As long as it has support from places other than the White House, I am okay with it. NK has been shaking that saber for a long time.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Hey !, he did it, dropping the big mother.
- Thread starter psychoslice
- Start date
I don't trust support from other places.
But if NK is to be attacked, I'd want China's OK.
tytlyf
Not Religious
Republicans will change their mind if their media changes their mind. RW media is praising this as the new "Shock and Awe.' Not 2 tomahawks, 60. Not a few bunker busters, the biggest.The right wing was against various wars until one of their own took office. Now they're pro-war. This is for Syria but I assume the same is true everywhere
Apparently ISIL is now in Afghanistan and Pakistan.....and they are our chosen enemy instead of Al Qaeda. Next up is creating hysteria over IRAN and then the troops go in. This is what we warned people about prior to the election. THis is the normal republican track record.
BSM1
What? Me worry?
Yep. You're welcome.
Amen. It is reported they have 17 more such bombs. Hopefully he will drop some on Assad. Hopefully where he lives.
Republican will not change theirf mind on what the mindless LW media says, with their fake news.
Which far better than the "lead from behind" and red line fiasco of your hero. His policies will lengthen the problems, not bring them to an end.
esmith
Veteran Member
Suggest you study history before you make a statement.
Yes, the Korean War was ended by re-establishing the border between North and South Korea. I wouldn't exactly call that a "loss". What would you have had the UN do, take over all of Korea?
As far as the Vietnam War goes. When you fight a war with the military having one arm tied behind their backs you will realize that it is a lost cause. Could the US have "won" the war? Probably, but it would have required actions that the politicians didn't want. Yes the military made considerable mistakes in the prosecution of the war and that mindset was seen again in Iraq.
Can the war against terrorism be won? The answer is not totally, but they can be reduced to a manageable state.
And Trump will not tie the hands of the military
...nor are you to break any bone of it----coming to Jesus, when they saw He was dead, they did not break His legs---for these things came to pass to fulfill the Scripture, not a bone of Him shall be broken.
I'm tentatively in favor of this use of the bomb. It sounds like it's purpose was to eliminate the safe havens and transport routes that ISIS (and probably tons of previous terrorist groups) were using to operate. It was also in a relatively remote area so hopefully few civilian casualties. Maybe this will cripple them, for the time being.
But in general, I do think we need a radically different plan of dealing with the Middle East and terrorism because bombing the crap out of countries and deposing leaders is obviously not working.
And I wholeheartedly disagree with @psychoslice regarding his dehumanization of these people. That's exactly the mindset that creates terrorists in the first place. These are misguided and horrible people but they likely got that way through childhood indoctrination and decades of their lives being destabilized and destroyed by the meddling of outside forces. We need to, ultimately, kill the ideology with kindness (humanitarian aid and general leaving them alone) rather than bombs.
But in general, I do think we need a radically different plan of dealing with the Middle East and terrorism because bombing the crap out of countries and deposing leaders is obviously not working.
And I wholeheartedly disagree with @psychoslice regarding his dehumanization of these people. That's exactly the mindset that creates terrorists in the first place. These are misguided and horrible people but they likely got that way through childhood indoctrination and decades of their lives being destabilized and destroyed by the meddling of outside forces. We need to, ultimately, kill the ideology with kindness (humanitarian aid and general leaving them alone) rather than bombs.
The problem is that the US is trying to maintain a facade that can no longer be maintained. Korea and Vietnam ended up as they did because it was never our goal to actually "win." If we had operated that way during WW2, it would be like quitting and declaring an armistice after the Battle of the Bulge, letting Hitler remain in power under the belief that he has been "contained." Likewise, we didn't really need to drop any atomic bombs on Japan, nor did we even need to contemplate an amphibious invasion of the Japanese home islands. Once we drove them out of the Philippines, we could have just said "we quit" and left at that.
But we didn't do that; we kept going until the enemy unconditionally surrendered. We actually wanted to win World War 2, as opposed to the wars we've fought since then. That makes a big difference. Of course, it also made a big difference that China and Russia were on our side, but in these other conflicts, our actions were limited because we were afraid of triggering an escalation by China or Russia.
It's because of that, that our hands are tied now. The terrorists become emboldened by dissension among the major powers. We can't fight a war on so many fronts. We can't be at odds with Russia and China while trying to involve ourselves in Middle Eastern civil wars. Our main problem is that we have no sensible or coherent goals or objectives.
Historian checking in! Gotta throw a flag here for some clarification. It is important.
ISIS represents an ideology or a very abstract band of militants, at best. Hitler, on the other hand, represented a nation. A nation has a system of government, a populace, an army, an economy, assets, foreign policy, advisors, etc etc etc. Isis does not have these things. To compare fighting a nation that has declared traditional war to the struggle against ISIS is not a good one. ISIS does not have to answer to anything outside of their own circle. Germany did. They had to balance and maintain things that ISIS does not. Germany operated under what we generally like to call rules of war. (To be clear: this is not including the Holocaust, this is discussing formal war as a nation and why comparing the two is not always accurate.) ISIS does not operate under these rules and their tactics are much more difficult to predict because they don't have an "army" or "generals" or "presidents/chancellors, etc". There is no diplomacy, no lines of communication, no representatives, nothing, nada, zip.
Summary: It is much easier to fight a nation. You can defeat a nation. It is much harder to defeat an ideology.
For these reasons (and a few more if I wanted to dedicate more time to it), the comparison between the two is a faulty one.
tytlyf
Not Religious
The only problem with that theory is that it is RW media telling you to not trust ANY media that isn't conservative media. I wouldn't trust them if I were you.
You think Trump is better now? You're not disgusted with voting for someone who lied over and over and has flip-flopped on nearly every position?
roger1440
I do stuff
I don't claim to be the brightest kid on the block but my guess is that it stopped the terrorists who were killed by the bombs.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber
And outsiders tend to be the absolute worst at resolving the internal affairs of others, especially when the insiders are not in unanimous decision that the outsiders should be helping.
Let them put their "big boy pants" on, run their own nation, enjoy their own sovereignty, and solve their problems without outsiders telling them how to do it while dropping bombs on them.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber
Incase you haven't noticed, terrorists, terrorists rings and organizations, and even their leaders, you kill one and their are plenty enough to take their place. We are fighting a war of ideas, and ideas are bullet proof and bomb resistant. You can kill a person with a gun, but you cannot destroy the ideas that move them with that gun.
Terrywoodenpic
Oldest Heretic
Both were lost... there was no chance of winning either of them. There was just a little political face saving.
I do not need to consult history, I was in the forces in Hong Kong at the time, as a replacement to reform our Artillery regiment wiped out in Korea.
At one stage we did overrun most of Korea, but the Chinese forces were limitless and pushed the UN forces back. at least the American howitzers could range over the hills. Our 45 Pounders fired in low trajectory, and had to be dug in on a slope to get the necessary upper register. Or wait till they came close and fire open sights.
Terrywoodenpic
Oldest Heretic
I have not heard that it killed a single Isis terrorist, Just that it supposedly made a big bang.
Up date..... it seems it did kill 36 people.
ISIS kill more than that with a Suicided vest and a small child or Girl wandering into a market or church. They have more volunteers than America has Bombs.
I rather doubt that this MOAB will make the slightest difference.
Last edited:
Terrywoodenpic
Oldest Heretic
I saw that and revised my post.. ( one was a civilian and his son.)
From which unholy, putrified crypt of decadence could anyone find an upside to the use of that bomb?