if you were president...

[NEO]

would you pull out our troops from afghanistan?

Yes. I would. But I would drop an A bomb 1 second later after the last troop was pulled out.

This country needs to remember we have the bomb and that it worked very well for us in WW2. Why build them if you don't use them in times like this?

 

[IPorange]

Yes. I would. But I would drop an A bomb 1 second later after the last troop was pulled out.

This country needs to remember we have the bomb and that it worked very well for us in WW2. Why build them if you don't use them in times like this?

psychotic and incredibly ignorant.

 

[rjd970]

Yes. I would. But I would drop an A bomb 1 second later after the last troop was pulled out.

This country needs to remember we have the bomb and that it worked very well for us in WW2. Why build them if you don't use them in times like this?

Not sure if my sarcasm meter is working on this one. If serious then you are :crazy:

 

[rjd970]

I wouldn't completely pull the troops out. I would keep some presence there indefinitely until stability is complete...eg Iraq.

 

[NEO]

psychotic and incredibly ignorant.

Tell me then why the bomb worked on Japan but would not work in the Muslim extremist.

Both are based on honor. It was the Japanese honor system that made them so tough to beat. They were very big into suicide missions towards the end when they had more planes and pilots than fuel. Alot like the Muslim faith. Don't be funny with your reply either. Bring a decent answer based in fact.

My facts are simple. 2 bombs stopped Japan. Japan was honor based alot like the Muslims. Worked then.

What's your facts?

And yes, I am for dropping a bomb on a country like Iran.

 

[rjd970]

Tell me then why the bomb worked on Japan but would not work in the Muslim extremist.

Both are based on honor. It was the Japanese honor system that made them so tough to beat. They were very big into suicide missions towards the end when they had more planes and pilots than fuel. Alot like the Muslim faith. Don't be funny with your reply either. Bring a decent answer based in fact.

My facts are simple. 2 bombs stopped Japan. Japan was honor based alot like the Muslims. Worked then.

What's your facts?

And yes, I am for dropping a bomb on a country like Iran.

We were the only ones with the bomb then. Dropping one now on anybody for any reason other than retaliation for the same attack would de-stabilize things even worse. To say nothing of the fact that we actually dropped the bomb on a defined and clear enemy we actually declared war on.

Your argument is just like IP said, psychotic and incredibly ignorant.

 

[IPorange]

because there is no "muslim extremist" city to bomb. You'll be killing millions of innocents. You'll be ensuring the rest of the world will turn against us. You'll be unleashing huge radioactive fallout clouds that will blow across Pakistan and India.

Terrorists are not a nation. There is no country to make surrender. If anything, you'll take a somewhat cooperative government like Afganistan, and completely destabilize it and alienate it. You'll ensure the return of the Taliban.

If you drop a bomb on Iran, they'll be sure to seal off the Persian gulf and cripple the world's oil supply causing a dire economic crisis. They'll get their licks in too. And you'll still have killed millions of innocent civilians-- in retaliation for what?

The problem with the bomb is it is too broad of a stroke to ever use in this day and age. You need precision.

 

[rjd970]

because there is no "muslim extremist" city to bomb. You'll be killing millions of innocents. You'll be ensuring the rest of the world will turn against us. You'll be unleashing huge radioactive fallout clouds that will blow across Pakistan and India.

Terrorists are not a nation. There is no country to make surrender. If anything, you'll take a somewhat cooperative government like Afganistan, and completely destabilize it and alienate it. You'll ensure the return of the Taliban.

If you drop a bomb on Iran, they'll be sure to seal off the Persian gulf and cripple the world's oil supply causing a dire economic crisis. They'll get their licks in too. And you'll still have killed millions of innocent civilians-- in retaliation for what?

The problem with the bomb is it is too broad of a stroke to ever use in this day and age. You need precision.

Which we dont have, and why this problem is so difficult. Using nuclear weapons to solve this would be like trying to do surgery with a chainsaw.

 

[NEO]

Last I checked Iran does not have a bomb. Last I checked the extremist do not have a bomb. I didn't say bomb India, Russia, China. This country always gets itself in trouble when it tries to Nation build and not just wipe out the threat.

We could have won Viet Nam in 3 weeks if not for the rules. We went in not to win due to Russia and China backing the Viet Kong. We are not in Afghan to win a war. We are there to hand it over to a leader who is crooked and about as bad as the extremist.

