TheDuckOfFlanders
the fish collecter
Agree Bluemonday ,that no country wil use nukes in this situation, as it is no.
The best possibel tactic is to nuke Afhanistan?
- Thread starter TheDuckOfFlanders
- Start date
TheDuckOfFlanders
the fish collecter
Morten Blaabjerg
Settler
Pretty smart propaganda stunt on part of the US, if that was what this ABC broadcast was about. Everyone is shaking in their panties, especially in the middle east. Just keep it that way.<br /> <img src="tongue.gif" border="0">
Ashoka
Reluctant Warrior
No nukes = good nukes.
However - I think it would be very good to manouver a few ships w/ nuclear missles, and a few planes w/ nuclear payloads, into the area (or at least hint that we are).
For deterence purposes, of course.
Some bad karma from some of our European allies, but the intimidation factor might more than make up for it.
Ashoka
However - I think it would be very good to manouver a few ships w/ nuclear missles, and a few planes w/ nuclear payloads, into the area (or at least hint that we are).
For deterence purposes, of course.
Some bad karma from some of our European allies, but the intimidation factor might more than make up for it.
Ashoka
allan
Cabrón
"As soon as Russia saw a nuclear launch, it would send all of it's up and then we'd have to send all of ours up. Bad mojo!"
Tactical nukes can be dropped from planes, or shot from heavy artillery. We don't need to send ICBMs over polar routes (Russia) to use them, as long as they are the small, tactical kind.
Although using a low-yield nuke to wipe out bin Laden's compounds would send a chilling signal to such terrorists, I'd overall be against it--unless it's the only way to do it given the terrain or fortifications, which I doubt.... "Nukes", even little ones that destroy only military targets, carry too many bad connotations--and we don't need that right now....
Tactical nukes can be dropped from planes, or shot from heavy artillery. We don't need to send ICBMs over polar routes (Russia) to use them, as long as they are the small, tactical kind.
Although using a low-yield nuke to wipe out bin Laden's compounds would send a chilling signal to such terrorists, I'd overall be against it--unless it's the only way to do it given the terrain or fortifications, which I doubt.... "Nukes", even little ones that destroy only military targets, carry too many bad connotations--and we don't need that right now....
I am sure that cooler heads are in charge over at the top of the American military establishment and that the American President and his staff and advisors will have consider all options and their 'price' before deciding on a course of action. At this point in time, it is more important to gather information. Like for example, where exactly is Osama in Afghanistan? I read somewhere he never stays in the same place for more than 2 days in a row. <br />At the end of the day, the important thing is that the actual perpertrators of this hideous crime are brought to justice, whether earthly or divine. If innocents are harmed or even killed in the course of pursuing the original terrorists, it may bring on even more terrorism in the future.
Graeme the mad
Certified Maniac
You guys are funny - ITS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN
TrailblazingScot
I was kittenOFchaos
...you nuke afghanistan and PAkistan will nuke Israel...and why not?
TheDuckOfFlanders
the fish collecter
Graeme the mad
Certified Maniac
Pakistan will nuke Israel???: was that serious?
If so <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[LOL]" />
If so <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[LOL]" />
allan
Cabrón
Do their missiles have the range? Israel is a tad bit further than India....
