ISIS beheads American journalist, Obama goes back on vacation

I am concerned that The Islamic State has real intentions of doing more harm here and we have a wide open border and the Mexican coyotes have a pretty damned good system in place for getting people and stuff into the country. For the right price they could get anything into the country they were asked to.

I think our gov't should do it's best to protect us from those threats. Waging all out war and toppling and installing new regimes is not fiscally responsible. However, I do support preemptive strikes when we know something is going down. Originally Posted by boardman

http://news.msn.com/videos/?ap=True&...8-ff311cbf765c

CNN discussion/pundit suggested an estimate of "thousands" ISIS members with U.S. passports, and more with European passports. They don't need "coyotes." But ...

http://www.independentsentinel.com/5...-china-to-u-s/

"In August 2007 former Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell stated that not only have terrorists used the Southwest border to enter the United States but that they will inevitably continue to do so as long as it is an available possibility.

"In a July 2012 hearing before the full U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Homeland Security, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano confirmed that terrorists have crossed the Southwest border with the intent to harm the American people. Additionally, the U.S. Border Patrol regularly apprehends aliens from the 35 “special interest countries” designated by our intelligence community as countries that could export individuals that could bring harm to our country in the way of terrorism.”

"From Fiscal Years 2006 to 2011, there were 1,918 apprehensions of these special interest aliens at our Southwest border."

Yeah, I admit I am projecting but it's based on Saddam's history. What? Do you really think he would have all of a sudden started playing nice at some point.

I've been saying that I don't think we can defeat a group of people who believe they will get into heaven simply by killing and dying for their faith.

. Originally Posted by boardman

[QUOTE=WTF;1055727025]This was the quote from the article you provided.


A decade and a half ago the contrast between the capabilities and structure of an organisation such as Baghdadi's and states in the Middle East would have been dramatic. Militant activity in Iraq or Syria was small scale, fleeting and mercilessly tracked by dictators.

Do you not understand that the rulers in Iraq and Syria were having none of this radical bs. They tracked them down like dogs and killed them. We then topple folks who have been doing our dirty work and stick their finger in purple ink and think every thing gonna be ok man....

I think our gov't should do it's best to protect us from those threats. Waging all out war and toppling and installing new regimes is not fiscally responsible. However, I do support preemptive strikes when we know something is going down. Originally Posted by boardman

That is wtf Saddam was doing for us! That is what the Syrian leader is/was doing. Are you starting to see why we had such little support for the 2003 invasion vs the 1991 invasion? Bush II fucked up what was a very fragile eco system in the ME. Plain and simple.

http://news.msn.com/videos/?ap=True&...8-ff311cbf765c



http://www.independentsentinel.com/5...-china-to-u-s/ Originally Posted by LexusLover

Two more cut and pastes from Eccie's king of cut and pastes'

Is LLIdiot capable of having a meaningful thought of his own?

This from a dicksucker ....
Originally Posted by WTF

Rule #7 when debating WTF the moronic buffoon.

Rule #7 when debating WTF the moronic buffoon. Originally Posted by gnadfly

I'm a moronic baffon according tou you you're a dickwipe according to me.

I'm a moronic baffon according tou you you're a dickwipe according to me. Originally Posted by WTF

Apparently his assessment is accurate. You prove it with every post.

[QUOTE=WTF;1055729640]

This was the quote from the article you provided.


A decade and a half ago the contrast between the capabilities and structure of an organisation such as Baghdadi's and states in the Middle East would have been dramatic. Militant activity in Iraq or Syria was small scale, fleeting and mercilessly tracked by dictators.

Do you not understand that the rulers in Iraq and Syria were having none of this radical bs. They tracked them down like dogs and killed them. We then topple folks who have been doing our dirty work and stick their finger in purple ink and think every thing gonna be ok man....



That is wtf Saddam was doing for us! That is what the Syrian leader is/was doing. Are you starting to see why we had such little support for the 2003 invasion vs the 1991 invasion? Bush II fucked up what was a very fragile eco system in the ME. Plain and simple.
Originally Posted by WTF

Saddam's interests became more radical and self serving as time went on and his value to us became negligible. Assad has taken much the same path since coming to power in the early 2000's when he was seen as a reformer. Now he is either letting ISIS exist inside his borders or is powerless to stop them.
They always have their own agenda and use the US for money and power until they have enough of their own.
How many times have we seen this happen? Cuba, Panama and Venezuela are just a few that come to mind in our own Hemisphere. What was it you were saying about nation building?
Gaddafi did do an about face after getting his ass kicked so many times but now he's gone and Libya is in just as much turmoil as Syria.

http://news.msn.com/videos/?ap=True&...8-ff311cbf765c

CNN discussion/pundit suggested an estimate of "thousands" ISIS members with U.S. passports, and more with European passports. They don't need "coyotes." But ...

http://www.independentsentinel.com/5...-china-to-u-s/

"In August 2007 former Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell stated that not only have terrorists used the Southwest border to enter the United States but that they will inevitably continue to do so as long as it is an available possibility.

"In a July 2012 hearing before the full U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Homeland Security, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano confirmed that terrorists have crossed the Southwest border with the intent to harm the American people. Additionally, the U.S. Border Patrol regularly apprehends aliens from the 35 “special interest countries” designated by our intelligence community as countries that could export individuals that could bring harm to our country in the way of terrorism.”

"From Fiscal Years 2006 to 2011, there were 1,918 apprehensions of these special interest aliens at our Southwest border." Originally Posted by LexusLover

I agree that the people can get here. I'm more concerned with weapons. The southern border seems the easiest way to do that.

I agree that the people can get here. I'm more concerned with weapons. The southern border seems the easiest way to do that. Originally Posted by boardman

Other than the fact that 911 came from Canada, and our coast line is porous.

