Barack Obama

'World War III Is a Very Important, Very Progressive War'


"Help Obama Kickstart World War III!" is a darling little video made by improvisational comedy titans Second City. I was introduced to it today via Twitter, but the video was made and released in 2013, during President Obama's push to use force against the Assad regime in Syria. Perhaps it has new relevance now that the U.S. House has voted to train and arm Syrian rebels in support of Obama's advertures in ISIS-slaying. Enjoy! (And remember: All WWIII crowdfunding donations can be sent directly to the Internal Revenue Service.)

NEXT: Dems File Discharge Petition on Gay Rights Bill

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Cuts a bit too close to home…

    1. The whole sketch feels like it was written by ratfucking tebaggers.

      1. It was paid for by the Koch brothers.

        1. I saw that at the end, but couldn’t decide if that was real, or snarkasm. I mean, it’s just such a dogwhistle for the proggies that everything is done by the KKKochsuckers!!!eleventy! that it’s hard to tell.

  2. Considering how the first two benefitted the Progs then this is true.

  3. My gawd, that is fucking awesome! Can we require that all congress critters watch this now?

  4. Absolutely love the “Paid for by Koch Industries” small print in the final “Because Obama” logo fadeout. Really?

    1. Oh yes, because clearly when any politician does something bad, the Kochs must be behind it.

      I get the feeling they though they were being too hard on Obama, so they took a wild jab at the hated Kochs.

      1. I got the feeling it was from the Jane Hamsher wing of earnest progressives who have gotten past the “I just don’t understand, I thought Obama was one of us” phase, and into the “Obama sucks, but not as much as those goddamn KKKapitalist Republicans and their neoliberal libertarian overlords” part of progressive angst over Obama.

      2. “I get the feeling they though they were being too hard on Obama, so they took a wild jab at the hated Kochs.”

        Dunno. I’ve read some amazingly convoluted theories about how The Koch Bros(tm) really are at the bottom of most everything proggies don’t like.

        1. Yeah, back when the Tea Party was getting started thanks to TARP the proglodytes couldn’t believe that many people were protesting the Lightbringer’s policies, so it must be an AstroTurf campaign funded by the Kochs! And they called us the conspiracy theorist loonies.

      3. The “jab at the Kochs” is irony.

        1. It was the line that finally got me to bust out laughing. Like Andy Breckman & Ken Freedman, they save the best punch for the end.

  5. So I support World War III. And IV. And any moon war the president might want to start


    1. Agreed:)

    2. Suddenly I’m ready to re-enlist. Forwar!!d

    3. Have you seen the movie Iron Sky?

      1. +1 Nazi Moon Base

        1. In the shape of a swastika.

      2. I have not.

        1. Sarah Palin conquers the moon. What’s not to love? Watch it now. It’s terrible, but not the worst thing to do with an evening.

          1. Not tonight, but it’ll go on the list.

          2. The first 20 minutes is pure gold.

            Then it turns out that Sarah Palin is President and it goes straight downhill from there.

          3. It’s terrible

            Still better then Pacific Rim.

            1. Sarah Palin can see the Pacific Rim from her front porch, once she whups the rednecks talkin’ smack about her son off ‘n it.

    4. I have ridden the mighty moon worm!

  6. Challenge to the commentariat: decide if “stalinista” here is trolling or serious. Show your work.

    1. stalinista
      14 September 2014 4:56am

      Lofven in the U.S. would be considered a communist.
      There have to be shifts worldwide to the left because neoliberalism is so barbarous, violent, and destructive that it has to be stopped, and I think people’s suffering will respond with shifts to the left.
      And I support all working class and mass liberation movements to unchain from capitalism and imperialism.

      1. Gonna go with authentic Mid-West communoprog, probably from a Blue city in a Red state. Gun rack reference puts him over the top.

      2. Madison, Wisconsin if I had to guess

      3. Just another clever bot.

    2. I got bored in like 5 seconds

    3. Serious. She a communist who believe’s she’s on the losing side. All that matters is more vigor applied to the cause. And she never breaks character

      From her history:

      stalinista commented on High school students care more about free speech than adults, poll finds.17 Sep 2014 7:37pm
      All it takes is one student bringing home a copy of The Communist Manifesto, having their reactionary capitalist parent call the school, and that teacher is out of a job. Union inferiority complex

      They have ways of keeping the purveyors of propaganda in line.

