I heard a guy being interviewed on MSNBC (caught the end of it so didn't get his name) and he said ISIS leaders are now saying they plan to reclaim spain as they did in 711. In 711 Muslim forces invaded and in seven years conquered the Iberian peninsula. It became one of the great Muslim civilisations; reaching its summit with the Umayyad caliphate of Cordovain the tenth century. Muslim rule declined after that and ended in 1492 when Granada was conquered.

Back on topic, Trumps not insane but he needs to be more focused. Serious times we live in. I'll still take him over Clinton the crook. The continuation of the Clinton Foundation pay to play would have destroyed us. Even the liberals on this board should be able to agree with that.

Are Democrats collectively deranged? No Seriously?

(08-17-2017 05:09 PM)shere khan Wrote:  Are Democrats collectively deranged? No Seriously?

Yes

(08-17-2017 05:09 PM)shere khan Wrote:  Are Democrats collectively deranged? No Seriously?

Seriously, why did you have to ask?

So...many examples, and especially by those in office and their minions.

http://www.rathcoombe.net/blogs/blackjack.html

Quote: The Moros tended to harass US forces with sniper fire and sabotage (e.g., cutting telegraph wires). When confronted, they would withdraw into their fortifications, from which they would sometimes venture forth in rushes of suicidal killing frenzy, but never in a coordinated fashion. The Americans would simply surround these forts, bombard them with artillery and then move in and finish the defenders. The result was consistently devastating to the Moros with extremely slight losses on the American side. Usually the loss exchange ratio was at least 10 to 1.

Despite the disparity of these conflicts, its apparent that Pershing did not seek to provoke the Moros to fight and made overtures to tribal leaders to attempt to win them over. President Roosevelt, famous for odd expressions of enthusiasm, was so impressed with Pershing's record against the Moros that he promoted him from captain directly to brigadier general and brought him back to the US.

Quote: Only days after Pershing's return to the Sulu district, another band of 1000 Moros again retreated into Bud Dajo. Pershing, disgusted by the slaughter of his predecessor, vowed to find a better way. Pershing wrote: "I am sorry these Moros are such fools, but . . . I shall lose as few men and kill as few Moros as possible." He beseiged the volcano and cut off all traffic in and out of the crater. Within days the food and water ran out and the Moros surrendered without much fuss - only 12 Moros were killed.

Pershing wrote of the encounter in his official report:

There was never a moment during this investment of Bud Dajo when the Moros, including women, on top of the mountain, would not have fought to the death had they been given the opportunity. They had gone there to make a last stand on this, their sacred mountain, and they were determined to die fighting . . . It was only by the greatest effort that their solid determination to fight it out could be broken. The fact is that they were completely surprised at the prompt and decisive action of the troops in cutting off supplies and preventing escape, and they were chagrined and disappointed in that they were not encouraged to die the death of Mohammedan fanatics. (Quoted from Vandiver, Frank E., Black Jack: The Life and Times of John J. Pershing, Texas A&M University Press, 1977, pp. 464-594)

For the next three or four years the Sulu region experienced peace by Moro standards, with only sporadic and small-scale outbreaks of violence (the Moros were a warlike people and had been for centuries, so true peace was too much to expect).

However, in 1913 the greatest confrontation between the Moros and US forces occurrred under Pershing's watch. This time it was undeniably grave. As many as 10,000 Moro warriors had assembled on the volcanic summit to wage war against the infidels at Bud Bagsak. Pershing saw the potential for a massacre ten times bloodier than the Battle of the Clouds on Bud Dajo had been in 1906. Since the Moros would gather all their family together for these martyr frenzies, Pershing sought to find a way to conduct the inevitable battle against only the hardened, implacable extremists and certainly without the presence of the women and children. To accomplish this, he orchestrated a plan of calculated deception and high level secrecy, intended to lull the Moros into a non-defensive state. After pretending to sail from the region, he covertly landed with a force at night and marched rapidly to the mountain, surprising the Moros in the villages below the mountain and catching all but a few hundred outside the summit fortress. As a consequence, the Moros lost only about 500 men, as the defenders of the fortress fought furiously almost to the last man. However, following this battle, American military hegemony over the Sulu district was not seriously contested ever again.

I always thought using propaganda indicating pig grease was being used to lubricate American rifle barrels would cut down on insurgency. Put barrels labeled "pig grease" around the barracks and on trucks).

One thing he is right about, when you look back at the way we used to fight wars we fought to win. No police action. We did what was necessary. My feeling is we shouldnt be sending our young soldiers into any battle where we are not willing to do anything to win. If its not important enough to meet that level commitment---then its not important enough to spill American blood over.

Not to quote Kaps full post but shouldn't someone be protesting the name of Matamoris, Mexico. It's pretty culturally insensitive. Wonder how it came by that name.

Omg he tweeted again! The horror!

