IS

[kramerfan86]

As to the number lost in total to Islamic terrorism? There is no way to calculate that. This issue is much older then ten years.

Fine make it a 100 years, 200 years, the entire existence of the united states for all I care. And forget exact numbers, go with a liberal range for all I care. It certainly under 50,000 americans. Hell I think it is very likely under 10,000 even if you include the soldiers who died combating this... "dire" threat. What about the threat justifies nuclear bombs exactly?

 

[Colonel]

"Angled drilling"?

Where are you proposing they "angle drill" from? Florida?

Ah, let me correct that I was meaning slant drilling, I couldn't remember what it was called. As to where, that depends on how wide an area we are required to nuke.

 

[Colonel]

Fine make it a 100 years, 200 years, the entire existence of the united states for all I care. And forget exact numbers, go with a liberal range for all I care. It certainly under 50,000 americans. Hell I think it is very likely under 10,000 even if you include the soldiers who died combating this... "dire" threat. What about the threat justifies nuclear bombs exactly?

It is a threat to the security and stability of the region. Islamic terrorism is counter to American interests in the region and as such we need to come down with an iron fist on the region. Let none doubt the resolve of the United States, it is our world to rule and we will achieve this through any means necessary.

 

[kramerfan86]

It is a threat to the security and stability of the region. Islamic terrorism is counter to American interests in the region and as such we need to come down with an iron fist on the region. Let none doubt the resolve of the United States, it is our world to rule and we will achieve this through any means necessary.

Because nothing says stability like irradiated wasteland. You are a schmuck.

 

[brennan]

I'm falling firmly on the side of this being trolling now.

 

[kramerfan86]

I'm falling firmly on the side of this being trolling now.

Has to be, he is wanting atom bombs to promote stability, insists that super pacs are VITAL to people being properly represented in politics, wants that clerk in kentucy executed. Simply cannot be real.

 

[Colonel]

Because nothing says stability like irradiated wasteland. You are a schmuck.

Stability and peace! Silence across the land, deep under ground our drills pulling the oil from the land, bringing it back to America, the greatest nation on this Earth!

 

[kramerfan86]

isnt this supposed to be a RD thread? Who let the comedian in?

 

[Colonel]

isnt this supposed to be a RD thread? Who let the comedian in?

This is the only safe eventuality for that region of the world. If we fail to act it will mean the end of Western Civilization! The problems of the third world will boil over into the first world and the world as a whole will end.

 

[kramerfan86]

Oh yea sure buddy, the path to stability is nuclear genocide against undesirables.

 

[Colonel]

Oh yea sure buddy, the path to stability is nuclear genocide against undesirables.

Its not nuclear genocide! It is WAR! The populations of the Middle East support the many terrorist organizations and are therefore legitimate targets of war! Besides which it would realistically only take one nuke to stop Islamic Terrorism.

 

[brennan]

Perhaps he's drunk... ?

 

[MagisterCultuum]

One nuke could kill many terrorists, but would definitely create orders of magnitude more of them in the process.

 

[Colonel]

One nuke could kill many terrorists, but would definitely create orders of magnitude more of them in the process.

Thats why after the first nuke you simply send a warning that if more terrorist acts happen we will strike again. Eventually they will get the message.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

The message they would get is that the terrorists were right all along, and that destroying the USA is more important than it ever way.

 

[Lohrenswald]

Its not nuclear genocide! It is WAR! The populations of the Middle East support the many terrorist organizations and are therefore legitimate targets of war! Besides which it would realistically only take one nuke to stop Islamic Terrorism.

The populations of USA support the many nuclear attacks and are therefore legitimate targets of genocide war

 

[Colonel]

The message they would get is that the terrorists were right all along, and that destroying the USA is more important than it ever way.

If that is the case so be it. In the end Southwest Asia and wherever else will be wiped off the map.

 

[Commodore]

Thats why after the first nuke you simply send a warning that if more terrorist acts happen we will strike again. Eventually they will get the message.

Nuclear weapons aren't meant to be a "send a message" weapon. They are supposed to be last resort weapons that are only to be used in the event of imminent defeat. The concept being: "You may have defeated us, but we are going to destroy your homes and your families in the process. Congratulations on your victory."

 

[Colonel]

Nuclear weapons aren't meant to be a "send a message" weapon. They are supposed to be last resort weapons that are only to be used in the event of imminent defeat. The concept being: "You may have defeated us, but we are going to destroy your homes and your families in the process. Congratulations on your victory."

This application nuclear weapons has held us back for 25 years now since the break up of the Soviet! After the fall we should have resorted to nuclear diplomacy with these non-state actors and ended the problem of terrorism and insurgency in an instance.

 

[Tigranes]

Perhaps he's drunk... ?

I have suggested that but got very sober answer:

I'm not drunk nor am I joking. US troops should be sent to the region to secure it. Russia must be driven out and a permanent US presence should remain in the region!