So, american milfags, are you going to fight ISIS?

Trump has no idea what the fuck he's talking about and he says things like that because it impresses morons.

File: w40k do you even purge.jpg (35KB, 333x500px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 333x500px

If it really will be "fast and dirty" we'll do only Air Force precision strikes to level half the desert and send in a minimum of ground troops to do some very minor clean-up.

>>30985040
So more of the same?

>>30985017
As /pol/ tell me, when Trump says stuff like taking down ISIS fast and dirty that really does not involve wide scale American military involvement.

>>30985026

What are you talking about? Hes gonna keep Putin from going into Ukraine.

>>30985017
>do you expect to be hauling ass around Iraq and Syria doing 'patrolling the Mojave', babysitting locals, and 'hearts and minds' kind of shit?
Nope.

I don't think the US would send troops in again. Airstrikes only and maybe special forces. Because that's the only kind of war Americans are willing to risk anymore in regards to terrorists.

I'd be more worried about somehow getting into a fight with Iran. I can imagine things going to get really shitty for US servicemen, and the middle-east in general, if Iran suddenly "needs" to get invaded.

Say the next president starts a 'lets bomb Iran and stop its nuclear program for good!' thingy. The president can just do that, because kek "congress has to declare war" is literally untrue since like, Vietnam.

And then Iran shoots down an American plane, killing airmen, or some of Irans many agents in the reagon kills American soldiers. Because Iran is far more capable than random terrorists or Iraq, and is allied with Russia and China.

Can you imagine? "President Trump/Clinton, why did you let Iran victimize us, what are you going to do?"

I don't think an Iran invasion would be very fun.

>>30985017
my battalion commander says we will be at war without a doubt in the next two years, and has had this major push for training in my unit. he said syria and the middle east, specifically. i believe him

>>30987640
have heard the same

File: image.jpg (71KB, 638x425px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 638x425px

>>30985017
>tfw about to wrap up my enlistment
>no combat but did end up in the middle easy
>at the border of Kuwait and Iraq, got to do some security bullshit
>spend almost a week doing turret watches on the desert
>see a fuckload of equipment and vehicles
>it seems almost endless, humvees, MATVs, quadcons and palcons all heading to Iraq
>get told its for the Iraqi Army to figt ISIS
>on the boat ride back we find out that most of that shit was "lost" to ISIS almost immediately
>tfw I was prt of the problem

Quite the moral conundrum but if I could make things right and go fight them, I'd do it

>>30987640
same but mostly NCOs in my experience. I don't believe them; I'm sure much of the same was said in garrison army between vietnam and 1st gulf war

File: 1456118135504.jpg (496KB, 1504x1000px) Image search: [Google]

496KB, 1504x1000px

Well, if Clinton gets it, then we will most likely see war with Russia.

This is all around a bad fucking idea and millions will die.

If Trump wins, we get a nationalistic surge in the country, and/or the powder keg goes off and we see Civil War 2.0(Which would be a de facto rebel victory, see pic)

I personally believe some shit will go down before the election. So you best get right with your Jesus, boy.

>>30988610
why would we have a civil war if Trump wins?The only people with guns all support Trump.

>>30988785
Think of all the chimpouts around his protests.

BLM and the like will have a fucking meltdown if he gets it.

>>30988813
Adding, granted the "war" would be onesided, considering all gun owners support trump and dislike BLM but it would be LA Riots x 10.

The least we will see is riots like Milwaukee.

>>30988813
and we wont have one if hillary wins? imagine how many people will take issue with a litteral criminal taking office

>>30985017
What are you talking about? We're already engagin ISIL with boots since they're rise in Iraq. We later put Green Berets in Syria "advising" the Kurds. Meanwhile in Afghanistan, The Taliban has remerged from their sleep and are b8ing us with ISIS flags

>>30988785
> All gun owners support Trump

It's funny you think that.

>>30988832
The return of the roof Koreans? Tbh tho if trump wins you'll have roof everyone. The roof army vs blm

>>30985017
>I mean, Trump has said he will take ISIL down 'fast and dirty', so does that mean 'charging machine gun positions' kind of stuff?
i love civies

>>30987100
Everyone's been taking about a war with Iran. What has Iran gotten itself into this time?