Last time we tried to help out Afghan we knocked Russia out and put Bin Laden into power. That was brilliant.

You can make your funny comments but facts are facts.

 

[IPorange]

Last I checked Iran does not have a bomb. Last I checked the extremist do not have a bomb. I didn't say bomb India, Russia, China. This country always gets itself in trouble when it tries to Nation build and not just wipe out the threat.

We could have won Viet Nam in 3 weeks if not for the rules. We went in not to win due to Russia and China backing the Viet Kong. We are not in Afghan to win a war. We are there to hand it over to a leader who is crooked and about as bad as the extremist.

Last time we tried to help out Afghan we knocked Russia out and put Bin Laden into power. That was brilliant.

You can make your funny comments but facts are facts.

If we blow radioactive fallout all across India (which would be unavoidable if we used nukes in Afghanistan), we essentially will have attacked them as well.

If we used nukes in Vietnam, the world would have erupted into a nuclear holocaust. We wouldn't be here right now. You can bank on that.

You seem to believe that because we are the lone super power, we are the lone power. It just doesn't work that way.

 

[rjd970]

Not worth the argument IP, IMO. Just be glad everybody doesnt get to be president for a day.

 

[BeecherVol]

Fighting terrorism is unconventional compared to anything else we have fought over time.

Unfortunately it requires more troops, and more out of the troops. Technology helps a lot, but we are still forced to keeps boots on the ground and in harms way more often than not.

We have keep constant pressure on them since 9/11, and I think that has kept them more occupied with surviving rather than planning.

I think we need to keep a force there.

 

[IPorange]

Not worth the argument IP, IMO. Just be glad everybody doesnt get to be president for a day.

You're probably right. I used to think everyone was reasonable, but the internet has taught me that some people will never get it.

 

[NEO]

because there is no "muslim extremist" city to bomb. You'll be killing millions of innocents. You'll be ensuring the rest of the world will turn against us. You'll be unleashing huge radioactive fallout clouds that will blow across Pakistan and India.

Terrorists are not a nation. There is no country to make surrender. If anything, you'll take a somewhat cooperative government like Afganistan, and completely destabilize it and alienate it. You'll ensure the return of the Taliban.

If you drop a bomb on Iran, they'll be sure to seal off the Persian gulf and cripple the world's oil supply causing a dire economic crisis. They'll get their licks in too. And you'll still have killed millions of innocent civilians-- in retaliation for what?

The problem with the bomb is it is too broad of a stroke to ever use in this day and age. You need precision.

I disagree with alot you said here. Iran would also not get a single lick in. Not a single one. We would knock out their infrostructure and they would be a parking lot before they knew what hit them.

Also, the off set to the oil price is local drilling but that is another debate.

 

[IPorange]

Fighting terrorism is unconventional compared to anything else we have fought over time.

Unfortunately it requires more troops, and more out of the troops. Technology helps a lot, but we are still forced to keeps boots on the ground and in harms way more often than not.

We have keep constant pressure on them since 9/11, and I think that has kept them more occupied with surviving rather than planning.

I think we need to keep a force there.

I actually tend to agree. Why so many people who used to see it this way have changed their tune, I'm not sure.

We can't stop them from getting over here. Not completely. I think keeping a lightning rod overseas is a good way to control the problem, while allowing the younger and more moderate generation of muslims to grow up and take over the culture.

 

[NEO]

If we blow radioactive fallout all across India (which would be unavoidable if we used nukes in Afghanistan), we essentially will have attacked them as well.

If we used nukes in Vietnam, the world would have erupted into a nuclear holocaust. We wouldn't be here right now. You can bank on that.

You seem to believe that because we are the lone super power, we are the lone power. It just doesn't work that way.

I wasn't saying to Nuke Vietnam. If you read that, it is not what I intended. We should never have been there to begin with. Same with Afghan during the Russia invasion. I would not have nuked them then either. I am not for getting into wars that have no end or gain.

 

[IPorange]

So you were against the war in Iraq and Afghanistan?

 

[NEO]

Fighting terrorism is unconventional compared to anything else we have fought over time.

Unfortunately it requires more troops, and more out of the troops. Technology helps a lot, but we are still forced to keeps boots on the ground and in harms way more often than not.

We have keep constant pressure on them since 9/11, and I think that has kept them more occupied with surviving rather than planning.

I think we need to keep a force there.

Yeah, worked well for Russia.

