Al Qaeda to jihadis: ‘Target white Americans, avoid minorities, because US mislabels attacks as ‘hate crime’

http://www.foreigndesknews.com/world/us/al-qaeda-jihadis-target-white-americans-avoid-minorities-us-mislabels-attacks-hate-crime/

We live in a world where terrorists want you to attack whites so that the liberals can't mislabel it as a hate crime.

The terrorists are more honest than the liberals are.

I mean strategically it makes sense. Not that I support terrorism.

Libtards will be libtards. The liberal twaddle is more intoxicating than the strongest alcoholic beverage out there.

What's new?

This white privilege is getting worse and worse all the time.

You are really reaching, bud

You might say that correlation is a bit of a stretch

@battlestreak:

What you mean?

Only in America

If you only target one group then it will still be labeled a hate crime.

I was about to say the same thing.

@TheWalkingGhost: not if its terrorism

@dave123321: Can be both. The KKK did it for decades. Commiting acts of terrorism against black people.

Not if it's white men

@Chozofication:

Why do people hate white Americans?

@Chozofication: read my above comment

The US military was awesome during WW2. After that they turned into pussies. My grandfathers generation would have this shit set straight by now if they were still around.

@TheWalkingGhost: The kkk killed 3k blacks in 86 years, blacks killed 324,000 Blacks In Only 35 Years. Pulling the old liberal white guilt tactic are you.

The US military, and the Allies in general, got away with mass civilian casualties to help win the war that aren't socially acceptable anymore.

Total War is ugly but that's not what I'm suggesting. I'm talking about commitment. Boots on the ground and all resources put to the effort.

That little picnic in Iraq and Afghanistan was laughable.

Fair enough. Although I'd like to point out that the main bad guys in Afghanistan and Iraq blended in with the civilians, making it very difficult to identify and take them out. We had no such dilemma with German soldiers.

A lot of Nazis went into hiding, and we found most of them pretty quickly. This of course required martial law and controlled movement but yeah.

Yes, but you can't possibly compare that to the guerrilla warfare of the terrorists we're fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq.

because imperialism and western life style is linked to the whites, not the black Americans, not the Latino Americans, not the Native Americans, etc.

With martial law and enough men and equipment, and proper execution, I think we could have routed them years ago.

Of course, there's also the problem of pussy-footing around with countries who host these bastards. If we don't get real with them then nothing else is going to matter. This goes back to that proper execution remark above.

Western life style is linked to people in the west. Go figure. Imperialism, not so much.

Yeah, I think my brother, whose two friends were blown up right behind him on a convoy in Iraq, would disagree with you.

It was a poorly executed effort. There aren't many who would disagree with this. Hell, they hardly had a plan going in.

What kinda of racist neo-con crap are you trying to pull here? Do you even have any idea what is going on around you? You seem confused.

False. There is nothing wrong with the western lifestyle and imperialism is not western exclusive.

So you go full flippant and act as if it was a picnic?!

@br0kenrabbit: If you want to blame someone for what happened in Iraq and Afghanistan, blame politicians, not the troops. Troops can only operate within the limits of the rules of engagement put in place by the civilians that give the Pentagon their orders, and troops that go outside of those rules find themselves going on vacation in Fort Leavenworth for a few years.

It is easy to judge from the outside based on what you see on the news and compare it to past conflicts. It is totally different when you have actually been there seeing it first hand for several tours.

In the sense that it had about as much planning and operational support as one.

Why are you suddenly going sore for semantics? It's quite out of character for you.

I'm not blaming the troops. Troops don't lay the plans, do they? I've been complaining about operational limits, how is that ragging on the troops?

Since when is any the above the responsibility of grunts?

Seriously people, my statements were pretty clear. You folks are just looking to argue.

So the whole PC culture is really pissing off their agenda, eh?

Reminds me of this video.

Because my brother's psyche was all but destroyed from those two wars. I do not like flippant behavior in describing them. Making jokes, along with many other types of discourse on matters like this gives shade to the demons who waged this war for their pocketbooks.

I wasn't making a joke. I was referring to the incompetence of those overseeing these actions. It's almost like they expected the native populations to be throwing roses in front of our missiles. Remember the "We will be greeted as liberators" spiel?

Yeah, I guess I was over offended, sorry. When my brother went to Iraq in 2004, Donald Rumsfeld came and gave a speech about how great the war was going. Someone in my bros platoon apparently yelled, "We've been sleeping in tents with holes for 6 ******** weeks!" Rumsfeld promised a barracks in 10 days. They built a barracks for high class guests like him, the army? Nope. My bro was riding around in humvees that did not even have doors. Because of assholes like Rumsfeld, body armor for his division remained locked in a storage shed for 4 months. Those ****** need to face a tribunal for war crimes.

But wasn't your opening post this:

Looks like you was blaming the boots on the ground for the failures in Iraq and Afghanistan, not the politicians, based on that initial post. If that was not your intention, then the wording of your initial post made it seem like you was. I've been there and I have felt the pain of having our hands tied due to restrictive rules of engagement straight from the top and trying to avoid harming innocent people.

I was part of the initial invasion, and we went from the Kuwaiti border to Baghdad in less than three weeks, with only 139 US troops killed out of 192,000 US troops participating in the invasion. After the insurgency kicked off, we had to deal with an enemy that didn't wear a uniform and we had to try and minimize civilian casualties at the same time.

Fighting a bunch of people that are willing to strap bombs on not only themselves, but their women and children, are a different animal than fighting a bunch of Nazis. When comparing our current enemy to our enemies during World War 2, they may be closer to the Imperial Japanese Army than the German Army, but even they wasn't nearly as fanatic as the Taliban, al Qaeda, and ISIS.

Trying to authorize going all out to kill the enemy isn't going to work in today's world, and that is one of the biggest things Trump is getting criticized for, with his suggestion of going after the family members of terrorists.

That is how you win wars, kill civilians to force their governments to end the war.

I was simply pointing out the differences in how wars are fought then vs now. I'd also like to point out that that strategy makes no sense in Iraq and Afghanistan since we're not fighting the country's government.

Nor are we fighting a uniformed army. In this type of a conflict civilians are going to get killed and injured and that is what the enemies we are now fighting want so they can get headlines.

The Imperial Japanese Army was far more fanatic than those groups... The Rape of Nanking alone was far more brutal and horrific than all the atrocities of the Taliban, Al Qaeda and ISIS combined.

Not False. I didnt say there was anything wrong with western style of society, but it is them (ISIS for example) who find western lifestyle wrong. (Just like you many find Islam problematic, but its not to them in middle east..... perspectives).

Secondly imperialism is not western exclusive but it is western imperialism that they have experienced and have the issue with (because its also the most prevalent).

@kend0_kap0ni: Nice apology for terrorism. Still false, western life is not just linked to white people and so called imperialism.

And if you think that is why they attack the west then i got a bridge to sell you. The most prevalent imperialism they experience is their own and are (like you) brainwashed into thinking it is all the west.

Alright! Now my privilege will finally allow me to feel what it's like to be targeted for the color of my skin!

Yea, but the 3K blacks killed by the KKK were killed BECAUSE they were black and no other reason.

Blacks killing blacks is not based on racism toward each other. In fact, blacks killing blacks is more a result of the privileged white forcing them into desperation.

War has changed since WW2 so I doubt it.

Nonsensical comparison. You're comparing a single terrorist organisation to an entire ethnic group. And that doesn't even compare to the millions of blacks who were enslaved and killed by white Americans.