Weird as it is to say this we possess too much of a moral compass to "win" in Afghanistan.

nein51 said:

---

Weird as it is to say this we possess too much of a moral compass to "win" in Afghanistan.

---

But do we have a moral obligation to support/assist those who have risked their lives to give us assistance? I think we do.

TexasScientist said:

---

nein51 said:

---

Weird as it is to say this we possess too much of a moral compass to "win" in Afghanistan.

---

But do we have a moral obligation to support/assist those who have risked their lives to give us assistance? I think we do.

---

Nations don't have morals. Nations have interests.

Redbrickbear said:

---

PartyBear said:

---

The premise above that every American wants to wage war against the US is way the fxck off. I in the post above that suspect 90% of America would soundly defeat the 10% who want to wage war against the US and it would not last long at all. Furthermore 10% is probably a high estimate of those who want civil war.

---

Who on this thread is saying every American wants to wage war against the U.S. Federal government?

Lets never forget this thread was started because the liberal President of the United States Joe Biden threated violence against the American people and said they the common people had no chance to defeat the Federal governments military forces unless they had Air force power and nuclear weapons.

A decent amount of twitter and Facebook libs agreed with him gleefully.

Thus the conversation began....with moderates and conservatives pointing out that the US government has been defeated by smaller numbers and by less well armed forces on at least 2 different occasions in the past.

---

The poster above literally said the government would be facing 330 million Americans (that's the whole population).


Most people don't care about this stuff and plenty would be on the side of the government. Even Texas would likely have 50%+ supporting the government.

I'm very cynical about the average citizen's ability to overthrow a "tyrannical government" in 2021 America. I think this aspect of the 2nd amendment has passed us by. Wishful thinking to say otherwise unless the entire military sat out a conflict.

Canon said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

nein51 said:

---

Weird as it is to say this we possess too much of a moral compass to "win" in Afghanistan.

---

But do we have a moral obligation to support/assist those who have risked their lives to give us assistance? I think we do.

---

Nations don't have morals. Nations have interests.

---

Nations are made of people, and they have the capacity for morals. Nations impose morals, i.e. crimes against humanity, Geneva Coventions.

BearTruth13 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

---

Well that is dark.

---

Well that's why they call it dark humor

Canon said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Canon said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

nein51 said:

---

Weird as it is to say this we possess too much of a moral compass to "win" in Afghanistan.

---

But do we have a moral obligation to support/assist those who have risked their lives to give us assistance? I think we do.

---

Nations don't have morals. Nations have interests.

---

Nations are made of people, and they have the capacity for morals. Nations impose morals, i.e. crimes against humanity, Geneva Conventions.

---

Nations make errors, but they don't have morals.

---

As I said, nations are made of people, and they (people) have the capacity for morals.

Amen.

As Steve Earl sang, "They always draft the white trash first anyway."

We'd have never fought much less won a single war without scots Irish white trash.

Redbrickbear said:

---

BearTruth13 said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

---

Well that is dark.

---

Well that's why they call it dark humor

---

Pretty fun though.

Whenever these stupid gun control debates start I always hear Hank.

I hear Merle.

Robert Wilson said:

---

Amen.

As Steve Earl sang, "They always draft the white trash first anyway."

We'd have never fought much less won a single war without scots Irish white trash.

---

Yep, the Scotch-Irish (Ulster-Scots) are American's only white warrior tribe.

https://www.amazon.com/Born-Fighting-Scots-Irish-Shaped-America/dp/0767916891

Redbrickbear said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

Amen.

As Steve Earl sang, "They always draft the white trash first anyway."

We'd have never fought much less won a single war without scots Irish white trash.

---

Yep, the Scotch-Irish (Ulster-Scots) are American's only white warrior tribe.

https://www.amazon.com/Born-Fighting-Scots-Irish-Shaped-America/dp/0767916891

---

Great book.

Redbrickbear said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

Amen.