File: 1469529471450.jpg (256KB, 1162x850px) Image search: [Google]

256KB, 1162x850px

>>30988909
It's inevitable either way desu

Let it all come crumbling down, I have been preparing

>>30989044
>the return of roof koreans in 90s clothes

Supreme dankness

>>30987924
> I'm sure much of the same was said in garrison army between vietnam and 1st gulf war

Said every nco and officer in between wars since standing armed forces.

>>30985017
Drumpf won't win, and no one on /k/ seriously intends to vote for him.

>>30989023
im discounting the old moron fudds that watch CNN and that only own deer rifles of course.

>>30988813
thats not a war. Thats a riot.

>>30989497
yeah OK CTR. Record Corrected go back to /pol/ please.

>>30989023
>Owning guns
>Not supporting Trump
>Supporting You Can't Have Guns Because I Say So Hilary.
Wew lad

>>30985017
Unless the Iraqi and Syrian desert moved to California yes we would be patrolling the Mojave.

>>30987100
>I don't think an Iran invasion would be very fun.

The US would stomp the shit out of Iran. It would be Desert storm two.

Reminder that they stalemated with iraq 2 years before the US smashed the shit out of iraq.

Nothing has changed militarily with Iran, they are still using the same shit they have always used.

>>30989497
I do.

Trump is a wild card, but hillary is 100% anti gun.

How you can say this is beyond me, you have to be trolling.

File: 1897 - Mars Automatic Pistol.jpg (126KB, 1600x475px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 1600x475px

>>30992181
Hilary does what's popular, and so does Trump, except the opposite.

Hilary panders to anti-gun, therefore, Trump is pro-gun. He's not a wildcard, he's a contrarian.

>>30992231
>and so does Trump, except the opposite.

Did you even really think though this statement.

Its completely self contradictory.

Anyways and furthermore, when assault weapon bans roll around, they are VERY unpopular. Interestingly enough, outside gun ban d-day its about 50/50, with a slight lead to banning assault weapons; depends on the poll.

Hillary is 100% against really my only hobby. Her being elected would directly effect me.

Trump would not.

Pretty simple, imo.

>>30989497
Go shill on back to pol faggot

>>30992259
Hilary does what is popular with one crowd. Trump picks the other croud and takes reverse position. You happy now?

What am I saying, we're on 4chan. Of course we're not happy

File: 1401295743428.gif (4KB, 452x523px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 452x523px

>>30992417
Too bad he was always pro fun, and carries himself.

>>30992417

Yeah, that actually makes sense.

Still though, hillary would fuck me.

Hell, she already fucks me by running, shits already starting to creep up in price.

>>30992436

that's because the gun industry is more speculative than the oil industry.

>>30992445
Yes, because it has to be.

One bill can ruin businesses and fun.

Hillary wants to bring that bill to fruition.

>>30992459

bullshit. the NRA just uses fearmongering to jack up prices and make stupid gun nuts constantly feel like they have to buy more guns before they get banned.

>>30992470
>bullshit.

It literally happened. You dont remember because you were still shitting yourself.

Lurk more, kid.

>>30985055
Yes, but more.


Of the same.

File: image.png (117KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 300x300px

>>30985017
He's just saying it to get more voters. Hilary and Trump both do the same thing. Just politics.

no, we won't be entering another war. Probably just more drone strikes and some bombs here and there. It's not very cost effective to send a few thousand troops to get shot at to win hearts and minds. It never worked, nor will it this time. Plus, you know how much it would cost to build more bases and FOBS? Plus sending a few dozen MRAPS will cost a pretty penny just to ship them.

I support the Kurds because they have been fucked with a lot by other tribes. But I don't think we should have boots on the ground right now, especially when we've already done enough to fuck with everyone in the sandbox. I would just keep supporting the fighting tribes against isis.

We would be in better shape if we where an isolationist country.


But of course, if there was another terrorist attack on America, that would change everything...

psa nuke the sandbox and rake the turds

>>30992685
>We would be in better shape if we where an isolationist country.

Fuck no. You are COMPLETELY ignorant of basic history if you think this.

