@GoodoldBob Tell that to all the conservatives who screech and shit their pants and tell me to fuck off and die when I remind them that they support Muslim terrorism.
@GoodoldBob Apparently, OP is a liar, because if he re-posted something that was removed by admins, he'd likely have the same action taken again and possibly suspended.
But, conservatives love to lie and love to play the oppressed victim.
@GoodoldBob Oh man, just follow me around SW for a few hours and you'll see. In fact, scroll down in these comments and you'll find two of them, calling me a racist and a Jew-hater because I said we need to stop giving money to jihadists in Syria.
@BlueMetalChick Oh? I'd have thought it was support for the Saudis that had you upset. But the fact does remain that the enemy of my enemy is sometimes almost as good as a friend (to paraphrase a bit). And it really is in the best interest of the U.S. that Iran has regional rivals to keep the Iranian government in check. It's ugly pragmatic policy in its most raw form, but there it is.
@GoodoldBob It's also wildly illegal, unconstitutional, and wastes hundreds of billions of dollars in taxpayer money. And it gets Americans killed, it gets civilians killed, and has done nothing for the last twenty years but breed more terrorism. It doesn't even work.
@GoodoldBob It's not a matter of opinion that it's unconstitutional. You can't have an opinion on whether or not the US Constitution explicitly forbids the sale of weapons to groups who are known terrorists. It's codified in at least four places.
It's not a matter of opinion that Americans die because of these wars. It's not a matter of opinion that civilians die because of them either.
It's not a matter of opinion that it costs hundreds of billions of dollars.
A lot of things are matters of opinion. These are not.
@GoodoldBob Look at what we're doing in Afghanistan. The Taliban now controls more territory than they did when we invaded. Groups like ISIS, ISIL, and the AQI would never have existed if we hadn't fucked around in Iraq and Libya.
@BlueMetalChick Again, that is a matter of opinion. In all likelihood those groups would exist in some form or other no matter what the U.S. does or does not do. Islam will not tolerate non-islamic thought or culture so as long as there are people who will not bow to their false prophet and his false religion there will be ISIS etc
@GoodoldBob Not Wahhabi or Salafi Islam, at least. Those are the most prominent and most powerful Islamic denominations unfortunately. Most other denominations which aren't nearly so radical aren't relevant because they're not the ones with the guns and money.
Regardless, even if it DID work, it would still be insanely illegal by both international law and our own Constitution, and it would still waste a tremendous amount of taxpayer money that could be used to fix problems back home like the country's abhorrently outdated infrastructure or the student loan debt crisis that is preventing an entire generation from participating in the economy and withholding most of the next generation from ever attending college in the first place.
That's what we as Americans want. We want our money spent on things that improve our lives. Funding and propping up the Al Nusra Front or Liwa al Umma or Boko Haram does nothing at all for us. And it's our money, so we should be able to choose what it's spent on.
@BlueMetalChick Do not be silly. Supporting the enemy of my enemy is also well established in American history. You can call it unconstitutional all you want, it's practical, and well practiced, by any and all parties.
@tj786100 Because it's an old practice means it's perfectly fine? It IS unconstitutional. I can name at least four constitutional laws that it violates. And it wastes a shitload of taxpayer money, it gets thousands if not hundreds of thousands of civilians killed, and it never succeeds. Funding the enemy's enemy is why the World Trade Center was destroyed.
@BlueMetalChick We may not agree with the mechanisms, but the idea is a competing governmental requirement to "provide for the welfare of the people" (something like that). I know I'd very much personally prefer wars fought somewhere other than our lands.
I honestly don't think this is political either - and supporting the enemy of our enemy is a necessary evil - even if it sometimes comes back to bite us. Helping Iraq against Iran in the late 70s/early 80s did the same when Saddam Hussein did his thing in the 90s. It still does not mean we did not thwart what would have been an even bigger issue. We will never know if it did. I'm still convinced not destroying UBL when Clinton had the chance (AFTER the first WTC bombing, BTW) is as much responsible for 9/11 as anything either, but beyond that statement, I refuse to politicize that horrible day. It fails to respect those involved (including a dear friend's mother) and I'm not upset with Bill Clinton either - who would have expected what occurred?
I should be more honest here though - I sincerely NEVER watch a political show anymore - so I have no clue what is currently happening. I might completely change my mind if I listened more. I'm by-and-large apolitical for exactly what occurred in this thread where both sides are doing exactly what they accuse the other of, over and over again. It accomplishes nothing, sorta like our government.
@tj786100 [quote]I know I'd very much personally prefer wars fought somewhere other than our lands.[/quote] Are you implying that if we don't spend billions of dollars bombing Syria, that the Syrian jihadists are going to show up in Nebraska by next Wednesday? You can't possibly feel legitimately threatened by these people. They don't present a real threat to us. And the only ones that DO present a threat are only powerful enough to do so because we armed them. Like Al Qaeda. They were of no threat to the USA and had no ability to attack us in any way. Then we gave them weapons and money and they used it to blow up the Twin Towers. If we hadn't have done that, they wouldn't have been able to commit the September 11th terrorist attacks.
[quote] Helping Iraq against Iran in the late 70s/early 80s did the same when Saddam Hussein did his thing in the 90s.[/quote] We wouldn't have had to fight Iran at all had we not infiltrated their country decades earlier and assassinated their president because we were upset that he wanted to return the oil wealth to the Iranian people and enrich their lives by giving them the money that came from the sale of the oil mined out of their own property. Once again, we created another conflict by doing something completely unnecessary and stupid.
[quote]I should be more honest here though - I sincerely NEVER watch a political show anymore - so I have no clue what is currently happening[/quote] Can I give you an example and then ask for your opinion?
