Bombing in Belgium Airport, Metro stations - Page 13

Baalim, you clearly do believe in pacifism = peace, you just repeated it again, saying we have a huge, violent military that we deploy for selfish rather than self-defense purposes and that if we were "passive" and just left, the "cycle" would end.

The dogma he is referring to is the myth that the only reason people hate the West is that the West somehow creates the hatred instead of internalizing the incredibly basic truth that Terror groups and governments will use Islamic dogma to stir up hatred and unite people against non-Muslims regardless of what we do.

Saying that the US has a big army and is in a lot of wars means absolutely nothing and proves no point whatsoever when the people you are fighting are Nazis and Islamic Fascists, unless you think they were somehow just fine before we stepped in.

But you are right, sure would be nice if the US didn't have the do the heavy lifting, and we are pretty damn sick of it over here. Maybe some day Mexico will join the good fight instead of flooding our country with welfare-dependent mothers, violent criminals, and drug dealers.

As long as the Israeli occupation of Palestine continues (with western support) there will always be fuel for the terrorist agenda. I think the idea that muslims in the middle east hate me because Norway allows women to vote and attend school and homosexuals to marry is far dumber than the idea that they hate the west for their continued involvement (with support of dictators whenever strategically viable) in the middle east. Sure, you can argue that what originated as fight against western imperialism has to some degree transformed into generic western hate and hate of western values, but there is no doubt which comes first of these two.

The problem is that people's perspectives aren't long enough. 'People', as a generalization, are not that willing to change their minds, and for perceptions to be altered, we largely need to wait for the previous generation to die. Even with american withdrawal from the region, we'd be likely to face another couple decades of occasional terror, which would consequently pull you back into the region. I'm not very optimistic here and I don't really see a future outcome better than 'a couple thousand people die from terror attacks every decade', but honestly, those numbers are still fairly small.. As long as no terror nukes / attacks on nuclear power plants, the potential damage to western society comes more from the response to terror than from actual terror attacks.

Also, while it is true that world war 2 is what initially bloated the size of the US military, the global fight against communism is what kept it bloated, not the fight against 'islamic fascism'. In latin america, this fight had pretty disastrous and undemocratic effects, which has stirred anti-american sentiments in the continent for the past 60 years. Granted, not much terrorism from that region, which can probably partially be attributed to religious influence, and partially to violent revolutions overthrowing american-friendly regimes actually succeeding. (Which, in several cases, resulted in american-sponsored terrorism - of which the death tolls in latin america alone are at least equal to all terrorist attacks against western targets for the past 20 years. )

On April 10 2016 17:40 soberstone wrote: But maybe the answer is more interventionism like in Iraq.

No.
That's the main problem. Interventionism will only cause more trouble that's for sure. That's why the problem is so hard to resolve. Not a single person in his right mind approves of USA's invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq and they are right, look what it brought. I'm guessing it was like that before with other countries, but I've never read about other topics so I'm uneducated to give an opinion about other invasions, except Vietnam I guess which we can all agree on was retarded.

Pacifism is a utopian peace indeed. It's human nature that fails in this case and yeah, obviously its a huge factor that can't be ignored. " The dogma " you've mentioned is the pure truth, however, and it's funny how almost all of you feel a part of your countries respective politics, when in fact your opinions don't mean shit.

That being said, I can assure you the people that create the actual politics of the USA will NEVER if it depended on them( and it does ) give up that power. They would never give authority, or I'd rather say not try to stop another country that competes for their world leadership. So no, your argument is pretty weak, you just feel like a part of a big social group, which thinks is a part of the politics, but its not, its just a result of a well made propaganda. Not that this will matter as you obviously believe the USA is some sort of a savior of nations and the world and shit, which is hilarious.

Also yeah what Drone said, a 70 years old nation, that was artificially created by the USA and wrecks the region with their approval since its foundation and their constant invasions of other territories is the main problem. Its the ground zero.

