Teenage Boy Killed In Samurai Sword...
News2 mins ago
Tackle Is Threat ' By All Means '
UN back call to tackle IS threat 'By All Means '
http://
http://
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by tonyav. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Good.
I like the term, "by all means". It suggests that nothing is off the table.
The world has a cancer. It is goes by many names but it can be succinctly described as fundamental Islam.
When one has a virulent cancer, you can be sure of one thing: if left unchecked, it will spread. It will destroy everything in its path to the point where it even kills the host. The only solution to a virulent cancer is to eradicate it completely. Often the treatment for a virulent cancer causes the host great pain and comes at great cost to the host.
However, if the host is to survive, the cancer must be ruthlessly wiped out.
I like the term, "by all means". It suggests that nothing is off the table.
The world has a cancer. It is goes by many names but it can be succinctly described as fundamental Islam.
When one has a virulent cancer, you can be sure of one thing: if left unchecked, it will spread. It will destroy everything in its path to the point where it even kills the host. The only solution to a virulent cancer is to eradicate it completely. Often the treatment for a virulent cancer causes the host great pain and comes at great cost to the host.
However, if the host is to survive, the cancer must be ruthlessly wiped out.
I agree.
We (the UK and other EU nations) have ignored the danger posed by fundamental Islam for far too long. The Russians have had this on their doorstep for many years, hence Putin's hard-line stance on this matter.
Putin knows the threat that fundamental Islam poses to the world. Our current EU leaders appear blind to it. Why? I cannot fathom.
They seem to think that the mass importation of Islamic culture and peoples are a good thing for the West. I often wonder on what criteria they have come to this conclusion.
We (the UK and other EU nations) have ignored the danger posed by fundamental Islam for far too long. The Russians have had this on their doorstep for many years, hence Putin's hard-line stance on this matter.
Putin knows the threat that fundamental Islam poses to the world. Our current EU leaders appear blind to it. Why? I cannot fathom.
They seem to think that the mass importation of Islamic culture and peoples are a good thing for the West. I often wonder on what criteria they have come to this conclusion.
http://
Perhaps this will help dave get a YES vote in Parliament over action in Syria.
I am far from being a hawk but I can't see any alternative to getting together on an international basis to defeat this murderous and backward ISIS regime. We can hardly invite them to a peace conference can we ?
A tough decision but a tough situation calls for it.
As an aside, it looks as it Belgium could be next in line :::
http://
Perhaps this will help dave get a YES vote in Parliament over action in Syria.
I am far from being a hawk but I can't see any alternative to getting together on an international basis to defeat this murderous and backward ISIS regime. We can hardly invite them to a peace conference can we ?
A tough decision but a tough situation calls for it.
As an aside, it looks as it Belgium could be next in line :::
http://
TWR - much as I think IS and all similar extremists need to be dealt with, we need to remember that the Taliban defeated the mighty Soviet war machine in Afghanistan, then a generation later they defeated the combined efforts of the US-led campaign.
We don't call them the Taliban but these are the same that defeated the British colonial force in the 19th century.
Then add to that the way that 'war' has changed. We saw this up close with the IRA bombing campaigns. Every air strike made will lead further down the line to another shopping mall or holiday jet being attacked.
We don't call them the Taliban but these are the same that defeated the British colonial force in the 19th century.
Then add to that the way that 'war' has changed. We saw this up close with the IRA bombing campaigns. Every air strike made will lead further down the line to another shopping mall or holiday jet being attacked.
If 'by all means' is meant to be taken literally then they have to include nukes of any sort. If it is not to be taken literally and is just being used as a common phrase, then it can't be suggesting that nothing is off the table. I think common sense is supposed to be applied. Any country will still need to justify what it is they opt to do. I think the UN may have other rules about specific arms/weapons/behaviour which may take precedence.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles4 mins ago
Crosswords5 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles8 mins ago
News32 mins ago
ChatterBank52 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.