or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › What would happen if we dropped the bomb.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What would happen if we dropped the bomb.

post #1 of 61
Thread Starter 
I think there is a valid argument for us dropping the bomb after 9/11. Go ahead, flame away. I'm not saying we should have done it, bit there is a strong argument for it.

If we had dropped the bomb, say in early October, and say, on a city like Kabul, thousands of innocents would die. There would be nuclear fallout, world outrage, and UN condemnation.

But, there is no question that it would demonstrate to the world that we will use our ultimate weapon if provoked. We would send a message that if you attack us, we will retaliate with 100x times the force you attacked us with. You kill 3,000 Americans, we kill 300,000 of your people. You take out a federal building or economic center, we take out a city.

This would be a horrific thing to be sure. But I think some would argue that the very existence of our nation is at stake. Either we demonstrate our massive outrage and abilities or we spend hundreds of billions of dollars and thousands of lives fighting a prolonged war that may not be winable. Either we protect our way of life or we don't. Either they kill us or we kill them. No ground war, no budget deficts, just a big ****ing nuke down their throats.

Call it simplistic, call it stupid, call it horrible. I think there is an argument here. We have to get serious about protecting OUR lives in THIS nation, and not through the removal of civil liberties.

</puts on flame suit>

Of course, this is just an argument. I think in the end, I would reject this option. But not by much.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #2 of 61
First of all, you couldn't possibly think that killing thousands of innocent people is a good thing can you? I don't. I think it's a war crime.

Second, murdering 300,000 people would not help us at all. All that would do is to galvanize those who wish us ill. If there were 1000 terrorists, there would now be 100,000. Additionally, this would push the nations who were undecided about which side of this conflist they were on over the edge. We would have new enemies.

Third, detonating this sort of weapon could be seen as an excuse for terrorists to use this sort of weapon against us. Need I remind you how close Afghanistan is to the former Soviet Union? Need I remind you how lax the security of soviet made nuclear weapons is?

Fourth, nuclear explosions cause havoc to the environment and affect more than just the nation targeted. Even if you still think that nuking Afghanistan is a good idea, you couldn't possibly think that exposing the citizens of China, Pakistan, Iran, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and depening of the winds, Kazakhstan, Russia, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Iraq, Kuwait, India, and possibly more nataions to radioactive fallout is a good thing, could you?

[ 05-05-2002: Message edited by: Stroszek ]</p>
post #3 of 61
I see no need to kill innocent Afghans. They may hate us, but we are not at war.

If it is revealed that the Afghan people are wllingly financially supporting the terrorist groups, (like we do our Army), I say it's war on them. No nukes though.

If we use a nuke, then one of the Middle Eastern Bastard countries will buy one and ship it to Washington.
post #4 of 61
[quote]Originally posted by cdhostage:
<strong>I see no need to kill innocent Afghans. They may hate us, but we are not at war.

If it is revealed that the Afghan people are wllingly financially supporting the terrorist groups, (like we do our Army), I say it's war on them. No nukes though.

If we use a nuke, then one of the Middle Eastern Bastard countries will buy one and ship it to Washington.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Totally agree with you.
post #5 of 61
You're an idiot.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #6 of 61
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>You're an idiot.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Without any justifications?
post #7 of 61
I don't think it needs to be justified, just read SDW's first post. He's an idiot, that fact stands alone.

The first sentence alone is all the proof I need.

I think there is a valid argument for us dropping the bomb after 9/11."
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #8 of 61
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>I don't think it needs to be justified, just read SDW's first post. He's an idiot, that fact stands alone.

The first sentence alone is all the proof I need.

I think there is a valid argument for us dropping the bomb after 9/11."</strong><hr></blockquote>

I believe I read in National Review, if I am not wrong, couple of days after 9-11 a call for ethnic cleansing against all that is middle eastern in the US. That was written by a female columnist. That is not so far from this situation. There are lots of people who think that retaliation should on a very large scale. From what I read in another thread started by SDW also, that he watch's "everyone favorate's show" which the the Oraielly. O'Rielly have expressed more than once the extermination of all that is Muslim if necessary (more than 1 billion individuals in population).

This show has lots of audience, and many might have been convinced with what is presented by the host of the show. Shouldn't we at least bother answer back?
post #9 of 61
SDW2001:
Why just Afghanistan? If you wanted to "get Al Qaeda", then I imagine you would be in favor of nuking Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the Philippines and 57 other countries in which Al Qaeda operatives are based....

If America adopts those kind of (asinine) tactics then we will be terrorized more. It sounds like you really want that to happen. I assume you must have shares in Lockheed Martin and Raytheon.
Why of course the people don't want war ... But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a...
Reply
Why of course the people don't want war ... But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a...
Reply
post #10 of 61
I'm going to require a little proof that O'Reilly (sp?) or the National Review called for the extermination of all Muslims. Sounds like a load of crap to me.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #11 of 61
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>I'm going to require a little proof that O'Reilly (sp?) or the National Review called for the extermination of all Muslims. Sounds like a load of crap to me.</strong><hr></blockquote>

As far as the O'Reilly, that I personally heared while watching the show back in Oct. I am not sure if you could find those transcripts on his site.

As for the National Review, the columnists name is Ann Coulter (really good looking lady ). I managed to pull one of her first reactions from <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/coulter/coulter091301.shtml" target="_blank">National Review</a> site. In this she wants to invade the Muslim countries, kill their leaders, and convert them all to Christianity.
Another site which goes through her columns has the following:

"There is no principled basis for opposition to using Arab appearance as a factor in airport screening procedures. . . This is not a psychological about an ethnic group - it is an all points bulletin: Warning! The next terrorist to board a commerical flight will be an Arab or Muslim male" ("If the Profile Fits" 10 January 2002)

"Congress coudl pass a law requiring that all aliens from Arabic countries leave. . .Congress could certainly pass a law requiring all aliens to get approval from the INS before bording an airplane in the United States" ("Where is Janet Reno when we need her" 20 Septebmer 2001)

"Not all Muslims may be terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslim. . . There will be two fail-safes: (1) Muslim immigrants who agree to spy on the millions of Americans unaffected by the deportation order can stay; and (2) any Muslim immigrant who gets a U.S. Senator to waive his deportation - by name - gets to stay" ("Future Widows of America: Write Your Congressman" 27 September 2001)

Those are her quotes from her articles. Click on the Archive link at the top of the link I provided above and you could check it yourself.
post #12 of 61
[quote]Originally posted by SDW2001:
<strong>

We would send a message that if you attack us, we will retaliate with 100x times the force you attacked us with. You kill 3,000 Americans, we kill 300,000 of your people. You take out a federal building or economic center, we take out a city.

</strong><hr></blockquote>

Someone's been watching Swordfish.

J :cool:
post #13 of 61
[quote]Originally posted by SDW2001:
<strong>

Call it simplistic, call it stupid, call it horrible. I think there is an argument here.

Of course, this is just an argument. I think in the end, I would reject this option. But not by much.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I call this simplistic and stupid : because
if (cheap science fiction for brain washed anti US people) US dropped the bomb in kabul :
- all the world will be disapointed by these mass murder
- bin laden will be very happy : i think that bin laden was disapointed by the way US conduct the war in afghanistan. Bin laden was hoping that US will act as cow-boy and that in reaction all the arabs countries will go in jihad against US.
- all the ennemy of US will be very happy

I call it horrible : does i have to explain why ?

SDW 2001 : i am sorry but it's not the best post you ever made : it is the worse.
<img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
post #14 of 61
The only justification for using nuclear weapons is if we were attacked with them. We should never preemptively strike with nukes , only if we are first attacked with nuclear or biological weapons (warheads).
post #15 of 61
[quote]Originally posted by Outsider:
<strong>The only justification for using nuclear weapons is if we were attacked with them. We should never preemptively strike with nukes , only if we are first attacked with nuclear or biological weapons (warheads).</strong><hr></blockquote>
I agree with you on this one
post #16 of 61
first: I think that nuclear weapons are NEVER justified

second: some americans are stupid (not all, but SDW2001 for sure) always this "we are a free land !" singing. we don't need that.
post #17 of 61
What exactly is the connection between racial profiling and genocide?

Kind of toned down your accusations a bit, have you?

Don't be stupid, it's irritating. If you simply must be stupid don't talk to people who aren't. Stay in your circle of idiots with this blather.

--------------

I am a patriot and I love my nation. I don't care if people look down on me for loving my nation. But nuclear attacks on civilian populations because of a terrorist attack... absolute lunacy.

