Gen. Michael Flynn: Radical Islamic Enemy Has Doubled in 10 Years

[Dexter]

I already said I didn't share that belief, and never even came close to saying that I did.

I have also already shared what I think might work, and agree with what others here have said.

(You have chosen to ignore what I have already said so that you might continue to continue your imaginary argument against me).

Discriminate yet fierce, bombing, guided by a strong military which is not cuckolded by the political left as it is now.  Allowing the military to make the calls in order to win a winnable war.  Getting the peaceniks and naïve pacifists out of the way so that we can defeat the enemy as we did in Germany and Japan (there were people like you who opposed defeating Hitler too, you know).

Now that I have answered your "question" (once again), can you try to debate what I actually say without relying on the dribble you've continued here?

Stop asking the same insipid question that's already been answered, and answer a few of your own....

You claim you've already answered my question, but your answer is vague and really doesn't detail what we weren't doing properly. I am legitimately curious about what you think wasn't done on the battlefield that should have been in order to win. How was the bombing not fierce enough? We killed terrorists wherever we could find them. In your opinion, what military actions could have been taken to better fight the war on terror without the culling of civilian populations?  How was our effort not good enough? How could we have improved it? What could we have done to make the bombing more fierce and effective without doing it indiscriminately? What would the military have done differently if it had been allowed to deal with the situation however it wanted?

[Dexter]

He's a shill for the left, and his role here is to be a disruptor, a prevaricator, or both.

Completely agree.  He's not seriously interested in anyone's opinion but his own (and whoever sent him here).

Are you seriously that paranoid?

[musiclady]

You claim you've already answered my question, but your answer is vague and really doesn't detail what we weren't doing properly. I am legitimately curious about what you think wasn't done on the battlefield that should have been in order to win. How was the bombing not fierce enough? We killed terrorists wherever we could find them. In your opinion, what military actions could have been taken to better fight the war on terror without the culling of civilian populations?  How was our effort not good enough? How could we have improved it? What could we have done to make the bombing more fierce and effective without doing it indiscriminately? What would the military have done differently if it had been allowed to deal with the situation however it wanted?

Well, at least you've advanced from your pre-fab template with these questions......

Kudos.

Since you haven't specified which terrorists you're referring to and in which country, it's impossible to respond to these generic questions.  You know, of course, that I'm not a military expert, and that I have repeatedly said we should leave the decisions to the military, but since you aren't being clear as to which conflict and which era you're referring to, I'm not even going to try to respond specifically.

Let me just say that with the surge in Iraq and the thousands of terrorists our troops killed there in 2008, we had a good portion of the problem solved, and had Iraq stabilized (as much as a ME country with a thousand year plus conflict going on can be).  The terrorists were flocking to Iraq because we were there and they were going to kill the big bad Americans, and the opposite happened.

WE killed THEM instead.

As for your "paranoid" silliness in your next post.  No.  I don't have even a tinge of paranoia.  I just understand leftist trolling because I've never been on a conservative board where it didn't happen (and I've been a participant for well over a decade).   You're nicer and more polite than some, but that doesn't erase what appears to be the purpose of your posts.

If I were a betting woman (and I'm not), I'd never bet against the probability that you're here only to disrupt.  I know there are one or two here who think you're legit (and they're people I respect), but nothing I've seen from you indicates you're here to learn anything, or actually respond to the thoughts in other people's posts, or the vastly superior knowledge that many here possess over your own.

[Bigun]

Are you seriously that paranoid?

Dex you really should consider moving to http://www.democraticunderground.com/.

I'm certain you will be much more comfortable there!

[Dexter]

I'm not even going to try to respond specifically.

I knew that was going to be the case before you posted, but this has less to do with me not naming a specific conflict and more to do with you not knowing how to answer my question. The truth of the matter is that without indiscriminately killing unknown millions there is no way we could have better dealt with the problem. I was there, and I can tell you with confidence that there was never a moment that we thought we could kill a bunch of terrorists but didn't because we got a call from Washington telling us not to. We destroyed them ruthlessly anywhere we could find them, even at the cost of innocent lives. It's also completely absurd and incorrect when you imply that Washington was badly micromanaging the efforts of the troops. They had the final call of course, but by and large it was our generals making the decisions. Your belief that there was some method we neglected for the sake of the hippies back home is not based in fact whatsoever. Unless of course you were talking about leveling entire cities and murdering millions of innocent people unnecessarily, but you said you would never support something like that.

As for your "paranoid" silliness in your next post.  No.  I don't have even a tinge of paranoia.  I just understand leftist trolling because I've never been on a conservative board where it didn't happen (and I've been a participant for well over a decade).   You're nicer and more polite than some, but that doesn't erase what appears to be the purpose of your posts.

If I were a betting woman (and I'm not), I'd never bet against the probability that you're here only to disrupt.  I know there are one or two here who think you're legit (and they're people I respect), but nothing I've seen from you indicates you're here to learn anything, or actually respond to the thoughts in other people's posts, or the vastly superior knowledge that many here possess over your own.

