O admin insists Ft. Hood shooting is workplace violence

Protectionist · Dec 11, 2013

David said:
Saddam was a Muslim hating atheist.

FALSE! He was a Sunni Muslim.

David · Dec 11, 2013

Protectionist said:
EARTH TO DAVID: The US troops are in Afghanistan for 2 basic reasons:

1. To deny al Qaeda the use of the non-nation (Afghanistan) to hold bomb-making schools, with which the graduates can come to the US and kill Americans. In 2013, you don't know this ? We've only been there for 10 years. Sheeeesh.

2. Even more importantly, to be in close proximity to Pakistan's 100+ nuclear warheads, so that if the fragile Paki govt were to be toppled by Islamist loons (who are in abundance there), th eUS troops could quickly move in to secure those nukes lest they be acquired by Al Qaeda, the Taliban, Lashar Toiba, et al Islamist loonies. In essence, we are preventing the annilhilation of the USA. Thousands of US troops don't die for no good reason. This isn't the 1960's with a bunch of nut cases promoting a Vietnam type war situation. Far from it.

The $1,000,000,000,000 in lithium deposits couldn't have anything to do with it...

don't try to mask your geopolitical ignorance behind mass produced sectarian talking points.

Protectionist · Dec 12, 2013

David said:
The $1,000,000,000,000 in lithium deposits couldn't have anything to do with it...

don't try to mask your geopolitical ignorance behind mass produced sectarian talking points.

So you deny the 2 reasons I stated for US military action in Afghanistan ?

PS - if I listed all the business interest reason$ speculated about US military involvement, that I've heard over the past 50 years, my computer night burn out. Ever hear the one about tin and tungsten in Vietnam ? I t happened to be true. But only an idiot would believe that was the reason for the war.

And you think the 2 reasons I stated are "mass produced sectarian talking points" ? If you do, you are worse off than just ignorant. You are programmed.

Think logically. What does 100+ nuclear warheads, in a country with tens of millions of jihadist Muslims (perhaps the majority), and a fragile central government, all combine to equal ? Think hard.
If you can't come up with the answer, I have a few 5th grade friends who could easily explain it to you. As a March 2010 Harvard study reported, Pakistan's nuclear stockpile "faces a greater threat from Islamic extremists seeking nuclear weapons than any other nuclear stockpile on earth." One of the reasons is the amazing way that Pakistan "secures" their nukes. The move them from place to place constantly - and move them in prdianry cargo vans, through ordinary traffic, placing them highly susceptible to terrorist attack.
Pakistan has emerged as the world's number one source of Jehadi suicide bombers and ground zero for the training of Islamic terrorists around the world."

http://www.nation.com.pk/national/2...kes-pose-more-danger-than-iran-us-ex-official

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/11/pakistan-nukes-delivery-vans/

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/drishtikone/2011/11/are-pakistani-nukes-danger-going-jehadis/

http://www.thetrumpet.com/article/8...greater-danger-of-nuclear-war-says-think-tank

http://video.search.yahoo.com/search/video?p=Danger+of+Pakistan+nukes

David · Dec 12, 2013

If you don't think we and India have a plan for that, your a fool. What presence we have left is only to keep the gov't in power, no other reason. Hell we want the Taliban in gov't so we can have some level of control over them.

Protectionist · Dec 15, 2013

David said:
If you don't think we and India have a plan for that, your a fool. What presence we have left is only to keep the gov't in power, no other reason. Hell we want the Taliban in gov't so we can have some level of control over them.

SUre, that's why US troops ran them out of town, and kill them every chance they get. Want to buy a bridge in Brooklyn ?

As for a "plan", what kind of plan allows nuclear warheads to be transported around the country in ordinary, non-secured vans, through ordinary traffic (where terrorists could get at them) ? Think about this some more.

David · Dec 16, 2013

Protectionist said:
SUre, that's why US troops ran them out of town, and kill them every chance they get. Want to buy a bridge in Brooklyn ?

As for a "plan", what kind of plan allows nuclear warheads to be transported around the country in ordinary, non-secured vans, through ordinary traffic (where terrorists could get at them) ? Think about this some more.

A plan that involves the CIA, India's equivalent and predator drones ready to drop a missile at a moments notice.

Protectionist · Dec 17, 2013

David said:
A plan that involves the CIA, India's equivalent and predator drones ready to drop a missile at a moments notice.

No matter what, it's pretty stupis ans insecure when it allows nuclear warheads to be transported around the country in ordinary, non-secured vans, through ordinary traffic (facilitating terrorist acquisition of those warheads)

PS - you got a link for your 3 mentions ?

Polydectes · Dec 18, 2013

Protectionist said:
This clearly shows you don't know what you're talking about. You keep talking as if the "enemy" is only some jihadists gunners thousands of miles away in Asia. What about the enemy right here in the USA. What about the thousands of non-violent, subversive attacks going on for over 20 years. The fact that you don't address yourself to these when I mention them indicates to me that mist likely you are oblivious to them,a nd have no idea what I'm talking about. So again >> who is Lina Morales ? What important things starts with the word "Explanatory" ? Who is Phil Alden Robinson ? Who is Peter DiGangi ? Hasham Islam ? Michael Graham ?

To be honest I have never heard of these names, I searched them, Luna Morales bright up some face book accounts. The only Phil Alden Robinson I saw was a movie director, nothing on peter DiGangi. I didn't find anything on Hasham Islam. I saw a pro wrestler named Michael graham.

Who are these people indeed?