[ 05-05-2002: Message edited by: groverat ]</p>
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #18 of 61
I would worry about the possible domino effect of such actions...

I dont think that nukes are ever justified...

it's a horrible blunt weapon and given the dynamics of the faceless attack...

where is the battle front? where is the enemy?

How many thousands of innocent people have to die to get the few bad guys?...

we would be no better than our enemy...

IMO...
post #19 of 61
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>You're an idiot.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Shut up groverat.

Anyways, a nuclear bomb is not the ideal weapon for deflating a very spread-out society. Unless you planned to carpet-nuke Afghanistan, I don't think a nuclear assualt would have too much affect.
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
post #20 of 61
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>What exactly is the connection between racial profiling and genocide?

Kind of toned down your accusations a bit, have you?

Don't be stupid, it's irritating. If you simply must be stupid don't talk to people who aren't. Stay in your circle of idiots with this blather.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

did you say that to me ?
post #21 of 61
Were you the one who said that O'Reilly and the National Review called for a Muslim genocide?

Context clues, people.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #22 of 61
People need to do some more research on what happen in 11th September 2001. Really folks, reality actually is a LOT different than what the mass media have been telling you.

Below are some the things that some of you need to check out.


Hunt the Boeing:

<a href="http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/pentagone/erreurs_en.htm" target="_blank">http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/pentagone/erreurs_en.htm</a>


Jet fuel fire, melted steel?:

<a href="http://world.care2.com/jmcmichael/files/" target="_blank">http://world.care2.com/jmcmichael/files/</a>


No suicide bombers:

<a href="http://www.eionews.addr.com/psyops/news/carolvalentine.htm" target="_blank">http://www.eionews.addr.com/psyops/news/carolvalentine.htm</a>


Information about the United States' Air Defense:

<a href="http://www.ecologynews.com/cuenews43updates3.html" target="_blank">http://www.ecologynews.com/cuenews43updates3.html</a>


The stuff above aren't completely correct, but... those things will at least give you some extra information to be processed.

Please don't think that I'm anti United States for saying this kind of thing, I'm not, if I were, I won't using this Apple Power Macintosh 7500/100.

What I want is... For some of you to think about some things, things that might be relevant but wasn't revealed by the mass media to the general public.

As for using nukes.

Why not? Eradicating and leveling an entire area is a very effective way. And it's not like that it hasn't been done before.

Like Sodom and Gomorrah for example.

But then again, that place was really a screwed up place, and I'm a REALLY screwed up place.

As for the rule to even out the odds.

If you mean something like.

You kill my brother, I will kill you.

Agree. IF the killing of your brother isn't an accident and isn't done for the right reason.

Like for example. Person A killed person B and it isn't an accident and isn't done for the right reason. Person C, who's the son of person B is outraged and is very upset over the death of his father and wanted person A DEAD! Then yes, person C should kill person A.

Note: Person C should kill person A directly and shouldn't let other people do the killing for him.

Of course, if person C decided to spare the life of person A and person A become a good person later on. Hey. There's nothing wrong with that either.


But... What happen if person A killed person B is because he was told by person D to kill person B.

Should person A killed person D?

No. Why? Because person D isn't the one who killed person B. Why should person D be killed also?
post #23 of 61
[quote]digix's links<hr></blockquote>

<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

I love all the physics and thermodynamics lessons we've been getting on this subject from activist journalists.

<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

I, for one, don't think you're anti-American, digix, I just think you're a fool if you believe any of those idiotic links.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #24 of 61
Thread Starter 
Wow, you guys are predictable. I was just saying there was an argument for the bomb. Lighten up.

Anyone that doesn't think our executive branch didn't have exactly the same argument on 9/11 and afterwards has got to be kidding.

And wow, goverat, EVERYONE must be dumb compared to you!!!

[ 05-05-2002: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]</p>
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #25 of 61
Now first everybody say "Anders is the most reasonable person I have ever known and hee has always been a worthy president of Sane Elite"

[quote]Originally posted by digix:
<strong>
Hunt the Boeing:

<a href="http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/pentagone/erreurs_en.htm" target="_blank">http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/pentagone/erreurs_en.htm</a>
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Actually I wondered about this too looking on the pictures 911. Do anyone have a picture that actually show the Boeing or parts of it?
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
"I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" - President Bush
Reply
post #26 of 61
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>What exactly is the connection between racial profiling and genocide?

