Donald Trump can suck our collective dicks

[BigV]

Big Sarge. it saddens me to hear you speak so blithely about "Yeah, just kill their families". You love your family, they're precious to you. I can't understand how anyone can dehumanize the people in this scenario to the point at which the deaths of the families of the "others" would be any less atrocious than the deaths of their own family members. I doubt anyone here lost a family member to the violence in San Bernardino recently. Yet, many around us are apoplectic about the need to take swift and sure action, including killing the family members of ... of... somebody.

Think about how much distance there is between you and the people who died and compare that to how strongly you feel that killing any-fucking-one who stands between you and the person you feel's responsible. Big distance, big reaction. And it stands to reason were the distance smaller, like someone in your direct circle or family, that the reaction would be even greater. How can someone disagree with that? They can't. And yet, it is seen as a path to peace (!!!) to kill the family members of those "others".

How can you explain that it would not incite "them" to even greater reactions, just as you are whipped up by the deaths of your fellows? Death begets death. Violence begets violence. It is a warmongering, hateful, profiteering fantasy to suggest that we can kill our way to peace. It is exactly this kind of attitude and action that provides them motivation in the first place. This is what makes more terrorists more active. Only stupid people think otherwise.

Do you have any evidence that they can be intimidated? Frightened into cooperation? Do they lack resolve? And say you *could* kill all of them, albeit in and amongst the civilian carnage. How can you justify the deaths of all the innocents?

You can't.

Killing innocent people to bring about political change is what terrorists do, it's the fucking definition of terrorists. Suggesting that we should kill their families should be treated with the same kind of response that a 14 year old (brown) boy who brings a clock he made to school. Arrest, incitement to violence, making terroristic threats.

[Big Sarge]

I'm not really having a knee jerk reaction to the San Bernadino event. My reaction is more to us being sucked deeper into the ISIL/Daesh and the likelihood US troops will be sacrificed. Here's the sitrep as I understand:

1. The Iraqi Army folded and abandoned their equipment to a smaller ill equipped force.
2. Military age males from Syria and Iraq have fled to Europe rather than fight in defense of their own homeland.
3. President Obama has stated he will destroy ISIL. His precision air campaign has had limited success in disruption, but the US has been forced to deploy SOF troops on the ground.
4. US military commanders have stated conventional ground forces will have to be deployed for the destruction of ISIL. This will surely guarantee another OIF/OEF type drawn out campaign - US causalities and multiple deployment cycles.

So yes, I fear we are being drawn into a fight that will see US troops sacrificed for an area the indigenous people refused to fight for and the World expects us to do the dirty work. The US has recently downsized the military and less than 0.4% serve on active duty, but they will carry the burden. When they return home, the VA system is struggling to provide care and the veteran suicide rate is high.

Donal Trump, whom I do not support, has stated his desire to carpet bomb. I see merit in it to save our troops from meaningless sacrifice. Dana, I hate to throw you under the bus, but you said it was better to see soldiers die than civilian casualties. I recommend you start a grass roots campaign to send British troops to Syria and state you would rather see soldiers die than risk civilian casualties.

Guys, remember this only a political discussion and no matter what I love you all.

[xoxoxoBruce]

United Nations data

Previously, PolitiFact has examined claims about Syrian refugees. In October, Donald Trump said "there aren't that many women; there aren't that many children" among Syrian refugees. We ranked that statement False.

The United Nations keeps track of more than 4 million registered Syrian refugees, with an online database that includes specific demographic data.

Let’s start by leaving out the other qualifiers — young and able-bodied — and look at whether the "vast majority" of refugees are men. We need not split hairs on what constitutes a "vast majority" here, since the gender breakdown is pretty evenly split; in hard numbers, the majority of refugees is actually female.

Further, to look at only the male refugees – which amount to 49.7 percent of the total – less than half of that population is age 18 or older. Men ages 18 to 59 comprise about 22 percent of all Syrian refugees.

Contrary to Fiorina’s statement, most refugees overall are children age 17 or younger.

[DanaC]

Originally Posted by Big Sarge

Dana, I hate to throw you under the bus, but you said it was better to see soldiers die than civilian casualties. I recommend you start a grass roots campaign to send British troops to Syria and state you would rather see soldiers die than risk civilian casualties.
.

That is not what I said.