PDA

View Full Version : Trump will be the next POTUS IF...



Bluesky
07-15-2016, 07:23 AM
If an attack or two like we have seen in Nice, France happens in the USA, it will be all Trump needs to win the presidency come November.

The scary thing is, there is no protection against this kind of attack . A truck veers off the road onto a crowded sidewalk. There is no warning, no barriers. Everyone is vulnerable. Fear will run rampant. Fear is all Trump needs now to win.

Barry Morris
07-15-2016, 07:40 AM
I fear that you are correct.

But it looks like a choice between bad and worse.

Anapeg
07-15-2016, 08:01 AM
Fear has been Trumps ace in the hole. He has used that since day one. He has used fear, suspicion and distrust as his selling point what with building walls, not allowing certain groups into the country etc. Without these points he has no platform what some ever.

Bluesky
07-15-2016, 09:11 AM
It will be the radicalized voter vs the radicalized Muslim.

Barry Morris
07-15-2016, 09:37 AM
It will be the radicalized voter vs the radicalized Muslim.

So, was Timothy McVey a radicalized Christian??

Bluesky
07-15-2016, 10:02 AM
He wasn't a Christian at all. Do you not draw a line between domestic terrorism and the Islamic jihad of ISIS?

Barry Morris
07-15-2016, 11:52 AM
http://www.ethicsdaily.com/an-accurate-look-at-timothy-mcveighs-beliefs-cms-15532

I'm not talking about OUR views, I'm talking about the secular view.

Seems to me that, in the same way, we view Muslims like this.

Bluesky
07-15-2016, 01:34 PM
You have a way of derailing threads.

Barry Morris
07-15-2016, 03:54 PM
You have a way of derailing threads.

Oh.

I see.

Well then, what was post 4 all about???

Bluesky
07-15-2016, 05:18 PM
Not hard to figure out. The more terrorist attacks we see from the radicalized Islamists, the more it will radicalize voters to vote for the radical presidential nominee, Donald Trump. It is another way of repeating post 1.

Barry Morris
07-15-2016, 06:09 PM
Not hard to figure out. The more terrorist attacks we see from the radicalized Islamists, the more it will radicalize voters to vote for the radical presidential nominee, Donald Trump. It is another way of repeating post 1.

Ok, just trying get a handle on what you mean by radicalized.

Hans
07-15-2016, 07:11 PM
If an attack or two like we have seen in Nice, France happens in the USA, it will be all Trump needs to win the presidency come November.

The scary thing is, there is no protection against this kind of attack . A truck veers off the road onto a crowded sidewalk. There is no warning, no barriers. Everyone is vulnerable. Fear will run rampant. Fear is all Trump needs now to win.


There is protection against this kind of attack, but no country in the world wants to initiate it out of fear for the worldwide backlash it will cause.
Ask Israel why they do not get these type of terrorist attacks.

Barry Morris
07-15-2016, 09:17 PM
There is protection against this kind of attack, but no country in the world wants to initiate it out of fear for the worldwide backlash it will cause.
Ask Israel why they do not get these type of terrorist attacks.

More armed people on the streets.

riggs
07-16-2016, 11:41 AM
Fear has been Trumps ace in the hole. He has used that since day one. He has used fear, suspicion and distrust as his selling point what with building walls, not allowing certain groups into the country etc. Without these points he has no platform what some ever.

He has only used what already exist in the minds of many voters. His actions have only watered the seeds planted by the media and Hillary's actions have only fanned the flames of suspicion and distrust driving voters in his direction. You're correct in saying he has no platform, and I believe that only means less broken promises if he eventually wins.

Bluesky
07-16-2016, 12:21 PM
There is protection against this kind of attack, but no country in the world wants to initiate it out of fear for the worldwide backlash it will cause.
Ask Israel why they do not get these type of terrorist attacks.

Why not tell us? I cannot ask Israel. DO you have a phone number? ;)

Hans
07-16-2016, 04:36 PM
They go after terrorists with force, not being afraid to level their homes and use air strikes in foreign countries to bomb targets they consider dangerous.
They do not wait on a UN or other agreement, they just go in and take care of it swiftly.

As for airport security they are the golden standard.
https://www.quora.com/What-is-it-like-to-go-through-airport-security-in-Israel

Barry Morris
07-16-2016, 07:05 PM
Just a minor clarification.

"....not being afraid to level their MOTHERS homes...."

Which doesn't much help when considering the adage about war, "Leave room for your enemy to become your friend".