Sent from my SM-J700T using CSNbbs mobile app

(08-17-2017 07:50 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  Omg he tweeted again! The horror!

Sent from my SM-J700T using CSNbbs mobile app

Democrat multiple choice:

A) Tweeted too slow
B) Tweeted too fast
C) Tweet not strong enough
D) Tweet too strong

(08-17-2017 07:38 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  One thing he is right about, when you look back at the way we used to fight wars we fought to win. No police action. We did what was necessary. My feeling is we shouldnt be sending our young soldiers into any battle where we are not willing to do anything to win. If its not important enough to meet that level commitment---then it not important enough to spill American blood over.

Exactly.

(08-17-2017 05:09 PM)shere khan Wrote:  Are Democrats collectively deranged? No Seriously?

Collectively, no. But their national leadership pretty much is. Maybe deranged isn't the correct word, but they're definitely totally clueless.

(08-17-2017 02:18 PM)Kronke Wrote:  Now the left gets to show their ass yet again, and feign outrage over a tweet rather than focusing on the problem, radical islamic terror.

How was his tweet in any way useful?

This man is demonstrating two things.

1) A lack of understanding of reality
2) A clear bias against Muslims, regardless of any extremism.

(08-17-2017 09:26 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-17-2017 07:38 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  One thing he is right about, when you look back at the way we used to fight wars we fought to win. No police action. We did what was necessary. My feeling is we shouldnt be sending our young soldiers into any battle where we are not willing to do anything to win. If its not important enough to meet that level commitment---then it not important enough to spill American blood over.

Exactly.

I think most agree with that. That being said, we still need to avoid war crimes as a means to victory. Even in war, we need to strive to be morally superior as well as militarily.

Trump's tweet would have seemed more apt to be issued by Lyndie England than the President of the US

(08-18-2017 09:26 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Trump's tweet would have seemed more apt to be issued by Lyndie England than the President of the US

Additionally, it was issued in the immediate aftermath of the attack in Barcelona. Basically implying that committing war crimes or torturing terrorists is somehow going to squelch their activities.

If that's the strategy to defeat ISIS from this administration, God help us indeed!

(08-17-2017 09:26 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-17-2017 07:38 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  One thing he is right about, when you look back at the way we used to fight wars we fought to win. No police action. We did what was necessary. My feeling is we shouldnt be sending our young soldiers into any battle where we are not willing to do anything to win. If its not important enough to meet that level commitment---then it not important enough to spill American blood over.

Exactly.

dipshites are always dipshites

the only out if 'they' win is.....well, many of yaz already know

hence, Trump

(08-17-2017 02:18 PM)Kronke Wrote:  Now the left gets to show their ass yet again, and feign outrage over a tweet rather than focusing on the problem, radical islamic terror.

This is really quite interesting.

First, the "left" is not in charge of the government policy on dealing with terrorists. And the left leaning posters on this site clearly aren't either.

The right is in charge of it now.

And the leader of it, the orange ape, is seemingly more focused on what people are saying about him and who likes him rather than actually being president and honoring his pledge to protect and defend us.

Finally, yet again it was shown this past weekend that domestic terrorists pose a far greater threat currently to America and the president can't even bring himself to condemn Nazi's.

And save the spin, there are never any good people marching in a Nazi or White Supremacist parade.

Sad.

(08-18-2017 09:23 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(08-17-2017 02:18 PM)Kronke Wrote:  Now the left gets to show their ass yet again, and feign outrage over a tweet rather than focusing on the problem, radical islamic terror.

How was his tweet in any way useful?

How was the 8 year Obama presidency useful in any way?

You guys are butthurt over a tweet. The voting public was/is outraged over 8 years of incompetence. But I guess you'll need to see another election result to get that pounded back into your head.

0 for 6, or whatever the tally is now. I've honestly lost track.

Why should we elect Democrats in the mid-terms?

Trump's tweets. Tweeting Trump. Trump tweeting. Tweets of Trump.

What is the number one thing you want to tell voters?

Tweetage by Trump. Trump tweetstorm. Tweeting Trump. Trump tweet.

Is there anything non-Tweet related you would like to say to the voters?

Outrage. Statues. Dreamer. Statues. Flags. Statues. Colbert. Statues. Thomas Jefferson. Trump tweets.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

(08-18-2017 09:49 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  Why should we elect Democrats in the mid-terms?

Trump's tweets. Tweeting Trump. Trump tweeting. Tweets of Trump.

What is the number one thing you want to tell voters?

Tweetage by Trump. Trump tweetstorm. Tweeting Trump. Trump tweet.

Is there anything non-Tweet related you would like to say to the voters?

Outrage. Statues. Dreamer. Statues. Flags. Statues. Colbert. Statues. Thomas Jefferson. Trump tweets.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

My problem with the Corkers of the world. Lets deal with real things instead of sitting in the Senate doing nothing.