Don't like terrorism? Stop selling them weapons.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

lol

a reply to: D8Tee

So these terrorists wouldn't use guns if they were put in their hands? Those ISIS videos with all their members holding guns are fake?

Why is selling guns to terrorists a good thing in your opinion? Why are we selling the same terrorists we're fighting to get rid of all these guns to kill our soldiers and other innocent people with?

It's like we're trying to bring down a building but keep adding bricks to it. It doesn't make any sense at all.

How about outlawing backpacks? Suicide bombers all have backpacks don't they?

a reply to: carewemust

So selling terrorists guns is no big deal because they use other types of weapons too?

The cognitive dissonance going on here is crazy. You guys are all for stopping terrorism but don't seem to care that we supply them with their weapons.

The next time a mass shooting by ISIS happens there's a possibility Trump is the one who put the gun in that terrorist's hands. You guys are ok with that though, you're ok with the U.S. arming its own enemies.

I can't believe that this is the kind of thinking this place has devolved into.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

What is cognitive dissonance? I see that a lot here on the Forum but I've never bothered to look it up.

a reply to: carewemust

Believing two opposing ideas at once, like wanting to stop terrorists but being ok with selling them weapons at the same time.

originally posted by: TruMcCarthy
Petro-Dollar, Saudi Arabia is America's most important ally. You have to think as a realist, the US is trying to maintain it's hegemony (as any nation would), and sometimes dealing with unsavory people and nations is a must. If the US wants the dollar to remain the reserve currency (and why wouldn't they?), they need to keep the petro-dollar alliance and Saudi Arabia strong, hence the arms deal.

I thought it was Capitalism that makes our country great not the Petro Dollar - sarcasm

I remember the Cold War, we were told, was a war between Communism and Capitalism.
It was all lies.
We were able to outspend the Soviet Union because we had the Petro Dollar and the rest of the world to absorb the inflation when we printed as much as we want

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Do you even know what exactly was sold to SA?

a reply to: seeker1963

Yesterdays attack used knives and a vehicle, now what?

You have climbed the signpost instead of following it. You have confused Western policies and Gulf State ideologies—the crux of terrorism—with arming of ammunition and weapons...

originally posted by: xuenchen
Yeah, let the Russians and China sell them what they need.

If China and / or Russia were selling nukes to North Korea, are you saying we should beat them to it and sell North Korea our own nukes?

No, the proper thing would be to stop China and Russia from selling nukes to North Korea.
The same would apply here, but China and Russia are not selling to Saudi Arabia
We are

Principles and doing the right thing don't exist when it comes to foreign policy
Only $$$$$ does

originally posted by: ttobban
a reply to: kurthall

If you think that we weren't already forced to ride the wave of the Saudis financial influence for propping up the Petro dollars all these years would have been different if Hillary were voted in, then you are just one those people who think all answers shall come from a Red or Blue source.

You red/blue voters are to blame here... not the policy makers you all voted in.

I'll bet dollars to donuts, some of these weapons we sell to the Saudi's, will end up killing Americans overseas
I would not be surprised either if we get "handed" back some of these weapons from ISIS here in the states

I remember the arms deals we had with the Pakistani ISI to give to the mujahideen fighting the Russias in Afghanistan
Look what happened there...

Some things never change

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: carewemust

So selling terrorists guns is no big deal because they use other types of weapons too?

The cognitive dissonance going on here is crazy. You guys are all for stopping terrorism but don't seem to care that we supply them with their weapons.

The next time a mass shooting by ISIS happens there's a possibility Trump is the one who put the gun in that terrorist's hands. You guys are ok with that though, you're ok with the U.S. arming its own enemies.

I can't believe that this is the kind of thinking this place has devolved into.

I agree wholeheartedly.

It is shocking, to say the least, that people have simply decided to make up their own illogical, alternate universe to prove themselves to be in the right.

These are the kind of arguments that were heard before great upheavals like the Fall of the Roman empire and pre-Nazi Germany. Trump's supporters are creating language to meet their ideological requirements.

a reply to: knowledgehunter0986

Weapons. That should say enough on its own.

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: TruMcCarthy

And while we bend over backwards for Saudi Arabia they are funding the terrorism we are trying to get rid of.

How is helping Saudi Arabia to fund terrorists helping us in our fight on terrorism?

I don't think the actions being taken were never intended to stop terrorism but increase it instead.
The MIC Benefits big time from that

Before we went into Iraq, the Middle East was relatively peaceful compared to now
Iraq, Libya, and Syria have been raped.
Iran will be next.

This will increase terrorism, not decrease it
It is like the war on drugs, it was never about stopping the drugs but controlling them and we know who the biggest dealer of drugs is.

Big Pharma!

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

You sure it's enough? You're trying to attribute this arms deal to future mass shootings from ISIS, and going as far as blaming Trump for it.


You should look into the arms deal for yourself.


I'll say this though, no gun's are part of the deal.

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: carewemust

Believing two opposing ideas at once, like wanting to stop terrorists but being ok with selling them weapons at the same time.

Is that what you believe? I don't. BTW.. why is it important that ISIS has claimed "responsibility"? All the news channels seem excited to report it.

All those deflections are astounding. Makes me sick. Why make it harder for our soldiers to defeat ISIS?

a reply to: carewemust

So you believe Trump shouldn't have sold those weapons to terrorists or you don't believe selling weapons to Saudi Arabia will put those weapons in the hands of the very terrorists we're trying to fight?

Either way you look at it though Trump made a $110 billion weapons deal with known terrorists.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Who cares, lots of cannon fodder in the middle east, consider it investing in population control.

Long as he can get the ban upheld and not let em come into the USA, it's all good.

He has to get that idiot in Canada, Trudeau on board or the snakes will just slither on their bellies across the northern border, and that ones too big to build a wall.

The upcoming NAFTA talks will be a good time to communicate to Justin that the USA will not tolerate a country on it's nothern border importing terrorists.

a reply to: D8Tee

So you're fine with your country funding world terrorism and sending their troops to die by the very weapons they sold? Sick.