As Steve Earl sang, "They always draft the white trash first anyway."

We'd have never fought much less won a single war without scots Irish white trash.

---

Yep, the Scotch-Irish (Ulster-Scots) are American's only white warrior tribe.

https://www.amazon.com/Born-Fighting-Scots-Irish-Shaped-America/dp/0767916891

---

There's some Germans that might suggest different.

Canon said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Robert Wilson said:

---

Amen.

As Steve Earl sang, "They always draft the white trash first anyway."

We'd have never fought much less won a single war without scots Irish white trash.

---

Yep, the Scotch-Irish (Ulster-Scots) are American's only white warrior tribe.

https://www.amazon.com/Born-Fighting-Scots-Irish-Shaped-America/dp/0767916891

---

There's some Germans that might suggest different.

---

Very few. Most of them sat it out

Canon said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

nein51 said:

---

Weird as it is to say this we possess too much of a moral compass to "win" in Afghanistan.

---

But do we have a moral obligation to support/assist those who have risked their lives to give us assistance? I think we do.

---

Nations don't have morals. Nations have interests.

---

How you assert your interests can be based on values.

quash said:

---

Canon said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

nein51 said:

---

Weird as it is to say this we possess too much of a moral compass to "win" in Afghanistan.

---

But do we have a moral obligation to support/assist those who have risked their lives to give us assistance? I think we do.

---

Nations don't have morals. Nations have interests.

---

How you assert your interests can be based on values.

---

Values are not morals. Insofar as what a country values informs what it considers its interests, sure. A country with an interest in maintaining sovereignty will value adherence to and enforcement of immigration laws. A country with an interest in remaining a country will value a strong military and honor those who serve. A country with an interest in economic prosperity will value free speech, free markets and limited domestic government/regulation. A country with an interest in pursuing full employment will value conservative fiscal policy and restrained transfer payments.

None of those are morals. Nations don't have morals.

Canon said:

---

quash said:

---

Canon said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

nein51 said:

---

Weird as it is to say this we possess too much of a moral compass to "win" in Afghanistan.

---

But do we have a moral obligation to support/assist those who have risked their lives to give us assistance? I think we do.

---

Nations don't have morals. Nations have interests.

---

How you assert your interests can be based on values.

---

Values are not morals. Insofar as what a country values informs what it considers its interests, sure. A country with an interest in maintaining sovereignty will value adherence to and enforcement of immigration laws. A country with an interest in remaining a country will value a strong military and honor those who serve. A country with an interest in economic prosperity will value free speech, free markets and limited domestic government/regulation. A country with an interest in pursuing full employment will value conservative fiscal policy and restrained transfer payments.

None of those are morals. Nations don't have morals.

---

And the citizens of the country should not be misled about the status of the country's sovereignty, military, or economy.

Canon said:

---

quash said:

---

Canon said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

nein51 said:

---

Weird as it is to say this we possess too much of a moral compass to "win" in Afghanistan.

---

But do we have a moral obligation to support/assist those who have risked their lives to give us assistance? I think we do.

---

Nations don't have morals. Nations have interests.

---

How you assert your interests can be based on values.

---

Values are not morals. Insofar as what a country values informs what it considers its interests, sure. A country with an interest in maintaining sovereignty will value adherence to and enforcement of immigration laws. A country with an interest in remaining a country will value a strong military and honor those who serve. A country with an interest in economic prosperity will value free speech, free markets and limited domestic government/regulation. A country with an interest in pursuing full employment will value conservative fiscal policy and restrained transfer payments.

None of those are morals. Nations don't have morals.

---

Yet a nation's laws and policies reflect the morals and culture of its people, and a nation is an organized collection of people.

