Hey Justin!

[Whitespinnerbait]

Does anyone know if the elderly woman in question has return to her apartment yet ??

[Steve]

I would just like to personally thank Dutch01 for his logical, patient, and informed replies.

 

Something this board lacks dearly.

 

Your patience with the "short replies" that don't provide any facts, just rhetoric, is amazing.

 

I don't know what you do for a job, but I'm guessing you deal with a lot of this in real life.

 

Each time I read a ridiculous reply, you have already rebutted with a well thought out, informative post....allowing me to take a breath and remind myself it's generally those in a minority position who bark the loudest.

 

I truly appreciate your posts and look forward to reading them in the future.....If your ever in the Hamilton area, and want a spot on the boat, let me know. I'd gladly share a day on the water....it's the least you deserve.

[manitoubass2]

I would just like to personally thank Dutch01 for his logical, patient, and informed replies.

 

Something this board lacks dearly.

 

Your patience with the "short replies" that don't provide any facts, just rhetoric, is amazing.

 

I don't know what you do for a job, but I'm guessing you deal with a lot of this in real life.

 

Each time I read a ridiculous reply, you have already rebutted with a well thought out, informative post....allowing me to take a breath and remind myself it's generally those in a minority position who bark the loudest.

 

I truly appreciate your posts and look forward to reading them in the future.....If your ever in the Hamilton area, and want a spot on the boat, let me know. I'd gladly share a day on the water....it's the least you deserve.

???

[Old Ironmaker]

Keep em comin Dutch01. Some people just don't have the life they want and can come on the internet and be anything they want to be. Sometimes a jack butt.

[Dutch01]

Thanks guys. My Mom always told me I had a hard head!

 

I know some guys are rolling their eyes at this but I don't really think I'm going to change many minds on here. I do hope I can change one or two, that would be enough to be worth the effort.

[Steve]

minds are changing every day.

 

If I could only pull up a thread from circa 2003ish where I generated a discussion about smoking while fishing....

 

At that time, I was one of only three people who supported anything related to the green plant.

 

I clearly remember many folks then, who appear to support it now (or at least not against it), vehemently against anything to do with the devil plant.

 

It's absolutely awesome reading the same folks, 10 years later, stating "although I don't smoke it, I don't see what is wrong with it"....

 

Amazing.

 

And it occurred simply by discussing it. People are opening their minds.

 

Discussion is a good thing. When you respond with facts, most run and hide.

Edited February 24, 2016 by Steve

[NANUK]

I would just like to personally thank Dutch01 for his logical, patient, and informed replies.

 

Something this board lacks dearly.

 

Your patience with the "short replies" that don't provide any facts, just rhetoric, is amazing.

 

I don't know what you do for a job, but I'm guessing you deal with a lot of this in real life.

 

Each time I read a ridiculous reply, you have already rebutted with a well thought out, informative post....allowing me to take a breath and remind myself it's generally those in a minority position who bark the loudest.

 

I truly appreciate your posts and look forward to reading them in the future.....If your ever in the Hamilton area, and want a spot on the boat, let me know. I'd gladly share a day on the water....it's the least you deserve.

 

^

Well said Steve !!

[Canuck]

ISIL are no more representative of mainstream Islam than the Westboro Baptist Church is representative of mainstream Christianity.

That was not my point. Mainstream Muslims are not bombing us. ISIL and el Qaeda are. And they are doing it, not to avenge the crusades (which by the way Christianity left behind centuries ago). They are very clearly working to cleanse the world of infidels, starting in the Caliphate and then you think they will stop? It's not about oil it's about religion. There ARE many in the Middle East that oppose the west for meddling in their affairs for the sake of oil. And I don't disagree that there is a lot of truth to that. But that is not what ISIl is fighting for. Or el Qaeda or the Taliban.

[manitoubass2]

That was not my point. Mainstream Muslims are not bombing us. ISIL and el Qaeda are. And they are doing it, not to avenge the crusades (which by the way Christianity left behind centuries ago). They are very clearly working to cleanse the world of infidels, starting in the Caliphate and then you think they will stop? It's not about oil it's about religion. There ARE many in the Middle East that oppose the west for meddling in their affairs for the sake of oil. And I don't disagree that there is a lot of truth to that. But that is not what ISIl is fighting for. Or el Qaeda or the Taliban.

And al queda and the taliban were admittedly created/funded by the west to fight russia in afghanistan.

 

Hillary clinton even admitted it(as secretary of state nonetheless) but hey...

