't declared war on.

And hello....soldiers went to jail for killing innocent people in Vietnam. You can't just kill people indiscriminately. And you should NOT be advocating turning our soldiers into murderers. They are NOT Nazis. Shame on you.

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

Lawyerlady wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
Ok.

So what do you propose we do?

I mean, our president said we shouldn't worry about women and children.

But here we have women killing in the street.

So? What do we do?
I'm confused by the logic, here? You are concerned about them killing their own people, so you'd just rather do it for them?

No.

I'm concerned with it spilling into our streets.

I want to stop it before it's you, me or our girls being beaten and killed.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Tinydancer wrote:
Yes. LL has never said she doesn't give a crap about veterans. That's just you putting words in her mouth to support your argument.

It's deflection and inflamatory idiocy because he doesn't have a coherent argument. It's nothing different than what the liberal media does.

Husker likes yellow journalism.

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

And you didn't answer the question.

What do we do?

Tinydancer · Guru

I know...lol

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

lilyofcourse wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
Ok.

So what do you propose we do?

I mean, our president said we shouldn't worry about women and children.

But here we have women killing in the street.

So? What do we do?
I'm confused by the logic, here? You are concerned about them killing their own people, so you'd just rather do it for them?
No.
I'm concerned with it spilling into our streets.
I want to stop it before it's you, me or our girls being beaten and killed.

And if it gets to our streets, you are ok with them just dropping bombs and killing innocent Americans to get the bad guy?

Tinydancer · Guru

I answered your question upthread lily. I didn't realize it was to a specific person.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

lilyofcourse wrote:
And you didn't answer the question.

What do we do?

This is a group of people. We train special military forces to go kill them. We stop letting people into our country that have been anywhere that is sympathetic to terrorists, we strategically target them. We don't just ignore collateral damage.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

just Czech wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
ed11563 wrote:
Tell me again why we're worried about collateral damage from bombing them in this war?

I suppose, to kill the Nazis, we could have just bombed all the concentration camps they were working in.
Not remotely the same thing.

We did bomb the hell out of many German cities.
How is it not the same thing? They are killing their own. To kill the bad ones, we'd have to bomb them all.
Killing their own is okay?
You have got to be kidding.

Of course not - but when the suggested solution is to kill them ALL instead of just the bad ones, what the hell kind of logic is that? You would be killing the people you are supposedly avenging. Don't pretend you care and it's anything but an excuse.

Ohfour · Hooker

I dont think any of them are innocent. They are either actively supporting ISIS or they are giving aid. They need to be taken out. Period.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Ohfour wrote:
I dont think any of them are innocent. They are either actively supporting ISIS or they are giving aid. They need to be taken out. Period.

Thank God not everyone feels the way you do.

flan

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

Lawyerlady wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
And you didn't answer the question.

What do we do?
This is a group of people. We train special military forces to go kill them. We stop letting people into our country that have been anywhere that is sympathetic to terrorists, we strategically target them. We don't just ignore collateral damage.

All very well and good. Sounds like a plan.

But doesn't it go against our Constitution?

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

Tinydancer wrote:
I answered your question upthread lily. I didn't realize it was to a specific person.

Yes. I saw that.

No. Not really to any one person.

just Czech · Give Me Grand's!

Lawyerlady wrote:
just Czech wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
ed11563 wrote:
Tell me again why we're worried about collateral damage from bombing them in this war?

I suppose, to kill the Nazis, we could have just bombed all the concentration camps they were working in.
Not remotely the same thing.

We did bomb the hell out of many German cities.
How is it not the same thing? They are killing their own. To kill the bad ones, we'd have to bomb them all.
Killing their own is okay?
You have got to be kidding.
Of course not - but when the suggested solution is to kill them ALL instead of just the bad ones, what the hell kind of logic is that? You would be killing the people you are supposedly avenging. Don't pretend you care and it's anything but an excuse.

Sorry, but you are not making any sense at all with your last sentence.

War is fluid. Is war today the same as, say 200 years ago? Or 300 years ago? Or 100 years from now?

Every single war has changed how it was fought throughout history. The war on terror is a new concept of war. We must adapt or die.

There has never been a war in which innocents have not died. This war is no different and can not be different due to the "change" in terror tactics. Terrorists do not care about "peace treaties" signed by "nations".

Remember, you are placing YOUR values on them. They are not abiding by YOUR values or anyone else's for that matter.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

lilyofcourse wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
And you didn't answer the question.

What do we do?
This is a group of people. We train special military forces to go kill them. We stop letting people into our country that have been anywhere that is sympathetic to terrorists, we strategically target them. We don't just ignore collateral damage.
All very well and good. Sounds like a plan.
But doesn't it go against our Constitution?

Does what go against our Constitution? Killing terrorists overseas? Keeping out foriegners? What exactly?

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

Lawyerlady wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
And you didn't answer the question.

