DescentBB

Erdogan seems intent on completing the religious cleansing of Turkey's historic Christian populations, which began more than a century ago with the Armenian genocide, and later with the genocide and exodus of the Pontic Greek population.

https://pjmedia.com/homeland-security/2 ... -property/

ITT OP shows his double standards.

What I don't understand is why an atheist would even care about one particular religion's plight? And if he really did care, he wouldn't have voted for an autocrat like Trump, who embraces Erodgan because he needs a partner in the fight against ISIS. You can't have it both ways NS. If you support leaders that want to eliminate ISIS, odds are those very same leaders want to eliminate Christians as well.

Tunnelcat wrote:What I don't understand is why an atheist would even care about one particular religion's plight?

Because it's not "just" a religion. These are people being marginalized and dehumanized just as the Jews were in Nazi Germany.

It's a prelude to genocide (just as the Ottoman Empire killed Armenian people in its' genocide of non-muslims before: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_Genocide )

In fact, genocide is written into islamic law. If you are not muslim or submit to islam, you are to be wiped out.

Nightshade wrote:

Tunnelcat wrote:What I don't understand is why an atheist would even care about one particular religion's plight?

Because it's not "just" a religion. These are people being marginalized and dehumanized just as the Jews were in Nazi Germany.

It's a prelude to genocide (just as the Ottoman Empire killed Armenian people in its' genocide of non-muslims before: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_Genocide )

In fact, genocide is written into islamic law. If you are not muslim or submit to islam, you are to be wiped out.

Sooo, that means we need to wipe them out first, all 2.18 billion of them?

Tunnelcat wrote:Sooo, that means we need to wipe them out first, all 2.18 billion of them?

By "them" who do you mean? Christians?

By "them" who do you mean?

She means 2.8 billion muslims, you [Deleted - Personal Shot].

Ferno wrote:She means 2.8 billion muslims, you [Deleted - Personal Shot].

So it's implied that the "only" solution is to commit genocide in kind. Such is the stupidity of the (regressive) left.

I did mean "Muslims" NS. I "assumed" you had reverse genocide in mind when starting this post since you love to trash Muslims and their religion as an entire group at any opportunity. Sure, genocide and forced relocation of people from their homelands is wrong, for ANY reason. Quit blaming your "other" hated group of choice, the left, for what amounts to your own fears and phobias. Both Socialists and Fascists have engaged in that practice all through history and large wars have been fought in response. That's why extremism is evil, no matter which political affiliation engages in it.

What I'd like to know is if you have an idea on how to solve the problem instead of bitching about it. Personally, IMO, our insipid excuse for a "president" needs to quit giving smooches and hugs to a slimeball murdering dictator like Erdogan. I mean even Erdogan's ambassador to the U.S. violently sicked his thugs and supporters on local American anti-Erdogan protestors in front of his own Washington DC residence, ON American soil, and so far he seems to have gotten away with it. Apologize my ass. Almost sounds like something Obama would say that you know Republicans would quickly pounce on as "being weak". I see their spines are just as flimsy too. Trump needs to stand up, quit acting like a juvenile bully, BE the leader of the free world and back the U.S. and it's principles and say what needs to be said, that we will not tolerate Erdogan's thugs committing violence on U.S. soil and that the forced relocation and genocide of Christians in Turkey, or any other country for that matter is WRONG, and that we will back up that threat with action.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/17/us/t ... st-dc.html

NATO needs to step up as well and tighten the screws on Erdogan and any other member of NATO. Since Turkey is a member, NATO needs to put words into action if Erdogan wants to continue to get all the perks of being a member of NATO, like military aid, weapons and protection. No play nice, no weapons, no nothing. But you know how spineless NATO can be when trying to bring it's members into line, weak.

But you do realize that this type of action puts the U.S. right back into the "world police" scheme of things don't you? The very hated ideal that Trump railed about during his campaign? So either we stand up and back up our principles with action, like fighting for justice and taking in the poor and politically oppressed, or sit back, succumb to the vile nationalistic fears running rampant and let ★■◆● happen, all because we don't want to get involved in yet another war in some other country and that we certainly don't want to take in their oppressed refugees out of fears of terrorism. We can't pick only the Christian refugees and expect the world to see us as treating ALL oppressed peoples fairly either. We either adhere to our original founding ideals or we don't. Right now, our nation is very far away from being what we once were. We've become too wrapped up in ourselves and too fearful to care about the rest of the world. I don't even see Trump wanting to help war displaced Muslim Syrians resettle to the U.S in order to escape their own problem of genocide at the hands of a brutal dictator. Trump even created a specific travel ban to bar them from U.S. entry. As Trump would tweet, "SAD".

