13 Wounded at Fort Lauderdale Airport

Rum, beer, women, movies, nice websites, gaming, etc., without interrupting the flow of martial threads.

Re: 13 Wounded at Fort Lauderdale Airport

Postby windwalker on Wed Jan 11, 2017 8:23 am

@ Michael,

Can you see the text book SJW response here?

“Nobody can reason me into disliking or stigmatizing a group of people. Not the Russians, or the Vietnamese, or Germans, or Jews, or even "White" people. BTW, remember we used to have Muslims posting here. None agreed with Islamic terrorism. AFAIK, none remain. I note the outrage when anyone brings up the KKK or Nazis. Usually, the counter is that there are people with similar views in all groups. Yeah, we know. What is you suggestion for a final solution? How do we eliminate them. I'll accept it for all of them.”


As for solutions, many have suggested as I would agree with that they should be left to work out their own solutions within their “own” countries.
Not come to or be imported to other countries in mass numbers which than results in imposing their culture, ideology on the host countries attempting
to change it.

What is you suggestion for a final solution? How do we eliminate them. I'll accept it for all of them.”


"eliminate them" wow :o
Last edited by windwalker on Wed Jan 11, 2017 8:34 am, edited 2 times in total.
rule 19
windwalker
Wuji
 
Posts: 5445
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 4:08 am
Location: Hisnchu, Taiwan

Re: 13 Wounded at Fort Lauderdale Airport

Postby Michael on Wed Jan 11, 2017 8:38 am

@ Windy, no I do not think that is a text book SJW response.

I see several people doing a pretty good job of having a discussion on a controversial topic, so best to keep it as drama free as possible.
User avatar
Michael
Great Old One
 
Posts: 11093
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 7:05 pm
Location: Guangzhou, China

Re: 13 Wounded at Fort Lauderdale Airport

Postby Steve James on Wed Jan 11, 2017 8:49 am

no one that I know of tries to deny Christian terrorism in the past or present,

I'm waiting for a response to that one. :)

but the extreme left's political ideology is not only to deny that there are any social problems related to some tiny minority of Muslims immigrating to Western countries, but then accuse people trying to discuss it of being racists.


Seriously dude, you're not talking to "the extreme left" here. It's me. Who's accused you of racism? You simply create a false enemy (the left) whom you then say try to stop you from saying exactly what you are saying instead of discussing it. This is immediately after I've tried to discuss the logic and the issue with you.

Moreover, I've specifically pointed out that there are obviously bad elements in the Muslim community. If we're talking about those elements, fine. Criminals, terrorists, fanatics, tell me where we disagree about them. But, when you or anyone slip into a broad generalization about a billion and a half people (which is Islam), then you're condemning the group for the actions of a few. That's fine too. That's exactly the logic that they use against the west.

If I posted or linked to sites that talked about how Jews controlled the media and caused all the problems, should we discuss it? Remember the Bilderbergs, Trilateral Commission and all those other things that the Jewish bankers control? Hmm. Would that be considered anti-Semitic? Are Muslims Semites? Are Europeans Semites, Hamites or Japhites?

Of course, as I've said several times, I could care less about anyone's personal phobia, bigotry or belief. I'm interested in what that person thinks should be done to the objects of the phobia or bigotry. If you say you want Muslim immigrants treated differently, tell me how. I'm not so concerned about immigrants. When you talk about Islam, you're talking about American citizens. I'm very interested in what anyone thinks is acceptable treatment of them.

And, really, nothing I could call you would be as bad as treating a citizen as second- class because of the religion or ethnicity he was born into. It's just tfb if feelings are hurt.
"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."
User avatar
Steve James
Great Old One
 
Posts: 15382
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:20 am

Re: 13 Wounded at Fort Lauderdale Airport

Postby Steve James on Wed Jan 11, 2017 8:53 am

Michael wrote:@ Windy, no I do not think that is a text book SJW response.

I see several people doing a pretty good job of having a discussion on a controversial topic, so best to keep it as drama free as possible.


I dunno what SJW is, but I wrote my above post before I read your response, and I saw that you realized I was trying to discuss.
"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."
User avatar
Steve James
Great Old One
 
Posts: 15382
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:20 am

Re: 13 Wounded at Fort Lauderdale Airport

Postby Steve James on Wed Jan 11, 2017 9:23 am

As for solutions, many have suggested as I would agree with that they should be left to work out their own solutions within their “own” countries.


So, Russia and the west should leave those countries to figure out their affairs. Fair enough. I'm down with withdrawing all western forces, interests and personnel from the ME.

