Let's Make America Strong Again

a reply to: Quantum12

You don't have to agree, but it is important that you are aware.

a reply to: kendix1960

Palpatine, is that you?



The only thing your "ideas" would accomplish is alienating the few allies we have left, and making us an irrefutable target for anyone & everyone. No one likes assholes, let alone ones bent on world domination.

a reply to: Nyiah

Guess President Obama's tired failed approach is the one you endorse. Take a look at current events in Paris and in our own California and ask yourself just how well the President's efforts to deal with Isis have been working.

a reply to: kendix1960

Annihilating everything under the sun in a region will never get rid of the problem. Like the Death Penalty, it may deter some, but never all of the criminals. Never. We can drop nukes over there & turn it into a radioactive sea of glass tomorrow, but we will still have to deal with the fallout (pun intended) from other regions, and other people entirely. That's mass-effing murder. You're not just cutting off your nose to spite your face, you're continuing on to slashing your own throat.

originally posted by: kendix1960
Steps Needed to Get America On the Right Track: (1) Increase the military budget to a trillion dollars. (2) Markedly increase bombing raids over Syria. (3) Lead coalition of our allies in placing up to 50,000 boots on the ground to destroy Isis in Syria, Iraq, and Libya so as to include Arab partners such as Jordan and Saudi Arabia. (4) Stop letting Isis know in advance what we are going to do. (5) Call Isis what they are i.e. radical Islamic terrorists out to destroy our way of life in a world wide holy war against western civilization and culture. (6) Stop using the idea of political correctness to excuse cowardly inaction and fear. (6) Take the fight to the enemy and destroy them where they live before they try to come to us in order to kill us where we live. (7) Only negotiate with Vladimir Putin after we restore our nuclear triad and increase our military budget so we can act from a position of strength rather than weakness as we have been doing. (8) Introduce a Bill of Impeachment against President Obama for failing to protect our nation and turning his back on our greatest Middle East partner, Israel, if the President continues to refuse to deal effectively with the terrorists and continues to cave into Iran. (9) Pull out of the awful Iran-Nuclear deal as Iran continues it's ballistic testing and development of nuclear war heads in violation of the said deal and in violation of U.N. sanctions. (10) Stop ignoring ever increasing tendencies in Europe and elsewhere to attempt a link between the Israeli- Palestinian issue and the motives of Isis when the two are entirely unrelated problems.

Heavy on the 'duh' factor, a little light on nuance. Personally, I blame Fox news.

a reply to: Nyiah

Who EVER said anything about nukes. Try to refrain from interjecting your own words into another blog just because you don't agree with what you read. If you choose to believe, as President Obama would have you do, that the Isis threat is contained and that the administration's present approach is realistic, that's your right, but the problem is not going to disappear just because you don't want to look at it.

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: kendix1960

A trillion dollars??!!

How do we generate the money for that?

Just print it. What's another trillion?

a reply to: JohnnyCanuck

I hardly ever watch Fox News. My ideas are strictly my own and were not typed until a great deal of thought and analysis had been completed. It is simply my opinion that a different, stronger, and more proactive approach to the Isis menace is necessary to avoid another terrorist attack on our shores. Did Obama's present tepid policies help our folks in California recently? France now seems to get it, at least they did after Paris. We better get it and wake up soon here too!

a reply to: kendix1960

My only reference to nuclear weapons in the original blog was in reference to our out dated nuclear triad. Our nuclear silos, submarines, and aircraft all lag behind the quality of what Russia under Putin presently has at their disposal. At no time should the U.S. ever utilize any nuclear weapons or any weapons of mass destruction in the war against Isis in the M.E. or anywhere else. The triad needs updating strictly as a deterrence against Russia, i.e. as a defensive apparatus only! I hope this clarifies and amplifies my last reply.

originally posted by: kendix1960
a reply to: JohnnyCanuck

I hardly ever watch Fox News. My ideas are strictly my own and were not typed until a great deal of thought and analysis had been completed. It is simply my opinion that a different, stronger, and more proactive approach to the Isis menace is necessary to avoid another terrorist attack on our shores. Did Obama's present tepid policies help our folks in California recently? France now seems to get it, at least they did after Paris. We better get it and wake up soon here too!

Well, you're busy beating the snot out of the symptoms while giving little consideration to the causes. That serves a higher agenda...same one, actually. I'd drill down a layer and give it some more thought.

a reply to: JohnnyCanuck

Have you bothered to realize that Isis stated this war and their quest for world domination is the cause of the problem? Why do you insist on making it more complicated than that?

a reply to: kendix1960

In their quest for world domination?





