Israel vs Palestinians

[McDad]

There are 2 big problems with thinking you, as hypothetical POTUS, can "send a message" once or twice, say, killing 40k Palestinians over hostages and expecting the message to be permanently received....

1) terrorists aren't exactly rational and I don't think it's consistently the deterrent it would be for a western power. Some terrorist will think twice. Some will not GAF. Again, some want to goad us into action.

2) there is no guarantee at all that your actions will have a lasting impact bc you aren't going to be POTUS for the next 40 years. You'll be out of office in 2 years and terrorists will be curious about testing the next guy, whether or not he will take a heavy hand.

It's like the border. Trump tried to be tough. Illegal entry was growing still big time by year 4 and then even more with his successor hecause of how he is perceived, despite the fact that there isn't much difference in policy at the border. These things never work neatly like the fancy government planners think they will.

We've been here a long time. Literally no idea ever discussed on this board became a plank in a president's platform or became SOP for America.

I don't think it is reasonable to refute the discussion points with "it isn't viable given our system"

 

[n_huffhines]

The answer is you never reward bad behavior.

There are other things at stake besides compromising this standard^.

 

[n_huffhines]

We've been here a long time. Literally no idea ever discussed on this board became a plank in a president's platform or became SOP for America.

I don't think it is reasonable to refute the discussion points with "it isn't viable given our system"

I'm on the other side of the planet on this one. Everything should be considered in this light. That's how you make the best policy. That's what separates good policy from bad policy.

Trump should have been going for border policy that would have a lasting impact. He just wanted to send a message to voters and immigrants. It only worked on voters

 

[jp1]

There are other things at stake besides compromising this standard^.

Sure there is, but if the end result of your decision is to reward bad behavior, then you better rethink your decision.

 

[jp1]

There are 2 big problems with thinking you, as hypothetical POTUS, can "send a message" once or twice, say, killing 40k Palestinians over hostages and expecting the message to be permanently received....

1) terrorists aren't exactly rational and I don't think it's consistently the deterrent it would be for a western power. Some terrorist will think twice. Some will not GAF. Again, some want to goad us into action.

2) there is no guarantee at all that your actions will have a lasting impact bc you aren't going to be POTUS for the next 40 years. You'll be out of office in 2 years and terrorists will be curious about testing the next guy, whether or not he will take a heavy hand.

It's like the border. Trump tried to be tough. Illegal entry was growing still big time by year 4 and then even more with his successor hecause of how he is perceived, despite the fact that there isn't much difference in policy at the border. These things never work neatly like the fancy government planners think they will.

Not much difference in policy? You can't be serious.

 

[norrislakevol]

**** no. This is asking for perpetual war

The Islamist world understands two things, and two things only: Money, and fear. If you don't want to pay them then you have to kill them. Paying them is only temporary, they keep acting out to get more and more. We only half-azz kill them, just like Israel. You have to make them afraid of you if you want a long-term solution, and this can be done, but no one has the stones to do it.

 

[Vol8188]

My position is that any action has an unintended consequence factor associated with it.

As does inaction. A position Huff intentionally seems to ignore

 

[n_huffhines]

Not much difference in policy? You can't be serious.

Name them

 

[n_huffhines]

The Islamist world understands two things, and two things only: Money, and fear. If you don't want to pay them then you have to kill them. Paying them is only temporary, they keep acting out to get more and more. We only half-azz kill them, just like Israel. You have to make them afraid of you if you want a long-term solution, and this can be done, but no one has the stones to do it.

We don't have the money, bro. We're already trillions in the hole fighting them and we didn't make a dent

 

[jp1]

Name them

Are the results different?

 

[McDad]

I'm on the other side of the planet on this one. Everything should be considered in this light. That's how you make the best policy. That's what separates good policy from bad policy.

Trump should have been going for border policy that would have a lasting impact. He just wanted to send a message to voters and immigrants. It only worked on voters

I understand. And I would agree with you if we served in an advisory role or at the behest of CiC. But we aren't making policy. And no politician is running or legislating on the ideas we're discussing.

In many ways, we talk about things we think are good or better which have no chance of ever becoming policy.

