You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!
If we were attacked by some sort of radiological bomb, what response do you think would be appropriate? Do you think we should Nuke some Middle Eastern Nation or attack Saudi Arabia? In response to 9/11 we attacked two countries, what do you all think would be a appropriate response to lets say a dirty bomb going off in New York? Would we then be justified to use nuclear bombs against the Middle East?
Obviously any nuclear attack on the Middle East would have to be small because Israel’s close proximity to most the Terrorist havens of the world.
I got in a debate about this with a co-worker so I was wondering what your feedback on this subject would be.
In response to 9/11, we attacked 1 country, Afghanistan, because we knew that was where the head perp and a lot of the little perps were located. Don't think we attacked Iraq because of 9/11, although it sure primed the pump.
The Middle East is a big place. We would need a target. If we knew where the bomb came from, then, YES, we would be justified and, I believe, would do it.
__________________
"I was always taught to respect my elders, but it keeps getting harder to find one." - Ronny
>> Why would we nuke a country in the Middle East if we're attacked by independent terrorists?
It might make a good candid camera sketch. (Sorry.)
__________________ You can't go around building a better world for people. Only people can build a better world for people. Otherwise it's just a cage.
Originally posted by raceboy If the terrorist had dirty bombs or weapons of mass destruction, they would have used them already.
I might come close to agreeing, but that doesn't mean they won't have them in the future. I think this is why Iran and Pakistan are so dangerous in their volitilaty..
A nuclear attack in the U.S., would be bad news for the middle east I believe. Personally, I'd still have a problem with just pushing a button and toasting a few million innocent people, but I can see it happening if there were a few million dead innocent Americans because of a nuclear/biological attack.
I would agree with Steve's statement except for the typical MO of Al Qaeda. They really like grandiose operations. For instance, 9/11 was supposed to have 10 planes attacking all over the country. Even what the 3 accomplished (the fourth didn't succeed) was stupendous and unprecedented. I think that if Al Qaeda had dirty bombs or WMD weaponry, they'd stockpile them for a coordinated attack in multiple cities at the same time. They really like to top themselves in their attacks. It's almost like an obligation for them to one-up their previous efforts. They also have a keen interest in maximizing the damage, death and fear, so they tend to wait things out until the opportune time. With these thoughts in mind, it's not unreasonable that they simply are waiting for the right moment to use such weaponry.
Originally posted by raceboy I mean, why would they have gone through all the trouble of 911 if they had some type of WMD? But true, that doesn't mean they won't have them in the future.
Why not do both? The psychological impact of using our capitalist airline industry and our free travel against us was devastating.
Also, the attack was years in planning and implementing. A WMD attack may be forthcoming, planned from years ago.
Maybe they didn't have WMDs until recently? Maybe they don't have any at all. The possibilities are endless.
One certainty is that the 9/11 attacks were relatively cheap and easy to implement at the time. They just required willing participants. They stole their weaponry in the process of the attack.
I was reading an other thread here and some one was talking about how if the Terrorist ever got there wish and there was a Holy war (i cant spell Jihad ?) and all the Muslims rose up and tried to fight the other non-Islamic countries that they would be swiftly crushed by the overwhelming force which is Europe and the US. So perhaps a nuclear attack would do more harm then good in the sense that it would give the green light to the US to obliterate the Middle East.
So perhaps a better question would be what do u think the likelihood of a chemical attack similar to the Tokyo Gas attack on US soil? They did try to use serin(spelling) gas on our soldiers in Iraq so I would presume they have more of it?
Originally posted by carlos3186 I was reading an other thread here and some one was talking about how if the Terrorist ever got there wish and there was a Holy war (i cant spell Jihad ?) and all the Muslims rose up and tried to fight the other non-Islamic countries that they would be swiftly crushed by the overwhelming force which is Europe and the US. So perhaps a nuclear attack would do more harm then good in the sense that it would give the green light to the US to obliterate the Middle East.
So perhaps a better question would be what do u think the likelihood of a chemical attack similar to the Tokyo Gas attack on US soil? They did try to use serin(spelling) gas on our soldiers in Iraq so I would presume they have more of it?
Yeah, that was me that wrote that. You must understand something here carlos...
Just because it's crazy to want a jyhad doesn't mean that these crackpots won't try to make it happen. People do some crazy and otherwise completely irrational things when they honestly believe that God (or Allah) is on their side and will lead them to victory in spite of all the facts that indicate the opposite. They're so delusional they're trying with everything in their power to make this Muslim v. Judeo-Christian war happen.
These people are very dangerous, precisely because they don't understand that what they want (muslim world rule) will never, ever happen. The moderate Arab states and other non-middle eastern muslim countries have come to realize that world islam through war is not a possibility right now, and may never be. But many Iranians, Iraqis, Syrians, Saudis, Yemenese, and Pakistanis have NOT yet figured this out...and they're the ones trying to push the jyhad upon us. It would do them more harm than good, but they're too blinded by rage and religion to know that.