European immigration is a situation that Europe needs to resolve, but wars supported and promoted by the west in the ME is the cause for much of the latest wave of immigrants from ... tada... countries where are wars. Ok, I understand the concern about accepting large numbers of immigrants from war torn countries. The only problem is the rhetoric that argues they want to come to Europe because their religion requires them to take over. Ok, as I said, look who's spread out and controlled the globe.

In the States, however, (notably not in Canada or Mexico), the fear is that there are potential terrorists embedded with any group of Muslim immigrants. Ok, but I'm not concerned about Muslim immigrants, per se. In the 80s, they put Haitian immigrants behind barbed wire fences before screening them. Cuba sent the Marielitos too. Immigration has always been an issue, and there's always been specific groups singled out for special attention.

My concern is specifically about what is done to/with the Muslim-American community.
"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."
User avatar
Steve James
Great Old One
 
Posts: 15382
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:20 am

Re: 13 Wounded at Fort Lauderdale Airport

Postby Michael on Wed Jan 11, 2017 9:57 am

no one that I know of tries to deny Christian terrorism in the past or present,

I'm waiting for a response to that one. :)

but the extreme left's political ideology is not only to deny that there are any social problems related to some tiny minority of Muslims immigrating to Western countries, but then accuse people trying to discuss it of being racists.


Seriously dude, you're not talking to "the extreme left" here. It's me. Who's accused you of racism? You simply create a false enemy (the left) whom you then say try to stop you from saying exactly what you are saying instead of discussing it. This is immediately after I've tried to discuss the logic and the issue with you.

Moreover, I've specifically pointed out that there are obviously bad elements in the Muslim community. If we're talking about those elements, fine. Criminals, terrorists, fanatics, tell me where we disagree about them. But, when you or anyone slip into a broad generalization about a billion and a half people (which is Islam), then you're condemning the group for the actions of a few. That's fine too. That's exactly the logic that they use against the west.

If I posted or linked to sites that talked about how Jews controlled the media and caused all the problems, should we discuss it? Remember the Bilderbergs, Trilateral Commission and all those other things that the Jewish bankers control? Hmm. Would that be considered anti-Semitic? Are Muslims Semites? Are Europeans Semites, Hamites or Japhites?

Of course, as I've said several times, I could care less about anyone's personal phobia, bigotry or belief. I'm interested in what that person thinks should be done to the objects of the phobia or bigotry. If you say you want Muslim immigrants treated differently, tell me how. I'm not so concerned about immigrants. When you talk about Islam, you're talking about American citizens. I'm very interested in what anyone thinks is acceptable treatment of them.

And, really, nothing I could call you would be as bad as treating a citizen as second- class because of the religion or ethnicity he was born into. It's just tfb if feelings are hurt.

I think there's a misunderstanding here, Steve. I'm not even sure if you're talking to me or Windy. I certainly don't consider you the extreme left. It appears when I refer to the two sides of the debate that I've outlined as the topic of what I'm talking about you think I'm talking about you or me, but I'm not.
Last edited by Michael on Wed Jan 11, 2017 9:58 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Michael
Great Old One
 
Posts: 11093
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 7:05 pm
Location: Guangzhou, China

Re: 13 Wounded at Fort Lauderdale Airport

Postby Steve James on Wed Jan 11, 2017 11:06 am

I think there's a misunderstanding here, Steve. I'm not even sure if you're talking to me or Windy. I certainly don't consider you the extreme left. It appears when I refer to the two sides of the debate that I've outlined as the topic of what I'm talking about you think I'm talking about you or me, but I'm not.


Oh, naw, it's not the person, it's the idea. I used the "you" generally, except for the part about the extreme left. I know you realize that I'm not on the extreme left. My point was that the term "extreme left" is like "extreme right," "leftist," "liberal," and other terms that really don't mean much when you a person face-to-face what he or she means. When people say "the leftists want" something or other, it means that both who they are and what they want are bad and shouldn't be wanted. So, when "social security" is called "leftist," it's bad. But, if a "conservative" replacement is found, it will be good.

When someone questions new Israeli settlements, someone may label them anti-Semitic. The same people may argue that it's unfair to call them Islamophobes when they question the rights of Palestinians to stay. My point was that the issue is not what people call each other.
"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."
User avatar
Steve James
Great Old One
 
Posts: 15382
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:20 am

Re: 13 Wounded at Fort Lauderdale Airport

Postby Michael on Wed Jan 11, 2017 7:54 pm

I used the "you" generally, except for the part about the extreme left.


Who's accused you of racism? You simply create a false enemy (the left) whom you then say try to stop you from saying exactly what you are saying instead of discussing it. This is immediately after I've tried to discuss the logic and the issue with you.


But, when you or anyone slip into a broad generalization about a billion and a half people (which is Islam), then you're condemning the group for the actions of a few.