I can confidently tell you their quest is a pipe dream they only control an area of about 12,000 square miles a little less than the size of Maryland. Estimate's say they have about 31,500 men.

a reply to: Grimpachi

Wonder if the folks in Paris felt that way? Or our own folks in California? They control a lot more territory now than they did only a short while ago. Lets defeat them as soon as possible before they strike again as they are right now planning to do. Great Britain is the next target and the U.S. will be next. It's time for action, not talk!

originally posted by: kendix1960
a reply to: JohnnyCanuck

Have you bothered to realize that Isis stated this war and their quest for world domination is the cause of the problem? Why do you insist on making it more complicated than that?

Because it is. Who are they? Where do they get their resources...follow the money.

originally posted by: kendix1960
a reply to: Grimpachi

Wonder if the folks in Paris felt that way? Or our own folks in California? They control a lot more territory now than they did only a short while ago. Lets defeat them as soon as possible before they strike again as they are right now planning to do. Great Britain is the next target and the U.S. will be next. It's time for action, not talk!

But you can't really defeat them. It's small regional conflict with to many moving parts. It's an insurgency against Assad, It's Russia revenging their airplane, It's separatists in IRAQ waning a civil war. It's Kurds wanting their own land.

There will always be extremist ideas, people to spread them and people susceptible to them. Especially with the internet. The couple from San Bernardino, lived in California. Boots on the ground in the middle east wouldn't have stopped them. Should we invade California? That's how we would have stopped them. Hmmm bombing and invading California. That's not a bad idea. LOL

a reply to: amazing

You really just don't get it. Stay safe!

a reply to: kendix1960

Maybe Bush was on to something when they instituted the color-coded terror alerts. Of course they were all BS, but at least they told people to be blue and they calmed down.



If we stop meddling in other nations affairs and they won't give a crap about us.

OK ...can i have an M60 Mg. please to help?

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: kendix1960

In their quest for world domination?

I can confidently tell you their quest is a pipe dream they only control an area of about 12,000 square miles a little less than the size of Maryland. Estimate's say they have about 31,500 men.

By the way, a lot of that map is useless barren desert.

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: kendix1960

In their quest for world domination?

I can confidently tell you their quest is a pipe dream they only control an area of about 12,000 square miles a little less than the size of Maryland. Estimate's say they have about 31,500 men.

And even worse, the CIA said ISIS only has 20,000 to 31,500 members. And this was in September of 2014, after the US started bombing ISIS positions. And even worse, this 20,000-31,500 number was supposed to be alarming because it was an increase over earlier estimates of only 10,000 members.

ISIS can 'muster' between 20,000 and 31,500 fighters, CIA says

It's baffling to me that everyone still thinks ISIS is the issue here (not referring to you specifically). It doesn't take all of the world's most powerful militaries to fight off 10,000-32,000 people. It's been shown that ISIS is smuggling cheap oil to Turkey & Israel. Western & Gulf governments have been arming, training, and supporting "rebels" who coincidentally "defect" to ISIS or ally with ISIS right after they leave training. Western media gives ISIS an almost unlimited amount of free promotion for their videos/advertisements and use this coverage to encourage more war spending. And many of the top members of ISIS were members of Western-backed "rebel groups" that fought in Chechnya to separate it from Russia, fought in Libya against Qaddafi, and fought in Georgia against Russia (like this guy).

Now they're fighting against Assad, which just so happens to be another enemy of the West & Gulf. And they're fighting against the Kurds in both Syria and Iraq, which NATO-member Turkey is using to justify its new war against its Kurdish rivals. And ISIS suddenly appeared in Yemen & is fighting the Houthis during the Saudi alliance's war against the Houthis. And some of those same "rebels" who helped the West topple Gaddafi then crossed into Mali and were immediately labeled "terrorists" (and some are now being attacked by Egypt in Libya because they reneged on business arrangements and foreign investment projects in "liberated" Libya).

Oh yeah, and remember President Obama's "red line" about chemical weapons in Syria? The one that almost got the West to militarily intervene in Syria until it came out that it was the "rebels" who did the attacks, not Assad's Syria? Well, that angle failed miserably, as did the "al-Nusra''s the new al-Qaeda" angle. So they went with another angle which got the desired result of Western military missions in Syria (not to mentioned the failed, short lived "Khorason terrorist group" like THIS and THIS).

Yet people still believe the public narrative from our business & political leadership (and our complicit media).