On April 11 2016 10:42 Spitfiree wrote: Show nested quote + On April 10 2016 17:40 soberstone wrote: But maybe the answer is more interventionism like in Iraq. No. That's the main problem. Interventionism will only cause more trouble that's for sure. That's why the problem is so hard to resolve. Not a single person in his right mind approves of USA's invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq and they are right, look what it brought. I'm guessing it was like that before with other countries, but I've never read about other topics so I'm uneducated to give an opinion about other invasions, except Vietnam I guess which we can all agree on was retarded. Pacifism is a utopian peace indeed. It's human nature that fails in this case and yeah, obviously its a huge factor that can't be ignored. " The dogma " you've mentioned is the pure truth, however, and it's funny how almost all of you feel a part of your countries respective politics, when in fact your opinions don't mean shit. That being said, I can assure you the people that create the actual politics of the USA will NEVER if it depended on them( and it does ) give up that power. They would never give authority, or I'd rather say not try to stop another country that competes for their world leadership. So no, your argument is pretty weak, you just feel like a part of a big social group, which thinks is a part of the politics, but its not, its just a result of a well made propaganda. Not that this will matter as you obviously believe the USA is some sort of a savior of nations and the world and shit, which is hilarious. Also yeah what Drone said, a 70 years old nation, that was artificially created by the USA and wrecks the region with their approval since its foundation and their constant invasions of other territories is the main problem. Its the ground zero.

Well Hamas's charter states that their mission will not be complete until Israel is destroyed and replaced with an Islamic caliphate. So you are correct, one solution to the problem would be to destroy Israel, you have that in common with the Muslim Extremists.

However, just to correct your history, it was created by the United Nations, not the United States. Big difference, considering it was the worlds solution to a complex problem following a genocide of the Jewish people and giving them a state in a land owned by the Ottomans (not the 'Palestinians, 'Palestine' has never been a country... ever, Palestine doesn't even mean anything aside from a biblical term which is very much post the Israelites)

Also, incase its relevant to you, it's ALWAYS the other side that attacks first, never Israel. As recently as 2000, Israel gave back Gaza and the West Bank in exchange for peace. What happened? Palestinians bombed Israel from those areas, so Israel rightly went back in, took that shit back. Shocker.

Is my history wrong? Or is your premise? Because neither are compatible. Maybe you need to do a little research, I know you think you know what's going on, but when you say things like "the USA created Israel" and "Israel is constantly invading"... you admit complete ignorance.

On April 10 2016 05:18 capaneo wrote: My Arabic isn't the greatest, but what I find interesting is that she is specifically talking about Salafis and madrasas. And how religious fundamentalism is not criticized. And she is 100% right. She is NOT actually talking about Islam, she is talking about how Muslims are not standing up to extremism. Read about these fucking fundamentalists https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wahhabism and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salafi_movement

U speak arabic? U from that sand brah? Explains a lot (how Sam harris is worse than murdering jihadis beheading innocents for propaganda videos)

On April 11 2016 02:24 Baalim wrote: Show nested quote + I would really like to know what argument you think you made. The implication of what I asked should be clear to any erudite person - the West was doing hardly anything in the region when Al-Qaeda executed the worst terror attack in history. Pulling out, as usual, has not been shown to be reliably effective for achieving what you want. And I posted a brief summary of all the shit the United States has been doing in the region for the past decades. My argument is that the recipe to brew terrorist is to stir up hatred through religion and ignorance and let it simmer, but this basic ingredient, hatred comes from your foreign policy, these people were affected by the US intervention one way or another, families destroyed in wars, relatives being blown up by drones etc, it is this suffering and need for retribution that powers terrorism (and again, helped by religion, poverty etc). Why is this so difficult for you to see? if you were living an ok life its hard for you to throw it away in a crazy pursuit, but if someone kills your mom before your eyes while you are young and turns out somebody tells you that God himself is telling you to avenge her and that after you do it you will go to heaven then no wonder they actually do it. There are two ways to stop this, you either withdraw from the region totally and stop this cycle or a total genocide so there is no one left to pick up the rifle... I obviously think the first option is far more reasonable.

Over half the boys out there are regularly raped as children so that populace is going to be intrinsically fucked up before any foreign policy factors even come into effect.

Africa has as bad if not worse atrocities going on all the time and we dont get involved there. No oil, no Nukes, no threat to israel (real reasons we out there). Close borders. Give aid rather than sanctions where possible. Send in CA operatives to bring about internal change as we did with South America and the more recently eastern Europe via the color revolutions.

