Anyone wanting on or off this ping list, please advise.
Benghazi Index
Posted on 06/18/2013 3:56:40 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
I’m not defending jihadist but is this barbaric picture much different than sucking out the brains from an innocent fetus inside a women’s womb?
We probably ought to arrange to ship them out of there ~ their cousins are, after all, some of our larger taxpayers.
If you leave it up to the Moslems all the Christians will be killed.
It shows up during the 30 years war several times, and it pops up here and there all the way to the modern age where 'glass parking lot' has exceeded it for vitriol.
Intelligent people understand it for the literary reference it is ~ unlearned people might imagine it to be something on the order of a real threat.
I'd say it's NOT worth a 'strong language/violence warning ' ~ whatever that is.
BTW, Kain’tuckee wasn’t worth a darn in basketball this year. What happen?
Cal had a couple of freshmen jump to the pros somewhat unexpectedly after the National Championship.
That, coupled with a relatively weak freshmen class, caused the team makeup to be unbalanced. They had weak point guards (a walk-on was the primary backup) and never developed a good chemistry.
Next year will be interesting. They supposedly have one of the best recruiting classes ever. But that was also said about Michigan’s Fab Five and look how many national championships THEY won. (Zero)
Obama may not be a practicing Muslim but he is certainly a Muslim sympathizer.
I read a part of the Koran that describes a woman follower of Mohammed who cut out the liver of an enemy and ate it. If Mohammed’s followers did it I guess it’s okay.
Palin was not trying to make light of a terrible situation in Syria. What she was doing was expressing the thoughts of the vast majority of people who are tired of us sending aid to people who hate us or sending our sons and daughters to lands to be killed or maimed.
Put in the context of what has become known as the Palin Doctrine, her remarks were clear, succinct, and unambiguous.
Oh, you don’t know what the Palin Doctrine is? She spelled it out in a speech in 2011 to military families at the Colorado Cristian University. In the speech she said:
“There’s a lesson here then for the effective use of force, as opposed to sending our troops on missions that are ill-defined. And it can be argued that our involvement elsewhere, say in Libya, is an example of a lack of clarity. See, these are deadly serious questions that we must ask ourselves when we contemplate sending Americans into harm’s way. Our men and women in uniform deserve a clear understanding of U.S. positions on such a crucial decision. I believe our criteria before we send our young men and women—America’s finest—into harm’s way should be spelled out clearly when it comes to the use of our military force. I can tell you what I believe that criteria should be in five points.”
“First, we should only commit our forces when clear and vital American interests are at stake. Period.”
“Second, if we have to fight, we fight to win. To do that, we use overwhelming force. We only send our troops into war with the objective to defeat the enemy as quickly as possible. We do not stretch out our military with open-ended and ill-defined missions. Nation building is a nice idea in theory, but it is not the main purpose of our armed forces. We use our military to win wars.”
“And third, we must have clearly defined goals and objectives before sending troops into harm’s way. If you can’t explain the mission to the American people clearly and concisely, then our sons and daughters should not be sent into battle. Period.”
“Fourth, American soldiers must never be put under foreign command. We will fight side by side with our allies, but American soldiers must remain under the care and the command of American officers.”
“Fifth, sending in our armed forces should be the last resort. We don’t go looking for dragons to slay. However, we will encourage the forces of freedom around the world who are sincerely fighting for the empowerment of the individual. When it makes sense, when it’s appropriate, we will provide them with material support to help them win their own freedom.”
“We are not indifferent to the cause of human rights or the desire for freedom. We are always on the side of both. But we can’t fight every war. We can’t undo every injustice around the world. But with strength and clarity in those five points, we’ll make for a safer, more prosperous, more peaceful world because as the U.S. leads by example, as we support freedom across the globe, we’re going to prove that free and healthy countries don’t wage war on other free and healthy countries. The stronger we are, the stronger and more peaceful the world will be under our example.”
Palin expressed what most Americans feel. The left likes to paint her as a neocon. Her doctrine on foreign interventions says differently.
Every time somebody says 'gee, we probably shouldn't write anymore laws' ~ that's what happened to islam. it's a catastrophe!
I live in Cal. Not only do I want no more laws I want 50% of them deleted. Is that too Sharia for you?
Your idea of getting rid of laws is not part of how Sharia got developed. ~ so you luck out on that. Read closely!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.