Wanted: House Speaker Apply Within (Politics thread)

by **Youseff** » Fri Nov 13, 2015 17:32:00

some sort of what appears to be coordinated violence in Paris

http://www.businessinsider.com/paris-sh ... ns-2015-11

by **Youseff** » Sat Nov 14, 2015 02:25:20

I think it's worth doubling down on my huge bet of how awful of a president GW was in light of what's going on.

by **SK790** » Sat Nov 14, 2015 02:35:33

he kept us safe...

also plunged the middle east into a decade of chaos and further radicalism of the region.

at least we got saddam out, tho! that's going well, right?

by **Soren** » Sat Nov 14, 2015 09:18:30

So Iran is basically our only shot at a stable and moderate Muslim state at any point right?

by **The Savior** » Sat Nov 14, 2015 09:39:48

SK790 wrote:he kept us safe...

also plunged the middle east into a decade of chaos and further radicalism of the region.

at least we got saddam out, tho! that's going well, right?

uh, the middle east was in chaos well before bush. it's still in chaos now. will be in chaos tomorrow.

doesn't matter if the president is republican, democrat, libertarian, black, white, hispanic, male, female.

by **Stay_Disappointed** » Sat Nov 14, 2015 10:37:50

Bill Maher wrote:“I’m going to ask you this question that people asked after 9/11, because I don’t think we still know the answer: Why do they hate us?”
Ratigan, the only panelist to speak up, brought up the United States’ ties with Saudi Arabia as one reason Islamic Terrorists are angry with western countries.
“That’s not what terrorists say,” Maher responded. “When you capture one, or when they leave a note, you know what they say? Because you’re in Muslim lands.”
"This is because of all the harm done by Hollande to Muslims all over the world,” the eyewitness said one of the gunmen yelled in French. Later, ISIS released a video claming responsibility for the attacks and blaming France “for bragging that they're fighting against Islam in France and hit Muslims in Califat lands with their planes.”
“I have a crazy idea,” Maher said to his panel. “Why don’t we get out of Muslim lands?”

by **drsmooth** » Sat Nov 14, 2015 11:10:51

Warszawa wrote:
“I have a crazy idea,” Maher said to his panel. “Why don’t we get out of Muslim lands?”

I have a crazy idea. Let's not make out the ravings of a delusional just-recently-a-teenager as the diplomatic policy of one or more nations. Or even as the code of conduct of a reasonably durable gang.

by **pacino** » Sat Nov 14, 2015 11:23:20

Soren wrote:So Iran is basically our only shot at a stable and moderate Muslim state at any point right?

Turkey and Jordan. Turkey is electing a power hungry madman, though

by **pacino** » Sat Nov 14, 2015 11:24:07

The Savior wrote:
SK790 wrote:he kept us safe...

also plunged the middle east into a decade of chaos and further radicalism of the region.

at least we got saddam out, tho! that's going well, right?

uh, the middle east was in chaos well before bush. it's still in chaos now. will be in chaos tomorrow.

doesn't matter if the president is republican, democrat, libertarian, black, white, hispanic, male, female.

I've said it before. Our invasion broke Iraq and triggered a hell of a lot of sectarian violence.

by **The Savior** » Sat Nov 14, 2015 11:33:58

That violence was assisted by the invasion, sure. But it existed regardless. These people have hated each other for centuries. It was quelled prior to the invasion because Sadaam discriminated against everyone except his own people. That sounds like an ideal alternative.

These people have hated each other for as long as time. The mistake was made in thinking you could nation-build in this area of the world. The people in these countries relate to religion ideology, not a flag.

by **pacino** » Sat Nov 14, 2015 11:36:09

Arbitrary lines put in after WWI have created a lot of problems.

by **The Savior** » Sat Nov 14, 2015 12:09:46

pacino wrote:Arbitrary lines put in after WWI have created a lot of problems.

