Godspeed Paris

Do not advocate for "boots on the ground action" unless you are willing to go or send your children to fight for you. Go to a VA hospital and volunteer and you might not be so quick to send servicemen and women be put into harms way. Let's go exhaust all other means to control or limit ISIS. Seal off their country. We are not the worlds police force. Let France send their young men and women to police that area of the world. The US has more than done their part to minimize ISIS, now let the world send their people.
 
rlmccarty2000 said:
Do not advocate for "boots on the ground action" unless you are willing to go or send your children to fight for you. Go to a VA hospital and volunteer and you might not be so quick to send servicemen and women be put into harms way. Let's go exhaust all other means to control or limit ISIS. Seal off their country. We are not the worlds police force. Let France send their young men and women to police that area of the world. The US has more than done their part to minimize ISIS, now let the world send their people.
Click to expand...


Not disagreeing with you, I'm not sure what the answer is. But IMHO "limited action" (as we have been doing) is ineffective. (no we don't have them "contained")

I really do wonder what the cost of our inaction is/will be. History shows inaction and appeasement cost more in the long run.
 
WhyteWizard said:


Actually, the terrorists are trying to spread fear, not a message of fear and it seems to be working just fine. The article was trying to counteract the fear by pointing out that while the terror attacks are big, dramatic and terrible we shouldn't let them scare us into doing things we shouldn't.

Robert
Click to expand...

So, using this logic, we should just accept that if a Westerner is killed via some terrorist action we should just do nothing?

One or two dead Americans is just the cost of living in a tolerant and liberal society, where all refugees, religious extremists, and wack jobs from crazy countries must be accepted here?

I dunno. I'd kill everyone in Isis before I sacrificed 1 Western life.

As for gun violence compared to a terrorist threat, whose to say:

- Fear of guns haven't actually prevented someone from committing a violent crime for fear of getting their head blown off?

- The number of people in that statistic that were shot may have been committing a crime, at someplace they shouldn't be at, or doing something they shouldn't be doing?

**** As an example, if I drive down to K & A in N. Philly to buy a bag of dope in the middle of the night and get jacked and shot - whose fault is that? Prolly won't happen if I stay out of there.

- Suicides who would have just killed them self via some other method?

One thing I can guarantee, is that everyone who has been killed by a terrorist act is undeserving - but by "gun violence", who knows?

Also, dunno if the computer is messed up or what, but when you partially quoted my post - it appeared as you wrote it - just hit quote:

5088949dffdf15ee63a7999b94b445b4.jpg
 
DC Police Chief: 'Best Option' Is For Citizens To Take Out Paris-Style Attackers - Breitbart



In a 60 Minutes interview scheduled to air November 22, Washington DC police chief Cathy Lanier said taking out the gunmen in a Paris-style attack is the “best option” for citizens between the time they call 911 and the moment police arrive.

Lanier said citizens basically have three options–they can “run, hide, or fight.” And she said choosing to “take the gunman out” is the best option if the citizen is in a position to do so.
 
Ronkh said:
DC Police Chief: 'Best Option' Is For Citizens To Take Out Paris-Style Attackers - Breitbart



In a 60 Minutes interview scheduled to air November 22, Washington DC police chief Cathy Lanier said taking out the gunmen in a Paris-style attack is the “best option” for citizens between the time they call 911 and the moment police arrive.

Lanier said citizens basically have three options–they can “run, hide, or fight.” And she said choosing to “take the gunman out” is the best option if the citizen is in a position to do so.
Click to expand...


Problem with that DC and New York govt. officials do not like the citizens to have guns. So, what are they going to do, throw skittles at them ?. Probably one reason the scum bags like to pick on places like that, they know the public is not heavily armed.

Dave
 
I think even more important is the info in the bottom of the article where they speculate on strategy and I tend to agree why they are behaving as they do. They do not want to help Assad. Russia wants Syria since it is the only ally they have with a Mediterranean port and customer of arms. This is threading a needle that cannot be threaded.

Obama has been trying to get rid of Assad and also the fact that we know our allies in the region are supporting them in various ways (Turkey, Saudi Arabia, etc). I assume supporting them keeps them out of their country.
 
davidc said:
Problem with that DC and New York govt. officials do not like the citizens to have guns. So, what are they going to do, throw skittles at them ?. Probably one reason the scum bags like to pick on places like that, they know the public is not heavily armed...
Click to expand...

Schools, that movie theater (IIRC it was the one in town that didn't allow CCW), the bad people go after the softest targets which are the places where nobody's gonna shoot back. It's simple, it's obvious, and it's even been explicitly stated by the perps who've survived their massacres. Unarmed people are more vulnerable than armed ones and there are situations where that becomes the only thing that matters.
 
Accumulator said:
Schools, that movie theater (IIRC it was the one in town that didn't allow CCW), the bad people go after the softest targets which are the places where nobody's gonna shoot back. It's simple, it's obvious, and it's even been explicitly stated by the perps who've survived their massacres. Unarmed people are more vulnerable than armed ones and there are situations where that becomes the only thing that matters.
Click to expand...
Pretty simple concept eh?
 
That's the truth! I was shooting at the range about a year ago while there was a concealed class also in the range. The "instructor " was busy talking with one woman, meanwhile one of his pupils was shooting beside me....she hit my target twice! I heard him encouraging her afterwards also. I went up front and let them know they needed to pay closer attention to the students as well as the instructor.
 
Bunky said:
What vetting process is going to stop the Planned Parenthood Shooter that was radicalized by conservative rhetoric. It is closer to home than you think.
Click to expand...

Personally I think we have enough of them. So I am against importing any more of either.

Sorta expected a better answer than that from you. Granted it was 530 am when you responded.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top