No, I'm not here to learn anything from you. Are you here to learn from me? I doubt it. I have my own beliefs and I am here to discuss them, just like you.

[Dexter]

Dex you really should consider moving to http://www.democraticunderground.com/.

I'm certain you will be much more comfortable there!

It won't hurt my feelings if you ignore me.

[aligncare]

Dex you really should consider moving to http://www.democraticunderground.com/.

I'm certain you will be much more comfortable there!

Come on now. Surely there's room for different opinions here.

Dex proposes serious questions that concern many people. The answers are not as simple as some would suggest.

Take King Abdullah of Jordan. A Muslim monarch of an Islamic state—and he's outraged enough by the violence of Islamic fundamentalists to go to the mat. And al Sisi of Egypt, a military man, calling out violence and extremism in Islam. These are the folks and others like them, who will help drag Islam out of the dark ages.

America can and should defend itself. But, lasting reformation must come from Islam itself. American resolve and military might is not enough to fix this problem.

[EdinVA]

Come on now. Surely there's room for different opinions here.

Dex proposes serious questions that concern many people. The answers are not as simple as some would suggest.

Take King Abdullah of Jordan. A Muslim monarch of an Islamic state—and he's outraged enough by the violence of Islamic fundamentalists to go to the mat. And al Sisi of Egypt, a military man, calling out violence and extremism in Islam. These are the folks and others like them, who will help drag Islam out of the dark ages.

America can and should defend itself. But, lasting reformation must come from Islam itself. American resolve and military might is not enough to fix this problem.

Islam has had thousands of years to "reform" itself... what is going to change in the next 1000 years?

[Dexter]

But, lasting reformation must come from Islam itself. American resolve and military might is not enough to fix this problem.

 

[aligncare]

Islam has had thousands of years to "reform" itself... what is going to change in the next 1000 years?

You got to have faith. You want to know what's changed? The Internet, YouTube, instant world-wide communication, in short, modernity.

[aligncare]

You left the first sentence out of what you quoted. I also said America can and should defend itself. Appeasement is not an option.

[EdinVA]

You got to have faith. You want to know what's changed? The Internet, YouTube, instant world-wide communication, in short, modernity.

So a society that lives in mud huts, has no electricity, is only now learning what toilet paper is, is suddenly going to change because people they hate and murder are yelling stop?  I don't think so....

[Dexter]

So a society that lives in mud huts, has no electricity, is only now learning what toilet paper is, is suddenly going to change because people they hate and murder are yelling stop?  I don't think so....

Maybe they won't be so angry and unreasonable when they are not living in mud huts without electricity.

[Dexter]

You left the first sentence out of what you quoted. I also said America can and should defend itself. Appeasement is not an option.

I agree with both parts of your statement, but the second part is the part I felt deserved the giant red 'thumbs up'.

[musiclady]

I knew that was going to be the case before you posted, but this has less to do with me not naming a specific conflict and more to do with you not knowing how to answer my question. The truth of the matter is that without indiscriminately killing unknown millions there is no way we could have better dealt with the problem. I was there, and I can tell you with confidence that there was never a moment that we thought we could kill a bunch of terrorists but didn't because we got a call from Washington telling us not to. We destroyed them ruthlessly anywhere we could find them, even at the cost of innocent lives. It's also completely absurd and incorrect when you imply that Washington was badly micromanaging the efforts of the troops. They had the final call of course, but by and large it was our generals making the decisions. Your belief that there was some method we neglected for the sake of the hippies back home is not based in fact whatsoever. Unless of course you were talking about leveling entire cities and murdering millions of innocent people unnecessarily, but you said you would never support something like that.

LOL.  You have a lot of hubris, young fellow!  You communicate poorly, and it's my fault.   

So tell me then.......... is it your learned view that the Washington meddling in Viet Nam didn't have any effect on the war effort there either?

And, were you in Iraq (as you claim, at least) when Bush was President, or when Obama was pretending to be CinC?  There would be a difference in how the military was treated between the two situations.  (I know you think R's and D's are all alike, but you would, of course, be wrong about that as you are most of the time).

Also............. you have given only two options.  Bomb "indiscriminately" or lose the war against evil and terrorism.

Which of those two do you prefer?

No, I'm not here to learn anything from you. Are you here to learn from me? I doubt it. I have my own beliefs and I am here to discuss them, just like you.

Actually, I learn a lot from a lot of people here. (Though nothing from you, so far).  That's one of the advantages of being on a conservative forum with THINKING people.  It's a place for open-minded people (like me. not you) to learn things and grow as a person and as a patriot.

The fact that you don't try to learn anything speaks volumes about you....

[DCPatriot]

Dex you really should consider moving to http://www.democraticunderground.com/.

I'm certain you will be much more comfortable there!

There's absolutely nothing wrong with Dex's presence here on the forum.