What do we do?
This is a group of people. We train special military forces to go kill them. We stop letting people into our country that have been anywhere that is sympathetic to terrorists, we strategically target them. We don't just ignore collateral damage.
All very well and good. Sounds like a plan.
But doesn't it go against our Constitution?

Does what go against our Constitution? Killing terrorists overseas? Keeping out foriegners? What exactly?

The keeping out foreigners.

Maybe it doesn't go against the Constitution but it does go against the ideals of our founding fathers.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

just Czech wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
just Czech wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
ed11563 wrote:
Tell me again why we're worried about collateral damage from bombing them in this war?

I suppose, to kill the Nazis, we could have just bombed all the concentration camps they were working in.
Not remotely the same thing.

We did bomb the hell out of many German cities.
How is it not the same thing? They are killing their own. To kill the bad ones, we'd have to bomb them all.
Killing their own is okay?
You have got to be kidding.
Of course not - but when the suggested solution is to kill them ALL instead of just the bad ones, what the hell kind of logic is that? You would be killing the people you are supposedly avenging. Don't pretend you care and it's anything but an excuse.
Sorry, but you are not making any sense at all with your last sentence.
War is fluid. Is war today the same as, say 200 years ago? Or 300 years ago? Or 100 years from now?
Every single war has changed how it was fought throughout history. The war on terror is a new concept of war. We must adapt or die.
There has never been a war in which innocents have not died. This war is no different and can not be different due to the "change" in terror tactics. Terrorists do not care about "peace treaties" signed by "nations".
Remember, you are placing YOUR values on them. They are not abiding by YOUR values or anyone else's for that matter.

I'm applying my values, OUR values, to US. We are not ISIS, and regardless of what THEY do, it should not affect our morals, our values, and our sense of decency.

The last sentence means that if you were to bomb ISIS over them killing other Muslims, it would not be because you care about those Muslims, it would be because you were using it as an excuse to justify killing them and whoever else happens to get in the way.

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

I promise I am not trying to argue.

I am seriously wondering and asking questions.

This has no sure fire answer that will magically end the problem.

huskerbb · Guru

lilyofcourse wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
And you didn't answer the question.

What do we do?
This is a group of people. We train special military forces to go kill them. We stop letting people into our country that have been anywhere that is sympathetic to terrorists, we strategically target them. We don't just ignore collateral damage.
All very well and good. Sounds like a plan.
But doesn't it go against our Constitution?

Does what go against our Constitution? Killing terrorists overseas? Keeping out foriegners? What exactly?
The keeping out foreigners.
Maybe it doesn't go against the Constitution but it does go against the ideals of our founding fathers.

Complete BS. We have long regulated our borders and have every right to do so.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

lilyofcourse wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
And you didn't answer the question.

What do we do?
This is a group of people. We train special military forces to go kill them. We stop letting people into our country that have been anywhere that is sympathetic to terrorists, we strategically target them. We don't just ignore collateral damage.
All very well and good. Sounds like a plan.
But doesn't it go against our Constitution?

Does what go against our Constitution? Killing terrorists overseas? Keeping out foriegners? What exactly?
The keeping out foreigners.
Maybe it doesn't go against the Constitution but it does go against the ideals of our founding fathers.

Idealism has to face reality on occasion.

huskerbb · Guru

Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
ed11563 wrote:
Tell me again why we're worried about collateral damage from bombing them in this war?

I suppose, to kill the Nazis, we could have just bombed all the concentration camps they were working in.
Not remotely the same thing.

We did bomb the hell out of many German cities.
How is it not the same thing? They are killing their own. To kill the bad ones, we'd have to bomb them all.
Because it's not remotely comparable. Where are the concentration camps here?
Cities with civilian populations I'll give you--and we did bomb those.
Your grasp of history is almost nonexistent.
Husker, shut up. I'm damn sick and tired of you telling me I don't understand history when I have a degree with HONORS in it and am part of the National HIstorical Honor Society. We are not at war with a country, so comparing bombing ISIS and innocent civilians getting killed to WAR is just plain STUPID and shows a level of ignorance not normally found in educated people.
It must not have stuck. YOU brought up bmobbing concentration camps.

we ARE at war. Just because you have no skin in that doesn't mean no one does.
What country have we declared war on?
Irrelevant. One does not have to have a declaration of war to be at war. the minute Japan dropped the first bimb on Pearl Harbor, we were at war even though none had been declared. Vietnam was a war--ask any vet who was there.
but then, we know you don't give a crap about those who serve.
LOL! It is not irrelevant if you are going to kill innocent people in a country we haven't declared war on.
And hello....soldiers went to jail for killing innocent people in Vietnam. You can't just kill people indiscriminately. And you should NOT be advocating turning our soldiers into murderers. They are NOT Nazis. Shame on you.

Oh, so as long as we declare war we can kill all the civilians we want? That is idiotic.

huskerbb · Guru

Tinydancer wrote:
Yes. LL has never said she doesn't give a crap about veterans. That's just you putting words in her mouth to support your argument.

