Message posted by Richard on March 10, 2002 at 7:15:57 PST:
Good point raised, and well phrased however some of the same issues apply. Libya is quite a different issue than that of a whole religion. I do see your point, yes the 48th FW did a grand job, it did shut him up, but then a few years afterwards he had two terrorists blow up Pan Am 103 over Scotland. This is a really interesting discussion, a bit off topic from the board but nevermind.
We know these terrorists following Laden have the means to make dirty bombs...they may not be much, but are effective to win over peoples decisions.
Launching a small strike with nuclear weapons into Afghanistan, or even Iraq could have disastrious consequences if the US had mis-judged the after-effects.
They may want to show who is the 'main player' and 'dominant' one, but then you cannot under estimate the terrorists who have shown us what they can do, afterall, i have never ever seen anything like that on September 11th, i was in awe and gobsmacked and it will never be out of my mind.
They did their job, they terrorised America, they obviously knew they would be declaring war on the USA also, however not as much as what has happened in the past few months.
If they are attacked with an unconventional weapon, my point is, will they subside and 'be submissive' or will they counter-attack, and keep doing so.
Once Bin Laden is demised, another will follow... they are 'unseen terrorists' and it is 'more' difficult to control these type of fighters, you might of walked past one on the way to the shop yesterday.
The one thing these terrorists differentiate from others is that they are fanatical, fanatical is the crucial word, they WILL keep going, and will get worse if they think they are being defeated, as that is NOT an option for them, letting American, and the West, which is their sole enemy in life be dominant over them i dont think will be an option... we will see increased martyrs suicide bombing, increased attacks using conventional weapons, and if nukes are used, they wont think twice about using them in a small counter-attack...
And who will have the upper-hand... terrorists using a dirty bomb in the centre of Washington or New York, or the US using a nuke in the middle of a desert?
Dominant people are people who can control the population of that country at war... terrorism controls the peoples mind and if you have a population of a country in fear, then you are the dominant one.
All i am pointing at, is not to under-estimate the power of Islamic militants/terrorists, they have half the world on their side, and half the world will not faulter or be submissive of any american attack, whether it be conventional or unconventional, they will strike back, however large or small, but probably effective.
If the US did do a strike, and 'showed' the Terrorists who was dominant and 'the mighty, dont mess with me' policy, then what would happen if they did 'mess with the almighty' and start shooting down, bombing as many airliners as they can, bombing as many cities as they can in retaliation?
They have already attacked the 'almighty' which took a lot of guts...and it was effective in what they wanted to do...They did attack the US on purpose for declaration on who has guts and who is willing to do what... America is getting desperate for things to do, nukes maybe the answer, but maybe not, you cant fight an invisible enemy who are fanatical about their beliefs in destroying the west.
I watched a programme last night on Fanatical Jihad Martyres, very interesting, but disturbing. A British journalist in Israel following Hamas suicide bombers, they strapped on their explosives, and carried a gun incase the bombs failed, to shoot as many civilians as possible and themselves if required. They told the correspondant that western civilians are targetted because they are 'just western people' and are just as bad as the military, and so, the bomb was caught on camera... two kids killed, many wounded... all because Isreal shot dead one Hamas follower...
So, take that and multiply it 1000 times, the fanatics wont let down in defeat, its not their religion to do so, and youcant dominate a religion, especially a religion where probably 90% of all wars are created by..
Libya is quite a different issue than that of a whole religion. I do see your point, yes the 48th FW did a grand job, it did shut him up, but then a few years afterwards he had two terrorists blow up Pan Am 103 over Scotland.
This is a really interesting discussion, a bit off topic from the board but nevermind.
In Reply to: Re: off topic - US told to use Nukes posted by Andre' M. Dall'au on March 10, 2002 at 6:11:34 PST: