Forums

Posted by tecwrg on 9/5/2014 11:51:00 AM (view original):
If "it really isn't their problem", then why did the UK raise their terror threat level to "severe" last week?

A) "Other countries" was referring to countries in NATO that the US & UK were asking to help. Clearly the UK believes this is their problem.

B) Once again, fighting a war in Iraq doesn't stop terror attacks at home.

9/5/2014 12:06 PM

burnsy483

Posts: 6848 (0)

Veteran

1 1 26

Prospect

If we fought a war overseas before 2001, rather than after, is it possible that would have stopped a terror attack at home?

I disagree with the general idea of pacificism when it comes to stopping growing terrorist groups overseas.

9/5/2014 12:35 PM

bad_luck

Posts: 21761 (0)

Hall of Famer

48 1 10

Prospect

Posted by burnsy483 on 9/5/2014 12:36:00 PM (view original):
If we fought a war overseas before 2001, rather than after, is it possible that would have stopped a terror attack at home?

I disagree with the general idea of pacificism when it comes to stopping growing terrorist groups overseas.

We had a terror attack in Boston after the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, right?

And we were still concerned with terror attacks between the end of those wars and the rise of ISIS, right?

Sometimes fighting a ground war in another country is necessary and helpful. Other times, we're fighting an undefined enemy in an giant game of whack-a-mole.

9/5/2014 12:46 PM

tecwrg

Posts: 18997 (0)

Hall of Famer

4 1 164 32 129

Prospect

Was the Boston Marathon bombing sponsored by an organized terrorist group?

I'll answer. No. No, it wasn't. It was a "lone wolf" attack, planned and carried out domestically. Much like Timothy McVeigh, Ted Kaczynski, Eric Rudolph, etc.

So why bring it up in a discussion.of organized, international terrorism?

9/5/2014 12:59 PM

bad_luck

Posts: 21761 (0)

Hall of Famer

48 1 10

Prospect

Posted by tecwrg on 9/5/2014 12:59:00 PM (view original):
Was the Boston Marathon bombing sponsored by an organized terrorist group?

I'll answer. No. No, it wasn't. It was a "lone wolf" attack, planned and carried out domestically. Much like Timothy McVeigh, Ted Kaczynski, Eric Rudolph, etc.

So why bring it up in a discussion.of organized, international terrorism?

How do you know that? As someone who won't blame the police in the Lollie arrest because "who knows what Lollie was doing before the video," you're awfully certain that it wasn't a sponsored attack.

9/5/2014 1:03 PM

tecwrg

Posts: 18997 (0)

Hall of Famer

4 1 164 32 129

Prospect

Um, sure. OK.

9/5/2014 1:10 PM

burnsy483

Posts: 6848 (0)

Veteran

1 1 26

Prospect

Posted by bad_luck on 9/5/2014 1:03:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 9/5/2014 12:59:00 PM (view original):
Was the Boston Marathon bombing sponsored by an organized terrorist group?

I'll answer. No. No, it wasn't. It was a "lone wolf" attack, planned and carried out domestically. Much like Timothy McVeigh, Ted Kaczynski, Eric Rudolph, etc.

So why bring it up in a discussion.of organized, international terrorism?

How do you know that? As someone who won't blame the police in the Lollie arrest because "who knows what Lollie was doing before the video," you're awfully certain that it wasn't a sponsored attack.

It seems like all the evidence is pointing towards it being a lone wolf type attack. Generally, terrorist organizations are proud of the attacks they help to carry out, and let you know about it.

9/5/2014 1:19 PM

burnsy483

Posts: 6848 (0)

Veteran

1 1 26

Prospect

Posted by bad_luck on 9/5/2014 12:46:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 9/5/2014 12:36:00 PM (view original):
If we fought a war overseas before 2001, rather than after, is it possible that would have stopped a terror attack at home?

I disagree with the general idea of pacificism when it comes to stopping growing terrorist groups overseas.
We had a terror attack in Boston after the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, right?

And we were still concerned with terror attacks between the end of those wars and the rise of ISIS, right?

Sometimes fighting a ground war in another country is necessary and helpful. Other times, we're fighting an undefined enemy in an giant game of whack-a-mole.

I'm not for a ground war, unless coordinated air strikes won't have much of an effect to end the growth of ISIS. You gave a statement that led me to believe that we shouldn't be involved in the Middle East in this way at all at this time, which I strongly disagree with.

9/5/2014 1:21 PM

bad_luck

Posts: 21761 (0)

Hall of Famer

48 1 10

Prospect

Posted by tecwrg on 9/5/2014 1:10:00 PM (view original):
Um, sure. OK.