She doesn't. She has openly stated she is ok trading the lives of American soldiers for enemy civilians.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
ed11563 wrote:
Tell me again why we're worried about collateral damage from bombing them in this war?

I suppose, to kill the Nazis, we could have just bombed all the concentration camps they were working in.
Not remotely the same thing.

We did bomb the hell out of many German cities.
How is it not the same thing? They are killing their own. To kill the bad ones, we'd have to bomb them all.
Because it's not remotely comparable. Where are the concentration camps here?
Cities with civilian populations I'll give you--and we did bomb those.
Your grasp of history is almost nonexistent.
Husker, shut up. I'm damn sick and tired of you telling me I don't understand history when I have a degree with HONORS in it and am part of the National HIstorical Honor Society. We are not at war with a country, so comparing bombing ISIS and innocent civilians getting killed to WAR is just plain STUPID and shows a level of ignorance not normally found in educated people.
It must not have stuck. YOU brought up bmobbing concentration camps.

we ARE at war. Just because you have no skin in that doesn't mean no one does.
What country have we declared war on?
Irrelevant. One does not have to have a declaration of war to be at war. the minute Japan dropped the first bimb on Pearl Harbor, we were at war even though none had been declared. Vietnam was a war--ask any vet who was there.
but then, we know you don't give a crap about those who serve.
LOL! It is not irrelevant if you are going to kill innocent people in a country we haven't declared war on.
And hello....soldiers went to jail for killing innocent people in Vietnam. You can't just kill people indiscriminately. And you should NOT be advocating turning our soldiers into murderers. They are NOT Nazis. Shame on you.

Oh, so as long as we declare war we can kill all the civilians we want? That is idiotic.

Not according to you. According to you, we can kill all the civilians we want just because they are near terrorists.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

huskerbb wrote:
Tinydancer wrote:
Yes. LL has never said she doesn't give a crap about veterans. That's just you putting words in her mouth to support your argument.
She doesn't. She has openly stated she is ok trading the lives of American soldiers for enemy civilians.

Uh, no I have not. That is a flat out lie.

huskerbb · Guru

Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
ed11563 wrote:
Tell me again why we're worried about collateral damage from bombing them in this war?

I suppose, to kill the Nazis, we could have just bombed all the concentration camps they were working in.
Not remotely the same thing.

We did bomb the hell out of many German cities.
How is it not the same thing? They are killing their own. To kill the bad ones, we'd have to bomb them all.
Because it's not remotely comparable. Where are the concentration camps here?
Cities with civilian populations I'll give you--and we did bomb those.
Your grasp of history is almost nonexistent.
Husker, shut up. I'm damn sick and tired of you telling me I don't understand history when I have a degree with HONORS in it and am part of the National HIstorical Honor Society. We are not at war with a country, so comparing bombing ISIS and innocent civilians getting killed to WAR is just plain STUPID and shows a level of ignorance not normally found in educated people.
It must not have stuck. YOU brought up bmobbing concentration camps.

we ARE at war. Just because you have no skin in that doesn't mean no one does.
What country have we declared war on?
Irrelevant. One does not have to have a declaration of war to be at war. the minute Japan dropped the first bimb on Pearl Harbor, we were at war even though none had been declared. Vietnam was a war--ask any vet who was there.
but then, we know you don't give a crap about those who serve.
LOL! It is not irrelevant if you are going to kill innocent people in a country we haven't declared war on.
And hello....soldiers went to jail for killing innocent people in Vietnam. You can't just kill people indiscriminately. And you should NOT be advocating turning our soldiers into murderers. They are NOT Nazis. Shame on you.

Oh, so as long as we declare war we can kill all the civilians we want? That is idiotic.
Not according to you. According to you, we can kill all the civilians we want just because they are near terrorists.

You are the one trying to make some distinction where there is none.

huskerbb · Guru

Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Tinydancer wrote:
Yes. LL has never said she doesn't give a crap about veterans. That's just you putting words in her mouth to support your argument.
She doesn't. She has openly stated she is ok trading the lives of American soldiers for enemy civilians.
Uh, no I have not. That is a flat out lie.

You absolutely have. We had an entire argument about a marine who killed a kid in the heat of battle.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Tinydancer wrote:
Yes. LL has never said she doesn't give a crap about veterans. That's just you putting words in her mouth to support your argument.
She doesn't. She has openly stated she is ok trading the lives of American soldiers for enemy civilians.
Uh, no I have not. That is a flat out lie.
You absolutely have. We had an entire argument about a marine who killed a kid in the heat of battle.

And I never said he should DIE. WTF??? I never even said he should go to prison. I said he should have been trained better - which is TRUE. If he can't assess a situation before he starts shooting, he was not trained well enough. And I remember the argument back - that is wasn't his fault, he was only given 6 weeks of training before being sent to war. Which only supports my position that he was not trained well enough.

TOTALLY GEEKED!

Mother was mutilated and murdered by ISIS for breastfeeding her baby in public after another woman spotted the child under her burkha in Syria

RELATED ARTICLES

SHARE THIS ARTICLE