On April 09 2016 05:03 Baalim wrote: Show nested quote + On April 09 2016 02:57 traxamillion wrote:   On April 07 2016 02:58 Baalim wrote:   On April 06 2016 23:19 Mortensen8 wrote: You know my spirit home that should be enough So what were they supposed to do, imprison him indefinitely for suspicions? I guess thats what the US does... He coulda got a hell of a lot more than 4 years for shooting at police with an AK imo. Attempted murder = life if not execution. R u serious you see no problems with that timeline? So are you saying muslims statistically get lighter sentences? or what is the point here

You said what are they supposed to erstwhile maintaining that timeline had no problems. I said imprison him properly for his actual initial crimes (shooting police)

On April 11 2016 02:32 Baalim wrote: Show nested quote + when you say peaceful, are you using that in the usual sense of the word, or in the sense of your usual dogmatic pacifism? So are you saying the US is peaceful? and if I dont believe so I have a dogmatic interpretation of pacifism? are you fucking serious? Who on earth would consider the US a peaceful nation? You have by far the biggest army in the world, you have been literally in constant war with dozens of different countries for the past 200 fucking years. I think its pretty safe to say that the US does not have a remotely peaceful foreign policy.

Mexico is more violent and corrupt than the US. Just no international power. Could you imagine themy in the USA's shoes. They woulda confiscated those poppy fields in Afghanistan and started slinging even fatter!

The US also saved the world in both world wars and took no spoils after victory. Wouldn't bitch too much else u woulda prefered stalin and Hitler as kings of the world and probably billions dead

On April 12 2016 01:23 traxamillion wrote: Show nested quote + On April 10 2016 05:18 capaneo wrote: My Arabic isn't the greatest, but what I find interesting is that she is specifically talking about Salafis and madrasas. And how religious fundamentalism is not criticized. And she is 100% right. She is NOT actually talking about Islam, she is talking about how Muslims are not standing up to extremism. Read about these fucking fundamentalists https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wahhabism and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salafi_movement U speak arabic? U from that sand brah? Explains a lot (how Sam harris is worse than murdering jihadis beheading innocents for propaganda videos)

No I am not from the "sand", I speak a little Chinese too, try to get over that one as well. And I said people blowing themselves up vs Sam Harris. Actually, that is a great example about beheading. The people who make the beheading videos are alot more dangerous and fucked up than people blowing themselves up. They are too much of a pussy to do it themselves but they want to see the world burn. That is pretty much Sam Harris, a big pussy who is trying to burn down the world but is too much of a coward to do anything about it.

I always hear that the U.S. was so great in WW 2, but when I saw some movies it kind of seems like the Russians did the heavy lifting when it comes to stopping Hitler specifically.

On April 11 2016 06:22 soberstone wrote: But you are right, sure would be nice if the US didn't have the do the heavy lifting, and we are pretty damn sick of it over here. Maybe some day Mexico will join the good fight instead of flooding our country with welfare-dependent mothers, violent criminals, and drug dealers.

I used to say that most of LP.net were smart individuals but in the past 30 days or so all these idiots have been crawling out of nowhere posting their ignorant opinions, just look at this specimen shining proudly with his stupidity channeling Trump.

Why do you even indulge him in conversation, he clearly is a troll or too stupid to speak about foreign policy and this kind of subject.

On April 12 2016 01:37 traxamillion wrote: Show nested quote + On April 09 2016 05:03 Baalim wrote:   On April 09 2016 02:57 traxamillion wrote:   On April 07 2016 02:58 Baalim wrote:   On April 06 2016 23:19 Mortensen8 wrote: You know my spirit home that should be enough So what were they supposed to do, imprison him indefinitely for suspicions? I guess thats what the US does... He coulda got a hell of a lot more than 4 years for shooting at police with an AK imo. Attempted murder = life if not execution. R u serious you see no problems with that timeline? So are you saying muslims statistically get lighter sentences? or what is the point here You said what are they supposed to erstwhile maintaining that timeline had no problems. I said imprison him properly for his actual initial crimes (shooting police)

So I ask again, are you saying muslims get more lenient sentences? or in general that their jailing times are too short?, whats the point here.

