Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Do you feel that American lives are worth more than kurdish lives? Because "our" young men doesn't sound like anarchist guy that thinks there should be no government. Now a guy living on one side of a line on a map is worth more than a guy on the other side?
2. Is there a moral difference between sending draftees vs. professional soldiers that ASKED to join?
3. Compare and contrast the moral depravity of war vs. genocide. Because war can prevent genocide.
The two guys on opposite sides of the line are of equal value.
He should not be placed like a slave at the disposition of his government to violently interfere in a violent situation about which he has no overriding interest. Privately (as an individual acting on his own belief) if he wants to get involved, that's his choice.
2) American professional soldiers joined with the intention of defending the homeland and protecting the constitution which enables our way of life. So, no, I don't see a moral difference between the two.
3) It would take the equivalent of a PhD thesis to explain the utter stupidity in thinking one should have a war in order to prevent genocide. The senseless slaughter of innocent human beings in the name of war is every bit as depraved as the slaughter in genocide. One thing I can assure you: the victims don't particularly see a moral difference.
3) It would take the equivalent of a PhD thesis to explain the utter stupidity in thinking one should have a war in order to prevent genocide. The senseless slaughter of innocent human beings in the name of war is every bit as depraved as the slaughter in genocide. One thing I can assure you: the victims don't particularly see a moral difference.
False choice. You don't need a war to protect this civillians, all you need is the presence of US troops that have already been there.Why? If killing combatants that are intent on killing innocents saves many more innocents than the combatants, why isn't that the obvious moral preference? Killing a few predators to protect many more victims? Setting back and doing nothing is the moral choice, huh?
False choice. You don't need a war to protect this civillians, all you need is the presence of US troops that have already been there.
This is like the trolley problem, only you are actively pulling a lever to move 100 US troops to some other foreign outpost and the trolley is going to kill a whole bunch of innocent Kurds.
Doing nothing is the best course of action.
they some pussy gettin' mf's on this board then.
False choice. You don't need a war to protect this civillians, all you need is the presence of US troops that have already been there.
This is like the trolley problem, only you are actively pulling a lever to move 100 US troops to some other foreign outpost and the trolley is going to kill a whole bunch of innocent Kurds.
Doing nothing is the best course of action.
I guess their women and children aren't innocent?Innocent kurds? Why do turkey and Syria and Iraq want to kill them?
I guess their women and children aren't innocent?
1). State precisely - PRECISELY - what the mission is.
2). State precisely - PRECISELY - what victory would be. At what point can the troops come home?
3). State precisely PRECISELY - what is the acceptable cost of the mission in both the blood of our young men and the treasure to our taxpayers. How many American lives must be lost before you say enough is enough? How many billions of dollars must be wasted before you sat that’s enough. Please be PRECISE with both numbers.
4). Volunteer to join the army and request to be sent to the Turkey/Kurd dustup and volunteer to be on the front line in as many firefights as possible.
5). Display the signed agreement between the Kurds and the American government, ratified with the support of the legislature, that requires the US to stay and protect the Kurds in perpetuity. You know, like the one we have had with Turkey since 1952.
So we agree the Kurdish fighters are terrorists and separatists in the eyes of a nato ally?
Do we agree that there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah in the eyes of a nato ally?So we agree the Kurdish fighters are terrorists and separatists in the eyes of a nato ally?
You have no moral high ground, we're watching in real time a historically disastrous presidency unfold. Look at my sig.
You can also find where I've given Biff a pass for a bit on NK until he tweeted out the nuclear free NK peninsula like an impulsive child or psychotic old fool. I've also said in general I agreed with his "gtfo of the middle east" rhetoric (but not actions). I might even be persuaded to go along with some withdrawal from syria and the region, if it was managed and handled professionally. That's about it.
But this deal stunk like hot shit from the first instant. You'll defend him and conduct your typical dumbshit FOX overlay because you're a born follower, but everybody with any sense is calling this as awful. Those people are our friends, our allies, they're badasses that have earned the respect of many veterans and military, they've been a huge ISIS foe, and he stabs them in the back. It's dishonorable on so many levels. Inexcusable. And it enables a humanitarian disaster.
And yes, they allow a minority religion to live among them in peace. Muslims, christian, buddhist, atheist, whatever. Call me crazy because I don't like to see people victimized because of their religious beliefs. I've given islam no quarter on here. I can also appreciate when they can live in peace and recognize a friend. You take the typical chickenshit route to justify Cpl. Bone Spurs' great and unmatched wisdom.
they some pussy gettin' mf's on this board then.
Would that justify something?
I notice you haven't asked or noted how Americans feel about them. Does that matter, or only what an authoritarian Turk thinks? A MUSLIM one at that?
Do we agree that there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah in the eyes of a nato ally?
Good question, and I don't know what it was or currently is or when we come home. All are great questions.
If I had to guess, I'd say our involvement originally all started with Dumbya's Iraq stupidity.
Fair question, I don't know the answer. If they come home, it should be a disengagement that minimizes our former allies taking it on the chin and gives them some cover. In the short term, keeping Turkey from killing our foreign allies and bombing neighborhoods of civilians would be a good objective.
I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. All are fair questions, too. I don't think averting a wide ranging atrocity is "wasted" resources. Wasting money by preventing a genocide. Financial statement morality much?
Why? We had a small number of volunteer soldiers that by all accounts did a heluva job. Look at the russians that started some shit with us in Syria a couple years ago. I don't hear people howling to get our boys out, outside of Erdogan.
I don't have it.
It's almost as if... it's a real bad situation I don't approve of, but we were minimizing a lot of humanitarian atrocity just by maintaining a presence.
War was averted before, and now it's not. I agree with much of your anti-war sentiment. So let's anti-war and not war. Withdrawing has instantly STARTED a war. Huh. Now just who here is anti-war? Cuz it doesn't look like Biff prevented a war by pulling out. Or a slaughter, to be more accurate.
Or is your hatred of Donald Trump so insane that as the #2 pacifist on this board you’re willing to side with the likes of Lindsay Graham rather than allow the president to give peace a chance?
El lol @bradley.El lol at you thinking this means Jack shit to the modern right. Key word modern.
While you and your ilk regress us back to the dark ages.
See "tough" guy thread, Princess.
Again, laughing at you. El lol.
El lol @bradley.
1). So let me get this straight. You think our young men should be placed in harm’s way, but you don’t knowwhy.
Yes, i know why. You never asked that question Dan. Preventing a loyal ally from being slaughtered and keeping them as an effective counterweight against ISIS is a valid reason, particularly when we're not dying.
That means what to me in the context of moving American soldiers to safety?
Are you about to become an activist, quit your job, and go aid whoever needs it?
bullshit.
Americans weren't dying. Just keeping this from happening.
Didn't pull them from africa. Not from central america or far east.... from someone that was loyal and needed us. For a thug.
Welp, ya'll won again.