What are your thoughts on my child tantrum hypothetical?

 

[McDad]

As does inaction. A position Huff intentionally seems to ignore

He didn't ignore. He mentioned that in a post yesterday. I saw it as I read through and caught up on the thread.

 

[EasternVol]

We once had hostages held in Iran for an extended period of time with a weak president trying diplomacy. A new president was elected and said if our people are not back by the time I’m in charge I’m going to **** you up big time.
It’s amazing but those hostages were returned before the new guy took office.

It’s like a real time example of the failure of what the dipsticks want and absolute proof of the validity of what you’re saying.

Either you'll believe anything or you expect other people to believe anything.
edit - just to clarify, it's generally accepted that the Reagan camp made a deal with the Ayatollahs to delay release of the hostages and the tale as told above is a fable.

 

[dalton_vol]

The Islamist world understands two things, and two things only: Money, and fear. If you don't want to pay them then you have to kill them. Paying them is only temporary, they keep acting out to get more and more. We only half-azz kill them, just like Israel. You have to make them afraid of you if you want a long-term solution, and this can be done, but no one has the stones to do it.

Yep, the Muslim have took control of much of American policy since 9-11. The screamed racism to every liberal and moderate political and they caved. They also worked with many pro-marxist groups in America and Europe.

England has dies right before our eye from the immigration nightmare. They are sentencing English citizens years in prison for making posts yet they are protecting the immigrants. How can I country just betray itself. America is happening the same

 

[Orangeslice13]

He didn't ignore. He mentioned that in a post yesterday. I saw it as I read through and caught up on the thread.

in a way he still ignores those facts because they contradict how he wants things to be.

 

[hog88]

Ever had a stray dog follow you because you stopped giving another dog food?

What?

 

[n_huffhines]

I understand. And I would agree with you if we served in an advisory role or at the behest of CiC. But we aren't making policy. And no politician is running or legislating on the ideas we're discussing.

In many ways, we talk about things we think are good or better which have no chance of ever becoming policy.

What are your thoughts on my child tantrum hypothetical?

I am talking about what we should do, in other words, because this is foreign policy, what I would do if I were POTUS.

The child's tantrum is an interesting parallel that doesn't exactly translate because Hamas is not a child I am raising or living with. It's more like multiple kids on the other side of the state throwing tantrums, and I don't need to be involved in that.

 

[jp1]

Good luck McDad. He knows where this question is going.

 

[85SugarVol]

Name them

Weren’t there like 97 that the current administration proudly claimed they were ending “day one”?

 

[EasternVol]

Is the "us" in your reply an America "us" or a global "us".

And who or what is RTX?

It's whoever follows that path.
RTX is the result of the merger of Raytheon and UTC / Collins. $69 billion in revenue and $3.5 billion EBIT in 2023 for those keeping score at home.

 

[EasternVol]

Care to give your explanation of what was written?

Why don't you just read it?

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

I am also in favor of a FAFO approach but I also don’t think now is the time to be traipsing about abroad as an American unless you really have to… and my husband and I disagree on that one

The key to that is to not look and act like an American. Don't wear American clothes. Keep your voice down. Years ago I sat on a bench in Paris with a street weenie and just watched people. Americans are loud, obnoxious and easy to pick out by the way they dress. The term 'ugly American' is a stereotype based in fact.

Ymmv.

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

Believe what you want, but this is based on absolutely nothing

September 11 says hi.

 

[McDad]

in a way he still ignores those facts because they contradict how he wants things to be.

I disagree with your assessment.

His post:

But it doesn't cost anything and it doesn't kill thousands of people.

If another terrorist cell kidnaps some Americans and their demand is we cut off funding to country X, I'll take that as an unintended consequence. It's a much better outcome than war, or almost any heavy measure imaginable.

shows he isn't ignoring untintended consequences of his ideas.

I think it is more accurate to say huff believes the unintended consequences of his idea are better than the unintended consequence of my idea.

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

If we killed say 10,000 and then announce that's our warning shot. If this happens again, anywhere in the world, our next response will be a serious response.

We didn't have the stones. We really won't with a president heelsUp