Which one is it?

by **pacino** » Sat Nov 14, 2015 12:17:35

Meaning they lumped together peoples that weren't going to form a country together on their own. Like Iraq.

by **drsmooth** » Sat Nov 14, 2015 12:32:31

The Savior wrote:
pacino wrote:Arbitrary lines put in after WWI have created a lot of problems.

Which one is it?

oh, making out the pattern gets worse. The Ottoman Empire had begun crumbling more than a century BEFORE WWI. WWI and the state-making Pac mentions was Western Europe attempting to flush the john (and yeah, advance their various imperialist schemes)

by **pacino** » Sat Nov 14, 2015 16:21:46

Kenyan attack by al-Shabab kills 147 people at a university. This is the same group that attacked the shopping center.

by **CalvinBall** » Sat Nov 14, 2015 16:31:24

That's from April Pacino

by **pacino** » Sat Nov 14, 2015 16:51:22

by **CalvinBall** » Sat Nov 14, 2015 18:10:05

Ok? Why are you posting it like it happened today?

by **Stay_Disappointed** » Sat Nov 14, 2015 21:11:56

pacino wrote:
Soren wrote:So Iran is basically our only shot at a stable and moderate Muslim state at any point right?

Turkey and Jordan. Turkey is electing a power hungry madman, though

I just read an Interesting esquire story...basically saying all these Middle East countries sponsor terrorism so that the masses in their own country don't rebel against the incredibly repressive economic systems in place there; basically create a diversion with the west feeling the brunt. The US knows this and permits it to happen. Why? Better to play along and keep the Middle East stable than risk a disruption in oil supply. If you want to cripple terrorist organizations than create sanctions, freeze assets and forcibly bankrupt these regimes....the question is will the west do that knowing the risk of mass instability in the region

by **SK790** » Sat Nov 14, 2015 22:11:57

Warszawa wrote:
pacino wrote:
Soren wrote:So Iran is basically our only shot at a stable and moderate Muslim state at any point right?

Turkey and Jordan. Turkey is electing a power hungry madman, though

I just read an Interesting esquire story...basically saying all these Middle East countries sponsor terrorism so that the masses in their own country don't rebel against the incredibly repressive economic systems in place there; basically create a diversion with the west feeling the brunt. The US knows this and permits it to happen. Why? Better to play along and keep the Middle East stable than risk a disruption in oil supply. If you want to cripple terrorist organizations than create sanctions, freeze assets and forcibly bankrupt these regimes....the question is will the west do that knowing the risk of mass instability in the region

We're allies with the Saudis who help to fund Salafis across the globe, including the IS.

Archived

Wanted: House Speaker Apply Within (Politics thread)

Re: Wanted: House Speaker Apply Within (Politics thread)

Re: Wanted: House Speaker Apply Within (Politics thread)

Re: Wanted: House Speaker Apply Within (Politics thread)

Re: Wanted: House Speaker Apply Within (Politics thread)

Re: Wanted: House Speaker Apply Within (Politics thread)

Re: Wanted: House Speaker Apply Within (Politics thread)

Re: Wanted: House Speaker Apply Within (Politics thread)

Re: Wanted: House Speaker Apply Within (Politics thread)

Re: Wanted: House Speaker Apply Within (Politics thread)

Re: Wanted: House Speaker Apply Within (Politics thread)

Re: Wanted: House Speaker Apply Within (Politics thread)

Re: Wanted: House Speaker Apply Within (Politics thread)

Re: Wanted: House Speaker Apply Within (Politics thread)

Re: Wanted: House Speaker Apply Within (Politics thread)

Re: Wanted: House Speaker Apply Within (Politics thread)

Re: Wanted: House Speaker Apply Within (Politics thread)

Re: Wanted: House Speaker Apply Within (Politics thread)

Re: Wanted: House Speaker Apply Within (Politics thread)

Re: Wanted: House Speaker Apply Within (Politics thread)

Re: Wanted: House Speaker Apply Within (Politics thread)