The bottom line is this group has 1,000's of current members with Western passports and identities. There are millions of people in this country as we post who are here illegally, either upon their arrival and/or by "overstaying," and they are not all from Latin American countries.

To not dispose of the needles BEFORE they get in the hay stack ...

.. is TOTALLY IRRESPONSIBLE AND ANTIQUATED PRE-911 thinking.

What kind of "weapons"?

In "The sum of all fears" Tom Clancy described getting a nuclear warhead into the country in great detail. There are many ways to do it.
The major ports, like Houston, at least have an illusion of looking for that sort of thing. Whether it is actually effective I don't know but it probably has some deterring factor.
I'm just saying if I was determined to do it I think the coyote's have the best system in place. They know the border, they know the terrain. They apparently use diversionary tactics very effectively and consistently outsmart/outmaneuver the border patrol in that regard.
If it failed or the weapon was somehow found tracing it back to it's origin would prove difficult as I'm sure anyone but the highest level people in a organization/cartel with any knowledge would wake up with a bullet in their head.
For a few million in cash an operation like that would be right up their alley.

How do you two plan on paying for this war on terrorism?

Is it the same way the folks on the left want you to pay for the threat of Global Warming?

How do you two plan on paying for this war on terrorism?

Is it the same way the folks on the left want you to pay for the threat of Global Warming? Originally Posted by WTF

Your obsessively repetitive question about cost reminds me of the motor oil commercial .... "you can pay now or pay later, but you are going to pay."

Apparently, you either didn't pay much attention to the 911 Commission hearings or you selectively ingested the theme through the testimony and presentation of documents.

Just one example:

In 1996 Al Gore chaired an airliner security "commission" and presented a 'report" to his Boss, Bill Clinton. Among the suggestions was "hardening" the cockpit access so it could be secured from the inside and restrict flight crew access (no more "coffee breaks" by attendants with the flight crew, etc.). The estimated retro-fit cost to the domestic airliners who had overseas flights was around $50 million. The Clinton administration didn't want to seek any funding from the government (Congress) and let the airlines do it themselves. (Remember the "Clinton surplus"?)

Had it been made mandatory and funded, even for double that cost, it is more than likely that control of the aircraft that devastated this country on 911 would not have happened. The first "check" cut by Bush was about $50 billion post 911 ... and you know the rest of the story..... I think ... because you keep whining about it.

But like John Kerry said ON 911 ABOUT 911

... "Absolutely" they knew it could happen, BUT ..

did NOTHING ABOUT IT.

I'm sorry YOUR MAN IN THE WHITE HOUSE threw billions down a rat hole on "green" bullshit, and created a debt problem, AND I'm also sorry YOUR MAN IN THE WHITE HOUSE shut down exploration and development of existing reserves within the Western Hemisphere around the U.S., AND I'm sorry YOUR MAN IN THE WHITE HOUSE doesn't want a pipeline from Canada TO FEED YOUR ADDICTION ...

.. but these folks are NOT pissed about the oil ... they are using it for funding ... at a substantially reduced, black market price .....

that don't like Christians, or anyone who doesn't believe like they do.

If you believe like they do, then you got nothing to worry about, as long as you keep quiet about it!!!! Until they come knocking on your door to ask.

Now, I think I'll line me up some pussy. Are you gonna find a foursome?

YOUR MAN IN THE WHITE HOUSE is probably looking now ... foursome!

Your obsessively repetitive question about cost reminds me of the motor oil commercial ....
! Originally Posted by LexusLover

People that do not consider cost wind up 17 Trillion dollars in debt.

"you can pay now or pay later, but you are going to pay."

! Originally Posted by LexusLover

Everything has a cost LL, my question pertains to if you are willing to pay it. So far I have seen nothing to indicate that you would. You are are a mooch wanting to spend others' money while crying if anyone tries to get you to pay for what you want.

Your obsessively repetitive question about cost

! Originally Posted by LexusLover

17 Trillion dollar debt thanks to folks like you that do not question costs? Oh you question cost of things you do not agree with but are to ignorant to acknowledge that the other side does not agree with your risk assessment on things they do not agree with you on.

Some folks see Global Warming as a bigger threat than Muslims , do you want to pay for the cost of GW? That is how the other side feels about you bullshit terrorist assessment. The risk is less than getting struck by lightning yet you two seem not to want to take that minimal personal responsibility.

Have you forgotten that Global Warming isn't politically correct anymore because science doesn't support it. It's called climate change. I wonder how many billions of dollars we have wasted on that farce.
Lightening doesn't strike fear in most people. You usually have some warning of it coming and can personally do something to minimize the risk.
For that matter lightening is an act of God or nature and we have become accustomed to it's existence and accept that it can happen. Is that what you are suggesting we do about terrorism?
Just how many people have been terrorized by lightening in the last twenty years anyway.
Now, how many people have been terrorized, I mean legitimately scared by acts of terror on our soil in that same time?
9/11 damn near brought the country to it's knees. 3000+ Americans killed, hundreds of thousands affected directly in New York City and millions of us watched stunned and helpless. I remember how I felt watching those buildings come down. Do You?
How many people were affected by the Muslim who drove his suburban into a crowd of people in San Francisco in 2006?
How about the nearly 300 people on board flight 253 on Christmas day 2009 and their families?
Or the families of the victims at Ft. Hood in 2009? Oh, wait that was workplace violence, By a Fucking MUSLIM!
How many thousands of people were killed, injured or otherwise directly affected by the Boston Marathon bombings in 2013?

Spreading fear among as many people as possible is what radical Muslims want. The death toll does not matter to them other than the more the better.

Don't tell me Muslims aren't a threat when history and the Defense Secretary says otherwise.