Kind of toned down your accusations a bit, have you?

Don't be stupid, it's irritating. If you simply must be stupid don't talk to people who aren't. Stay in your circle of idiots with this blather.

--------------

I am a patriot and I love my nation. I don't care if people look down on me for loving my nation. But nuclear attacks on civilian populations because of a terrorist attack... absolute lunacy.

[ 05-05-2002: Message edited by: groverat ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

It does not play it down. Like I said she called for ethnic cleansing. That is not so far from genocide. Genocide is only few steps down the chain of reaction.

As far as the O'Reilly show goes, well ... it is my personal credibility at stack, you don't have to believe it so long as I fail to reference it. If you do not think that there are stupid people in the US who would call for such a thing or believe in it, that is your problem with superiority feelings.

Life is about chain of actions and reactions. When you grow wise enough, you will realize that throwing words such as "stupid" is not recommended in discussions. Unless of course you are here to show how superior you're in thoughts and vista. If so, that is what you are after, then I will delightfully take the word "stupid" and I leave you with the better than my IQ score.

I hope that makes your day.
post #27 of 61
When nukes are next used in anger it will break the enormous taboo that has built up since the end of WW2. So far there hasn't been an attack against the US or its allies so horrific as to require at least considering a nuclear response.

The argument that using a nuclear weapon would necessarily kill many thousands of innocent people is mistaken. Nuclear weapons can be designed to have a very low explosive yield. If you attacked a remote and/or buried site - think Libyan chemical weapon factory - the damage to civilians from direct blast effects or radiation would probably be quite slight.
post #28 of 61
SDW:

If you think nuclear attack was a reaction to 9/11 with a valid argument then you're an idiot, plain and simple. By no stretch of the imagination was that a reasonable thing to do. There can be no logical arguments made to that extent.

As for an argument against nuking nations of innocents for the actions of terrorists, look at the rate of terrorist attacks against the U.S. since 9/11... non-existant.

jakkorz:

I will recommend that you don't engage in debates like this until you have a better grasp of the English language. I am assuming that English isn't your first language because "ethnic cleansing" and "genocide" are the same thing.

[quote]If you do not think that there are stupid people in the US who would call for such a thing or believe in it, that is your problem with superiority feelings.<hr></blockquote>

Sure there are. The original poster was stupid enough to assert that there is a "valid argument" for a nuclear attack after 9/11. There are people who think that, yes, but you mentioned specific people and that's a heavy charge to throw out.

Would you not mind if I accused you of being a murderer and child rapist and my only way of backing it up was to say "there are murderers and child rapists in the world."?

[quote]Unless of course you are here to show how superior you're in thoughts and vista.<hr></blockquote>

I am here to discuss things and refute things. You post your accusations and I will post mine.

Anders:

There wouldn't be much left of a plane going that speed hitting a reinforced building like the Pentagon.

Then there's the entire matter of that flight disappearing along with the people on board...

If you're interested in reading a larger topic regarding this, <a href="http://arstechnica.infopop.net/OpenTopic/page?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=28609695&m=3140912793& p=1" target="_blank">Go here</a>.

[ 05-05-2002: Message edited by: groverat ]</p>
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #29 of 61
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>SDW:

If you think nuclear attack was a reaction to 9/11 with a valid argument then you're an idiot, plain and simple. By no stretch of the imagination was that a reasonable thing to do. There can be no logical arguments made to that extent.

As for an argument against nuking nations of innocents for the actions of terrorists, look at the rate of terrorist attacks against the U.S. since 9/11... non-existant.

jakkorz:

I will recommend that you don't engage in debates like this until you have a better grasp of the English language. I am assuming that English isn't your first language because "ethnic cleansing" and "genocide" are the same thing.



I am here to discuss things and refute things. You post your accusations and I will post mine.

Anders:

There wouldn't be much left of a plane going that speed hitting a reinforced building like the Pentagon.

Then there's the entire matter of that flight disappearing along with the people on board...

If you're interested in reading a larger topic regarding this, <a href="http://arstechnica.infopop.net/OpenTopic/page?q=Y&a=tpc&s=50009562&f=28609695&m=3140912793& p=1" target="_blank">Go here</a>.

