Originally Posted by Hyde
You mean a disruption that *isn't* ISIS liquidating their captured oil reserves?
In the petroworld, terrorist attacks on oil are considered the costs of doing business. It's a negligible disruption, comparatively.
Originally Posted by Hyde
The "doming" theory isn't physically feasible, and it was a joke. Containing them must be done through controlling immigration and "aid"/sanctions.
Yeah I know, I just used it as a byword for containment. Containment would fuck up Middle Eastern relations.
Originally Posted by Hyde
We do not rely on the (middle) east for resources as much as you'd think, and blocking immigration is not akin to severe trade restrictions a la Cuba.
Continuing on from my last sentence, how do you think countries that are being blocked will respond? The most common manifestation of power politics is economic sanctions.
US has ramped up domestic production in the past decade, which is great, but OPEC still has considerable influence on every energy market.
Originally Posted by xlr84life
Okayyyyyyyyyyyy, just another internet troll, I shall not waste time of you, should've seen it.
Anyways, apparenlty the Paris terrorist had a history of terrorism, France/other countries should check backgrounds before letting anyone in, that may solve it instead of doming the whole of the middle east, will it? Probably not that easy I think.
"WE ONLY WAGE WAR AND TAKE YOUR LANDS IN SELF DEFENSE!!!"
and i'm the troll
Do you really equate peace with killing nonbelievers unless they concede and believe?
What else should I expect from a muslim? Literally in the scripture. :^)
Hoss.
Originally Posted by Ele
In the petroworld, terrorist attacks on oil are considered the costs of doing business. It's a negligible disruption, comparatively.
Yeah I know, I just used it as a byword for containment. Containment would fuck up Middle Eastern relations.
Continuing on from my last sentence, how do you think countries that are being blocked will respond? The most common manifestation of power politics is economic sanctions.
US has ramped up domestic production in the past decade, which is great, but OPEC still has considerable influence on every energy market.
Who would economic sanctions hurt more? Them or the rest of the world? The only reason Iran was able to survive sanctions in the 70s is because the leaders were okay with sacrificing their people's quality of life.
Hoss.
Originally Posted by Hyde
"WE ONLY WAGE WAR AND TAKE YOUR LANDS IN SELF DEFENSE!!!"
and i'm the troll
Do you really equate peace with killing nonbelievers unless they concede and believe?
What else should I expect from a muslim? Literally in the scripture. :^)
It wasn't a war, it was peaceful march into the city, no one was hurt. They only came to take back their land which they were persecuted.
They were allowed to leave, and no harm was done on them.
No blood was spilt.
I don't know how ignorant you can get
You just try to twist my words cause you got nothing left. Please, it's not professional.
Parkour like you've never seen before:
http://forum.toribash.com/showthread.php?t=423045
http://forum.toribash.com/showthread.php?t=423045
Originally Posted by xlr84life
It wasn't a war, it was peaceful march into the city, no one was hurt. They only came to take back their land which they were persecuted.
They were allowed to leave, and no harm was done on them.
No blood was spilt.
I don't know how ignorant you can get
You just try to twist my words cause you got nothing left. Please, it's not professional.
I am not twisting your words, you do not understand what the words you are using mean.
They must either accept Islam or leave, if they havent done either of them, then they were given permission to kill
Let's break this sentence down so you can understand what it means, shall we?
They must either accept Islam or leave
Phrased as a binary proposition, in actuality it is not. The options afforded to them were to accept Islam, leave, or die.
You worded the latter part as:
if they havent done either of them, then they were given permission to kill
You are saying that you are free to kill them if they do not accept your religion or leave the territory behind. Are you too thick to see the precedent this sets?
No blood was spilt.
Because clearly their leader valued his people's lives far more than your cuntish leaders value yours.
Tone down the brainwashed hogspeak please.
Hoss.
