U.S. Military Taught Officers ‘Hiroshima’ Tactics for ‘Total War’ on Islam

[lem34]

And as usual you are missing the point: Hatred is a mere emotion that cannot affect pursuit of national interests; the lack of credibility, which is what I was pointing out, damages the ability of Pakistani officials to carry out state business.

VC mate ring a ring a roses pocket full of poses. You must try to stay on topic. Even if it shows America in a bad light. Even the thought of committing genocide should be anathema in civilised society

 

[VCheng]

Which brings us back to this original incident..which has now triggered a lack of credibility in those statements made by US officials that the United States is not at war with Islam.

Not at all; it has triggered a lack of credibility only in those already blinded by hate. They are a lost cause. The response of canceling the course and the investigation will set things right for all others.

VC mate ring a ring a roses pocket full of poses. You must try to stay on topic. Even if it shows America in a bad light. Even the thought of committing genocide should be anathema in civilised society

Yeah: try telling that to those calling for destruction of USA and at least one another country too. And they drew first blood too.

 

[lem34]

Yeah: try telling that to those calling for destruction of USA and at least one another country too. And they drew first blood too.

VC mate please do not be offended but are you being a bit dim today. How can you compare the rantings of any individual to state institutions??

You see this is the thing where I think some nouveau Americans have lost the plot. Americans were a proud nation with morals and standards above the rest. But they have lost any claim to that. In fighting evil they have become evil

 

[LeGenD]

Mate do you not get the picture I was pointing out to you that American regime policies are hated the world over for hypocrisy. It would appear that you have special glasses which hide American misdemeanour's but highlight Pakistani one lol

While muslims are generally quick to point out flaws in policies of others; how about the need to address flaws and menace of fundamentalism prevalent in the Islamic Front as well?

Do not forget that terrorists from Islamic nations are responsible for WOT. 9/11 have fueled fundamentalism in USA. Thanks to these terrorists, US now harbors a new threat perception: Islamic Fundamentalism.

Oh wait! 9/11 was an inside job, right?

And by the way, Allah Almighty (God) controls the whole world. Not AIPAC.

Every human is responsible for own actions.

 

[VCheng]

...........
Do not forget that terrorists from Islamic nations are responsible for WOT. 9/11 have fueled fundamentalism in USA. Thanks to these terrorists, US now harbors a new threat perception: Islamic Fundamentalism.
.....................

It is not just a perception: Militant Islamic fundamentalism, and the terrorism it has already spawned, is a real threat to all of modern civilization as most countries would know it, not just the West.

 

[lem34]

While muslims are generally quick to point out flaws in policies of others; how about the need to address flaws and menace of fundamentalism prevalent in the Islamic Front as well?

.

Go and start a thread and we will. This thread is about Ameirca

Do not forget that terrorists from Islamic nations are responsible for WOT. 9/11 have fueled fundamentalism in USA. Thanks to these terrorists, US now harbors a new threat perception: Islamic Fundamentalism.
.

Yes most of them were Saudis

Oh wait! 9/11 was an inside job, right?

And by the way, Allah Almighty (God) controls the whole world. Not AIPAC.

Every human is responsible for own actions.

AIPAC controls American foreign policy

It is not just a perception: Militant Islamic fundamentalism, and the terrorism it has already spawned, is a real threat to all of modern civilization as most countries would know it, not just the West.

well off topic in your defence of abhorrent American action that is to commit genocide

 

[KS]

Go and start a thread and we will. This thread is about Ameirca

Things don't happen in vacuum to isolate and analyze.

Yes most of them were Saudis

And ?

 

[Developereo]

Then this is a matter of corruption. Drug cartels export a substance. Al-Qaeda and the like minded export what equivalent?

The US military is tasked to protect American interests. They don't care whether it's Noriega or BinLaden, or what they are 'exporting'. As long as the US administration designates them as a threat to American interests, they will engage the enemy.

