Getting Rid of the Terrorists

martinello · Congressional Page Joined: 31 Oct 2006 Posts: 2

This is the end all and be all for getting rid of the terrorists. Don't get me wrong, and there is no need to insult me. This isn't so much me being serious, but it would fix the problem. Right? Okay, here we go...

Why doesn't the United States take all of these Weapons of Mass Destruction they keep finding in all these terrorist compounds, and use it against all of these terrorist countries? Fly over the country, and just release all of their own weapons, diseases, whatever they have to offer, plus anything the United States has to add to the pot, and just wipe out the entire country. Just leave it a smouldering pile of debris. Start with the Middle East, for example. Move on to India. Move on to the former Soviet Union. Hit Korea. Nail Africa. Wipe out China and Japan. Then, finally, get rid of South and Central America. Then all you need to worry about is the rest of Europe and North America. I am sure Greenland, Australia, the UK, and Antarctica will want to rise up against the United States after that show of power.

The terrorists will not have a chance. There won't be anywhere left to hide. Any country that is harbouring these terrorists will immediately want to kick them out for fear of being wiped out.

bangfor1 · Mayor's Aide Joined: 21 Oct 2006 Posts: 88

There's no need to do that, a good premise to start out with, and to expound on it, it can't be done because the USA or no other one country can conquer the whole word, and what would happen is the world could unite quickly and retaliate. Some of these countries you mentioned have weapons of mass destruction and some of the lesser world powers might not support what the USA is doing like what happened when Iraq was invaded. So, it's a no-win situation where all the world needs is to weed out the bad guys and lead a peaceful and prosperous life.

julian4239 · Mayor Joined: 07 Jun 2006 Posts: 211

Tactically we do have control of space. That in itself may give the US the ability to surgically attack anywhere, without too much collateral damage. I hope we build a weapons system that can literally shot lazers at one single human target.

I, myself, would not ever condone an action of using weapons of mass destruction on any innocent life, despite how disappointed I am with the rest of the world.

bangfor1 · Mayor's Aide Joined: 21 Oct 2006 Posts: 88

That'll be effective only when all Americans start living in space away from harms way, and it might be possible to attack one nation like NK or Iran from space when that capability is there, but the other powers could retaliate and the weapon they would use could be nuclear warheads, and that'll the beginning and the end.

Black Dragon · Posted: Thu Nov 30, 2006 9:33 am Post subject:

Two words: Special Forces.

bangfor1 · Mayor's Aide Joined: 21 Oct 2006 Posts: 88

This reply had been around for a while, however, it won't work because it's not working in the most backward countries like Iraq and Afghanistan where the price had been already high, and as the complication rises the gridlock will rise too, at the same time using a special force to attain any goal is the same as terrorism.

reviewer · Mayor's Aide Joined: 04 Dec 2006 Posts: 145

The question is, how do you know it is a terrorist camp? Can you tell from space if the people there include innocents? There are no easy answers.

bangfor1 · Mayor's Aide Joined: 21 Oct 2006 Posts: 88

If you are dealing with terrorists taking any measure is not going to be a problem, but the problem is if especial force is used say for example, to disarm a nation suspected of having nuclear arms, then the nature of the engagement will get complicated, and the success rate could also be lukewarm, not to mention the consequences, but it might work.