Is Biden right?

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
The difference is Adolf Hitler had an organised army, which you could fight and defeat. Islamic fundamentalists don't have an army, they have guerilla fighters who depend on support from the local population. You can't defeat a guerilla army unless you eradicate the entire population; for every civilian you kill a new guerilla fighter is recruited.

Islamic fundamentalists have the nation of Iran to draw equipment and money and mercenaries from. Hamas is a shining example and so are the insurgents in Iraq.

No doubt, there are factions within society that are Neo-Nazi in origin and in that regard I would agree with you in that you cannot completely destroy such movements, rather, you can only try to prevent them from coming to power over an entire country.

Originally posted by whodey
Islamic fundamentalists have the nation of Iran to draw equipment and money and mercenaries from. Hamas is a shining example and so are the insurgents in Iraq.

No doubt, there are factions within society that are Neo-Nazi in origin and in that regard I would agree with you in that you cannot completely destroy such movements, rather, you can only try to prevent them from coming to power over an entire country.

Iran isn't the only place they get their weapons and training from.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
Iran isn't the only place they get their weapons and training from.

That is very true, however, Iran has been invaluable to the cause.

Originally posted by whodey
That is very true, however, Iran has been invaluable to the cause.

Almost as invaluable as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. They are great propaganda for Islamic insurgents.

Originally posted by ale1552
He says whatever he needs to say, depending on his audience. He sounded alot different when he talked to the Palestinians the day before he talked to the Israelis. He is not going to support Israel in a crisis.

so you have nothing to back this up with? figures

Originally posted by whodey
Kinda like with Hitler? 😉

You see, this is what scares the poopy doo out of me. President Jimmy Carter let the Jennie out of the bottle when he undermined the Shah of Iran and let the Islamic radicals take over. He reasoned that the Shah was corrupt in some ways and that the US should let them fall. Then enters the radicals and almost immediately took ...[text shortened]... the sea and is currently as war with through Hamas? No doubt, Obama is determined to find out.

are you forgetting that the shah was a complete bastard?

Originally posted by mbakunin
are you forgetting that the shah was a complete bastard?

Just like this election we must choose between a lesser of two evils. So tell me, who was the biggest bastard? Was it the Shah or the ayatollah who took over for the Shah? To try and defeat the evils of the Shah, Carter unleashed far greater evil than he suppressed. It's called a lack of judgment.

Originally posted by mbakunin
so you have nothing to back this up with? figures

Just an educated guess. He has been with anti-Israel/ pro-Palestinian people his entire life. Even the church of his choice for 20 years held the same view. So why should he change when he is president? His autobiography states as much.

Originally posted by ale1552
Just an educated guess. He has been with anti-Israel/ pro-Palestinian people his entire life. Even the church of his choice for 20 years held the same view. So why should he change when he is president? His autobiography states as much.

I don't know if I would call it educated, but a guess, yes, I'd call it that.

By your reasoning, John McCain becoming President will be equally bad for Israel since Pastor Hagee, McCain's preacher, said "Hitler was sent by god to kill the Jews".

So it sounds like, once again, the Jews are screwed.

Originally posted by whodey
[President Jimmy Carter] reasoned that the Shah was corrupt in some ways and that the US should let them fall. Then enters the radicals and almost immediately took US hostages and has been engaged in a war against the West ever since.

You should read some histories of this period. Your characterization of it is trite, ill-informed and American-pub-bore-esque.

1st EDIT: added 'ill-informed'
2nd EDIT: added 'trite'

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
The difference is Adolf Hitler had an organised army, which you could fight and defeat. Islamic fundamentalists don't have an army, they have guerilla fighters who depend on support from the local population. You can't defeat a guerilla army unless you eradicate the entire population; for every civilian you kill a new guerilla fighter is recruited.

Guerillas are hard to defeat -- but they cannot win outright, either. They are also very low-cost.

They are the Walmart of warriors -- cheap but effective.

Originally posted by FMF
You should read some histories of this period. Your characterization of it is trite, ill-informed and American-pub-bore-esque.

1st EDIT: added 'ill-informed'
2nd EDIT: added 'trite'

In what way?

Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter
Of course Biden is right. I predict that Nobama will be tested not in Iran, Iraq or North Korea, but by Somali pirates...who will take control of his Pontoon One, and cut his head off on national TV and across the Internet for being an apostate Muslim.

You should send this scenario to Political Fantasy Channel. You might win a prize!

Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter
Of course Biden is right. I predict that Nobama will be tested not in Iran, Iraq or North Korea, but by Somali pirates...who will take control of his Pontoon One, and cut his head off on national TV and across the Internet for being an apostate Muslim.

I say he can sit down with them and "reason" with them.....without preconditions of course.