To Nuke Or Not To Nuke
 

So the CIA FBI is saying a major terrorist attack is imminent, possibly a 'dirty' bomb containing radioactive material, another gutless attack on innocent civilians, children, women and men.

So if this should happen do you think we should drop a nuke on Iraq or any other country who harbors and funds Al Qaeda?

We dropped two H-bombs in WWII to end a war that could have lasted much longer and cost many more American soldiers lives.
No innocent civilians were every harmed by the Japanese or Germans, the closest they came was the sneak attack on Pearl Harbor.

Two attacks for me is enough to wipe every single last Muslim extremist off the map and if that means nuking innocents so be it, you wanna start shit be prepared for the consequences. Friggin peaceniks just love burying their heads in the sand, these fucking lunatics announced to the world that they were at war, a JIHAD, with the United States. Um........what part of that don't these freakin Hollywood terrorist huggers understand?

Well there is only one coutry to nuke that will solve all problems and that is Saudi Arabia, all the people and money comes right from there

i am so with you on that brother. That is my target of choice, far ahead of Iraq.

Iraq is a country of ignorant poor people living under a dictator who has made no secret he is up to no good. The Saudis are the backstabbers, the funders, the architects of this attack on Western civilization.

I prefer Postnuke.

With the ammount of nukes the US has, why not nuke both countries?

Using a nuclear weapon would be very stupid to say the least. It seems the CIA knows where these camps are located throughout the world. Iraq, Iran, Lybia, Syria, Pakistan, etc... targetted JDAMS are the weapon of choice. Use them by the 100's ;)

No need to hurt innocent people on purpose.

We dropped A bombs on Japan during WWII. The A bomb is nothing more then a trigger head for the 700x as powerfull Hydrogen Bomb these days.

And to think, one day we will all die because of idiots like you... a saddening thought indeed.

why not just bomb every other country? No more problems, bombing solves everything :321GFY

Hehe.. if they dropped two H bombs on Japan there wouldnt be anymore japan.

yes you Einsteins it is a much better strategy to negotiate with religious lunatics who declare holy wars and their wish for a fight to the death in the name of Allah. Not to mention their major goal to wipe the Jewish race off the face of the earth.

I think guys like you who understand so much of world and religious history should be sent to Baghdad to negotiate. Please report back on any progress you make.

And ya know what, at the end of the day if this is all about OIL on the American end, I'll take that ANY FUCKING DAY over the annihilation of one religion in the name of another one.

This might be true if you equate civilian = american. Which is a fault I find it very likely you would make.

History is bound to repeat itself, especially when there are so many idiots around who don't know the history.
And btw, the risks of a "dirty" bomb are very overrated, most experts seem to agree the effect would be very limited. But it would spread fear among the uneducated.

I am not opposed to war. But you cant just go around destroying countries with nuclear weapons. That will be the beginning of the end towards everything.

a man dies of radiation sickness, a man dies jumping out of a skyscraper that is on fire and collapsing after being hit by two jumbo jets piloted by terrorists? what is the difference?

nobody is saying nuke the whole fucking country into being uninhabitable for the next thousand years, the US has many nuclear weapons that will not wipe out massive numbers of people but they will bring about the end of Saddam Hussein and scare the shit out of those who harbor and fund terrorism.

You consider 9/11 a <b>bad</b> thing, right?
If, like you imply, there is no difference, wouldn't that mean that it would be a <b>bad</b> thing to nuke the innocent?

If you say they should be nuked and civilians do not matter, you are basically saying they had every right to destroy the twin towers, and that what they did is an acceptable tactic.

It would create a new ball game. Other countries would get involved. Nuclear war is the biggest self inflicted man made threat.

Muslims have an important presence in 59 countries.

you play by the rules of your enemy. don't bring a knife to a gunfight, bring a bigger gun than your enemy's gun.

do you think the United States wanted any part of this? Get real.
The United States and its allies were PROVOKED into this a year and a half ago. War was declared. Or did you miss that?

I said wipe the Muslim extremists, repeat, EXTREMISTS, off the map.

Just as I would say wipe WHITE SUPREMACISTS off the map if they brought down the WTC towers and had more weapons of mass destruction and a public declaration of war, jihad, and the annihilation of the Jewish race.

Many people dont realize how much destruction weapons of mass destruction can cause.:1orglaugh
I think they said a large portion of Hiroshima was leveled faster then you can blink your eyes with the fission atomic weapon. Multiply that by hundreds for the fussion kicker they added.

Do you know if your neighbour is a muslim extremist?

Perhaps you and your town will be the target for the next US tactical nuke.

Risks?

You should research what kind of damagae 9/11 did to our country.
Why do you think alot of retail stores are now bankrupt ? Airline workers were laid off..

Example.

Museum Co had to file for bankruptcy the Jan after 9/11..Their biggest selling retail stores are in airports... What closed up after 9/11 in DC for a week or so..

One dirty bomb would have a LARGE effect on this country and it would be worse than 9/11..

There is a huge difference between the two bombs we dropped on Japan and what we have today. In Japan we took out two entire cities in the blink of an eye; Today we can take out all of Iraq just as quickly.

I also don't believe we should use something "small" to take out just a small area - A single base or a small town.

We are fighting with Iraq to prevent them from getting / using weapons of mass destruction - We shouldn't use them ourselves.

Nukes are really a last resort.

Right, with effect I really meant physical effects.

The psychology of the people is an entirely different issue. More people would have to have that sense of immortality removed.

I bet the people of Israel and London would have much to teach in that matter.

I dont think they even have baby nukes for a small job, being that there is no reason to use nuclear technology for something small.
The fission bomb of Japan (A-bomb), is the only device which can create a temp. high enough in degree to start the fussion process. Which is why the A-bomb serves as the trigger for the fussion (Hydrogen Bomb). They have a Neutron Bomb that causes as much damage as a hydrogen bomb but without the fireworks.

In the reality of nuclear weapons the ones we dropped on Japan are the baby nukes. The small ones.

People throw around the term "Weapons of mass destruction" like they want to super size a value meal.

This is one of the very few statements I can agree with in this post. Most people here disguss about a topic they don't know a shit about. Ok that's maybe the rights of free speech and I'm free not to read it :)

Mutt, just STFU while you still can