Ralph Peters is correct; we need to squash these bugs once and for all.

[line-em-up]

http://video.foxnews.com/v/3728313739001/peters-islamic-state-the-most-brutal-force-ive-ever-seen/#sp=show-clips

[jw33]

We were foolish for going into Irag and thinking it would ever end.

[line-em-up]

While I am all for staying out of other people's business and letting them live their run their lives (good or bad), we cannot turn our back on these barbarians and expect to not see them on our doorstep again. Hamas is a good example of that. They can't even withstrain their hate long enough to make it through a cease fire. The only thing they'll will ever understand is violence. They only way to stop them is crush them like bugs.

[Forever_frost]

Considering we have open borders and they have taken a picture of the Islamic flag in front of the WH, it's a threat we should handle there and draw them back into Iraq.

[BP]

Considering we have open borders and they have taken a picture of the Islamic flag in front of the WH, it's a threat we should handle there and draw them back into Iraq.

This actually makes sense and it's likely a tactic we are covertly using. It also will solve the problem with Nouri al-Maliki. We don't like him at all, nor do the Saudis. The Iranians and Russians absolutely love the guy though. Obama couldn't exactly force him to resign. Now with ISIS taking over half the country we are in a position where he's begging for help.

So either al-Maliki agrees to resign, signs a US friendly status of forces agreement or he can sit back and watch while ISIS burns city after city. No matter what happens it's all al-Maliki's fault so it works well for the United States.

[Sean88gt]

We don't have the stones, as a nation, to deal with ISIS in a manner they would respect and fear.

I'm talking about taking thousands of the hardest criminals (or police...), giving them special forces training, shutting off the cameras and turning them loose. Instead of just decapitating their shoulds, we need some sick fuck that is willing to literally skull fuck the liberated head with a bacon condom. Or go Mad Max style with roving gangs that have giant shredders on trailers where they throw those savages and them toss in pigs. Just a full out assault on their belief structures. And put in place a king or a dictator that is willing to kill anyone that steps up.

[BP]

We don't have the stones, as a nation, to deal with ISIS in a manner they would respect and fear.

Why would we want to? The Saudi government started this mess, they should be involved in cleaning it up.

[Sean88gt]

Why would we want to? The Saudi government started this mess, they should be involved in cleaning it up.

I'm not saying we want to. But the battle will be fought easier there than here. Have to and want to are different arguments.

[YALE]

While I am all for staying out of other people's business and letting them live their run their lives (good or bad), we cannot turn our back on these barbarians and expect to not see them on our doorstep again. Hamas is a good example of that. They can't even withstrain their hate long enough to make it through a cease fire. The only thing they'll will ever understand is violence. They only way to stop them is crush them like bugs.

No one withstrains anything. Withstrain isn't a word.

[Sean88gt]

No one withstrains anything. Withstrain isn't a word.

Not true. I took a shit withstrain just yesterday.

[line-em-up]

No one withstrains anything. Withstrain isn't a word.

Really?

http://www.wordsense.eu/withstrain/

Etymology[edit]

From Middle English withstreynen, equivalent to with- + strain.

Verb[edit]

withstrain (third-person singular simple present withstrains, present participle withstraining, simple past and past participle withstrained)
1.(archaic, transitive) To restrain.  [quotations ▲]
##1889–1892, in Cambridge Sermons: Preached Before the University in St. Mary's Church 1889-1892, page 215: Even when this is known, [only] with difficulty is the multitude withstrained from doing sacrifice to a Paul and a Barnabas.
##1914, Jack London, The Mutiny of the Elsinore, page 22: The sailors surrounded him, laying hands on him, withstraining him, the while they guffawed and cheered.
##1919 August, in The Pacific Unitarian, volumes 27, number 7, page 2 (170): Her ambition became boundless and her patriotism an obsession. Her pride was in her power and she held weakness in contempt. Withstrained by no scruples she placed her reliance in the sword, […]

[Sean88gt]

1919 was the last update? Thou doth useth cogent speak.

[racrguy]

Really?

http://www.wordsense.eu/withstrain/

Etymology[edit]

From Middle English withstreynen, equivalent to with- + strain.

Verb[edit]

withstrain (third-person singular simple present withstrains, present participle withstraining, simple past and past participle withstrained)
1.(archaic, transitive) To restrain.  [quotations ▲]
##1889–1892, in Cambridge Sermons: Preached Before the University in St. Mary's Church 1889-1892, page 215: Even when this is known, [only] with difficulty is the multitude withstrained from doing sacrifice to a Paul and a Barnabas.
##1914, Jack London, The Mutiny of the Elsinore, page 22: The sailors surrounded him, laying hands on him, withstraining him, the while they guffawed and cheered.
##1919 August, in The Pacific Unitarian, volumes 27, number 7, page 2 (170): Her ambition became boundless and her patriotism an obsession. Her pride was in her power and she held weakness in contempt. Withstrained by no scruples she placed her reliance in the sword, […]

That's etymology, not a definition. If it isn't in the dictionary, it isn't a word...

[line-em-up]

Weird. I've heard people use it all my life. Words come and go. When I was younger, "ain't" and "bigger" weren't official words. My high school English teacher would give an automatic zero on a paper if you used them.

[line-em-up]

That's etymology, not a definition. If it isn't in the dictionary, it isn't a word...

Etymology

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Etymology is the history of words, their origins, and how their form and meaning have changed over time. By an extension, the term "the etymology of [a word]" means the origin of the particular word.

For languages with a long written history, etymologists make use of texts in these languages and texts about the languages to gather knowledge about how words were used during earlier periods of their history and when they entered the languages in question. Etymologists also apply the methods of comparative linguistics to reconstruct information about languages that are too old for any direct information to be available.

By analyzing related languages with a technique known as the comparative method, linguists can make inferences about their shared parent language and its vocabulary. In this way, word roots have been found that can be traced all the way back to the origin of, for instance, the Indo-European language family.

Even though etymological research originally grew from the philological tradition, currently much etymological research is done on language families where little or no early documentation is available, such as Uralic and Austronesian.

The word etymology is derived from the Greek word ἐτυμολογία, etymologia, itself from ἔτυμον, etymon, meaning "true sense" and the suffix -logia, denoting "the study of".[1][2]