The Taliban now controls 25 of Afghanistan's 34 provinces. Given the fall of Daykundi & current state of play, @LongWarJournal assesses Samangan, Balkh & Baghlan as Taliban controlled. Given what we have witnessed, whatever resistance that may exist is immaterial. pic.twitter.com/6LLJQHu4TG

— Bill Roggio (@billroggio) August 15, 2021

Osodecentx said:

---

Rawhide said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

This thread is like a drunken frat party. I mean, I guess it was Friday last night, so Miss Black would be proud.

I've never met anyone who thought the insurrection standed a chance, but crazy does seem to attract more crazy, so you are the posters who would know.

---

It was only a matter of time before a bitter democrat showed up to give us his sour grapes when it was pointed out how absurd his party's characterizations of the "insurrection" have been.

---

It was an insurrection led and executed by morons

---

I would describe it as more of a ridiculous protest than anything. Were there some who participated who wanted to topple the govt.? Perhaps, but most were there to voice their displeasure or throw tantrums.

In terms of actual violence, we saw BLM protests that were far worse.

---

Agree that we saw BLM violence that was worse, but not in the nation's capitol disrupting a Constitutionally mandated duty. Location, location, location

There were many sheeple who believed Trump and are paying the price.

---

The BLMers and antifers broke into, torched and destroyed federal buildings.... all the while demanding that gov't law enforcement be defunded and disbanded.

Sorry cupcake, if you're going to try to pass off what happened at the Capitol as an insurrection, then anyone with half a brain has to recognize what occurred over the summer, for months, at least amounted to the same thing.

---

What happened at the Capitol was an insurrection. Violence was used to break into the Capitol to disrupt the Constitutionally mandated duties of Congress.

What happened in Seattle a nd other cities last summer was a violent riot/looting, clearly criminals committing crimes. For some reason it is important to you that the two be equivalent. In my mind they are not because of the location. Both sets of perps should be prosecuted.

The lack of prosecution in Seattle does not excuse the violent invasion of the US Senate.

---

Why weren't the Kavanaugh protesters denounced as insurrectionists?

https://trendingpolitics.com/flashback-anti-kavanaugh-protesters-banged-on-doors-of-supreme-court-occupied-capitol-building/

JXL said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Rawhide said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

This thread is like a drunken frat party. I mean, I guess it was Friday last night, so Miss Black would be proud.

I've never met anyone who thought the insurrection standed a chance, but crazy does seem to attract more crazy, so you are the posters who would know.

---

It was only a matter of time before a bitter democrat showed up to give us his sour grapes when it was pointed out how absurd his party's characterizations of the "insurrection" have been.

---

It was an insurrection led and executed by morons

---

I would describe it as more of a ridiculous protest than anything. Were there some who participated who wanted to topple the govt.? Perhaps, but most were there to voice their displeasure or throw tantrums.

In terms of actual violence, we saw BLM protests that were far worse.

---

Agree that we saw BLM violence that was worse, but not in the nation's capitol disrupting a Constitutionally mandated duty. Location, location, location

There were many sheeple who believed Trump and are paying the price.

---

The BLMers and antifers broke into, torched and destroyed federal buildings.... all the while demanding that gov't law enforcement be defunded and disbanded.

Sorry cupcake, if you're going to try to pass off what happened at the Capitol as an insurrection, then anyone with half a brain has to recognize what occurred over the summer, for months, at least amounted to the same thing.

---

What happened at the Capitol was an insurrection. Violence was used to break into the Capitol to disrupt the Constitutionally mandated duties of Congress.

What happened in Seattle a nd other cities last summer was a violent riot/looting, clearly criminals committing crimes. For some reason it is important to you that the two be equivalent. In my mind they are not because of the location. Both sets of perps should be prosecuted.

The lack of prosecution in Seattle does not excuse the violent invasion of the US Senate.

---

Why weren't the Kavanaugh protesters denounced as insurrectionists?

https://trendingpolitics.com/flashback-anti-kavanaugh-protesters-banged-on-doors-of-supreme-court-occupied-capitol-building/

---

They were pathetic.