Anapeg
07-16-2016, 07:17 PM
Just a minor clarification.

"....not being afraid to level their MOTHERS homes...."

Which doesn't much help when considering the adage about war, "Leave room for your enemy to become your friend".

Either way it is effective.

Barry Morris
07-16-2016, 09:31 PM
Either way it is effective.

Knock down a family home with a bulldozer, and you think it's effective?? Anybody who lived there is instantly radicalized!!!

Kinda reminds me about the accusations against God about being the "Jewish War God".

On several occasions he had the Jews wipe out everybody.

Maybe He know something we don't.

Hans
07-16-2016, 10:10 PM
It is effective. It causes families to pay closer attention to what they are doing and who they hang out with.

Barry Morris
07-16-2016, 10:25 PM
It is effective. It causes families to pay closer attention to what they are doing and who they hang out with.

Yup. Like other's who lives have been affected, and they plot revenge!!!

Bluesky
07-16-2016, 11:32 PM
If I know my actions will cause my mother to be put out on the street, I might think twice. I wonder if Israel has already done a study of this practice and deemed it as an effective disincentive. Do you really think they would do this if it wasn't effective? Do you think you know strategy better than they do?

Anapeg
07-17-2016, 10:43 AM
Knock down a family home with a bulldozer, and you think it's effective?? Anybody who lived there is instantly radicalized!!!

Kinda reminds me about the accusations against God about being the "Jewish War God".

On several occasions he had the Jews wipe out everybody.

Maybe He know something we don't.

Radicalized or pissed off with the family member who brought this down on the family? Escalating the response is a deterrent as well. I have said in the past Western response to war is timid. We never have finished a job yet, WW1, lead to WW2 because we did not beat Germany, they were on their knees and we failed to offer up the killing blow. There can be no dealing with terrorists. They have to be beaten, rendered impotent so they know beyond any shadow of doubt they lost.

Barry Morris
07-17-2016, 02:32 PM
If I know my actions will cause my mother to be put out on the street, I might think twice. I wonder if Israel has already done a study of this practice and deemed it as an effective disincentive. Do you really think they would do this if it wasn't effective? Do you think you know strategy better than they do?

Yes, Blue, YOU might think twice.

But would a person of THAT culture think the same way??

Is it an effective deterrent?? Do you really think that a Middle Eastern man (especially a teenager) is concerned about a possible retaliation on his mother. Heck, she's only a woman.

Is it effective?? I sure haven't seen any studies.

Barry Morris
07-17-2016, 02:35 PM
Radicalized or pissed off with the family member who brought this down on the family?

Like I said to Blue, Do you really think that a Middle Eastern man (especially a teenager) is concerned about a possible retaliation on his mother. Heck, she's only a woman.


Escalating the response is a deterrent as well. I have said in the past Western response to war is timid. We never have finished a job yet, WW1, lead to WW2 because we did not beat Germany, they were on their knees and we failed to offer up the killing blow.

Define killing blow. Germany was left helpless and hungry after WW1, ripe pickings for a Hitler.


There can be no dealing with terrorists. They have to be beaten, rendered impotent so they know beyond any shadow of doubt they lost.

There is justice.

And there is genocide.

Genocide gets rid of the problem completely. No matter the attitude of a group towards you, if you kill them all, you won't ever have a problem with them again.

Naturally, western morals prevent such an action. But unfortunately, it seems that justice isn't sought either.

Hans
07-17-2016, 02:59 PM
Yes, Blue, YOU might think twice.

But would a person of THAT culture think the same way??

Is it an effective deterrent?? Do you really think that a Middle Eastern man (especially a teenager) is concerned about a possible retaliation on his mother. Heck, she's only a woman.

Is it effective?? I sure haven't seen any studies.

The best study is Israel. They are surrounded by Islamist terrorists and terror groups, and they have a very low incident rate of terrorism and terror attacks in comparison to the rest of the world.
Why? Because they deal harshly with the problem, not afraid to call a spade a spade.

Barry Morris
07-17-2016, 03:03 PM
The best study is Israel. They are surrounded by Islamist terrorists and terror groups, and they have a very low incident rate of terrorism and terror attacks in comparison to the rest of the world.
Why? Because they deal harshly with the problem, not afraid to call a spade a spade.

Really? Then you'd figure that deterrence is the final, perfect answer.

But then, why do the attacks continue??

I believe that the way they handle security and the fact that the general public is much better armed than anywhere else is the deciding factor.