 

 

Isis/isil has nothing to do with western powers/influence and funding

 

https://youtu.be/PJLR1LhxiN0

Edited February 24, 2016 by manitoubass2

[manitoubass2]

That was not my point. Mainstream Muslims are not bombing us. ISIL and el Qaeda are. And they are doing it, not to avenge the crusades (which by the way Christianity left behind centuries ago). They are very clearly working to cleanse the world of infidels, starting in the Caliphate and then you think they will stop? It's not about oil it's about religion. There ARE many in the Middle East that oppose the west for meddling in their affairs for the sake of oil. And I don't disagree that there is a lot of truth to that. But that is not what ISIl is fighting for. Or el Qaeda or the Taliban.

Your correct. They have ideoligies they wish to pursue.

 

But they can only pursue that with the protection, funding, politics of the west.

 

This is your new boogie man

[Dutch01]

That was not my point. Mainstream Muslims are not bombing us. ISIL and el Qaeda are. And they are doing it, not to avenge the crusades (which by the way Christianity left behind centuries ago). They are very clearly working to cleanse the world of infidels, starting in the Caliphate and then you think they will stop? It's not about oil it's about religion. There ARE many in the Middle East that oppose the west for meddling in their affairs for the sake of oil. And I don't disagree that there is a lot of truth to that. But that is not what ISIl is fighting for. Or el Qaeda or the Taliban.

Maybe some of you don't know any Muslims. I live in a multicultural city. I know a number of great people who are Muslims. They don't hate me or want to chop my head off. They bring homemade Samosas to the office and we break bread in the lunch room and talk about fishing, the Leafs, or whatever. These people represent mainstream Muslims, NOT ISIS.

 

ISIS is a rag tag group of 50,000 fighters at best. The generous estimate of 250,000 I gave in my previous comment above in this thread includes farmers, women, maybe some children and even goats. They are geographically contained. They have a limited capability to strike out via terror attacks, but beyond that they pose little to no threat to the world.

 

The countries around them that are considered our allies have more than 4 million troops available. ISIS could be wiped out in a matter of weeks or months if there was political will among those countries. That there isn't political will is not due to religion, as Rick pointed out earlier. It is about money and the politics of power. It is about oil sold to Turkey, or arms sold by the USA and Russia to continue these wars. It is about reconstruction contracts. It is about so much more. Because surely if the USA and Russia and Turkey and Egypt (just to name a few) really wanted ISIS gone, they would be gone already.

 

Now for the religion part of it. ISIS are extreme, there is no question. I am horrified by all that they do, and all that they stand for. Make no mistake about that. But they are a small minority. The vast majority of Muslims want nothing to do with head chopping, and want the same thing every human wants (a la Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs). They want equality, opportunity, love, peace and prosperity like anyone else.

 

When we bomb civilian cities in Syria, we are saying by our actions that those lives don't matter. ISIS is telling them the West hates you, they bomb you, they want to kill you. And then we do it and prove them right. We literally ARE the infidel from their point of view, because we are trying to kill them in their land. We give ISIS credence by our actions. No one who pulled their dead child out of the rubble of their apartment is ever going to be on our side again. And I don't blame them for it.

 

Then on the other side, ISIS kills civilians in a terror attack, and we clamor for more bombing.

 

All we are doing is creating cycles of hatred and revenge. This is how Israel and Palestine treat each other, and they are no closer to a solution.

 

I am not saying do nothing. I am saying that bombing is doing the wrong thing.

[Old Ironmaker]

Killing innocents is only collateral damage after all. This may be way off the wall but, what if 50,000 nutbars in Quebec took up arms to create a separate state and started taking Canadian territory and terrorizing say Quebec and New Brunswick. We send in the 6 fighter planes and bomb a town they took and we created some collateral damage. I guarantee you they will have more than 50,000 fighters the next day.

[Dutch01]

Killing innocents is only collateral damage after all. This may be way off the wall but, what if 50,000 nutbars in Quebec took up arms to create a separate state and started taking Canadian territory and terrorizing say Quebec and New Brunswick. We send in the 6 fighter planes and bomb a town they took and we created some collateral damage. I guarantee you they will have more than 50,000 fighters the next day.

This is a great analogy.

[manitoubass2]

This is a great analogy.

Thats truth...

 

 

And sorry OI Karsten is attached to my boob???

 

Ill return the call tomorrow sir

[Canuck]

This is a great analogy.

Killing innocents is only collateral damage after all. This may be way off the wall but, what if 50,000 nutbars in Quebec took up arms to create a separate state and started taking Canadian territory and terrorizing say Quebec and New Brunswick. We send in the 6 fighter planes and bomb a town they took and we created some collateral damage. I guarantee you they will have more than 50,000 fighters the next day.

That is a great analogy and I agree completely. And I suspect that some on this board would say those Quebecers were right to terrorize because of what English Canada did to them in the 1800s. Bottom line is that the the simple problems in the world were all solved long ago. The more complicated the issue, the less likely it can be solved. We cannot undo the past, only prevent further damage.