>>30992703
yeah because going into libya and iraq was a great fucking idea. your foreign policy singlehadedly fucked things over in the Middle East which adversly and severely affected your allies.

Clearly you're just interested in cherrypicking facts in history and jerking off in your echo chamber.

>>30992703
Yes because going to war with other countries is worth the effort and time.

Isolationism would work right now. We dont need to get into another war when we just got out of one with our knees skinned.

You cannot fight terrorism head on, one of the reason we went to Afghanistan and got our asses nowhere.

You are COMPLETELY ignorant of basic history if you think this

also fuck you

k

>>30989134
Nothing, so far as I know. I mean they're still heavily ascetic religiously, but they just had their nuclear program partially approved and some sanctions lifted.

Now Israel is shitting the bed because they hate Iran, and the US is happy because we have another potential ally in the region, counterbalancing both Saudi Arabia and lifting our dependency on Israel. US govt may no longer be sanctioning illegal Israeli govt activity with its wallet (4.2 billion per year, to be exact).

If Iran doesn't fuck up and do some crazy shit, don't be surprised in the next decade if the US and Iran become bffs, and the rhetoric completely changes on Israel, with the US govt taking a high-and-mighty moral stance on the Israel-Palestine issue, like they weren't the ones funding that bullshit in the first place.

>>30985017
The war in the Middle East has been the biggest 15 year joke in the history of the world. Every second the US remains in that hopeless region pretending to be helping is a second too long.

>>30992782
>>30992786

You assclowns. There is a HUGE difference between current us foreign policy and being actually fucking isolationist.

If the US went isolationist after WWII, korea would be all best korea, all of europe would pretty much be USSR (well, as much as they wanted to take), the SCS would be chinese, along with pretty much everything else in the area.

And you know what? the ME would still be a clusterfuck.

File: 1470808542367.jpg (297KB, 1280x850px) Image search: [Google]

297KB, 1280x850px

We already have troops there, and we're sending more to Afghanistan again

File: image.jpg (46KB, 500x276px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 500x276px

>>30992811
Because the US needs to be up every countries ass right now.

and those where countries which had designated leaders, who had a designated military, they had an actual country.

Newsflash you shit bag, terrorism doesn't have a designated leader of fighters. We aren't winning hearts and minds if we have to send drones and US soldiers to kill people because the tribes can't handle themselfs. It's time America steps back and let other countries police themselfs.

I mean, that shouldn't be a problem with all these different boards that are international that judge us, right?


Also

I'm not going to play armchair general with you. You piece of shit go fuck yourself cuck

>>30992470
>What are revised NFA "interpretations"
>What are Russian import bans
>What is the 7n6 ban
>What is using ITAR to fuck gunsmiths
>How about them arm braces?
Face it, the gun industry is completely at the mercy of the band of capricious fuckery that is the ATF. They could (and HAVE) throw(n) out the must retarded, ass-backward ruling related to firearms, in clear contradiction with existing law (vertical grips on pistols comes to mind, that's actually been tossed out in court but is still followed for literally no reason), and for months if not years gun shops would be forced to follow that regulation or risk being raided and losing everything while it works its way through court.
Then, they get to cross their fingers and pray the judge doesn't just give them the middle finger of judicial activism

>>30992811
The US right now is currently very interventionist, with a policy of destabilizing entire regions as its modus operandi. Thanks to the US covert and overt operations in Libya, Iraq, Syria, Yemen etc which are well documented through the large number of leaks, countries have either completely fallen apart and become failed states as in the case of Libya or forced into devastating civil wars (Yemen, Iraq, Syria) which themselves will likely end up as failed states themselves. These wars have led to massive numbers of refugees and migrants which are hurting Europe severely, not to mention ruined tens of millions of peoples lives. I could continue with examples from sub-saharan Africa and South America, but I'm really not that invested in this.

Dont come and fucking tell me that "it would still be a clusterfuck" when so much terrible shit can be directly linked to US policy. You're ignorant and arrogant and like I mentioned earlier, your examples prove that you're only interested in cherrypicking examples.

>>30992879
>and those where countries which had designated leaders, who had a designated military, they had an actual country.

What the dick does that have to do with isolationism?

>Newsflash you shit bag, terrorism doesn't have a designated leader of fighters.