Hans
07-17-2016, 07:47 PM
Armed public does not prevent terror attacks. If they do, provide a few examples where one or more armed members of the public prevented a terror or terrorism attack.
The whole "arming the public is good for safety" comes from lobby groups who push their agenda in the media, so they can sell more arms to the public.

They are partially responsible for creating this picture of "arming citizens and walking around carrying concealed guns is a good thing."
They are comparable to the tobacco industry and their advertisement tactics.

Hans
07-17-2016, 07:54 PM
Cleveland police union asks for suspension of 'open carry' in wake of Baton Rouge, ahead of RNC.

State law in Ohio allows for licensed firearm owners to wear their weapons in public. With the exception of a small "secure zone" inside and around the Quicken Loans Arena, residents, delegates and protesters are legally permitted to walk around the city -- including within its 1.7 square mile regulated "event zone" -- with any firearm not explicitly banned by the state.

"We are going to be looking very, very hard at anyone who has an open carry," he said. "An AR-15, a shotgun, multiple handguns. It's irresponsible of those folks -- especially right now -- to be coming downtown with open carry AR's or anything else. I couldn't care less if it's legal or not. We are constitutional law enforcement, we love the Constitution, support it and defend it, but you can't go into a crowded theater and scream fire. And that's exactly what they're doing by bringing those guns down there."

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/17/politics/cleveland-police-baton-rouge-security-open-carry/index.html

Mark my words: if they walk around carrying AR-15's "because they can" they are going to be arrested, and shot if they resist.

KDawg
07-17-2016, 08:19 PM
State law in Ohio allows for licensed firearm owners to wear their weapons in public.

Mark my words: if they walk around carrying AR-15's "because they can" they are going to be arrested, and shot if they resist.
That would be a crime... by the state.

Barry Morris
07-17-2016, 08:19 PM
Armed public does not prevent terror attacks. If they do, provide a few examples where one or more armed members of the public prevented a terror or terrorism attack.
The whole "arming the public is good for safety" comes from lobby groups who push their agenda in the media, so they can sell more arms to the public.

They are partially responsible for creating this picture of "arming citizens and walking around carrying concealed guns is a good thing."
They are comparable to the tobacco industry and their advertisement tactics.

We were discussing Israel.

Hans
07-17-2016, 09:58 PM
We were discussing Israel.

And you said the success of Israel is partially due to the fact the general public being much better armed.
This implies a good step in the right direction is to arm the general public better.

Hans
07-17-2016, 09:59 PM
That would be a crime... by the state.

Not if they don't shoot first.

Barry Morris
07-17-2016, 10:42 PM
And you said the success of Israel is partially due to the fact the general public being much better armed.
This implies a good step in the right direction is to arm the general public better.

Indeed, it might be.

I believe all Israelis MUST be in the army at some point, and might remain in the reserves afterwards.

Suppose in our countries veterans were required to remain armed after their service. Retired cops too Concealed carry.

Might not hurt.

Hans
07-18-2016, 06:16 AM
If I am not mistaken, the last 2 major cop shooting incidents in the USA were done by ex US military members.
I don't think it is a good idea.

Barry Morris
07-18-2016, 08:38 AM
If I am not mistaken, the last 2 major cop shooting incidents in the USA were done by ex US military members.
I don't think it is a good idea.

It is obvious that one of the first things a dictator does is to disarm the people.

That is why the second amendment was created.

Nutcases with illegal weapons are shooting people.

Now, if you can think of a way to fulfil the intent of the amendment, AND stop illegally armed bad guys, I'm all ears.

Hans
07-18-2016, 05:40 PM
It is actually simple: how many democratic countries in the world function properly without a second amendment, without the need for "the people" to carry guns (concealed or open carry).

This whole issue of the second amendment is being hijacked by certain interest groups in order to support the large gun industry that operates in the USA.

KDawg
07-18-2016, 06:20 PM
It is actually simple: how many democratic countries in the world function properly without a second amendment, without the need for "the people" to carry guns (concealed or open carry).

This whole issue of the second amendment is being hijacked by certain interest groups in order to support the large gun industry that operates in the USA.
Switzerland.

Hans
07-18-2016, 06:41 PM
They carry guns in Switzerland.

Barry Morris
07-18-2016, 08:42 PM
It is actually simple: how many democratic countries in the world function properly without a second amendment, without the need for "the people" to carry guns (concealed or open carry).
....

And look at how many don't.