...

It would be far better than winning the Cold War, in my estimation. It would be among the greatest historical achievements in the world, akin to winning the Revolutionary War, or the establishment of the Ming dynasty.

ISIS and Al-Qaeda are the very definition of radicalized people. They "chose" us because we are that from which all things cool and groovy emanate. If the USA falls, the remaining western nations will have a difficult time withstanding radical Islamist al-harb. If we fall to them, at worst, they block us from helping our allies. At best, they use us against our allies. It's chess, except that instead of removing the queen from the board if you take her, you can use the captured queen as an offensive weapon.

We gave the Jews Israel after WWII. After that, we fundamentally left the ME alone. We may have provided support for Israel, we may have meddled in Iranian politics, we may have sat by while various ME scrums played out, and we may have propped up Saddam Hussein. But no big weaponry until the Gulf War as far as I recall. Our problem is that we're the mecca for apostates, and, again, we created Israel. And, of course, they could point to all of the tinkering we had done in the region. But, I don't see why you asked the question.

I'm going to solve this for y'all... "radicalized people" is now the subject as presented by eastside. "Them" here is referring to "radicalized people", the subject as presented by eastside. JJ is asking how it makes sense to play the peace card first with radical terrorist types. They are not discussing "different people", they have been discussing "radicalized people". Prior to this, it seemed both parties understood who they were referring to, which is probably ISIS and Al-Qaeda types. I don't believe either radicalized peoples would welcome us to help develop and educate them (unless, of course, they used it as a way to gain access to us for Jihad). We had gone in there, trying to be nicey nice while hunting down radical Islam. The problem is that the locals are so terrified of the radicals, that invariably the locals turn on us. It almost worked in Iraq, until we pulled out too early. The people in Iraq were trying to side with us. At the moment we pulled out, the delicate balance was gone. You think they would trust us again with radicals still on the prowl? No, we would have to demonstrate to the locals we mean business first. We would have throw away the rules of engagement manual and kill terrorists. Our work is twice as difficult now thanks to pulling out early and not leaving any presence. Improving their education and improving their economy are a loooonnng way off. Many acts of terror will happen between the beginning of any sincere engagement in the ME and actually making a difference to the peaceful people there.

I'm sure you are.

They killed 3000 of our people in one day on our soil. Prior to that they killed hundreds of our people in foreign lands. They have killed hundreds, if not at this point, over a thousand, of our allies people. This is within our modern era. They threaten the safety and stability of the planet. They have laid down the gauntlet several times over. There is justification in my opinion. I do not want what happened in France to happen in NYC, or Nashville, or even Toronto. I think France would be right there with us.

It's an important tangent, not so much for the content, but as an illustration of how we will tear ourselves apart. All any opposing force has to do is keep the argument going. It's like a Polish family on Thanksgiving day.

How you would characterize our relationship with the Japanese and Germans today?

There is nothing more stopping a black family from getting out of the ghetto than what is stopping a white family from getting out of the ghetto. The only difference is the race-hustlers playing the black folk, and all the black folk have to do is ignore the race-husters. In fact, a black family has access to more tools to elevate their situation than does a white family. And God bless 'em, we owe that to 'em.

I don't go in that time-sink very much at all. Our discussion will end here on the matter. If what I said doesn't appeal to you, then we are among the schism'd and are contributing to the downfall of our country.

You have been conned if you believe that. How much more can a race represent than as a resident of the White House...for two terms? And one of the popular potential replacements is a black dude. WTF. No one is holding back black people in this country except for black people and those they chose to lead them.

We haven't been jack sh!t. The people of this country have been Rick-Rolled since Vietnam, with the exception of the first Iraq war where we ended it almost perfectly. If it weren't for the media making a sob story out of the "Highway of Death" we could have completely beat down Saddam Hussein and changed history. As it was, even over a decade later they were in no condition to wage any war when we rolled back in. When the military has a rules-of-engagement manual as thick as a telephone book, you're not the "strong horse", you're the fool.

OH MY GOD. No, it's been 150 years since slavery and people are still buying into the con job that anything remotely resembling slavery exists, or the treatment of black folks (or any other minority) is like what it was even 50 years ago. Or, that black folks (or any other minority) are repressed in any way in this country except voluntarily or by the people who supposedly represent them in government. The problem we're going to have with radical Islam, Russia, the PRC, and ourselves, is a severe schism in what constitutes reality. So-called racial problems here prove that. A significant percentage of our own country-men have bought into the CON JOB that this country SUCKS and proceed from there trying to convince everyone else in some manner or other that they are right. A significant percentage of people have bought in to the idea that the government should provide...whatever...instead of getting...whatever... for themselves. That is contrary to the spirit that put us in this position as a nation in the first place. If you kill their spirit, you have beaten your enemy. We are nearly beaten already and it's all occurred from within. France is first. Then Germany. The the UK. Then us.

Or, they think there are dozens of virgins waiting for them in the afterlife. Or, their family's lives are threatened. Or, there are promises their families will be taken care of. Or, they're psychopathic.

You sign up every time you vote, and watch an episode of The Daily Show.

One of my wife's best friends is a Canadian Muslim. Whenever the religions comes up, we can compare and kid like rational adults. So, I'm not sure what you face. Unless it's something akin to facing the Christian and Catholic bashing that has been institutionalized in popular culture for decades now. A message board is for discussion. We all have access to the world's media without this thread.

Look what it takes for the talking heads to finally admit that those Syrian so-called refugees and their security risk needs to reevaluated.

It's about time a Muslim group condemns ISIS.

I will be curious to know if anyone tried to fight back in that concert hall.

I see the thread has really taken a left turn. Awesome sauce.

Not until we're all coverted to fundamentalist Islam.

There are reports all over the place the attackers were shouting "It's for Syria" at Bataclan and "Allahu Akbar". There are reports they were suicide bombers. What else do you need?

McGinn has 47.2k twitter followers. :blink:

I liked him initially, but I am going the opposite direction. I did not like his call last night. I watch a modest amount of non-Sabres hockey so have some references to compare to. I think the Sabres could do better.

That was a sloppy mess, but a sloppy mess that worked in our favor.