Newsflash asshole, that has ZERO to do with isolationism.

>It's time America steps back and let other countries police themselfs.

Oh yes, lets let china just rip the SCS from everyone in the area, a world that has a metric fuckton of sea based traffic though it. I can go on and on.

There is a FUCKLOAD more to foreign policy than fucking "muh terrorism". Just becuase you are not interventionist does not mean you are isolationist.

Read a fucking book, you idiot.

>>30992916
>The US right now is currently very interventionist, with a policy of destabilizing entire regions as its modus operandi.

Yeah, the US was 100% behind it. No other forces were invovled in any of those places.

OH, fucking wait. The brits bombed syria. The french bombed syria. The russians bombed syria. The fucking iranians bombed syria.

But the americans are the one behind it all. FUCK they got so much god damn power.

Take some god damn responsibility.

>. You're ignorant and arrogant

Says the guy who thinks america is an actual boogieman.

Also, you seem to think that if you are not interventionist, you are isolationist.

FURTHERMORE, you blame america for Europe not opening its legs to the refugees.

Here is an idea, dont let them in.

>>30992959

Fuck, lets look at lybia.

NATO, actual fucking NATO was ALL involved in lybia. It was a fucking NATO operation. The god damn Belgians were there. Norway was there, the fucking sweeds.

But nope, fucking america! AMERICA did it! BLAME AMERICA!

Do i even NEED to go into iraq?

Take some fucking responsibility, you worthless fuck.

>>30992959
>not americucks fault
Someone really needs to read a couple of books on NATO, aswell as actual history documenting these civil wars. You know, the US carries significant political clout, maybe you don't know? Leaked Clinton emails show how the push to destabilize the region was engineered by the US.
>Syria
I especially like though how you focused in on Syria, I assume its because you know that your arguments dont hold a candle to reality if you were to mention Iraq, Libya and Yemen. Even then, the US has funded the so called "moderate" rebels in Syria that more often than not fight under ISIS flag, really despite everyone telling Obama and Clinton that its a really bad idea.
>Libya
Again its clear that you dont know your history, nor how the actual invasion of Libya went down. Read a book my friend on NATO command structures, or hell, even wiki, its clear you dont know even the most basic things. Do you know what diplomacy is? You know, the thing that can be used to push your allies in coming along? Fact of the matter is that the US pushed for the intervention. Fact of the matter is that Gaddafi himself tried to push for a peaceful transition to democracy but was rebuffed by Clinton. There is really no point in arguing this when your knowledge of the matter is practically non-existent.

And really its quite amusing that no matter how much responsibility you're telling me to take, its obvious that you're not willing or able (due to being an autistic child) to do the same, nor even accept the reality of things.

>>30993070
>You know, the US carries significant political clout, maybe you don't know?

Oh, that means the US is in direct control? Poor britan, france, hell all of NATO dindu fuckin nuttin and its the US who is to blame!

> I assume its because you know that your arguments dont hold a candle to reality if you were to mention Iraq, Libya and Yemen.

Libya is worse than fucking Syria. That was a true blue NATO op.

Yemen government forces has been fucking supported by both britan and france.

> Do you know what diplomacy is? You know, the thing that can be used to push your allies in coming along?

Yeah, its called geopolitics and EVERYONE DOES IT.

>B...BUT THE US HAS TO MUCH POWER! THEY ARE IN DIRECT CONTROL. YOU DONT TAKE ANY RESPONSIBILITY!

Ill take responsibility for my country's actions, will you? Not just the war, but your country's reaction to it as well. I dont know where you are from, nor do you me. (and you might be suprised)

I just don't blame America for everything like a fucking child. Nobody held a gun to the euro nations head.

>>30993149
>There is really no point in arguing this when your knowledge of the matter is practically non-existent.

thanks for just making sure that i knew i was correct in saying this

>>30992811
The Cold War is over, McCain

>>30985017
I already spent months doing that. It was satisfying to do my part, but I think I'm done with that now my contract is nearly up.

drones man, it averaged to like six people a day every day.

>>30993199
No problem.

Enjoy calling people arrogant while it wafts off you like a stench.

Enjoy your victim complex, friend!