PkrBum wrote:But it was OK when Obama couldn't call radical Islamic terrorists by name. Amiright?
Exactly how many standards do you live by?
I don't have a problem saying "radical Islamic terrorists." Because the word "radical" is in there. I disagree with all religions -- I think belief in gods is silly and childish, but I do know that most people go into religions with good intentions. And as philosophies, most religions are good. So, I don't fear Muslims any more than I fear Christians (less, actually - I've had more Christians do violence to me for not going to church than I have Muslims). Most Christians and Muslims are fine, and a lot of 'em are good people. But, you radicalize
anybody and you end up with dangerous idiots. So, pointing out that radicalized Islamists practice terrorism, absolutely. So do radicalized Christians.
Obama clearly targeted Islamic extremism and killed a lot of their leaders. I didn't agree with him for not using the words -- I would have, and I do -- but, his stance regarding them was clear by his actions. He gave the go-ahead to missions that put a lot of the bastards in the ground. I'm pretty goddamn sure ISIS was under no illusions about Obama being on their side.
Will Trump do the same with the White Nationalists? They're as much an enemy of the American way as ISIS. And they're in our borders already. What's he going to do about it? So far he's not even sending the message that he doesn't support them. They feel like he DOES. David Duke flat-out said he was "fullfilling Donald Trump's promise."
He's too needy for their love to stand up to them. And so they feel that he has their back, and they're emboldened to keep on doing what they're doing. So do the Russians, for the same reason -- Trump sees Putin as a big tough guy and wants him to be his "fwiend," so when Putin kicks out our diplomats, lickspittle Trump
thanks him.
Does that not embarrass you?
Hell, I'm starting to wonder if anything does.