 

As always, you are all an interesting bunch. Great insight from other perspectives, left right middle, libertarian leaning. I respect them all, even when I don't agree. We are all better for knowing the the other perspectives. And the freedom to openly debate and disagree IS worth fighting for. The few middle eastern countries that share that philosophy are the ones under attack by radicalism, and despite the oil and other political aspects, that is a major reason for us to do something.

[netminder]

Killing innocents is only collateral damage after all. This may be way off the wall but, what if 50,000 nutbars in Quebec took up arms to create a separate state and started taking Canadian territory and terrorizing say Quebec and New Brunswick. We send in the 6 fighter planes and bomb a town they took and we created some collateral damage. I guarantee you they will have more than 50,000 fighters the next day.

That's a good way to think about it.

 

I think what a lot of people who demand more fighting over there forget is that the vast majority of the fighting has been going on over there. There hasn't been a major conflict in North America for 150 years. Hell, there are still many living Europeans that are old enough remember having their homes and hometowns obliterated for someone else's war. Who the "terrorist" is all a matter of perception.

 

The sad fact is if there wasn't this black stuff bubbling up under the sand over there, no one here would care. There have been just as many atrocities occurring in Africa but no one cares because the western countries have pretty much cut ties with Africa since we figured out how to synthesize rubber. Hell, there are many that say WWIII has already taken place in Africa. http://www.ibtimes.com/congo-world-war-nobody-knows-about-213207

 

I have no idea where I'm going with this tangent but I think the point is all you do by bombing cities when you're not actually fighting a government or an actual organized military (or even when you are) is spreading hatred amongst the inhabitants of that city. When you're fighting ISIS you're not fighting people, you're fighting an idea. I'm not sure we've developed a bomb yet that can destroy ideas.

[Dutch01]

That is a great analogy and I agree completely. And I suspect that some on this board would say those Quebecers were right to terrorize because of what English Canada did to them in the 1800s. Bottom line is that the the simple problems in the world were all solved long ago. The more complicated the issue, the less likely it can be solved. We cannot undo the past, only prevent further damage.

 

As always, you are all an interesting bunch. Great insight from other perspectives, left right middle, libertarian leaning. I respect them all, even when I don't agree. We are all better for knowing the the other perspectives. And the freedom to openly debate and disagree IS worth fighting for. The few middle eastern countries that share that philosophy are the ones under attack by radicalism, and despite the oil and other political aspects, that is a major reason for us to do something.

Well said Canuck!

[Dutch01]

That's a good way to think about it.

 

I think what a lot of people who demand more fighting over there forget is that the vast majority of the fighting has been going on over there. There hasn't been a major conflict in North America for 150 years. Hell, there are still many living Europeans that are old enough remember having their homes and hometowns obliterated for someone else's war. Who the "terrorist" is all a matter of perception.

 

The sad fact is if there wasn't this black stuff bubbling up under the sand over there, no one here would care. There have been just as many atrocities occurring in Africa but no one cares because the western countries have pretty much cut ties with Africa since we figured out how to synthesize rubber. Hell, there are many that say WWIII has already taken place in Africa. http://www.ibtimes.com/congo-world-war-nobody-knows-about-213207

 

I have no idea where I'm going with this tangent but I think the point is all you do by bombing cities when you're not actually fighting a government or an actual organized military (or even when you are) is spreading hatred amongst the inhabitants of that city. When you're fighting ISIS you're not fighting people, you're fighting an idea. I'm not sure we've developed a bomb yet that can destroy ideas.

Imo, you hit the nail on the head. I think the bombs actually spread the idea, not kill it.

[NANUK]

We ( USA and allies ) have been blasting Al Quida in Afganistan since 911,

The result is spreading of Al Quida all over the globe plus dozens of affiliated terror groups as far as Africa.

Makes you think what has been gained by losing trillions of $$ and so many lives of our soldiers.

[Canuck]

We ( USA and allies ) have been blasting Al Quida in Afganistan since 911,

The result is spreading of Al Quida all over the globe plus dozens of affiliated terror groups as far as Africa.

Makes you think what has been gained by losing trillions of $$ and so many lives of our soldiers.

 

The real question is would we be better off today or worse off today if we did nothing in the past? If anyone thinks they actually know that answer, they are wrong.

 

If the US and Canada decided to do nothing and avoid bombing and potentially killing innocent people when Hitler's ideological army started to march, would we be better off or worse off? What if Canada or the US decided we could help best by providing logistics and training to the British and French forces, but stay out of it other than that. WW2 cost the world a lot of money? Did we gain anything from it?