      The kids ain’t bringing home primary sources, and teachers aren’t fired for anything short of bestiality in the hallway.

      stalinista commented on High school students care more about free speech than adults, poll finds.17 Sep 2014 7:27pm
      The dominant narrative in this country IS right-wing politics. How did you miss that?

      Until we have full-on socialism (working towards communism) kids in this country will be propagandized coming at them from all directions – parents, teachers, work, mass media, Facebook, ad nauseam.

      The dominant class is going to push their viewpoints any way they can. In a socialist society, kids would be learning about what criminals and shitstains the capital owners and ruling elites were and history would be told from the perspective of the oppressed, not from the perspective of the ruling class.

      I thought they were already taught that?

      1. So who’s doing the propaganda?

        And if the dominant class is pushing the propaganda, then it is impossible for the oppressed to do it, isn’t it? Since by definition they would be in charge.

      2. In a socialist society, kids would be learning about what criminals and shitstains the capital owners and ruling elites were and history would be told from the perspective of the oppressed

        Because, what better way to prepare people for the ultimate collapse of your socialist economic experiments than to fill their heads with bullshit propaganda, instead of what a real, functioning economy looks like?

      3. Serious. She a communist who believe’s

        You all do this just to piss me off, don’t you?

        1. Now we we’ll.

          1. Sorry, Ted. I grew up in Quebec. Apostrophes were outlawed for a while, ask Rufus. We sometimes get a little a crazy with the apostrophe usage when free to do so (“Freedom!”). That’s my excuse.

            How dare you shame me!

            1. But there are tons of apostrophes in French. Shit tons. This makes no sense to me.

              1. I think he might be referring to possessives?

              2. English apostrophes, man. Eaton’s became Eaton under the PQ. It was brutal. There are officials measuring the relative font sizes between official languages on menus and signs. The possessive apostrophe is all we’ve got left to stick it it to the man! (Eh, whatever, I left a decade a ago.)

                1. Ah. I know all about the language police, but I did not know about the war on apostrophes. Just moved back to the States after a three year stint in Montreal.

                  1. The apostrophes had all been killed by the time you got there. I’m glad you got out of there alive, LynchPin. Simmering counterinsurgency was brimming, you know?

                    Where were you Ted S.?

                    1. It was an interesting few years to live there. I arrived just before the student “strikes” started and the Charbonneau commission heated up. Three mayors arrested for corruption in one year, a PQ government and the BS that was the values charter along with a renewed push for tougher language laws, and then a second election in which the PQ got embarrassed only to see the corrupt Liberals step right back in. Oh, and they had to install an emergency support beam on the Champlain bridge one weekend because there was serious enough threat of a major structural failure, which nicely sums up the ongoing clusterfuck that is Quebec infrastructure.

                      But Montreal still kicked ass.

  7. Yes. This is getting fun – in a twisted way.
    Babs Boxer is nearly in tears when Republicans criticize little John Kerry and the President. Don’t they know there’s a WAR on?…..tes-corker

    Babs, show us your War Face!

    1. I always chuckle when I think back to these.

      1. As do I.

        I remember when leftists were bleating about how they were being accused of treason if they didn’t go along with the Iraq War. There might have been some dudes on AM radio doing it, but I don’t remember it actually being a part of the discourse.

        Now we have Democrats calling opposition treasonous on the House and Senate floors (like actually using the word treason) and nearly weekly bitch sessions in the NYT about how the GOP are traitors (again actually using the words treason and traitor).

    2. That’s really the best picture they could find of her?

    3. Let those warboners shine, progs.

      Oh, and Barbara Boxer might actually be retarded so let’s keep that in mind.

      1. Boxer has to give Feinstain some competition after all

        1. Once California secedes, we’ll be led by the Triumvirate of Brown, Feinstein and Boxer. So it won’t all be good.

    4. Yes ma’am

  8. Listen!

    Us Serbs started half the World Wars so far, and took a pretty good start at the Third.

    We tried to warn the West about Islam, but you wouldn’t listen.

    Don’t come crying to us now.

    1. Cork it or we’ll go all Novi Sad on your ass.

  9. Meh.

    Unfunny, smug liberal humor is still unfunny and smug when directed towards other liberals.

  10. Talking with some buddies recently about all the outrage about sports players actions off field, one of them had this to say and it made me smile:

    That’s society these days man. Everyone loves to get offended and all sensitive cry baby bitch about stuff that doesn’t affect them at all. Social media makes it 1000x worse because it gives all these pussies a voice where they can whine and fuckin complain and do absolutely nothing about any of the issues. I personally fuckin hate it all too, I hate society and most pple in general.

    1. #signaling

    2. It’s not that it gives them a voice, it’s that it gives them attention and encouragement.

  11. Rather amusing to see so many commenters here with ‘boy, this prog war’ just hours after 68% of GOP representatives, as compared to 57% of Democrats, voted to authorize this action. Derp indeed!

    1. Meh.

      Unfunny, smug libertarian commenter is still unfunny and smug when directed towards other libertarians.

      1. Facts make IT have a sad, but aggressive foreign policy might cheer him up.

        1. Insults this lame usually come pre-loaded with a sitcom studio laugh track.

    2. There is not a single comment above this one calling it a “prog war”

      You are reduced to just straight making shit up to stroke your moral superiority lobe.

      Get a fucking grip, Bo.

      Unless your point is the ENB is a secret Red Team shill? Is that next?

      1. It’s almost as if this post doesn’t have a title.

        1. And comments like

          Winston|9.17.14 @ 6:41PM|#

          Considering how the first two benefitted the Progs then this is true.

          And comments like

          Grand Moff Serious Man|9.17.14 @ 7:40PM|#

          Let those warboners shine, progs.

          Didn’t exist.

          1. That’s what you are going with here? That’s your supporting evidence? Just step away from the keyboard, man. It’d be for the best.

            1. So you didn’t read the thread but made an inaccurate claim about it? It’s ok, happens to most people now and then.

              1. You can’t stop yourself. It’s sad. You made a knee-jerk comment in furtherance of your basic motivation to stroke your sense of moral superiority and you fucked up. Just admit it. Fuck, you don’t even have to do that, just stop digging the hole deeper. Every comment makes you look more and more of a fool.

                1. Us your handle supposed to be some kind of reverse irony? I mean, look at your comments here, no real argument or evidence but retorting with reiterative riffs on your original comment. If that’s not trolling…

                  1. I wonder how many times I can get you to double-down on this. 10? 15? It might be interesting to find out but I’ve suddenly remembered why I had you blocked.

                    1. Talk about keeping digging, you keep doing exactly what I pointed to about your comments.

        2. Yes, Bo. ENB — she of the manifold abortion posts, she who positively links to Marcotte and Jezebel articles on Twitter and Reason, who calls herself a libertarian feminist and identifies with liberaltarianism, who praises Jill Filipovic’s incredible talent, who writes about the injustice of non-trans bathrooms and uses leftist callphrases like “privilege” and “microaggressions” seriously — she is a stark-raving mad red meat GOP shill.

          Just for shits and giggles, let’s check out some of this reactionary’s latest headlines, shall we?

          Holy Crap: Photographing Fake Blow Job From Jesus Could Land Teen In Jail

          Missouri Republicans Push 72-Hour Abortion Waiting Period

          Cops Storm Texas High School to Investigate Miscarriage ‘Suspect’

          Marijuana Users Less Likely to Engage In Domestic Violence

          Rise of the Hipster Capitalist

          My God, it’s worse than I thought. What a subservient lackey to the barefoot in the kitchen GOP politics! Confirmed by her linking positively to a dopey prog comedy video criticizing Obama and his supporters for being too in hock to the KKKorporate warmaking interests like the Kochs and neo-liberals, and which negatively alludes to the Bush administration. Just like a GOP shill would.

          If you weren’t this stupid, people wouldn’t have so much fun mocking you and shitting all over your posts.

          1. Wow, you really put some time into that post. Some deep seated ENB is a closet liberal angst there I guess.

            And that angst made you wrongly assume my point to boot.

            1. Dude.


              Just stop. Seriously.

              Not all of us are as bad at reading comp as you are, and it really shows right now.

              1. You’re lost, I get it.

            2. That wasn’t deep seated hatred of ENB, it was just him pointing out that this was posted by someone who cannot conceivably be described as right-wing.

              1. Keeping that list is a bit deep seated…

                More to the point, he missed that my point was about ENB’s title and the reaction to it by commenters.

                1. Keeping that list is a bit deep seated…

                  You.. you do realize you can search Reason by author and get a list of articles.. don’t you?

                2. Keeping that list is a bit deep seated…

                  I have a good memory, and I read Reason almost every day at work. I can also come up with similar lists on-demand for Doherty, Suderman, Matt Welch, and most of the writers on Reason. Yeah, that makes me real fun at parties. Maybe not quite as fun as the guy who whines about being scorned for his invaluable work in ferreting out the socons among us, but still.

                  my point was about ENB’s title and the reaction to it by commenters

                  A reaction which 1) does not describe most (or even any) of the actual comments, and which 2) has nothing to do with the fact that you cite in your original bitch.