 

[BeecherVol]

I actually tend to agree. Why so many people who used to see it this way have changed their tune, I'm not sure.

We can't stop them from getting over here. Not completely. I think keeping a lightning rod overseas is a good way to control the problem, while allowing the younger and more moderate generation of muslims to grow up and take over the culture.

You would hope that happens.

The larger strikes such as 9/11 with a few others require planning and leadership, similar to a uniformed military. As long as this is disrupted, which it currently seems to be you can slow it down dramatically as we have seen in the last 10 years.

Im not sure the threat will ever be completely eliminated IMO.

 

[NEO]

So you were against the war in Iraq and Afghanistan?

I was not against doing a night bomb to knock out the leaders of Iraq. I am not against (which we dont do in it's actual meaning) assassinating a leader like Saddam.

It was not wise to kill him though because it destablized the region due to him being the minority Muslim faith.

I am big believer in bomb dropping. Maybe not A-tomic. But I am a strong believer in knocking things out.

Good example. If Iran had a site I did not want to exist like an enrichment plant I would have no problem blowing it up in the middle of the night and saying deal with it.

That is what N Korea just did to S Korea isn't it? Just felt like attacking and did. They did just pretty much walk away from it didn't they?

It goes both ways.

 

[BeecherVol]

I was not against doing a night bomb to knock out the leaders of Iraq. I am not against (which we dont do in it's actual meaning) assassinating a leader like Saddam.

It was not wise to kill him though because it destablized the region due to him being the minority Muslim faith.

I am big believer in bomb dropping. Maybe not A-tomic. But I am a strong believer in knocking things out.

Good example. If Iran had a site I did not want to exist like an enrichment plant I would have no problem blowing it up in the middle of the night and saying deal with it.

That is what N Korea just did to S Korea isn't it? Just felt like attacking and did. They did just pretty much walk away from it didn't they?

It goes both ways.

We didn't.

He was tried and hung by his own people.

 

[IPorange]

I was not against doing a night bomb to knock out the leaders of Iraq. I am not against (which we dont do in it's actual meaning) assassinating a leader like Saddam.

It was not wise to kill him though because it destablized the region due to him being the minority Muslim faith.

I am big believer in bomb dropping. Maybe not A-tomic. But I am a strong believer in knocking things out.

Good example. If Iran had a site I did not want to exist like an enrichment plant I would have no problem blowing it up in the middle of the night and saying deal with it.

That is what N Korea just did to S Korea isn't it? Just felt like attacking and did. They did just pretty much walk away from it didn't they?

It goes both ways.

We deliberately tried to bomb him and the leadership from the very outset, but failed to get him as you recall. It isn't as simple as you make it out to be.

Iran's most important sites are so deep underground, even our considerable munitions can not easily penetrate far enough to take it out in a quick strike.

 

[NEO]

We deliberately tried to bomb him and the leadership from the very outset, but failed to get him as you recall. It isn't as simple as you make it out to be.

Iran's most important sites are so deep underground, even our considerable munitions can not easily penetrate far enough to take it out in a quick strike.

You're not going to make a very good scientist (or maybe you will if you go into the GW aspect) if you keep looking at the first part and not the secondf part. That's a good way to find another evolved creature that lives on arsenic.

Anyways, I am also for shooting a leader in the head by a military sniper which is against the rules of war right now. I also know for a fact that we have modern day bunker busters that can reach any level needed. I am not going into more than but they exist. I know this for a fact. Like I said though, I am all for placing hits on government leaders who need to go away. Two parts I believe in. I do not believe in invasions unless you are willing to take over the country completely and make it part of yours.

 

[NEO]

We didn't.

He was tried and hung by his own people.

LOL. Who handed him over to his people after we found him in a hole.

If they weren't going to do it, we were. His death was due to our hands.

 

[IPorange]

You're not going to make a very good scientist (or maybe you will if you go into the GW aspect) if you keep looking at the first part and not the secondf part. That's a good way to find another evolved creature that lives on arsenic.

Anyways, I am also for shooting a leader in the head by a military sniper which is against the rules of war right now. I also know for a fact that we have modern day bunker busters that can reach any level needed. I am not going into more than but they exist. I know this for a fact. Like I said though, I am all for placing hits on government leaders who need to go away. Two parts I believe in. I do not believe in invasions unless you are willing to take over the country completely and make it part of yours.

You make a great strip club employee and insurance salesman.