Why America or UK not drop A-bomb or better H-Bomb on isis

Post Reply New Topic

This^

And do you also think Motorcycle Clubs are like Ebola? Perhaps you would compare us to Russian Aggression, North Korea, Pot Pol?

The largest motorcycle club, ADAC, is much larger than ISIS, over 15,000,000 members, and is dedicated to local rallies, and International Motorcycle Racing. American Clubs do the same. Even our 1% do Toys for Tots runs with The US Marines.

We do invade small towns for a weekend, spend a lot of money, drink a lot of beer, and are a major draw for the local economy. We are gone by Sunday night, and welcome back the next year.

Riding a motorcycle is Legal, we are allowed on public roads.

Please stop killing us.

Thank you for your time.

ISIS can't be defeated by conventional means, they were born out of war and only become stronger the more we use the same tactics.

Wow, that's fantastic.

I ain't gonna jump on board here because I don't think any differentiation at all between the 'terrorists' and those 'bringing justice;' I just think that was a beautiful cartoon.

also tbf to OP, Alan Grayson recently said that the only way we could defeat ISIS is by turning Iraq and Syria into "molten glass" but he was making a similar point that I was making that it can't be done and we shouldn't involved ourselves in these wars overseas.

http://rt.com/usa/231907-usa-isis-terrorism-grayson/

a nuclear bomb will create MORE terrorists among the reasons previously listed

This said it best.

I personally believe Islam is poison. The only people who do not believe in spreading Islam by violence and death ultimately have to ignore what Islam teaches to do so. I'm grateful they don't subscribe to that belief, but they ultimately are heretics in doing so. Might as well just reject Islam.

Nuking an enemy to glass is a viable option if nothing short of total destruction will stop them, and this might prove to be the case here, but once you start throwing around big bombs, it's very, very tricky knowing where it will stop.

The USA employed "preemptive invasion" to attack Iraq and Afghanistan. This was an idea the UN rejected for a long time (including the USA). The idea was simple, if someone presents an immanent threat to you, you are justified to attack them first to protect yourself. The problem is proving the immanent threat exists.

Israel could justify it easily as they are surrounded by enemies and one atomic bomb would make them disappear. The USA, in contrast, could make no such argument. Still, we did it, and by doing so, opened the door for most anyone else to do it (e.g., Putin's actions of late). Once one of the larger and more "legitimate" global powers starts doing something, it becomes easy for everyone else to justify doing it. When a small dictatorship does it, it can be condemned and stopped early on.

As much as I would like to nuke 'em until they glow and use their asses for runway lights it's just not practical. It would unite the Arab world against us then we'd have to nuke some more of them and so on. I think Dantac's suggestion of "a girl with a book" is a better and more long-term effective weapon against what we're dealing with.

What we are dealing with is the result of our own actions.

We destroyed the functioning governments of Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya.

In other places we destroyed the government by supporting it. Yemen, Somalia.

The governments we imposed on other countries did not have local support.

Billions in arms, ten years in training, the Iraqi Army dropped their weapons and ran from several hundred in pickup trucks. The government and army of Iraq are barely defending the city limits of Bagdad.

At the time ISIS numbered less than 10,000. Under Saddam, Iraq fought a ten year war against Iran, millions died.

Not liking governments that dared disagree with the west, overthrowing them, replacing them, we get factions that do not agree with the west, or the local government.

ISIS may be horrible, but for the millions who live there, they are less of a problem than the government was.

The Taliban is in the same situation, the only force resisting the American imposed government.

Ho Chi Mien fought the French Colonials, and army, then the Japanese Occupation Army and Government, then the French again, then the Americans.

Botaflica fought the French in Algeria, for decades.

A local resistance force has the support of the population against imposed governments and occupation.

We left Viet Nam in 1975, Ho Chi Mien won, now anyone looking for factory space and cheap labor is welcome.

For all of our fears he fought China in a border war, and Cambodia, the communist government of Pot Pol.

Now it is a great place for tourism.

Nukes cause too much collateral damage. I say we should assemble a unit of highly-trained snipers and assassins to take out the top ISIS leaders swiftly and silently. Canada's JTF2 unit should do the job well.

Lol!

Exactly what OliveOilMom is complaining about!

A person cant be PC ENOUGH these days, can they?

Now I have to be sensitive to you bikers too!

OOPS!

I mean "motorcycle enthusiasts!

^this and I thought ISIS has people in various countries, its not like they're all grouped together in a perfect little target area. The problem is extremism, in this case religious extremism...extremism like that from us isn't going to help anything...we couldn't really call it a war on terrorism if we go dropping atomic bombs around the world wherever ISIS members are suspected to be.

But then there are people who think the movie Team America is some patriotic movie, when it's actually making fun...and shout America F*** yeah like its the new national anthem, so not to surprising some have the mentality of 'hey lets nuke the world to solve the problem.'

It's easy to see why atomic weapons are not being used. It's because the rule seems to be someone must be the first to do it then others respond and with that balance of power, no one ever uses them because there can logically never be a first. See?

AND if terrorists do set off a dirty bomb Lord have mercy on us all because they will be the first and that's like giving permission for what will happen next so it's best if nobody ever goes there.

I realize US was the first in the world to set off an atomic weapon but I am talking first after world war II.

I don't get what it is with people refusing to acknowledge that the Islamic State are, indeed, a state as they claim. They're a totalitarian, aggressive, expansionist state, but they are still a state.

Honestly, I don't think you can deal with them without flooding the entire place with troops and trapping them in the cities they've taken. Air drop food and water purification systems, you don't want the people in the cities to die, but other than that just keep them trapped. When they attempt to break out, then's your time to fight them, but trying to take the city by force is just going to be a bloodbath. But when they're isolated from each other (I'm presuming you're deploying radio jammers and EMPs...), you might not have to.

Beware human shields, though. Maybe invest in small combat drones, and supertanks that can roll up to a crowd and pick out the ones firing at it.

Get ready for a robot war.