On April 12 2016 01:41 traxamillion wrote: Show nested quote + On April 11 2016 02:32 Baalim wrote:   when you say peaceful, are you using that in the usual sense of the word, or in the sense of your usual dogmatic pacifism? So are you saying the US is peaceful? and if I dont believe so I have a dogmatic interpretation of pacifism? are you fucking serious? Who on earth would consider the US a peaceful nation? You have by far the biggest army in the world, you have been literally in constant war with dozens of different countries for the past 200 fucking years. I think its pretty safe to say that the US does not have a remotely peaceful foreign policy. Mexico is more violent and corrupt than the US. Just no international power. Could you imagine themy in the USA's shoes. They woulda confiscated those poppy fields in Afghanistan and started slinging even fatter!

Do you think this is a country competition you dumbass?

The fact that Mexico is more corrupt somehow makes the US foreign policy peaceful or somehow refutes a single sentence I typed?

On April 11 2016 21:48 soberstone wrote: However, just to correct your history, it was created by the United Nations, not the United States.

.... well played sir
I pronounce you the biggest troll in this thread .. and not just for that statement

The UN after WW2 aka Europe, wrecked by the war, in debt to the USA and other countries whose opinion doesn't matter
Sheesh I wonder who was controlling that organization at the time. Hmm hmm hmm

Good thing the USA isn't as stupid as creating a country on its own, but using an international organization and has been using it in various ways for its needs ever since.
Don't speak about politics with intelligent people irl, you ll get laughed at

Na I just think it is funny you rag on the US when Mexico is trash. Wasn't even trying to refute anything you said. Too corrupt and screwed up to even engage in international politics at all.

Where did you come up with me making any of those points about that timeline? I'm the dumbass tho. I simply said any person of any color whatever who shoots an AK at cops (attempted murder) should be locked up and the key thrown away. That happens the guy can'take blow up an airport. Again, nothing to do with politics

On April 12 2016 06:33 Big_Rob_isback wrote: I always hear that the U.S. was so great in WW 2, but when I saw some movies it kind of seems like the Russians did the heavy lifting when it comes to stopping Hitler specifically.

There is no doubt about Russia's role in WWII. But part of it was because Hitler was literally in their country. And second was because the Nazi regime hated the communists more than the Jews. America's role is very significant because they didn't have to engage in the war at all.

On April 12 2016 08:37 Spitfiree wrote: Show nested quote + On April 11 2016 21:48 soberstone wrote: However, just to correct your history, it was created by the United Nations, not the United States. .... well played sir I pronounce you the biggest troll in this thread .. and not just for that statement The UN after WW2 aka Europe, wrecked by the war, in debt to the USA and other countries whose opinion doesn't matter Sheesh I wonder who was controlling that organization at the time. Hmm hmm hmm Good thing the USA isn't as stupid as creating a country on its own, but using an international organization and has been using it in various ways for its needs ever since. Don't speak about politics with intelligent people irl, you ll get laughed at

Forgive me for correcting your factually incorrect statements, how dare I.

So what you are saying here is that the UN is just USA proxy organization that exists for the purposes of fooling idiots like me. Mmmmk.

But I'll play along.

Since you seem to have a firm grasp on this grand conspiracy, what exactly is the purely self-interested, corrupt purpose that the USA had for "creating Israel"? Please, enlighten me.

Also for like the 50th time, since you seem to have a hard-on for Donald Trump and pretending I've said anything to indicate I like him, I don't although I'd much prefer him to Hillary Clinton because unlike her, I think he actually gets some things right and genuinely wants to do a good job for his insanely large ego and I actually do buy the overplayed line that he isn't bought and paid for. So no need to create strawmen because I'm not a Trump supporter. The emergence of Donald Trump only serves to illustrate the utter failure of both party establishments who both have essentially advocated for not enforcing our immigration laws.

On April 12 2016 06:33 Big_Rob_isback wrote: I always hear that the U.S. was so great in WW 2, but when I saw some movies it kind of seems like the Russians did the heavy lifting when it comes to stopping Hitler specifically.

The US got in way too late, it's true, and Russia definitely took a huge tole. But as previously stated, it was geography and Germany's invasion that necessitated Russia's involvement.

Hitler's single biggest mistake was declaring war on the US, we were initially only going to war with Japan and probably wouldn't have invaded Germany and saved everyone else's asses soon enough had that not happened. It was completely unnecessary and stupid by Hitler, but he had really gone off the deep end high on that amphetamine and believed he was divine and couldn't lose.