[edit]For you military types, I note that the terrorists are "tactically" dangerous. Strategically, they're a bunch of lunatics whose long term plans can never be accomplished.[/edit]
Pete (thinks crazy people are more dangerous, not less)
__________________
"A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine." --Thomas Jefferson
Last edited by plezercruz; 06-23-2004 at 02:53 PM.
But many Iranians, Iraqis, Syrians, Saudis, Yemenese, and Pakistanis have NOT yet figured this out...and they're the ones trying to push the jyhad upon us. It would do them more harm than good, but they're too blinded by rage and religion to know that.
Pete (thinks crazy people are more dangerous, not less)
Agreed. Further, I think there are people blinded by rage on both sides of this issue..... and blind rage never produces a good result.
Hmmm interesting... this whole damn situation is so illogical. Thanks for the replies though. So much hate and so little love, why cant we all just get along…
__________________
"A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine." --Thomas Jefferson
Originally posted by carlos3186 Hmmm interesting... this whole damn situation is so illogical. Thanks for the replies though. So much hate and so little love, why cant we all just get along…
Excuse me, Carlos. Before you go away, what would you describe as "logical" in terms of a response to either of the two scenarios you described?
__________________
"I was always taught to respect my elders, but it keeps getting harder to find one." - Ronny
haha, well I would consider a logical war one in which the other side knows when it has lost. The Islamic world stands absolutely no chance of beating us. All they can hope to do is piss us off, which they are succeeding at doing. I used to be a very hard core believer that you need to just go in there and kick the crap out of them until they surrender, because that is the logical course of action. When some one is messing with you, you go and mess them up. In this war it seems that the only solution is to just wait them out and let them blow up enough people that, the other Muslims say enough and kill the terrorist. Unfortunately it seems that by attacking them we only add fuel to the fire.
During World War I and II we had a clear enemy and we had an objective and we accomplished it. Germany in both cases honestly had a shot at winning the war, but in this war the terrorist have 0 chance of victor and yet they still fight. This is an illogical course of action. We as Americans have the objective of being left the hell alone. We don’t really want anything other then peace; we gain nothing from a war over there other then our own security.
I still think our wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were necessary to show that we are a force to be reckoned with, but I don’t know were the US should go now. I think we need to get our act together as far as PR goes and win the hearts and minds of the Muslim world.
I hope that the terrorist will not use WMD on the US but I am sure down the line they will. It’s an unfortunate situation we have found our selves in, we are damned if attack them and we are damned if we don’t.
The democrats have put them selves in a position in which they criticize all our military’s actions, which make it ok for other countries to criticize every action. It is extremely bad for our nation. The GOP need to get on its game and make it clear that criticizing and being anti-war isn’t being patriotic and is not helping our nation. Though I do think a little criticizing amongst our people is good, but it has reach so a level that will hurt the nation
ok now that I have said that hopefully I haven’t pissed to many people off and haven’t talked to much out of my ***.
Normally I just read the post here, cuz u guys give me good stuff to argue to with my liberal friends but in the past few weeks I have been troubled by these beheadings and so much negative news that i felt i should post.
Thanks for the replies.
I don't think any war is logical. A defensive plan is logical whenever there's an offensive one.
>> I think we need to get our act together as far as PR goes and win the hearts and minds of the Muslim world.
Ah yeah, I think that's where this war is actually being fought. There's a hot war going on, per se, but the real battle ground is cold PR. The only way for terrorists to have any effect is to make us choose to give up.
__________________ You can't go around building a better world for people. Only people can build a better world for people. Otherwise it's just a cage.
As for the PR, I've been thinking about what is going on in Iraq. Eventually, more and more of the civilians are going to wake up to the fact that their fellow Muslims are attacking THEM, not us, and realize the blame really lies on the nuts among them. For instance, this has already happened in the north, where the Kurds have enjoyed a form of democracy/self rule for several years due to protection from our no-fly zones. A while back, I'm sure they felt abandoned by us when we didn't come rolling all the way through the country with tanks when they and the south tried uprisings in the early 90s. Now, that third of the country is pro-US with signs painted on buildings thanking the US, and no significant attacks on our soldiers. (I read an article on this early this week from one of the major papers, but can't find the link when I need it)
Eventually, maybe the rest of the country, and then the region will wake up, too, and realize it is the enemy in their midst that is really trying to keep them opressed, not us.
I don't think we can sit around and do nothing. Iran scares me a lot right now, because they are funding a lot of what is going on in Iraq against us in addition to their nuclear ambitions. I think eventually, we'll have to deal with them more directly.
Nuclear terrorist attack and how we would respond