The one who is dancing here is YOU who has to strain at gnats to compare drug cartels with religious and ideologically motivated terrorists.

It's a fake distinction YOU make to run away from the core issue, which is collective punishment. The example of drug cartels is given to show the logical inconsistency of Dooley's argument, since all his prerequisites for drastic action are satisfied by drug cartels also.

Escape while you can.

Nah, just bored with your performance. As much as you dance, you are no Travolta or Baryshnikov.

There are no religious banner in the US military,

The religious banner 'Jesus killed Mohammed' was paraded by US military personnel serving in Afghanistan. The video is on youtube.

one that allows homosexuals to openly serve while your society oppresses the same group. Another fail argument.

First sharia and now homosexuals?

Dance, baby, dance!

While muslims are generally quick to point out flaws in policies of others; how about the need to address flaws and menace of fundamentalism prevalent in the Islamic Front as well?

The topic here is not whether Islamic extremism exists, but whether a 'Total war on Islam' is a legitimate response by the US military.

Some posters, including gambit and VCheng, believe that such a war on all Muslims, including nuking Mecca and Medina, is a legitimate and valid response by the US military and that the option must 'remain on the table'.

Exhibit A (special focus on the last sentence):

That is exactly what I have been doing, no matter how unfashionable it is on this forum!

My statement that made you so irate remains true, no matter how you spin it:

"US military preparations must continue to be comprehensive for all scenarios as much as is possible".

And they will remain so, despite attempts to initiate a politically correct witch hunt.

 

[gambit]

The US military is tasked to protect American interests. They don't care whether it's Noriega or BinLaden, or what they are 'exporting'. As long as the US administration designates them as a threat to American interests, they will engage the enemy.

National interests. By your argument, may be the US military should round up American drug users? No wonder I do not take your arguments so far seriously.

It's a fake distinction YOU make to run away from the core issue, which is collective punishment. The example of drug cartels is given to show the logical inconsistency of Dooley's argument, since all his prerequisites for drastic action are satisfied by drug cartels also.

It is not a fake distinction. It is real enough that countries respects it.

First sharia and now homosexuals?

Dance, baby, dance!

Nah...The one who is dancing here is YOU in trying to equate drug cartels with state interests and our military with yours, one that is rife with religious zealots.

The topic here is not whether Islamic extremism exists, but whether a 'Total war on Islam' is a legitimate response by the US military.

Some posters, including gambit and VCheng, believe that such a war on all Muslims, including nuking Mecca and Medina, is a legitimate and valid response by the US military and that the option must 'remain on the table'.

It is presumed upon that a total war has been declared by the muslims upon US. You cannot even face the reality and truth that if Osama bin Laden had in possession a nuclear or at least a radiological weapon, he would have used it, and that would definitely earn the muslims an equivalent response.

 

[Developereo]

National interests. By your argument, may be the US military should round up American drug users? No wonder I do not take your arguments so far seriously.

I specifically said that the US administration decides whom the US military engages as targets. Where do drug users come into this?

It is not a fake distinction. It is real enough that countries respects it.

They are both threats to national security and they both fit the prerequisites of Dooley's drastic action. Those are the salient issues.

our military with yours, one that is rife with religious zealots.

I really enjoy watching you squirm every time you try to drag Pakistan into the discussion. I truly do!

It is presumed upon that a total war has been declared by the muslims upon US

Please read what I wrote about circular arguments and (false) a priori assumptions. Show us where in Dooley's course he waits for Muslims to 'declare total war' before triggering his retaliation.

How exactly does a politically, culturally and ethnically diverse group of 1.4 billion people 'declare total war' anyway?

You cannot even face the reality and truth that if Osama bin Laden had in possession a nuclear or at least a radiological weapon, he would have used it, and that would definitely earn the muslims an equivalent response.

He probably would have, and there is a non-zero probability that someone may still. How does that justify nuking Mecca? How will nuking Mecca solve the problem of terrorism?