Nightshade wrote:

Ferno wrote:She means 2.8 billion muslims, you [Deleted - Personal Shot].

So it's implied that the "only" solution is to commit genocide in kind. Such is the stupidity of the (regressive) left.

Nice try, but playing dumb will get you nowhere.

TC, he has no solution. He has no idea. He doesn't even know where to start. If he did, we'd see it by now.

I'd at least like to hear a response from him to my above post at least. If he's got a better solution or idea for the issue he raised in his OP, I'm all ears.

Tunnelcat wrote:I'd at least like to hear a response from him to my above post at least. If he's got a better solution or idea for the issue he raised in his OP, I'm all ears.

Yes- there are concrete things we can do like applying heavier and heavier sanctions against those governments that abridge human rights in any way. Of course many of those things will NEVER be done because those countries "importance" as 'allies' or trading partners outweighs our apparent concern for human rights- Saudi Arabia/Turkey/Pakistan/etc.

It's easy to do against a country like North Korea because we have no strategic common interests with lil' Kim and he's easy to isolate as a pariah among nations to begin with.

You do know sanctions usually hurt the little guy the most.

Have you seen how the average person has to live in NK because of sanctions.

but,sanctions work really well, historically.

Sure…look how well they have worked in Iran, NK, Syria, Cuba and Russia.

And let's not mention how they helped get us into WWII with Japan.

Nightshade wrote:

Tunnelcat wrote:I'd at least like to hear a response from him to my above post at least. If he's got a better solution or idea for the issue he raised in his OP, I'm all ears.

Yes- there are concrete things we can do like applying heavier and heavier sanctions against those governments that abridge human rights in any way. Of course many of those things will NEVER be done because those countries "importance" as 'allies' or trading partners outweighs our apparent concern for human rights- Saudi Arabia/Turkey/Pakistan/etc.

It's easy to do against a country like North Korea because we have no strategic common interests with lil' Kim and he's easy to isolate as a pariah among nations to begin with.

Well NS, as long as any country has some resource or strategic location we need, we'll deal with them as an "ally" even if their leader is the worst despot with the worst human rights record on the planet. Capitalism and national security will always top human rights concerns with this country's foreign policy. In the end, we'll look like the hypocrites we are whenever we whine about how some other nation is treating the least of it's citizens.

Speaking of sanctions, anyone want to wager how it'll take for Trump to lift those sanctions put on Russia by the Obama Administration?

You mean the sanctions that forced Russia to give back Crimea?
You mean the sanctions that are keeping Russian soldiers out of Ukraine?
You mean the sanctions that are making Russia behave in Syria?
You mean the sanctions that will keep Russia from meddling with elections around the world?
You mean the sanctions that prevented Russia from dropping the ransom-ware bomb on Ukraine?

You mean those sanctions?

Spidey wrote:You mean the sanctions that forced Russia to give back Crimea?
You mean the sanctions that are keeping Russian soldiers out of Ukraine?
You mean the sanctions that are making Russia behave in Syria?
You mean the sanctions that will keep Russia from meddling with elections around the world?
You mean the sanctions that prevented Russia from dropping the ransom-ware bomb on Ukraine?

You mean those sanctions?

no, like the sanctions that followed a period of freer trade that ended up bringing down the Soviet Union.
Like the sanctions that got Iran to stop concentrating raw uranium.
Like the sanctions got a few Latin American nations to clean up their acts a bit.
and those are just the American and recent examples.

It took a hell of a lot more than sanctions to bring down the Soviet Union.

Well, many in Congress don't want Trump to remove those sanctions with a stroke of his pen.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-admini ... 01145.html

And Putin has REALLY been trying to get those sanctions removed ever since Obama put them in place. Putin is obviously chafing under those supposedly toothless sanctions.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-russi ... SKCN1091NT

http://observer.com/2017/01/russia-vlad ... ald-trump/

No one has ever said sanctions are toothless, they usually hurt very much...

Good. At least for Putin, I hope they hurt him A LOT. Besides, there's not much else we can do to punish the arrogant autocrat other than start WWIII and that's not a palatable alternative.

Spidey wrote:It took a hell of a lot more than sanctions to bring down the Soviet Union.

true, it also took a concerted effort by an organized and robust State Department for years.........oh, snap!

callmeslick wrote:

Spidey wrote:It took a hell of a lot more than sanctions to bring down the Soviet Union.

true, it also took a concerted effort by an organized and robust State Department for years.........oh, snap!

What State Department? Trump's royal family is handling everything. Tillerson is just a figurehead running a mostly empty department that still contains a few Obama holdovers.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4 ... rginalized

I think that was his point.