Best post in the thread so far. Couldn’t agree more.
I’m pretty sure he’s thinking any adherent of Islam is a (potential) terrorist, and yes, the “left”, the ubiquitous solid block we are, would probably stand up against bombing innocent people.
People like this, however, are the reason we are at war every generation: they can’t conceive of not having a Bad Guy or a central conflict. The world is not that black and white, but they keep trying to make it so, and as you said, no one learns how we make new terrorists and how complicit we have been in making them.
- Anaamika, not Muslim, but close enough that the OP probably would boot me out of the country too. Or wait, would I be like the Chinese when the Japanese were interned…? forced to wear a pin that said “I’m Hindu” or maybe sign a loyalty oath?
A-ha! And that’s where they are going to get us. Coffee without caffeine is an Islamist plot.
The OP strengthens my belief then when Hillary is elected, there will be violent civil unrest. His polemic represents the true believers who cannot conceive of any other outcome other than total war against evil. When it doesn’t come about, they are going to to lose it. There will be blood.
Funny to see stuff like this juxtaposed with the OP, who is an obvious loon. Ironic doesn’t begin to tell the tale…
(ETA: I’m hoping Fear at least was speaking tongue in cheek)
Exactly. The OP is a nut and obviously doesn’t have a clue what s/he is actually talking about or any context to put it into. How can ‘the west’ go to war with ‘Islam’?? It doesn’t even make any sense. Would we be going to war with all 1.6 billion Muslims?? It’s so stupid I’m having trouble even making fun of such a ridiculous statement.
I think is is a performance, a parody, or instead of that other word, a masquerade…
It is almost as if there wasn’t a Republican candidate for President- the leading candidate, mind you, proposing that Muslims be banned from entering the U.S.
That would be hyperbolic.
Ignoring the rest of this, as well as somehow getting past the minor detail that “Islam” doesn’t, you know, have an army or a country to attack or anything, one might argue that this is precisely why armed combat in the Middle East and/or against the west has so often taken the form of guerrilla combat. When you are a poor, badly equipped, small force up against a much larger modern force, your best option is to operate in the shadows and avoid direct army-vs-army warfare. As the saying goes, we’re constantly preparing to fight the last war. The US (and the West in general) is admirably equipped for the Cold War to heat up. Not so much for the type of fighting we’ve seen over the last couple of decades.
I would have said - it’s wishful thinking. I think it’s clear that a sizable chunk of the Right wing wants a religious war.
True enough. I’m afraid that many Americans salivate at the thought of genocide against Muslims. If Trump was elected, would he pursue a Final Solution? I wouldn’t bet against it.
Not that he has any real chance, but I’d take that ridiculous bet. Even assuming Trump wanted to kill all the worlds 1.6 billion Muslims (which I doubt), it’s ridiculous to posit that he’d even try, let alone that he could do it. When you say ‘many Americans’ what you really mean is a fractional percentage of a party that can’t even generate 40% of the total vote on it’s own without independents weighing in on it’s side, which means you are talking about something like, well, the small percentage of Muslims who are radical. Ironic, no?
I know these kinds of threads are places for lefty types to blow off steam and vent about Trump et al, but couldn’t you guys at least try and keep it real? Bad enough we have a loony OP spewing right wing fantasy without you guys going off the deep end as well.
What do you have against Indonesians? They’re not involved in this, yet you want to kill them all. Very odd.
The current American system is set up so the president can’t casually embark on genocidal action once elected. However, it is also set up so a candidate is free to say (or imply) that he’ll casually embark on genocidal action once elected.
My personal opinion is that a Trump administration will be too incompetent to wage much of anything.
XT already addressed this but I wanted to reiterate: you honestly think the leading candidate for a major party is likely to bring on another holocaust if elected president?
More evidence that liberals are just as loony as conservatives.
Given the right conditions, hell yes. Suppose a Muslim terrorist cell manages to kill say 20,000 in a US attack. You don’t think a President Trump would use this to push for extreme measures against Muslims and extreme authority to achieve them?
Let’s try Reading For Comprehension, shall we? There is a difference between believing that someone is capable of pursuing a goal and believing that someone is capable of pulling it off. If Trump is elected, I think it’s just going to be like when Bush was in, but worse-A lot of alternating between “You can’t do that” and “You really shouldn’t have done that”, and more Americans abroad pretending to be Canadian.
Come on guys, look, B & P ain’t so bad.
And then you double down. His words were “If Trump was elected, would he pursue a Final Solution? I wouldn’t bet against it.”. He thinks that it is likely that Trump (if elected) would pursue a Nazi-style holocaust. None of us have said he would succeed but BobLibDem believes Trump would attempt a Nazi-style holocaust. That is just plain nutty, even for Trump. It’s just as bad as the right-wing nuts fearing that Obama is coming after their guns.
well maybe I should not have been so joking in the other thread…
I’m saying he would try to mobilize support for it and if he got it, he would definitely do it. Whether he got it or not depends on the political climate of the time. If you don’t think it could happen here, I suppose many Germans thought the same in 1930.