It is confusing trying to figure out when you are using "you" generally or specifically.
User avatar
Michael
Great Old One
 
Posts: 11093
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 7:05 pm
Location: Guangzhou, China

Re: 13 Wounded at Fort Lauderdale Airport

Postby Steve James on Wed Jan 11, 2017 8:21 pm

The you in "who's accused you" was you, and the pronoun reference sticks until the end of the sentences. When I say "you or anyone," I'm generalizing, but I'm including you as well. In the latter sentence, moreover, the "anyone" includes me, so it's not personal. It's about a specific type of argument.
"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."
User avatar
Steve James
Great Old One
 
Posts: 15382
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:20 am

Re: 13 Wounded at Fort Lauderdale Airport

Postby Michael on Wed Jan 11, 2017 8:39 pm

Thanks for clarifying.
User avatar
Michael
Great Old One
 
Posts: 11093
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 7:05 pm
Location: Guangzhou, China

Re: 13 Wounded at Fort Lauderdale Airport

Postby Steve James on Wed Jan 11, 2017 9:14 pm

Michael wrote:Thanks for clarifying.


Naw, thanks for asking for the clarification.
"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."
User avatar
Steve James
Great Old One
 
Posts: 15382
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:20 am

Re: 13 Wounded at Fort Lauderdale Airport

Postby windwalker on Wed Jan 18, 2017 9:06 am

2017.01.06 USA Fort Lauderdale, FL 5 6 A convert to Islam guns down five innocents in the baggage claim area of an airport.


"Jihad Report
Jan 07, 2017 -
Jan 13, 2017

Attacks 46
Killed 299
Injured 453
Suicide Blasts 14
Countries 12"

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/attac ... tacks.aspx
rule 19
windwalker
Wuji
 
Posts: 5445
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 4:08 am
Location: Hisnchu, Taiwan

Re: 13 Wounded at Fort Lauderdale Airport

Postby Ian C. Kuzushi on Wed Jan 18, 2017 9:15 am

According to a 2010 assessment by John Sloboda of Iraq Body Count, a United Kingdom-based organization, American and Coalition forces had killed at least 28,736 combatants as well as 13,807 civilians in the Iraq War, indicating a civilian to combatant casualty ratio inflicted by coalition forces of 1:2.[26] However, overall, figures by the Iraq Body Count from 20 March 2003 to 14 March 2013 indicate that of 174,000 casualties only 39,900 were combatants, resulting in a civilian casualty rate of 77%.[27]


According to the Watson Institute for International & Public Affairs, as of January 2015 roughly 92,000 people had been killed in the Afghanistan war, of which over 26,000 were civilians, for a civilian to combatant ratio of 0.4:1.[25]


The civilian casualty ratio for U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan is notoriously difficult to quantify. The U.S. itself puts the number of civilians killed from drone strikes in the last two years at no more than 20 to 30, a total that is far too low according to a spokesman for the NGO CIVIC.[28] At the other extreme, Daniel L. Byman of the Brookings Institution suggests that drone strikes may kill "10 or so civilians" for every militant killed, which would represent a civilian to combatant casualty ratio of 10:1. Byman argues that civilian killings constitute a humanitarian tragedy and create dangerous political problems, including damage to the legitimacy of the Pakistani government and alienation of the Pakistani populace from America.[29] An ongoing study by the New America Foundation finds non-militant casualty rates started high but have declined steeply over time, from about 60% (3 out of 5) in 2004-2007 to less than 2% (1 out of 50) in 2012. The study puts the overall non-militant casualty rate since 2004 at 15-16%, or a 1:5 ratio, out of a total of between 1,908 and 3,225 people killed in Pakistan by drone strikes since 2004.[30] Research published by Reprieve in 2014 suggested that U.S. drone strikes in Yemen and Pakistan have had an unknown person to target casualty ratio of 28:1 with one attack in the study having a ratio of 128:1 with 13 children being killed.[31]


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_ ... o#Iraq_War

::)
文武両道。

Lord Li requires one hundred gold coins per day!
User avatar
Ian C. Kuzushi
Great Old One
 
Posts: 1518
Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 10:02 pm

Re: 13 Wounded at Fort Lauderdale Airport

Postby Steve James on Wed Jan 18, 2017 9:26 am

It might be relevant, if this is a religious thing, to compare the number of Muslims killed/injured by Muslims, to the number of Muslims killed by Christians, or the number of Christians killed by Christians. It'd be great to see --and not "in history," so we don't have to count world wars. Just today.

It's not worth debating which religion is more peaceful. It's the people who just mouth their religion and then justify their killing who are the problem.
"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."
User avatar
Steve James
Great Old One
 
Posts: 15382
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:20 am

Previous

Return to Off the Topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest