Battle Rap and Freestyle Battles at Lets Beef


 
Start a battle

Vote on a battle to earn +1 credit!
 
  Scheme Championships May 2025
 
 
Battle Feed
Slogo16z vs ahSHHitahSHHit is on FIRE! 5+ wins in a row!
Style: Written Blind Drop
4 Votes 4.75 stars4.75 stars4.75 stars4.75 stars4.75 stars

[ more battles... ]
 
 

Go Back   Lets Beef - Battle Rap Forums > Battle Arena > General Talk
Register Articles FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search Journals

Notices

User Tag List

 
 
Thread Tools Display
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #1  
Unread 11-25-2015, 12:42 PM
Rant
Guest
Posts: n/a
Mentioned: Post(s)
Tagged: Thread(s)
Default ISIS, Russia, and the "credible" threat.

If you've been following the news, there are a few things you've become aware of. And I'd like to get some thoughts on these trending media topics.

First, with the downing of a Russian jet by Turkey, there has been a flurry of contradictory reports coming from these two factions. With that said, I have a couple of questions regarding these reports. Russia had made several, overt claims that there were no attempts by Turkey to contact their pilot in this incident. Furthering, they have posited that it was a planned attack, and that their jet was downed over Syrian airspace. Conversely, Turkey claims to have made multiple attempts to contact this jet, and made several explicit warnings before downing it. So, what I want to know, is this: Can we trust Russia to be forthcoming, and honest regarding their downed jet? Or, should we assume that they are being dishonest in their claims? If, however, they are being honest, why, then, would Turkey make this assault? Could there be underlying ties between Turkey, and radical Islamic factions?

Second, on the home front, we've heard a lot of the same over recent days, and weeks. Despite ramping up homeland security to measures previously unseen since 9/11, we've heard the same thing being reported. "No specific, credible threats at this time." In this regard, what I am then curious about, is this: Would the United States government be forthcoming, if there was explicit knowledge of a planned attack? If so, would it be rationally strategic to do so? In an instance in which there were identified threats, would public knowledge of those threats not hinder the disruption of any of these possible attacks, if they were to be so? And if this is to be true, does it further suggest that an identifiable, and "credible" threat has already been realized?
Reply With Quote
Unread 11-25-2015, 12:42 PM   #1
 
Rant
Guest
 
Voted: 0 audio / 0 text
Posts: n/a
Mentioned: Post(s)
Tagged: Thread(s)
Default ISIS, Russia, and the "credible" threat.

If you've been following the news, there are a few things you've become aware of. And I'd like to get some thoughts on these trending media topics.

First, with the downing of a Russian jet by Turkey, there has been a flurry of contradictory reports coming from these two factions. With that said, I have a couple of questions regarding these reports. Russia had made several, overt claims that there were no attempts by Turkey to contact their pilot in this incident. Furthering, they have posited that it was a planned attack, and that their jet was downed over Syrian airspace. Conversely, Turkey claims to have made multiple attempts to contact this jet, and made several explicit warnings before downing it. So, what I want to know, is this: Can we trust Russia to be forthcoming, and honest regarding their downed jet? Or, should we assume that they are being dishonest in their claims? If, however, they are being honest, why, then, would Turkey make this assault? Could there be underlying ties between Turkey, and radical Islamic factions?

Second, on the home front, we've heard a lot of the same over recent days, and weeks. Despite ramping up homeland security to measures previously unseen since 9/11, we've heard the same thing being reported. "No specific, credible threats at this time." In this regard, what I am then curious about, is this: Would the United States government be forthcoming, if there was explicit knowledge of a planned attack? If so, would it be rationally strategic to do so? In an instance in which there were identified threats, would public knowledge of those threats not hinder the disruption of any of these possible attacks, if they were to be so? And if this is to be true, does it further suggest that an identifiable, and "credible" threat has already been realized?
 
Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:29 AM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

 

[ LetsBeef Instagram | LetsBeef Facebook | LetsBeef Twitter | LetsBeef Youtube | Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions | FAQ | Contact Support ]
Some members of the public may use explicit lyrics in the performance of their art, so please be advised that such language, if any, may not be appropriate for minors.
Graphics by Pixel Dreams · Site © 2025 LetsBeef.com
 
no new posts