                  Sorry if they haven’t gone over the concept of “non-sequitur” in your lawyer classes yet, but the rest of us non-lawyers are familiar with the concept: why aren’t you?

                  1. From the guy who regularly whines about the Reason writers being too liberal your observations are especially rich.

                    And 1 I noted at least two comments is examples and 2 already explained the connection.

                    1. I don’t whine about or particularly care that Reason writers are “too liberal” (whatever that means). That wouldn’t even make my list of things that Reason could improve (which would be more focused on that they’ve become some kind of Drudge-style re-linker + shallow editorial rag over producing original content and having creative, interesting writers). I certainly think they have their heads so far up the collective sewer of the nation (i.e., DC) from working with them, so it gives them a skewed view of the nation. I disagree with them in a forthright fashion, as adults are wont to do. Disagree, that is — not whine. I don’t follow them around tsk tsking them, or trying to shame them into agreeing with me.

                      You should try that out sometime — perhaps after linking to an adequate argument explaining how the two comments you highlighted relate to your factoid in any compelling way.

                    2. ‘I don’t whine, I just disagree (manfully!) a lot, and I don’t criticize the Reason writers for being , I just call them out as cosmos !’

                      You’re too much there IT.

                    3. I will pay good money if you find me using the phrase “cosmo” unironically, much less actually going out and calling a Reason writer a “cosmo”.

                      And yes, I disagree with the Reason authors and other people all the time. Not sure how that’s manly, seeing as how Hazel does the exact same thing on a regular basis. It is an adult thing, which would explain your inability to understand the difference between the two.

        3. Dude, the title comes from the video, which as pointed out in the article is a year or two old now. And it’s really focused more on Obama who, last I checked, is pretty progressive on lots of issues. And just because 68% of Republicans voted for this while “only” 57% of Democrats doesn’t mean that there isn’t progressive support for the war. Neocon support doesn’t preclude progressive support.

          1. So the GOP outdoes the Dems in authorizing this mess and no GOP reps are criticized here, but rather the ‘progs’ are, and that makes sense how?

            1. Lindsay Graham and McCain are criticized here constantly.

              1. This is a wee but more than the Graham-McCain show, we’re talking over 2/3 of the House GOP.

                1. This is a wee but more than the Graham-McCain show, we’re talking over 2/3 of the House GOP.

                  So your beef is that the commentariat isn’t chimping out about the GOP votes? As if we’re supposed to expect anything less from them?

                  You sure do have an itch, Bo. Maybe it’s time to extract that SoCon botfly from your head.

            2. It makes sense if you watched the video and consider who the fucking commander in chief is! You get an unnecessary amount of flak here, but this is not one of those times. You’re reaching. Just drop it.

              1. Sure, let’s ignore which party just, in the opposition no less, blessed this intervention and go on and talk about how evil Woodrow Wilson is or some ‘proggie’ commenter’s silly anonymous comments…

                1. Who’s ignoring it!?!? Yes, 68% of the GOP voted for this. People blast neocons and Republican hawks here all the time.

                  But this video specifically focuses on President Obama. It is making fun of his supporters more than it is making fun of him. It’s is dressing Obama’s support for war in the language of progressive causes because Obama is a progressive and this is his war! And it was made in response to the initial attempts to engage in Syria last year. It’s apropos now because Obama is still the President and he is now (successfully) leading us into the mess in Syria.

                  Only someone who sees Red Gremlins around every corner would feel the need to divert the thread towards criticism of neocon Republicans, even though they totally deserve to be tarred and feathered over this along with the progressives who also support this new war.

                  And what’s more, you could have easily made your point in a way that wasn’t snarky if you weren’t trying to purposely push people’s buttons by implying that they closet conservatives. All you would have had to say is “It’s sad to see 68% of Republicans that are supposed to be in opposition support this along with 57% of Democrats. Obama is the progressive President leading us in to war, but the neocons in the house let him. More evidence that they march to the beat of the same war drum and that Republicans can’t be trusted any more than Democrats.”

                  See how that works?

                  1. But if he’d done it that way, he wouldn’t have gotten people to respond to him — or if he had, they would all have been comments agreeing with him, thus undermining his martyr complex.