 

[King Solomon]

Try enrolling in remedial English before typing again.

I specifically said that the US administration decides whom the US military engages as targets. Where do drug users come into this?

They are both threats to national security and they both fit the prerequisites of Dooley's drastic action. Those are the salient issues.

I really enjoy watching you squirm every time you try to drag Pakistan into the discussion. I truly do!

Please read what I wrote about circular arguments and (false) a priori assumptions. Show us where in Dooley's course he waits for Muslims to 'declare total war' before triggering his retaliation.

How exactly does a politically, culturally and ethnically diverse group of 1.4 billion people 'declare total war' anyway?

He probably would have, and there is a non-zero probability that someone may still. How does that justify nuking Mecca? How will nuking Mecca solve the problem of terrorism?

Off topic, but just wanted to ask this rhetorical question. If, suppose, pakistan and other Islamic nations had the capability to deliver nuclear weapons to US and Europe, considering the amount of venom these country's citizens are fed with against the west, wouldn't they already have nuked US?

US got attacked by extremists during 9/11 and others. The US today has the capability to vaporize all Islamic nations in the matter of minutes. But it is very merciful towards these nations and only targets selective nations where terrorists thrive like Afghanistan. Civilian casualty in the hand of US military is very low/

US shows far, far more restraint and responsibility than Islamic nations if you ask me.

 

[Developereo]

Off topic, but just wanted to ask this rhetorical question. If, suppose, pakistan and other Islamic nations had the capability to deliver nuclear weapons to US and Europe, considering the amount of venom these country's citizens are fed with against the west, wouldn't they already have nuked US?

US got attacked by extremists during 9/11 and others. The US today has the capability to vaporize all Islamic nations in the matter of minutes. But it is very merciful towards these nations and only targets selective nations where terrorists thrive like Afghanistan. Civilian casualty in the hand of US military is very low/

US shows far, far more restraint and responsibility than Islamic nations if you ask me.

How many countries have nuclear weapons?
How many countries have USED nuclear weapons?

What you are saying, in your typical shameless way, is that little brown people just can't be trusted with responsibility.

 

[King Solomon]

...... in your typical shameless way...........

Firstly, please spare the personal attack.. I've not said anything to warrant a response like that from you.

What you are saying, in your typical shameless way, is that little brown people just can't be trusted with responsibility.

You extrapolated that, I neither said nor meant anything like that. What I was saying is, considering the amount of venom and anti-western extremist propaganda the population is fed in Islamic nations, had they the capability to deliver nuclear weapons to US/Europe, they would have already done so and killed hundreds of millions of people. A few days ago I talked to a member in the forum who expressed explicit desire to "obliterate" the US and "kill hundred million Americans"..

Compare this with the reaction of US, which had nuclear weapons from 1945. Got attacked by muslim extremists in 9/11 as well as numerous attacks in the western world in general. Sacrificed thousands of lives. Muslim citizens in US/Europe still live in complete freedom and enjoys all rights as a normal citizen would.

Last time we saw, a mere drawing of Prophet Mohammed's cartoon meant boycotting Danish goods completely!

See the disparity between the reactions? You decide what would be the reaction if Islamic nations possessed nuclear delivery means to US/Europe!

Who is more mature? Who is responsible? Who is sensible? Who shows restraint? Islamic nations or the west? Let us put the Islamic nations in place of west. What would Muslims do if they were in the place of west? You decide.

 

[Developereo]

There's enough off-topic discussion already. Open another thread.

 

[King Solomon]

There's enough off-topic discussion already. Open another thread.

Not really off topic... You and Gambit were discussing the legality of the course material. In my opinion, it is fully legal (although not on moral grounds) because it envisages a contingency situation (I've learnt this after reviewing the slides).

I tried to reverse the roles and make a relative comparison. What would Islamic nations do if they were in place of US?

Anyway, looks like I outwitted you...