How to stop a school shooter? Something for you to consider personally!

[Major Lambda]

Yes but you are trying to be clever and weird. Anyone who is intelligent with a brain will know what I meant someone who has the intelligence of a rock cannot!

Not unless the OP is enjoying mind games.

Bad guys act , then counter the action with the appropriate force with the least amount of danger to the counter terror team and any innocents , in the smallest time possible.

Airstrike on a school. Really ! Really ignorant.



M-L

[Major Lambda]

Yes but you are trying to be clever and weird. Anyone who is intelligent with a brain will know what I meant someone who has the intelligence of a rock cannot!

Your scenario sounds like one of those can't win, multiple answers possible , psyche assessments. One of those frustrate you, get your goat , your answer can be cut in half head shrink questions.


Major Lambda

[RadioGod]

Not unless the OP is enjoying mind games.

Bad guys act , then counter the action with the appropriate force with the least amount of danger to the counter terror team and any innocents , in the smallest time possible.

Airstrike on a school. Really ! Really ignorant.



M-L

I thought the point was well made- we would be up in arms if we treated our own kids the way we treat kids in foreign combat zones.
I see it as a way to point out our hypocrisy as a society. We always claim we are bringing freedom and fighting injustice in the places we are bombing. Or just fighting terrorism, in some cases. But we are contributing to collapses of societies that leads to destablization of government and infrastructure, and oftentimes inspires more terror in the populace. Yet, these are not the values we promote for ourselves at home. America is two-faced, like a schitzophrenic. Since nobody wants to be considered mentally ill, it is far easier to attack the person that points out the illness. But not directly, it has to be done by taking some aspect of their explanation and arguing that.
There are situations I can see myself where civilian casualties would be a horrifying necessity. But I would rather risk my life or other American soldier's lives rather than a single foreign civilian life. And if we were fighting in a real war where we were defending ourselves and felt fully justified, we wouldn't be worried about risking our lives. We would prefer the fight to be up close and personal.
With that mentality, we wouldn't call in an airstrike to take out an apartment building, in the hopes that we wouldn't die and not make it home. We would clench knives in our teeth and flood into the building to teach them the meaning of a fight. And the civilians probably wouldn't care what we did, because they would be safe.

[RadioGod]

Fortunately that did not happen.

You just haven't taken a good, honest look around yourself. Try it. Embrace you inner marxist. Give in to the dark side

[RadioGod]

Facts, evidence, and logic = anti-American.

Damn, you pegged it all right there. Kudos

[RadioGod]

WTF are you talking about? WE are talking, as the OP indicated, school shootings. Either get in the game or please stop making your own rules about my posts
This is YOUR buddy's topic, not mine. If you think I'm going to engage in your off-topic posting, you are sadly mistaken

Off Topic? That is bizarre. I thought the OP was on comparing our morality about how to appropriately respond to school shootings compared to how we handle foreign reactions in similar civilian environments? That moral dilemma must have been too much for you to process without self-reflecting on your inner personality conflicts. It is OK to reconsider your opinion.

[Orion Rules]

Posted by Ethereal: The US government is not "we".

I do not see you denouncing Germany's bombing civilians, or Japans execution of civilians. There has always been war, if to attack or defend. It is the very nature of Man to war with one another. I will go so far as to say, I do not approve of war, but "We" the government have little to nothing to say about how to end wars except to merely surrender.

Per post #83:

stjames1_53: WTF are you talking about? WE are talking, as the OP indicated, school shootings. Either get in the game or please stop making your own rules about my posts
This is YOUR buddy's topic, not mine. If you think I'm going to engage in your off-topic posting, you are sadly mistaken

So be mistaken then. Here you are expanding upon the parameters of the discussion first posed, but advise others they must stay in those same positions, as stated in your posts. Notice the words you use, such as "surrender". The communists have murdered more people than what the National Socialists intended to kill because of murderers. The Germans had a right to defend the Germans being killed in massacres inside of the Polish Corridor by the Polish army and Bolshevik communists. One cite is 58,000 dead German Nationals before Germany moved in.

Danzig, did it ever belong to the Germans? It was the British who bombed German cities before there was the German Blitzkrieg against British industry and assortments. The Soviets did destructive things, but with them America was to do business. It was Joseph Stalin, F.D.R., and Winston Churchill sitting together with greedy smiles on their faces. The world has gone to hell ever since there was American involvement inside of banker wars. The attacks upon school children are being used to take away the right to bear arms by bringing an age-old war into school zones.

There shall be punishment for all of the wars caused because selfishness has reigned as I.S.I.S. gained entry into the same places the Germans wished to save from such awful arbitration. So what nations still serve Satan? Even Rudolph Hess was captured upon a peace flight because the capitals of the communist-zio brigade did not want peace, but a greater war to expand all the causes and the needs for more soldiers and munitions. He was murdered while in prison for speaking on what his purpose was, as to why he was made to suffer in a prison.

[Cletus]

Hess was not murdered.

[MisterVeritis]

you asked for one. I gave you one. Or are you implying it is the child's fault?
I can assume when you attended school, if a child failed, he had to make up the time, one way or another. Am I correct?
When I graduated from school, there were only 10 or so that didn't complete on time. They had to do over or take what ever classes they failed to meet the requirements to pass. Today, we hold those achievers back to meet the slower children. That only gives the underachievers a false sense of entitlement.
The school system awards them the same as those who accomplish what they need to graduate.
Those that don't meet the requirements are given a pass. How does that establish a proper ethic?
When they fail at life, they can react instead of respond.

What problem do you want to solve. State it. Be clear.

[MisterVeritis]

You just haven't taken a good, honest look around yourself. Try it. Embrace you inner marxist. Give in to the dark side

Goofballs believe as you do.