                  2. Perhaps I should have framed it that way, but seeing the comments I note when the big news is the vote seemed incredible. I’m also willing to bet that from many of ‘the usual suspects’ the video could have been about anything and we’d have got a similar ‘progs are under every bed and behind every ill’ line

      2. Remember, Bo Cara scored 94% on the Libertarian Purity Test?.

    3. Bo Cara Esq.|9.17.14 @ 8:19PM|#
      “Rather amusing to see so many commenters here with ‘boy, this prog war’ just hours after 68% of GOP representatives, as compared to 57% of Democrats, voted to authorize this action.”

      Rather amusing that self-important dolt confuses “prog” with team labels.

      1. The irony of saying it is I that confuse ‘prog’ with team labels is noted.

        1. Bo Cara Esq.|9.17.14 @ 8:38PM|#
          “The irony of saying it is I that confuse ‘prog’ with team labels is noted.”

          No-content post noted, twit.

          1. Content being beyond one =/= no content.

            1. Bo Cara Esq.|9.17.14 @ 9:03PM|#
              “Content being beyond one =/= no content.”

              You just LUV to see your handle in print, right twit?
              Fuck off.

    4. If Reason is as full of closet Republicans as you seem to think, shouldn’t the comments be supporting the war?

    5. It’s a “prog war” because only “grass-fed bombs” will be dropped and “rockets will be controlled by iPads” as per the video.

      Good job missing the joke.

      1. Do you think that’s what Winston and Grand Moff were referring too?

        1. fuck an A

          Take a deep breath and view your derp with fresh eyes.

          Who the fuck says “prog war”?

          Of course they are talking about the fucking video.

          If they said “Democrat wars” you might have a point.

          1. Right, Gran Moffs reference to Boxers ‘warboner’ was straight from and about the video.
            Sheesh, take a deep breath yourself there.

            1. So pointing out nominally anti-war prog hypocrisy is verboten in your eyes? Only criticism of all war-all the time GOPers is allowed?

    6. Gee thanks for the info that neocons suck. Without you I would not know that.

      Fucking BLUE Tulpa has to ruin everything.

      1. There are 114 neocons in the House GOP?

        1. I would think there was more then that.

          You are ruining it even more by the way.

          Fuck an A the first bit of good comedy making fun of Obama ever and you have to take a bright blue pile shit on it.

          Good fucking job.

          1. Friend, if my comments are causing you to have such a sad might I suggest you reach beyond your crippling desperation due to them and find the inner strength to…scroll past them?

    7. Yeah, but Republicans are supposed to be the War Party. Democrats are supposed to be for peace, love, equality, etc. 57% is still a majority.

  12. The absolute dumbest part of Obama’s extremely dumb overall plan regarding intervention against ISIS was the ‘fund the ‘moderates” part, and the House just said ‘okey-dokey!’


    1. Bo Cara Esq.|9.17.14 @ 8:41PM|#
      “The absolute dumbest part of Obama’s extremely dumb overall plan regarding intervention against ISIS was the ‘fund the ‘moderates” part, and the House just said ‘okey-dokey!'”

      ‘Oh, see, it wasn’t really that. I meant, uh, what’s coming out of the other side of my mouth NOW!’
      What a POS.

      1. Sevo, you’re not really this simplistic are you? Disliking Obama’s interventionist folly doesn’t preclude my pointing out who turned out in greater numbers to enable it today. In fact, quite the opposite.

        1. Bo Cara Esq.|9.17.14 @ 9:00PM|#
          “Sevo, you’re not really this simplistic are you?”

          Right. ‘It’s complicated! Only dolts like me are qualified to understand…’
          Go away. And stay away. Your act is tired.

    2. Seriously.

      If I thought that Obama was a secret plan, I would be of the opinion that the “fund the moderates” plan was a plot to funnel money to ISIS.

      Half the shit we give them ends up in ISIS’s hands.

      1. er secret muslim.

        Islamic psychoticism is more powerful now than it ever was.

      2. Consider that one year ago they were trying to intervene to help the ones we now target and harm the ones we are now going to help. It’s literally incredible. And the GOP House, which is supposed to be the opposition party for Pete’s sake, went 2/3 of them to support this madness. And does anyone in the commentariat here note this? No, they just roll on with the usual facsimile of the Rush Limbagh show that passed for libertarian discourse here.

        1. I never finished high school — had to work at my dad’s garage, so I went with a GED.

          Still, this is pretty much how I imagined high school drama.