He's ALWAYS conducted himself as a gentleman, even when confronted with insults.

His opinion is valued here just like yours is.   Please cut the crap.

[musiclady]

Come on now. Surely there's room for different opinions here.

Dex proposes serious questions that concern many people. The answers are not as simple as some would suggest.

Take King Abdullah of Jordan. A Muslim monarch of an Islamic state—and he's outraged enough by the violence of Islamic fundamentalists to go to the mat. And al Sisi of Egypt, a military man, calling out violence and extremism in Islam. These are the folks and others like them, who will help drag Islam out of the dark ages.

America can and should defend itself. But, lasting reformation must come from Islam itself. American resolve and military might is not enough to fix this problem.

Mostly he proposes the same few questions over and over again, and never offers any solutions, while rejecting every solution offered to him....

I completely agree that the issues are more complex than some here may think, but I don't think Dex brings much, if anything, to the discussion other than offering up what any random Jon Stewart fan might query.

JMHO.....

[musiclady]

There's absolutely nothing wrong with Dex's presence here on the forum.

He's ALWAYS conducted himself as a gentleman, even when confronted with insults.

His opinion is valued here just like yours is.   Please cut the crap.

What opinion would that be, DC?  All he's done here is regurgitate talking points.

[Bigun]

There's absolutely nothing wrong with Dex's presence here on the forum.

He's ALWAYS conducted himself as a gentleman, even when confronted with insults.

His opinion is valued here just like yours is.   Please cut the crap.

Go back and read this thread! And then YOU cut the crap!

I stand by every word I said to him! He's free to troll here all he wants but I will never respond to him again.

[DCPatriot]

Go back and read this thread! And then YOU cut the crap!

I stand by every word I said to him! He's free to troll here all he wants but I will never respond to him again.

There is absolutely no reason to accuse somebody of being a "liberal" just because they hold an opposing POV as yours.    As if YOU speak for all of us.

You don't.  There are many other people here that like to read an articulate argument from a different POV.  It's part of the growth process, Bigun.

[MACVSOG68]

Yeah, DC and aligncare...who do you think you are suggesting there's room for Dex here?  You've heard it from a few of the alleged "wisest and oldest" of this forum's members.  First they hurl insults and taunts at Dex, and when he continues to politely try to debate, they tell him he doesn't belong here.  He's a liberal, a troll, sent by the Devil to disrupt this otherwise peaceful Salem-like corner of cyber-ville.

Dex has the patience of Job to put up with that crap.  He has far more restraint and poise than I do...which is why I tend to read instead of write.  This forum was far more welcoming before the "wiser and older" cut every legitimate debate with their gang tactics.   

[Bigun]

There is absolutely no reason to accuse somebody of being a "liberal" just because they hold an opposing POV as yours.    As if YOU speak for all of us.

You don't.  There are many other people here that like to read an articulate argument from a different POV.  It's part of the growth process, Bigun.

It isn't the POV being different that is the problem! It's the lack of ability to support his side of the argument! Prove him wrong today and he's right back tomorrow making the same argument again!

YOU respond to him if you like! I'm done with him!

[Carling]

But, lasting reformation must come from Islam itself. American resolve and military might is not enough to fix this problem.

Unless Muhammad walks the earth again and disavows the atrocities attributed to him in the Koran, exactly what is there for Islam to reform?  Their own prophet advocates the slaughter of infidels, and even partook in that violence as is written in the Koran.

If the teachings of Muhammad are to be believed, ISIS is merely following Islamic dogma.

[olde north church]

Unless Muhammad walks the earth again and disavows the atrocities attributed to him in the Koran, exactly what is there for Islam to reform?  Their own prophet advocates the slaughter of infidels, and even partook in that violence as is written in the Koran.

If the teachings of Muhammad are to be believed, ISIS is merely following Islamic dogma.

Muhammed is basically a stand-in for the disciples.  Islam doesn't  imply a god's name.  It means submission or to submit.  Christianity is to follow Christ.

[musiclady]

Yeah, DC and aligncare...who do you think you are suggesting there's room for Dex here?  You've heard it from a few of the alleged "wisest and oldest" of this forum's members.  First they hurl insults and taunts at Dex, and when he continues to politely try to debate, they tell him he doesn't belong here.  He's a liberal, a troll, sent by the Devil to disrupt this otherwise peaceful Salem-like corner of cyber-ville.

Dex has the patience of Job to put up with that crap.  He has far more restraint and poise than I do...which is why I tend to read instead of write.  This forum was far more welcoming before the "wiser and older" cut every legitimate debate with their gang tactics.

You're full of malarkey, MAC.

There are no 'gang tactics.'  There's no one 'older and wiser.'  (As far as I know, I'm 3 years newer to this forum than you are).

I was engaging in legit debate with Dex, as I always do, and he did what he always does.

Regurgitates the same talking points.

You're full of malarkey.

And some sour grapes as well.....