 

A key difference from how Hitler wanted to spread his ideology was that he did not slowly build a worldwide following of his ideology. Technology did not allow it as easily then, and his egomania got in the way too. These global terrorist groups are, in some ways much more advanced. Stopping the new ISIL/Al Qaeda/Taliban Nazis from marching their ideology is not going to be as "easy" as WW2. Its a different world and a smarter enemy.

[manitoubass2]

We ( USA and allies ) have been blasting Al Quida in Afganistan since 911,

The result is spreading of Al Quida all over the globe plus dozens of affiliated terror groups as far as Africa.

Makes you think what has been gained by losing trillions of $$ and so many lives of our soldiers.

No doubt, and all this is just crazy.

 

The west along with other countries fund militant coupes,train them and "aid" with arms, then just leave them as they are and they cause conflicts and overthrow governments etc and eventually they become armies with their own agendas and ideologies. See my post about hillary clinton talking about al queda.

 

On top of that the arms supplies make alot of people very rich.

 

The west utilizes this tactic often to destabalize and overthrow countries the take resources and provide huge unpayable loans theough the IMF, and when they cant pay, badda bing badda BOOM, you know own the resources and have the political pressure to ensure whomever rises to power fits the agendas of the west.

 

Multinational corperations are so rich and powerfull they even have governments doing there bidding for them.

 

Many of these people are the vile of the earth. Goerge soros, the rockefellers, bilderburgers, fords etc.

 

And while radical islam does what its doing, muslims all get the blame.

 

And whos this protect? Look at all these scumbags

 

They are almost all jewish. Ashkenazi jews and they are waaay worse than radical islam. Look at their ideals

 

Throughout history they have been removed from many countries forceably because anywhere they go they have tried to conquer lands(mostly through monetary means)

[netminder]

Right on cue, here's a former top Canadian armed forces man agreeing with me...

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2016/02/24/the-west-should-have-left-taliban-alone-and-just-hit-al-qaida-former-commander_n_9304248.html?ir=Canada

[Dutch01]

 

The real question is would we be better off today or worse off today if we did nothing in the past? If anyone thinks they actually know that answer, they are wrong.

 

If the US and Canada decided to do nothing and avoid bombing and potentially killing innocent people when Hitler's ideological army started to march, would we be better off or worse off? What if Canada or the US decided we could help best by providing logistics and training to the British and French forces, but stay out of it other than that. WW2 cost the world a lot of money? Did we gain anything from it?

 

A key difference from how Hitler wanted to spread his ideology was that he did not slowly build a worldwide following of his ideology. Technology did not allow it as easily then, and his egomania got in the way too. These global terrorist groups are, in some ways much more advanced. Stopping the new ISIL/Al Qaeda/Taliban Nazis from marching their ideology is not going to be as "easy" as WW2. Its a different world and a smarter enemy.

I appreciate your point of view and willingness to share it, but Hitler's rise is not analogous to the rise of ISIS (in my opinion).

 

The Third Reich was a state actor, with a state army and the support of millions of Germans. Their fervor was nationalistic, and they had significant manufacturing and logistics capabilities, which are needed to support an army.

 

ISIS is a cult, not a state actor. Their "army" is not a threat to any real state armies in the area. They do not have the funds or the economic and industrial bases to support a sustained war effort. They are geographically contained to a small area, with little to no capability to expand their territory, despite the fact that real might and determination has not even been brought to bear on them yet.

 

I just don't see these two situations as comparable.

[netminder]

I appreciate your point of view and willingness to share it, but Hitler's rise is not analogous to the rise of ISIS (in my opinion).

 

The Third Reich was a state actor, with a state army and the support of millions of Germans. Their fervor was nationalistic, and they had significant manufacturing and logistics capabilities, which are needed to support an army.

 

ISIS is a cult, not a state actor. Their "army" is not a threat to any real state armies in the area. They do not have the funds or the economic and industrial bases to support a sustained war effort. They are geographically contained to a small area, with little to no capability to expand their territory, despite the fact that real might and determination has not even been brought to bear on them yet.

 

I just don't see these two situations as comparable.

I mostly agree, but the Nazis came from something too. They didn't just spring up out of the ground overnight. And if you want to be real technical about it, it can easily be argued the Nazi party was born out of oppression and a thirst for revenge against Germany after WWI. ISIS wants to become the Nazi party. They call themselves the Islamic STATE for a reason. It's not really that far fetched, IMO. But the key difference is the Nazis didn't start with behedings before they had significant support. And even then, without Googling statistics I'm pretty sure the Nazis never had more than a third of support among voters in Germany at their height. Still millions of people, but not a majority by any stretch.

[manitoubass2]

Nazi germany is similar in some ways

 

But yeah, ISIS(whats left of them) and ISIL are not armies. Anyone in the region could militarily destroy them VERY quickly. Ie Russia with ISIS

Edited February 24, 2016 by manitoubass2