          1. I would’ve given you junior college

            1. It could be worse. He could’ve gone to law school.

              1. I’m afraid that after getting my GED, I had to make do with going to a state college and getting a BS in Econ/Math, and then springing for my Math MS. Not quite as prestigious as being a law student, but I make do.

                Though Bo’s white collar chauvinism is duly noted.

  13. You know, it is truth. The progressives great and everlasting downfall since the beginning of the 20th century was their attempts to remake the world in America’s image. This started way back with Woodrow Wilson, who got us into WWI.

    Whenever Democrats are in office, they are always fighting humanitarian wars and intervening on behalf of democracy movements. They’re always trying to overthrow all the world’s dictators and replace them with Western Democracies. Not too different from the neo-cons, really, but they tend to use local proxies in place of US soldiers.

    But the reality has been that all that mucking around in other countries politics, in the name of democracy and human rights, hasn’t done us any more good than the neo-cons policies of invading and occupying.

    The Middle East is even more of a mess now than it was when Bush left office.
    This wasn’t what we signed up for. Obama was supposed to win over the Muslim world with peace and love. He promised reconcilliation in Cairo 6 years ago, but he has left only chaos and civil war. The Arab Spring has frozen into an Islamist Winter, killing its promise in the bud. None of the lofty dreams of the progressive left, in which America atoned for it’s sins and got rid of the dictators we propped up, have bourne fruit. Instead of a wave of liberalization, we have received a wave of beheadings as recompense for our trouble in destablizing the Arab world.

    1. I’ve no argument about progressives historical ties to the follies of Wilsonian interventions, just noting that on this particular vote they aren’t the main ones at fault, and further noting how crazy it is for so many here to whistle and ignore the fact and continue talking like this was the Sean Hannity show. The GOP blesses this mess and the talk here is ‘hey, how about thus warboner prog here!’

      1. I have no idea what the Republicans are thinking.

        What happened to Kissingerian realism?

        Kissinger would be cutting a deal with Russia and Assad and Al-Sisi.

        Replacing the world’s governments with liberal democracies has never been a Republican fantasy.

        1. There’s truth to that, but it’s also true that the Republicans have for a while been for intervention in the service of fighting what they see as international ideological threats such as communism (if you talk to commenters like IT it’s clear this Cold War mentality looms large).

          Well, after 9/11 many Republicans adopted ‘Islamofascism’ as their communist replacement and have supported many silly interventions to combat it, seemiingly now this folly as well

          1. Communism was a real threat and so is Islamism. The difference is that the Republicans traditionally followed a hard-nosed realistic policy in combatting communism, while Democrats had the idiotically naive believe that if we spread peace and love and democracy around that flowers would fall from heaven and we would have world peace.

            It’s like that episode of the Simpsons where Lisa’s fantasy world of no weapons is immediately taken over as soon as someone invents a stick with a nail in it. The Islamists have lots of sticks with nails in them, and they have no problem using them on the Lisa Simpsons of the world.

            1. I don’t find Islamism to be much of a threat, and hardly the existential one many on the Right see it as. A humbler foriegn policy, a distancing from Isreal, would go far more towards negating the minimal threat from Islamism than any of the silly interventions proposed by Obama and McCain.

              1. Why do you not think it’s a threat? Do you just not think they will ever gain enough power to attack us?

                I can imagine them sweeping across North Africa and setting up a unified Islamic State, which is their stated goal. They definitely have powerful political movements in all of the North African and Gulf states. It’s not beyond the realm of possibility that they could seize power in many of them. Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Lybia, Algeria, Nigeria, Pakistan, Afghanistan. All of these countries could realistically have islamist revolutions.

                1. Islamists aren’t exactly a united group. ISIS is a Sunni extremist group that can’t even get the support of al-Qaeda. In terms of US security, Islamism is a threat to pull off the occasional terrorist attack, not much else.

                  1. The goal of all of the Islmist groups is a unified Islamic state that stretches from north africa to Malaysia.

                    ISIS has already eclipsed Al Qaeda in terms of it’s appeal and influence in the Islamic world. Al Qaeda never held territory. And Syria/Iraq is a much more interesting place to control than Afghanistan.

  14. If we can bomb Cleveland first, I will chip in $20.00.

  15. 130 comments and nobody is talking about the hot chick? Are you sure everyone on HnR hasn’t been replaced with a bot? We should at least have a “too skinny / too fat” thread. C’mon guys, step up your misogyny game or we’ll be infiltrated by women.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.