[ 05-05-2002: Message edited by: groverat ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

You are right. Genocide == Ethnic Cleansing.

Merriam-Webster <a href="http://www.m-w.com" target="_blank">www.m-w.com</a>

One entry found for ethnic cleansing.

Main Entry: ethnic cleansing
Function: noun
Date: 1992
: the expulsion, imprisonment, or killing of ethnic minorities by a dominant majority group
---
One entry found for genocide.

Main Entry: geno·cide
Pronunciation: 'je-n&-"sId
Function: noun
Date: 1944
: the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group
- geno·cid·al /"je-n&-'sI-d&l/ adjective

They are wrong!

A lesson in English (your native language)
Just so that you would understand better how to get a clue at the meaning of words, I suggest that you always look for prefixes and post-fixes. They help a lot to decipher many words and technical definitions.

Post-fix -cide stands for extermination, killing, etc. e.g. insecti-cide, sui-cide, homo-cide, etc.

Peace, my enthusiastic human brother.
post #30 of 61
Ethnic cleansing is used in the language as a synonym for genocide. A term popularized in the U.S. (specifically) around the time of the genocidal tribe wars in Rwanda.

I commend your ability to use the dictionary. The word "faggot" means a small bundle of sticks, but oddly enough that's not what the word "means" in English.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #31 of 61
Yuo two si ghey!

Teh B0mB si guD fore teh Teroritz. Fsk1ng Terarists!

K THX BYE
post #32 of 61
SDW2001,

I see absolutely no legal or moral justification whatsoever for us to nuke Afghans or anybody else who may be responsible for 9-11.

I don't see a reason to nuke Iraq either if it turns out that they were involved with the 9-11 attack. But, I would support conventional warfare to topple the Iraq leadership if it does turn out they were involved.
post #33 of 61
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>You're an idiot.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I agree 100%.


In response to the thread title (what would happen if we dropped the bomb?):

The world would end. Plain and simple.
"Oh boy, sleep! That's where I'm a viking!"
Reply
"Oh boy, sleep! That's where I'm a viking!"
Reply
post #34 of 61
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>Ethnic cleansing is used in the language as a synonym for genocide. A term popularized in the U.S. (specifically) around the time of the genocidal tribe wars in Rwanda.

I commend your ability to use the dictionary. The word "faggot" means a small bundle of sticks, but oddly enough that's not what the word "means" in English.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Not only are you right, but you are always right. (I hope this is what he wanted me to confess!)
post #35 of 61
"Always" is a bit much%2¦OP827ll settle for 95-96% of the time.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #36 of 61
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>"Always" is a bit much%2¦OP827ll settle for 95-96% of the time.</strong><hr></blockquote>

You are Infallible. (Why does he feel bad that a none native speaker, like he thinks I am, could understand and carefully chose words better than he does in his natively spoken language!)
post #37 of 61
I don't know (care) whether or not you are non-native. I as just being an asshole, which is a specialty of mine.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #38 of 61
[quote]Originally posted by Jamie:
<strong>

Someone's been watching Swordfish.

J :cool: </strong><hr></blockquote>

My thoughts exactly. <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
post #39 of 61
[quote]Originally posted by digix:
<strong>People need to do some more research on what happen in 11th September 2001. Really folks, reality actually is a LOT different than what the mass media have been telling you.

Below are some the things that some of you need to check out.


Hunt the Boeing:

<a href="http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/pentagone/erreurs_en.htm" target="_blank">http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/pentagone/erreurs_en.htm</a>


etc.</strong><hr></blockquote>

This is why I hate the internet. Any fool can put anything they want on it, and people believe. It's on the iternet after all! And, hey, where's the link about the very obvious absence of an aircraft in that field in PA? Could it be that crater is from a meteorite? Or maybe Canada was lobbing missles at us?!

[quote]<strong>Like Sodom and Gomorrah for example.

But then again, that place was really a screwed up place, and I'm a REALLY screwed up place.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
&lt;RANT REMOVED&gt;
could you please explain your thinking here?
post #40 of 61
Well, we did everything short of dropping the bomb on those guys. If you have not looked up a daisy cutter recently i suggest you go look it up now. Many consider it to be as bad as a small nuke, without the nasty side effects (radiation for example). <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › What would happen if we dropped the bomb.