"Prosecutors seeking a death penalty conviction of accused Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on Wednesday said the FBI at the time of his arrest last year believed he and his brother Tamerlan had been trained by a terrorist group because of the sophistication of their weapons and tradecraft."

9/5/2014 1:28 PM

bad_luck

Posts: 21761 (0)

Hall of Famer

48 1 10

Prospect

Posted by burnsy483 on 9/5/2014 1:21:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 9/5/2014 12:46:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 9/5/2014 12:36:00 PM (view original):
If we fought a war overseas before 2001, rather than after, is it possible that would have stopped a terror attack at home?

I disagree with the general idea of pacificism when it comes to stopping growing terrorist groups overseas.
We had a terror attack in Boston after the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, right?

And we were still concerned with terror attacks between the end of those wars and the rise of ISIS, right?

Sometimes fighting a ground war in another country is necessary and helpful. Other times, we're fighting an undefined enemy in an giant game of whack-a-mole.
I'm not for a ground war, unless coordinated air strikes won't have much of an effect to end the growth of ISIS. You gave a statement that led me to believe that we shouldn't be involved in the Middle East in this way at all at this time, which I strongly disagree with.

I wish I had an answer. I don't know what the right thing to do is but ground wars against guerrilla terror groups are incredibly difficult. Even if you "win," you never eradicate terror and you do nothing to change the global perception of America.

9/5/2014 1:31 PM

burnsy483

Posts: 6848 (0)

Veteran

1 1 26

Prospect

If you can't "eradicate" terror, does that mean you shouldn't try to limit it as best as you can?

If the thought process is that terrorists are angry at us, largely because we're involved so heavily in the Middle East, promoting ideas that go against their values. And if we use a more hands-off approach, terror in our country will actually decrease. I get it point of view, and to an extent, believe that.

Hypothetical: If we use a "hands off" approach in Iraq, and let Iraq defend itself, and Iraq is overthrown by ISIS. Are Americans safer because we didn't interfere, or less safe because ISIS is in power of an entire country in the Middle East?

9/5/2014 1:41 PM

MikeT23

Posts: 58012 (0)

Hall of Famer

87 1 47 1 189

Prospect

Posted by burnsy483 on 9/5/2014 1:21:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 9/5/2014 12:46:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 9/5/2014 12:36:00 PM (view original):
If we fought a war overseas before 2001, rather than after, is it possible that would have stopped a terror attack at home?

I disagree with the general idea of pacificism when it comes to stopping growing terrorist groups overseas.
We had a terror attack in Boston after the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, right?

And we were still concerned with terror attacks between the end of those wars and the rise of ISIS, right?

Sometimes fighting a ground war in another country is necessary and helpful. Other times, we're fighting an undefined enemy in an giant game of whack-a-mole.
I'm not for a ground war, unless coordinated air strikes won't have much of an effect to end the growth of ISIS. You gave a statement that led me to believe that we shouldn't be involved in the Middle East in this way at all at this time, which I strongly disagree with.

Personally, I wouldn't even use the term "ground war". A thousand troops on the ground won't do much because terrorist groups don't say "Hey, we're all over here. We're having a meeting!!!" You really need something more like a raid team, Seal Team 6 if you will. Of course, for that to be effective, you have to have reliable intelligence. And, as I said before, we might just have to give up a few privacy rights to make it happen. And, as you know, the liberal faction of this site have no interest in that. "I KNOW MY RIGHTS!!!"

9/5/2014 1:42 PM

tecwrg

Posts: 18997 (0)

Hall of Famer

4 1 164 32 129

Prospect

Posted by bad_luck on 9/5/2014 1:28:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 9/5/2014 1:10:00 PM (view original):
Um, sure. OK.
"Prosecutors seeking a death penalty conviction of accused Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on Wednesday said the FBI at the time of his arrest last year believed he and his brother Tamerlan had been trained by a terrorist group because of the sophistication of their weapons and tradecraft."

They may indeed have been trained by a terrorist group. That does not mean that the attack was in any way sponsored or organized by a terrorist group.

They took their new found skills and went off on their own. Or so all the evidence says. If this was sponsored in any way by an organized group, we would have heard it by now, nearly 1 1/2 years after the fact.

You're coming off as a person desperate to try to win a point in an argument by making **** up.

9/5/2014 1:49 PM

◂ Prev 1...4|5|6|7|8...20 Next ▸

General Discussion

Non-Sports

Beheadings Topic

△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Search Text:

Location:

Forum:

Author:

Site Staff Posts:

Game Rating:

Forum Rating:

Timeframe:

Order By:

© 1999-2025 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.