Started By
Message
ISIS: When is catastrophic collateral damage on the table as acceptable?
Posted on 1/20/15 at 11:55 pm
Posted on 1/20/15 at 11:55 pm
It happened in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Most felt it had to be done.
It's hard for younger folks to comprehend a situation where the death of that large a number of innocent people is taken as acceptable.
Is ISIS capable of approaching that line? Where is the line drawn?
It's hard for younger folks to comprehend a situation where the death of that large a number of innocent people is taken as acceptable.
Is ISIS capable of approaching that line? Where is the line drawn?
9
Posted on 1/21/15 at 12:02 am to Stacked
Most of us got past that line in September some years ago.
Posted on 1/21/15 at 12:04 am to Rebelgator
hell, some people view the "collateral" as a perk.
Posted on 1/21/15 at 3:00 am to Stacked
ISIS ain't got shite on Boko Haram. That's who we're fighting next. They just killed 2000 civilians in a Nigerian town yesterday, look them up.
Posted on 1/21/15 at 6:41 am to Stacked
Around 60 million people died in Workd War 2, almost half a million Americans. Numbers like that made the decision to drop the bomb and end the war understandable. The idea that you're talking about dropping one today is laughable and I'm glad someone like you would never get to make such a big decision.
Posted on 1/21/15 at 6:47 am to Stacked
quote:
Is ISIS capable of approaching that line?
No
Posted on 1/21/15 at 6:59 am to jbond
quote:
The idea that you're talking about dropping one today is laughable and I'm glad someone like you would never get to make such a big decision.
Not sure why you think that I think we should drop an a-bomb today. I absolutely think the opposite.
Posted on 1/21/15 at 7:02 am to jbond
But that you think it's laughable that something could happen in today's world that would make dropping an a-bomb necessary is what I would call laughable.
I asked where the line is. I don't believe ISIS can cross it. I believe N. Korea and a few others can.
I asked where the line is. I don't believe ISIS can cross it. I believe N. Korea and a few others can.
Posted on 1/21/15 at 7:35 am to Stacked
ISIS and their single digit number of american casualties? Lol
This post was edited on 1/21/15 at 7:36 am
Posted on 1/21/15 at 7:44 am to ehole
This nation lost it's appetite for military battle when they allowed imbedded reporters to push their personal agenda for an unpopular war.
Wars should be fought on battlefields, not television sets.
Wars should be fought on battlefields, not television sets.
Posted on 1/21/15 at 7:46 am to bamarep
quote:
This nation lost it's appetite for military battle when they allowed imbedded reporters to push their personal agenda for an unpopular war.
I absolutely agree with this.
We need to keep the reporters at home, take the handcuffs off our military and let them do whatever it takes to win the war as soon as possible.
Posted on 1/21/15 at 7:54 am to Stacked
I don't think younger folks feel any different than older folks on this issue. War isn't pretty and will always be collateral damage. Unfortunately the US did this to itself by pulling out of the war so it's hard for many to justify dropping a bomb.
I for one think making the place a parking lot is about the only thing that will stop them. You can't stop extremists who have generations of cultural training to hate and kill westerners.
It's sad but also inevitable IMO.
I for one think making the place a parking lot is about the only thing that will stop them. You can't stop extremists who have generations of cultural training to hate and kill westerners.
It's sad but also inevitable IMO.
Posted on 1/21/15 at 7:56 am to ehole
Ever ward of "The Allies"? Go take a peek at who that consists of....
Posted on 1/21/15 at 7:57 am to Stacked
I think ISIS has to commit an act in American soil before it's an option. Which is why I said I think it's inevitable.
Posted on 1/21/15 at 7:57 am to Stacked
quote:
ISIS: When is catastrophic collateral damage on the table as acceptable?
It happened in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Most felt it had to be done.
It's hard for younger folks to comprehend a situation where the death of that large a number of innocent people is taken as acceptable.
Is ISIS capable of approaching that line? Where is the line drawn?
I'm confused.
Are you asking if we believe ISIS might detonate a nuclear device somewhere? Or are you asking if we believe we (the West) should detonate one over ISIS controlled territory?
The difference between now and WWII is that in 1945 no one knew if an "atomic" bomb would work. Also, the dropping of the two bombs on Japan were justified. Why? Because after the first one was dropped, it still took a second bomb to secure the surrender.
Japan had no natural resource to speak of. It was strictly loss of Japanese life verses loss of more American life trying to take the island without the bomb.
So now let's compare that to ISIS controlled territory.
Killing ISIS would be killing a religion and the lefties would sling the hate and racist words ad nauseam.
ISIS controlled territory would, effectively, be contaminated along with a much wider swath of a key region where oil is concerned, naturally, so it would send the rest of the world into a frenzy.
As someone stated before, we would be far better off simply dropping Ebola infected bodies into ISIS controlled camps and towns and cities and letting nature take its course.
Perhaps one day we'll be fortunate enough to develop a paint-brush wide beam laser that we could fly over and basically sweep all life out of the way before we land and takeover. Sorta like what the aliens used in War of the Worlds where it would just leave ashes of the Muslims everywhere ... which would quickly dissipate among the desert sands and be forgotten about.
This post was edited on 1/21/15 at 7:58 am
Posted on 1/21/15 at 8:38 am to cas4t
quote:
I think ISIS has to commit an act in American soil before it's an option.
Even if they do, it shouldn't be a option.
Posted on 1/21/15 at 8:40 am to Stacked
quote:
ISIS: When is catastrophic collateral damage on the table as acceptable?
If you'd been to the middle east, you'd know it's been a catastrophe for some time now. Collateral damage is just putting more innocents out of their misery and ending their suffering at the hands of the jew.
Posted on 1/21/15 at 8:43 am to cas4t
quote:
I think ISIS has to commit an act in American soil before it's an option. Which is why I said I think it's inevitable.
If there is "an act" committed, of the nuclear type, it will be ISIS or Al Qaeda in Israel, not the U.S. it will also be up to Israel with regard to how to retaliate.
However, hypothetically speaking, if ISIS or Al Qaeda were to somehow get past all of our security and get a bomb into say, NYC ... and detonate it - then what would happen after that would all depend upon which party was in power at the time.
Posted on 1/21/15 at 8:43 am to pvilleguru
Isolate, isolate. Assassinate, isolate, isolate, assassinate,isolate.......
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News